Combining Crop Growth Modeling and Statistical Genetic Modeling to Evaluate Phenotyping Strategies.

Clicks: 339
ID: 70879
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #43 of 187 articles by views in Frontiers in plant science

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 187 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Genomic prediction of complex traits, say yield, benefits from including information on correlated component traits. Statistical criteria to decide which yield components to consider in the prediction model include the heritability of the component traits and their genetic correlation with yield. Not all component traits are easy to measure. Therefore, it may be attractive to include proxies to yield components, where these proxies are measured in (high-throughput) phenotyping platforms during the growing season. Using the Agricultural Production Systems Simulator (APSIM)-wheat cropping systems model, we simulated phenotypes for a wheat diversity panel segregating for a set of physiological parameters regulating phenology, biomass partitioning, and the ability to capture environmental resources. The distribution of the additive quantitative trait locus effects regulating the APSIM physiological parameters approximated the same distribution of quantitative trait locus effects on real phenotypic data for yield and heading date. We use the crop growth model APSIM-wheat to simulate phenotypes in three Australian environments with contrasting water deficit patterns. The APSIM output contained the dynamics of biomass and canopy cover, plus yield at the end of the growing season. Each water deficit pattern triggered different adaptive mechanisms and the impact of component traits differed between drought scenarios. We evaluated multiple phenotyping schedules by adding plot and measurement error to the dynamics of biomass and canopy cover. We used these trait dynamics to fit parametric models and P-splines to extract parameters with a larger heritability than the phenotypes at individual time points. We used those parameters in multi-trait prediction models for final yield. The combined use of crop growth models and multi-trait genomic prediction models provides a procedure to assess the efficiency of phenotyping strategies and compare methods to model trait dynamics. It also allows us to quantify the impact of yield components on yield prediction accuracy even in different environment types. In scenarios with mild or no water stress, yield prediction accuracy benefitted from including biomass and green canopy cover parameters. The advantage of the multi-trait model was smaller for the early-drought scenario, due to the reduced correlation between the secondary and the target trait. Therefore, multi-trait genomic prediction models for yield require scenario-specific correlated traits.
Reference Key
bustoskorts2019combiningfrontiers Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Bustos-Korts, Daniela;Boer, Martin P;Malosetti, Marcos;Chapman, Scott;Chenu, Karine;Zheng, Bangyou;van Eeuwijk, Fred A;
Journal Frontiers in plant science
Year 2019
DOI
10.3389/fpls.2019.01491
URL
Keywords
wheat genomic prediction apsim model p-spline crop growth model dynamic traits genotype to phenotype trait hierarchy

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.