4.7 Article

Information Based Diagnostic for Genetic Variance Parameter Estimation in Multi-Environment Trials

期刊

FRONTIERS IN PLANT SCIENCE
卷 12, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2021.785430

关键词

multi-environment trials; linear mixed models; D-optimality; variety connectivity; simulation study

资金

  1. Grains Research and Development Corporation (GRDC)
  2. Statistics for the Australian Grains Industry (SAGI) project [UW00009]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper explores the use of D-optimality criterion as a diagnostic to improve the accuracy of genetic variance parameter estimation and reliability of predictions, in the context of multi-environment trials in plant breeding programs.
Plant breeding programs evaluate varieties in series of field trials across years and locations, referred to as multi-environment trials (METs). These are an essential part of variety evaluation with the key aim of the statistical analysis of these datasets to accurately estimate the variety by environment (VE) effects. It has previously been thought that the number of varieties in common between environments, referred to as variety connectivity, was a key driver of the reliability of genetic variance parameter estimation and that this in turn affected the reliability of predictions of VE effects. In this paper we have provided the link between the objectives of this work and those in model-based experimental design. We propose the use of the D-optimality criterion as a diagnostic to capture the information available for the residual maximum likelihood (REML) estimation of the genetic variance parameters. We demonstrate the methods for a dataset with pedigree information as well as evaluating the performance of the diagnostic using two simulation studies. This measure is shown to provide a superior diagnostic to the traditional connectivity type measure in the sense of better forecasting the uncertainty of genetic variance parameter estimates.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据