2020
DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2020.00025
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Exploring Deep Learning for Complex Trait Genomic Prediction in Polyploid Outcrossing Species

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

9
126
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 112 publications
(136 citation statements)
references
References 85 publications
(139 reference statements)
9
126
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The authors also pointed out that the use of DL methods in GP of polyploid plants allows one to exploit its non-linearity, and it has less restrictive assumptions in comparison to traditional linear model-based methods. Moreover, polyploid plants might present higher degrees of complete and partial intra-locus interactions compared with diploid species (Zingaretti et al, 2020). These results are not in agreement with this study, in which the PA of DL did not evidence differences between the contributions of the additive or dominance effects (Table 4), since DL was the best method in the prediction (in terms of PA) of all traits.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 91%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…The authors also pointed out that the use of DL methods in GP of polyploid plants allows one to exploit its non-linearity, and it has less restrictive assumptions in comparison to traditional linear model-based methods. Moreover, polyploid plants might present higher degrees of complete and partial intra-locus interactions compared with diploid species (Zingaretti et al, 2020). These results are not in agreement with this study, in which the PA of DL did not evidence differences between the contributions of the additive or dominance effects (Table 4), since DL was the best method in the prediction (in terms of PA) of all traits.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 91%
“…These results are not in agreement with this study, in which the PA of DL did not evidence differences between the contributions of the additive or dominance effects (Table 4), since DL was the best method in the prediction (in terms of PA) of all traits. These findings may be due to the fact that Bellot et al (2018) and Zingaretti et al (2020) used the Convolutional Neural Networks, whereas in the present study, the LSTM method was used; however, we emphasize that other studies must be performed to corroborate this argument. Interestingly, Alves et al (2020) compared the predictive performance of GBLUP with ANN method in simulated traits considering different levels of dominance effects.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 66%
See 3 more Smart Citations