Efficient genomics based ‘end-to-end’ selective tree breeding framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since their initiation in the 1950s, worldwide selective tree breeding programs followed the recurrent selection scheme of repeated cycles of selection, breeding (mating), and testing phases and essentially remained unchanged to accelerate this process or address environmental contingences and concerns. Here, we introduce an “end-to-end” selective tree breeding framework that: 1) leverages strategically preselected GWAS-based sequence data capturing trait architecture information, 2) generates unprecedented resolution of genealogical relationships among tested individuals, and 3) leads to the elimination of the breeding phase through the utilization of readily available wind-pollinated (OP) families. Individuals’ breeding values generated from multi-trait multi-site analysis were also used in an optimum contribution selection protocol to effectively manage genetic gain/co-ancestry trade-offs and traits’ correlated response to selection. The proof-of-concept study involved a 40-year-old spruce OP testing population growing on three sites in British Columbia, Canada, clearly demonstrating our method's superiority in capturing most of the available genetic gains in a substantially reduced timeline relative to the traditional approach. The proposed framework is expected to increase the efficiency of existing selective breeding programs, accelerate the start of new programs for ecologically and environmentally important tree species, and address climate-change caused biotic and abiotic stress concerns more effectively.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.184 |
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 teacher head, 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".