↓ Skip to main content

Genomic prediction in contrast to a genome-wide association study in explaining heritable variation of complex growth traits in breeding populations of Eucalyptus

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
68 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
127 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Genomic prediction in contrast to a genome-wide association study in explaining heritable variation of complex growth traits in breeding populations of Eucalyptus
Published in
BMC Genomics, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12864-017-3920-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bárbara S. F. Müller, Leandro G. Neves, Janeo E. de Almeida Filho, Márcio F. R. Resende, Patricio R. Muñoz, Paulo E. T. dos Santos, Estefano Paludzyszyn Filho, Matias Kirst, Dario Grattapaglia

Abstract

The advent of high-throughput genotyping technologies coupled to genomic prediction methods established a new paradigm to integrate genomics and breeding. We carried out whole-genome prediction and contrasted it to a genome-wide association study (GWAS) for growth traits in breeding populations of Eucalyptus benthamii (n =505) and Eucalyptus pellita (n =732). Both species are of increasing commercial interest for the development of germplasm adapted to environmental stresses. Predictive ability reached 0.16 in E. benthamii and 0.44 in E. pellita for diameter growth. Predictive abilities using either Genomic BLUP or different Bayesian methods were similar, suggesting that growth adequately fits the infinitesimal model. Genomic prediction models using ~5000-10,000 SNPs provided predictive abilities equivalent to using all 13,787 and 19,506 SNPs genotyped in the E. benthamii and E. pellita populations, respectively. No difference was detected in predictive ability when different sets of SNPs were utilized, based on position (equidistantly genome-wide, inside genes, linkage disequilibrium pruned or on single chromosomes), as long as the total number of SNPs used was above ~5000. Predictive abilities obtained by removing relatedness between training and validation sets fell near zero for E. benthamii and were halved for E. pellita. These results corroborate the current view that relatedness is the main driver of genomic prediction, although some short-range historical linkage disequilibrium (LD) was likely captured for E. pellita. A GWAS identified only one significant association for volume growth in E. pellita, illustrating the fact that while genome-wide regression is able to account for large proportions of the heritability, very little or none of it is captured into significant associations using GWAS in breeding populations of the size evaluated in this study. This study provides further experimental data supporting positive prospects of using genome-wide data to capture large proportions of trait heritability and predict growth traits in trees with accuracies equal or better than those attainable by phenotypic selection. Additionally, our results document the superiority of the whole-genome regression approach in accounting for large proportions of the heritability of complex traits such as growth in contrast to the limited value of the local GWAS approach toward breeding applications in forest trees.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 127 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 27 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 19%
Student > Master 19 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 9%
Other 7 6%
Other 18 14%
Unknown 20 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 73 57%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 18 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 2%
Environmental Science 2 2%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Other 5 4%
Unknown 24 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 July 2017.
All research outputs
#17,905,157
of 22,988,380 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#7,610
of 10,690 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#224,223
of 312,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#150
of 225 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,988,380 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,690 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,555 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 225 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.