↓ Skip to main content

Bayesian estimation and use of high-throughput remote sensing indices for quantitative genetic analyses of leaf growth

Overview of attention for article published in Theoretical and Applied Genetics, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
Title
Bayesian estimation and use of high-throughput remote sensing indices for quantitative genetic analyses of leaf growth
Published in
Theoretical and Applied Genetics, October 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00122-017-3001-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert L. Baker, Wen Fung Leong, Nan An, Marcus T. Brock, Matthew J. Rubin, Stephen Welch, Cynthia Weinig

Abstract

We develop Bayesian function-valued trait models that mathematically isolate genetic mechanisms underlying leaf growth trajectories by factoring out genotype-specific differences in photosynthesis. Remote sensing data can be used instead of leaf-level physiological measurements. Characterizing the genetic basis of traits that vary during ontogeny and affect plant performance is a major goal in evolutionary biology and agronomy. Describing genetic programs that specifically regulate morphological traits can be complicated by genotypic differences in physiological traits. We describe the growth trajectories of leaves using novel Bayesian function-valued trait (FVT) modeling approaches in Brassica rapa recombinant inbred lines raised in heterogeneous field settings. While frequentist approaches estimate parameter values by treating each experimental replicate discretely, Bayesian models can utilize information in the global dataset, potentially leading to more robust trait estimation. We illustrate this principle by estimating growth asymptotes in the face of missing data and comparing heritabilities of growth trajectory parameters estimated by Bayesian and frequentist approaches. Using pseudo-Bayes factors, we compare the performance of an initial Bayesian logistic growth model and a model that incorporates carbon assimilation (A max) as a cofactor, thus statistically accounting for genotypic differences in carbon resources. We further evaluate two remotely sensed spectroradiometric indices, photochemical reflectance (pri2) and MERIS Terrestrial Chlorophyll Index (mtci) as covariates in lieu of A max, because these two indices were genetically correlated with A max across years and treatments yet allow much higher throughput compared to direct leaf-level gas-exchange measurements. For leaf lengths in uncrowded settings, including A max improves model fit over the initial model. The mtci and pri2 indices also outperform direct A max measurements. Of particular importance for evolutionary biologists and plant breeders, hierarchical Bayesian models estimating FVT parameters improve heritabilities compared to frequentist approaches.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 17%
Researcher 3 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Other 4 17%
Unknown 7 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 63%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Environmental Science 1 4%
Unknown 7 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 02 March 2018.
All research outputs
#6,996,305
of 25,284,710 outputs
Outputs from Theoretical and Applied Genetics
#1,241
of 3,752 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,275
of 335,629 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Theoretical and Applied Genetics
#31
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,284,710 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,752 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 335,629 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.