Practical application of genomic selection in a doubled-haploid winter wheat breeding program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Crop improvement is a long-term, expensive institutional endeavor. Genomic selection (GS), which uses single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) information to estimate genomic breeding values, has proven efficient to increasing genetic gain by accelerating the breeding process in animal breeding programs. As for crop improvement, with few exceptions, GS applicability remains in the evaluation of algorithm performance. In this study, we examined factors related to GS applicability in line development stage for grain yield using a hard red winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) doubled-haploid population. The performance of GS was evaluated in two consecutive years to predict grain yield. In general, the semi-parametric reproducing kernel Hilbert space prediction algorithm outperformed parametric genomic best linear unbiased prediction. For both parametric and semi-parametric algorithms, an upward bias in predictability was apparent in within-year cross-validation, suggesting the prerequisite of cross-year validation for a more reliable prediction. Adjusting the training population’s phenotype for genotype by environment effect had a positive impact on GS model’s predictive ability. Possibly due to marker redundancy, a selected subset of SNPs at an absolute pairwise correlation coefficient threshold value of 0.4 produced comparable results and reduced the computational burden of considering the full SNP set. Finally, in the context of an ongoing breeding and selection effort, the present study has provided a measure of confidence based on the deviation of line selection from GS results, supporting the implementation of GS in wheat variety development.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".