↓ Skip to main content

Optimization of multi-environment trials for genomic selection based on crop models

Overview of attention for article published in Theoretical and Applied Genetics, May 2017
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 (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
20 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
159 Mendeley
Title
Optimization of multi-environment trials for genomic selection based on crop models
Published in
Theoretical and Applied Genetics, May 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00122-017-2922-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

R. Rincent, E. Kuhn, H. Monod, F.-X. Oury, M. Rousset, V. Allard, J. Le Gouis

Abstract

We propose a statistical criterion to optimize multi-environment trials to predict genotype × environment interactions more efficiently, by combining crop growth models and genomic selection models. Genotype × environment interactions (GEI) are common in plant multi-environment trials (METs). In this context, models developed for genomic selection (GS) that refers to the use of genome-wide information for predicting breeding values of selection candidates need to be adapted. One promising way to increase prediction accuracy in various environments is to combine ecophysiological and genetic modelling thanks to crop growth models (CGM) incorporating genetic parameters. The efficiency of this approach relies on the quality of the parameter estimates, which depends on the environments composing this MET used for calibration. The objective of this study was to determine a method to optimize the set of environments composing the MET for estimating genetic parameters in this context. A criterion called OptiMET was defined to this aim, and was evaluated on simulated and real data, with the example of wheat phenology. The MET defined with OptiMET allowed estimating the genetic parameters with lower error, leading to higher QTL detection power and higher prediction accuracies. MET defined with OptiMET was on average more efficient than random MET composed of twice as many environments, in terms of quality of the parameter estimates. OptiMET is thus a valuable tool to determine optimal experimental conditions to best exploit MET and the phenotyping tools that are currently developed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 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 159 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Unknown 156 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 43 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 23%
Student > Master 15 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 5%
Student > Bachelor 8 5%
Other 25 16%
Unknown 24 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 106 67%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 4%
Mathematics 3 2%
Environmental Science 2 1%
Psychology 2 1%
Other 2 1%
Unknown 37 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 16 April 2018.
All research outputs
#3,010,025
of 23,794,258 outputs
Outputs from Theoretical and Applied Genetics
#299
of 3,565 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,363
of 314,969 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Theoretical and Applied Genetics
#10
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,794,258 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,565 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 314,969 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 82% 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 done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.