↓ Skip to main content

Prediction of hybrid performance in maize with a ridge regression model employed to DNA markers and mRNA transcription profiles

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Prediction of hybrid performance in maize with a ridge regression model employed to DNA markers and mRNA transcription profiles
Published in
BMC Genomics, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12864-016-2580-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carola Zenke-Philippi, Alexander Thiemann, Felix Seifert, Tobias Schrag, Albrecht E. Melchinger, Stefan Scholten, Matthias Frisch

Abstract

Ridge regression models can be used for predicting heterosis and hybrid performance. Their application to mRNA transcription profiles has not yet been investigated. Our objective was to compare the prediction accuracy of models employing mRNA transcription profiles with that of models employing genome-wide markers using a data set of 98 maize hybrids from a breeding program. We predicted hybrid performance and mid-parent heterosis for grain yield and grain dry matter content and employed cross validation to assess the prediction accuracy. Prediction with a ridge regression model using random effects for mRNA transcription profiles resulted in similar prediction accuracies than employing the model to DNA markers. For hybrids, of which none of the parental inbred lines was part of the training set, the ridge regression model did not reach the prediction accuracy that was obtained with a model using transcriptome-based distances. We conclude that mRNA transcription profiles are a promising alternative to DNA markers for hybrid prediction, but further studies with larger data sets are required to investigate the superiority of alternative prediction models.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
France 1 2%
Belgium 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 50 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 39%
Researcher 9 17%
Student > Master 7 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 3 6%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 6 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 34 63%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 9%
Computer Science 2 4%
Mathematics 1 2%
Design 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 11 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 31 March 2016.
All research outputs
#18,449,393
of 22,858,915 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#8,188
of 10,662 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,293
of 300,926 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#200
of 230 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,858,915 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,662 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 300,926 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 230 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.