2010
DOI: 10.1093/bfgp/elq001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Genomic selection in plant breeding: from theory to practice

Abstract: We intuitively believe that the dramatic drop in the cost of DNA marker information we have experienced should have immediate benefits in accelerating the delivery of crop varieties with improved yield, quality and biotic and abiotic stress tolerance. But these traits are complex and affected by many genes, each with small effect. Traditional marker-assisted selection has been ineffective for such traits. The introduction of genomic selection (GS), however, has shifted that paradigm. Rather than seeking to ide… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

11
792
1
3

Year Published

2012
2012
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 987 publications
(807 citation statements)
references
References 64 publications
11
792
1
3
Order By: Relevance
“…For instance, high density SNP arrays have become available in case of chickpea (Roorkiwal et al, 2017), groundnut (Pandey et al, 2017a), and pigeonpea (Saxena et al, 2017 and unpublished). In addition, the efficiency and accuracy with which superior lines can be predicted also depend on the size of the reference population (Jannink et al, 2010;Lorenz et al, 2011). The genetic relatedness or population structure (Saatchi et al, 2011;Riedelsheimer et al, 2013;Wray et al, 2013) may result in overestimating the heritability of the traits (Price et al, 2010;Visscher et al, 2012;Wray et al, 2013).…”
Section: Genotyping Platforms Training Populations and Statistical Mmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For instance, high density SNP arrays have become available in case of chickpea (Roorkiwal et al, 2017), groundnut (Pandey et al, 2017a), and pigeonpea (Saxena et al, 2017 and unpublished). In addition, the efficiency and accuracy with which superior lines can be predicted also depend on the size of the reference population (Jannink et al, 2010;Lorenz et al, 2011). The genetic relatedness or population structure (Saatchi et al, 2011;Riedelsheimer et al, 2013;Wray et al, 2013) may result in overestimating the heritability of the traits (Price et al, 2010;Visscher et al, 2012;Wray et al, 2013).…”
Section: Genotyping Platforms Training Populations and Statistical Mmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Genomic selection (Meuwissen et al, 2001) using a large number of markers has been studied by various researchers in plant populations (Bernardo and Yu, 2007;Piepho, 2009;Jannink et al, 2010;Crossa et al, 2010 among others). Significant literatures also exist in animal breeding research (for example, Gonzalez-Recio et al, 2008;van Raden et al, 2008;de los Campos et al, 2009a;Hayes et al, 2009 andToosi et al, 2009).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1. Consider the typical situation for linear regression, where we have the training set y ∈ R l , x ∈ R l×n , in a standard linear regression, we wish to find parameters β 0 , β such that the sum of square 2 , is minimized. Many machine learning methods have been applied to the genetic trait prediction problem, such as Elastic-Net, Lasso, Ridge Regression [10,11], Bayes A, Bayes B [1], Bayes C π [12], and Bayesian Lasso [13,14].…”
Section: Preliminariesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Whole genome prediction of complex phenotypic traits using high-density genotyping arrays has attracted a lot of attention, as it is relevant to the fields of plant and animal breeding and genetic epidemiology [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]. Given a set of biallelic molecular markers, such as SNPs, with genotype values typically encoded as {0, 1, 2} on a collection of plant, animal or human samples, the goal is to predict the quantitative trait values by simultaneously modeling all marker effects.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%