Analysis of yield and oil from a series of canola breeding trials. Part I. Fitting factor analytic mixed models with pedigree informationThis article is one of a selection of papers from the conference “Exploiting Genome-wide Association in Oilseed Brassicas: a model for genetic improvement of major OECD crops for sustainable farming”.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper multiplicative mixed models have been used for the analysis of multi-environment trial (MET) data for canola oil and grain yield. Information on pedigrees has been included to allow for the modelling of additive and nonadditive genetic effects. The MET data set included a total of 19 trials (synonymous with sites or environments), which were sown across southern Australia in 2007 and 2008. Each trial was designed as a p-rep design using DiGGeR with the default prespecified spatial model. Lines in their first year of testing were unreplicated, whereas there were two or three replications of advanced lines or varieties. Pedigree information on a total of 578 entries was available, and there were 69 entries that had unknown pedigrees. The degree of inbreeding varied from 0 (55 entries) to nearly fully inbred (337 entries). Subsamples of 2 g harvested grain were taken from each plot for determination of seed oil percentage by near infrared reflectance spectroscopy. The MET analysis for both yield and oil modelled genetic effects in different trials using factor analytic models and the residual plot effects for each trial were modelled using spatial techniques. Models in which pedigree information was included provided significantly better fits to both yield and oil data.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".