Increased Genomic Prediction Accuracy in Wheat Breeding Through Spatial Adjustment of Field Trial Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In crop breeding, the interest of predicting the performance of candidate cultivars in the field has increased due to recent advances in molecular breeding technologies. However, the complexity of the wheat genome presents some challenges for applying new technologies in molecular marker identification with next-generation sequencing. We applied genotyping-by-sequencing, a recently developed method to identify single-nucleotide polymorphisms, in the genomes of 384 wheat (Triticum aestivum) genotypes that were field tested under three different water regimes in Mediterranean climatic conditions: rain-fed only, mild water stress, and fully irrigated. We identified 102,324 single-nucleotide polymorphisms in these genotypes, and the phenotypic data were used to train and test genomic selection models intended to predict yield, thousand-kernel weight, number of kernels per spike, and heading date. Phenotypic data showed marked spatial variation. Therefore, different models were tested to correct the trends observed in the field. A mixed-model using moving-means as a covariate was found to best fit the data. When we applied the genomic selection models, the accuracy of predicted traits increased with spatial adjustment. Multiple genomic selection models were tested, and a Gaussian kernel model was determined to give the highest accuracy. The best predictions between environments were obtained when data from different years were used to train the model. Our results confirm that genotyping-by-sequencing is an effective tool to obtain genome-wide information for crops with complex genomes, that these data are efficient for predicting traits, and that correction of spatial variation is a crucial ingredient to increase prediction accuracy in genomic selection models.
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 | 0.015 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".