Literature DB >> 24553963

Efficiency of augmented p-rep designs in multi-environmental trials.

Jens Moehring1, Emlyn R Williams, Hans-Peter Piepho.   

Abstract

KEY MESSAGE: The paper shows that unreplicated designs in multi-environmental trials are most efficient. If replication per environment is needed then augmented p-rep designs outperform augmented and replicated designs in triticale and maize. In plant breeding, augmented designs with unreplicated entries are frequently used for early generation testing. With limited amount of seed, this design allows to use a maximum number of environments in multi-environmental trials (METs). Check plots enable the estimation of block effects, error variances and a connection of otherwise unconnected trials in METs. Cullis et al. (J Agri Biol Environ Stat 11:381-393, 2006) propose to replace check plots from a grid-plot design by plots of replicated entries leading to partially replicated (p-rep) designs. Williams et al. (Biom J 53:19-27, 2011) apply this idea to augmented designs (augmented p-rep designs). While p-rep designs are increasingly used in METs, a comparison of the efficiency of augmented p-rep designs and augmented designs in the range between replicated and unreplicated designs in METs is lacking. We simulated genetic effects and allocated them according to these four designs to plot yields of a triticale and a maize uniformity trial. The designs varied in the number of environments, but have a fixed number of entries and total plots. The error model and the assumption of fixed or random entry effects were varied in simulations. We extended our simulation for the triticale data by including correlated entry effects which are common in genomic selection. Results show an advantage of unreplicated and augmented p-rep designs and a preference for using random entry effects, especially in case of correlated effects reflecting relationships among entries. Spatial error models had minor advantages compared to purely randomization-based models.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24553963     DOI: 10.1007/s00122-014-2278-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Theor Appl Genet        ISSN: 0040-5752            Impact factor:   5.699


  17 in total

1.  Why not routinely use best linear unbiased predictors (BLUPs) as estimates of cholesterol, per cent fat from kcal and physical activity?

Authors:  E J Stanek; A Well; I Ockene
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1999-11-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Evaluation of genome-wide selection efficiency in maize nested association mapping populations.

Authors:  Zhigang Guo; Dominic M Tucker; Jianwei Lu; Venkata Kishore; Gilles Gay
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2011-09-22       Impact factor: 5.699

3.  Construction of resolvable spatial row-column designs.

Authors:  E R Williams; J A John; D Whitaker
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Multi-environment QTL mixed models for drought stress adaptation in wheat.

Authors:  Ky L Mathews; Marcos Malosetti; Scott Chapman; Lynne McIntyre; Matthew Reynolds; Ray Shorter; Fred van Eeuwijk
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2008-08-12       Impact factor: 5.699

Review 5.  Genomic selection in plant breeding: from theory to practice.

Authors:  Jean-Luc Jannink; Aaron J Lorenz; Hiroyoshi Iwata
Journal:  Brief Funct Genomics       Date:  2010-02-15       Impact factor: 4.241

6.  Development and assessment of DArT markers in triticale.

Authors:  A Badea; F Eudes; D Salmon; S Tuvesson; A Vrolijk; C-T Larsson; V Caig; E Huttner; A Kilian; André Laroche
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2011-03-11       Impact factor: 5.699

7.  Augmented p-rep designs.

Authors:  Emlyn Williams; Hans-Peter Piepho; David Whitaker
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2010-11-25       Impact factor: 2.207

8.  A stage-wise approach for the analysis of multi-environment trials.

Authors:  Hans-Peter Piepho; Jens Möhring; Torben Schulz-Streeck; Joseph O Ogutu
Journal:  Biom J       Date:  2012-09-25       Impact factor: 2.207

9.  Comparisons of single-stage and two-stage approaches to genomic selection.

Authors:  Torben Schulz-Streeck; Joseph O Ogutu; Hans-Peter Piepho
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2012-08-19       Impact factor: 5.699

10.  Mapping Rph20: a gene conferring adult plant resistance to Puccinia hordei in barley.

Authors:  L T Hickey; W Lawson; G J Platz; M Dieters; V N Arief; S Germán; S Fletcher; R F Park; D Singh; S Pereyra; J Franckowiak
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2011-03-15       Impact factor: 5.699

View more
  6 in total

1.  Inter-block information: to recover or not to recover it?

Authors:  Jens Möhring; Emlyn Williams; Hans-Peter Piepho
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2015-05-14       Impact factor: 5.699

2.  Enviromics in breeding: applications and perspectives on envirotypic-assisted selection.

Authors:  Rafael T Resende; Hans-Peter Piepho; Guilherme J M Rosa; Orzenil B Silva-Junior; Fabyano F E Silva; Marcos Deon V de Resende; Dario Grattapaglia
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2020-09-22       Impact factor: 5.699

3.  Assessment of genomic prediction reliability and optimization of experimental designs in multi-environment trials.

Authors:  Simon Rio; Deniz Akdemir; Tiago Carvalho; Julio Isidro Y Sánchez
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2021-11-22       Impact factor: 5.699

4.  Average semivariance directly yields accurate estimates of the genomic variance in complex trait analyses.

Authors:  Mitchell J Feldmann; Hans-Peter Piepho; Steven J Knapp
Journal:  G3 (Bethesda)       Date:  2022-05-30       Impact factor: 3.542

5.  The importance of phenotypic data analysis for genomic prediction - a case study comparing different spatial models in rye.

Authors:  Angela-Maria Bernal-Vasquez; Jens Möhring; Malthe Schmidt; Manfred Schönleben; Chris-Carolin Schön; Hans-Peter Piepho
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2014-08-04       Impact factor: 3.969

Review 6.  GplusE: beyond genomic selection.

Authors:  Ian Mackay; Eric Ober; John Hickey
Journal:  Food Energy Secur       Date:  2015-03-25       Impact factor: 4.109

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.