↓ Skip to main content

Model training across multiple breeding cycles significantly improves genomic prediction accuracy in rye (Secale cereale L.)

Overview of attention for article published in Theoretical and Applied Genetics, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
15 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
79 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
118 Mendeley
Title
Model training across multiple breeding cycles significantly improves genomic prediction accuracy in rye (Secale cereale L.)
Published in
Theoretical and Applied Genetics, August 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00122-016-2756-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hans-Jürgen Auinger, Manfred Schönleben, Christina Lehermeier, Malthe Schmidt, Viktor Korzun, Hartwig H. Geiger, Hans-Peter Piepho, Andres Gordillo, Peer Wilde, Eva Bauer, Chris-Carolin Schön

Abstract

Genomic prediction accuracy can be significantly increased by model calibration across multiple breeding cycles as long as selection cycles are connected by common ancestors. In hybrid rye breeding, application of genome-based prediction is expected to increase selection gain because of long selection cycles in population improvement and development of hybrid components. Essentially two prediction scenarios arise: (1) prediction of the genetic value of lines from the same breeding cycle in which model training is performed and (2) prediction of lines from subsequent cycles. It is the latter from which a reduction in cycle length and consequently the strongest impact on selection gain is expected. We empirically investigated genome-based prediction of grain yield, plant height and thousand kernel weight within and across four selection cycles of a hybrid rye breeding program. Prediction performance was assessed using genomic and pedigree-based best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP and PBLUP). A total of 1040 S2 lines were genotyped with 16 k SNPs and each year testcrosses of 260 S2 lines were phenotyped in seven or eight locations. The performance gap between GBLUP and PBLUP increased significantly for all traits when model calibration was performed on aggregated data from several cycles. Prediction accuracies obtained from cross-validation were in the order of 0.70 for all traits when data from all cycles (N CS = 832) were used for model training and exceeded within-cycle accuracies in all cases. As long as selection cycles are connected by a sufficient number of common ancestors and prediction accuracy has not reached a plateau when increasing sample size, aggregating data from several preceding cycles is recommended for predicting genetic values in subsequent cycles despite decreasing relatedness over time.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 118 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 114 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 28 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 19%
Student > Master 22 19%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 12%
Other 5 4%
Other 13 11%
Unknown 14 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 84 71%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 6%
Mathematics 3 3%
Computer Science 2 2%
Energy 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 20 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 January 2017.
All research outputs
#4,358,493
of 25,721,020 outputs
Outputs from Theoretical and Applied Genetics
#585
of 3,843 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,804
of 382,445 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Theoretical and Applied Genetics
#16
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,721,020 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,843 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 382,445 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.