ArticleThe plant genome2026
Genomic prediction in quinoa across contrasting environments using statistical and machine learning models.
Article in The plant genome, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Genomic prediction in quinoa across contrasting environments using statistical and machine learning models.The plant genome · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) is gaining global importance for its nutritional value and adaptability; however, breeding progress remains limited. Genomic selection (GS), combined with rapid generation cycles, offers a strategy to accelerate genetic improvement. We conducted whole-genome resequencing of 610 accessions and present the first evaluation of genomic prediction in quinoa evaluated across six field trials in Australia and Pakistan for seven phenological and yield-related traits. Using ∼1.8 million single-nucleotide polymorphisms, we compared four models-genomic best linear unbiased prediction, reproducing kernel Hilbert space, BayesC, and light gradient boosting machine-for genotype ranking under four cross-validation schemes: predicting new genotypes (CV1), sparse testing (CV2), leave-one-location-year-out (CV0), and across locations. Model performance was evaluated using Pearson's correlation for overall accuracy and normalized discounted cumulative gain (NDCG@10) for ranking top performers. The four models were similar, with no method dominating across traits. NDCG@10 scores revealed that predictions remained useful for selecting superior genotypes even for difficult traits. Prediction accuracy was strongly associated with heritability and trait correlations across and within- location environments. Accuracy was highest for developmental traits and lowest for seed yield, while seed traits showed location-specific responses with higher accuracy in Australia. These findings support GS as a promising tool for quinoa breeding and provide benchmarks for global implementation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.