Cargando…
Optimizing Sparse Testing for Genomic Prediction of Plant Breeding Crops
While sparse testing methods have been proposed by researchers to improve the efficiency of genomic selection (GS) in breeding programs, there are several factors that can hinder this. In this research, we evaluated four methods (M1–M4) for sparse testing allocation of lines to environments under mu...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10137724/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37107685 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/genes14040927 |
_version_ | 1785032535795826688 |
---|---|
author | Montesinos-López, Osval A. Saint Pierre, Carolina Gezan, Salvador A. Bentley, Alison R. Mosqueda-González, Brandon A. Montesinos-López, Abelardo van Eeuwijk, Fred Beyene, Yoseph Gowda, Manje Gardner, Keith Gerard, Guillermo S. Crespo-Herrera, Leonardo Crossa, José |
author_facet | Montesinos-López, Osval A. Saint Pierre, Carolina Gezan, Salvador A. Bentley, Alison R. Mosqueda-González, Brandon A. Montesinos-López, Abelardo van Eeuwijk, Fred Beyene, Yoseph Gowda, Manje Gardner, Keith Gerard, Guillermo S. Crespo-Herrera, Leonardo Crossa, José |
author_sort | Montesinos-López, Osval A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | While sparse testing methods have been proposed by researchers to improve the efficiency of genomic selection (GS) in breeding programs, there are several factors that can hinder this. In this research, we evaluated four methods (M1–M4) for sparse testing allocation of lines to environments under multi-environmental trails for genomic prediction of unobserved lines. The sparse testing methods described in this study are applied in a two-stage analysis to build the genomic training and testing sets in a strategy that allows each location or environment to evaluate only a subset of all genotypes rather than all of them. To ensure a valid implementation, the sparse testing methods presented here require BLUEs (or BLUPs) of the lines to be computed at the first stage using an appropriate experimental design and statistical analyses in each location (or environment). The evaluation of the four cultivar allocation methods to environments of the second stage was done with four data sets (two large and two small) under a multi-trait and uni-trait framework. We found that the multi-trait model produced better genomic prediction (GP) accuracy than the uni-trait model and that methods M3 and M4 were slightly better than methods M1 and M2 for the allocation of lines to environments. Some of the most important findings, however, were that even under a scenario where we used a training-testing relation of 15–85%, the prediction accuracy of the four methods barely decreased. This indicates that genomic sparse testing methods for data sets under these scenarios can save considerable operational and financial resources with only a small loss in precision, which can be shown in our cost-benefit analysis. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10137724 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-101377242023-04-28 Optimizing Sparse Testing for Genomic Prediction of Plant Breeding Crops Montesinos-López, Osval A. Saint Pierre, Carolina Gezan, Salvador A. Bentley, Alison R. Mosqueda-González, Brandon A. Montesinos-López, Abelardo van Eeuwijk, Fred Beyene, Yoseph Gowda, Manje Gardner, Keith Gerard, Guillermo S. Crespo-Herrera, Leonardo Crossa, José Genes (Basel) Article While sparse testing methods have been proposed by researchers to improve the efficiency of genomic selection (GS) in breeding programs, there are several factors that can hinder this. In this research, we evaluated four methods (M1–M4) for sparse testing allocation of lines to environments under multi-environmental trails for genomic prediction of unobserved lines. The sparse testing methods described in this study are applied in a two-stage analysis to build the genomic training and testing sets in a strategy that allows each location or environment to evaluate only a subset of all genotypes rather than all of them. To ensure a valid implementation, the sparse testing methods presented here require BLUEs (or BLUPs) of the lines to be computed at the first stage using an appropriate experimental design and statistical analyses in each location (or environment). The evaluation of the four cultivar allocation methods to environments of the second stage was done with four data sets (two large and two small) under a multi-trait and uni-trait framework. We found that the multi-trait model produced better genomic prediction (GP) accuracy than the uni-trait model and that methods M3 and M4 were slightly better than methods M1 and M2 for the allocation of lines to environments. Some of the most important findings, however, were that even under a scenario where we used a training-testing relation of 15–85%, the prediction accuracy of the four methods barely decreased. This indicates that genomic sparse testing methods for data sets under these scenarios can save considerable operational and financial resources with only a small loss in precision, which can be shown in our cost-benefit analysis. MDPI 2023-04-17 /pmc/articles/PMC10137724/ /pubmed/37107685 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/genes14040927 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Montesinos-López, Osval A. Saint Pierre, Carolina Gezan, Salvador A. Bentley, Alison R. Mosqueda-González, Brandon A. Montesinos-López, Abelardo van Eeuwijk, Fred Beyene, Yoseph Gowda, Manje Gardner, Keith Gerard, Guillermo S. Crespo-Herrera, Leonardo Crossa, José Optimizing Sparse Testing for Genomic Prediction of Plant Breeding Crops |
title | Optimizing Sparse Testing for Genomic Prediction of Plant Breeding Crops |
title_full | Optimizing Sparse Testing for Genomic Prediction of Plant Breeding Crops |
title_fullStr | Optimizing Sparse Testing for Genomic Prediction of Plant Breeding Crops |
title_full_unstemmed | Optimizing Sparse Testing for Genomic Prediction of Plant Breeding Crops |
title_short | Optimizing Sparse Testing for Genomic Prediction of Plant Breeding Crops |
title_sort | optimizing sparse testing for genomic prediction of plant breeding crops |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10137724/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37107685 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/genes14040927 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT montesinoslopezosvala optimizingsparsetestingforgenomicpredictionofplantbreedingcrops AT saintpierrecarolina optimizingsparsetestingforgenomicpredictionofplantbreedingcrops AT gezansalvadora optimizingsparsetestingforgenomicpredictionofplantbreedingcrops AT bentleyalisonr optimizingsparsetestingforgenomicpredictionofplantbreedingcrops AT mosquedagonzalezbrandona optimizingsparsetestingforgenomicpredictionofplantbreedingcrops AT montesinoslopezabelardo optimizingsparsetestingforgenomicpredictionofplantbreedingcrops AT vaneeuwijkfred optimizingsparsetestingforgenomicpredictionofplantbreedingcrops AT beyeneyoseph optimizingsparsetestingforgenomicpredictionofplantbreedingcrops AT gowdamanje optimizingsparsetestingforgenomicpredictionofplantbreedingcrops AT gardnerkeith optimizingsparsetestingforgenomicpredictionofplantbreedingcrops AT gerardguillermos optimizingsparsetestingforgenomicpredictionofplantbreedingcrops AT crespoherreraleonardo optimizingsparsetestingforgenomicpredictionofplantbreedingcrops AT crossajose optimizingsparsetestingforgenomicpredictionofplantbreedingcrops |