Accuracy of genomic selection in biparental populations of flax ( Linum usitatissimum L.)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Flax is an important economic crop for seed oil and stem fiber. Phenotyping of traits such as seed yield, seed quality, stem fiber yield, and quality characteristics is expensive and time consuming. Genomic selection (GS) refers to a breeding approach aimed at selecting preferred individuals based on genomic estimated breeding values predicted by a statistical model based on the relationship between phenotypes and genome-wide genetic markers. We evaluated the prediction accuracy of GS (rMP) and the efficiency of GS relative to phenotypic selection (RE) for three GS models: ridge regression best linear unbiased prediction (RR-BLUP), Bayesian LASSO (BL), and Bayesian ridge regression (BRR), for seed yield, oil content, iodine value, linoleic, and linolenic acid content with a full and a common set of genome-wide simple sequence repeat markers in each of three biparental populations. The three GS models generated similar rMP and RE, while BRR displayed a higher coefficient of determination (R2) of the fitted models than did RR-BLUP or BL. The mean rMP and RE varied for traits with different heritabilities and was affected by the genetic variation of the traits in the populations. GS for seed yield generated a mean RE of 1.52 across populations and marker sets, a value significantly superior to that for direct phenotypic selection. Our empirical results provide the first validation of GS in flax and demonstrate that GS could increase genetic gain per unit time for linseed breeding. Further studies for selection of training populations and markers are warranted.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".