2021
DOI: 10.1007/s00122-021-03956-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Genome-wide association mapping and genomic prediction of yield-related traits and starch pasting properties in cassava

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

2
7
1

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 115 publications
2
7
1
Order By: Relevance
“…We found predictive ability values per trait by different models varied significantly, which was opposite 36 , 42 as well as similar 35 , 51 , 137 , 138 to previous reports. For example, Bari et al (2021) 36 determined the predictive ability for six traits in a diverse pea germplasm collection using five different models.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 78%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We found predictive ability values per trait by different models varied significantly, which was opposite 36 , 42 as well as similar 35 , 51 , 137 , 138 to previous reports. For example, Bari et al (2021) 36 determined the predictive ability for six traits in a diverse pea germplasm collection using five different models.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 78%
“…On the other hand, Azodi et al (2019) 35 , investigated 12 linear and non-linear models for different traits in six species and concluded that predictive ability by different models varies significantly for all traits. Yu et al (2022) 51 , Phumichai et al (2022) 137 , and Roorkiwal et al (2016) 138 revealed the same phenomenon in rice, cassava, and chickpea, respectively. These reports and our findings confirmed that no single model worked best for all traits i.e., specific models are good for specific traits.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…Distribution of the marker allelic effects associated with increased dry matter content in (A) breeding, and (B) pre-breeding populations. Phumichai et al, 2022). To our knowledge, this is the first study to use this metric for marker validation in cassava.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…The k -fold cross-validation, where the original dataset is randomly partitioned into equally sized k -subsets (a single subset is retained as the validation data for testing the model, and the remaining k - 1 subsets are used as training data), is one of the most commonly used cross-validation methods ( Refaeilzadeh et al., 2009 ; Mathew et al., 2015 ). It is routinely used to assess genomic prediction accuracies ( Okeke et al., 2017 ; de Andrade et al., 2019 ; Phumichai et al., 2022 ). To our knowledge, this is the first study to use this metric for marker validation in cassava.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The k -fold cross-validation, where the original dataset is randomly partitioned into equally sized k -subsets (a single subset is retained as the validation data for testing the model, and the remaining k - 1 subsets are used as training data) is one of the most commonly used cross-validation methods (Refaeilzadeh et al, 2009; Mathew et al, 2015). It is routinely used to assess genomic prediction accuracies (Okeke et al, 2017; Andrade et al, 2019; Phumichai et al, 2022). To our knowledge, this is the first study to use this metric for marker validation in cassava.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%