ArticleThe plant genome2023
Comparing artificial-intelligence techniques with state-of-the-art parametric prediction models for predicting soybean traits.
Article in The plant genome, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Improving grain yield prediction in Southern US oat germplasm using genomics information and environmental covariates.The plant genome · 2026Article
- Non-linear kernel methods for genomic prediction of soybean yield and quality in multi-environment trials.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2026Article
- Tailoring AI and ML models for genotype-by-environment prediction leveraging environmental covariates: A European rye example.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2026Article
- Impact of environmental covariates summarization on predictive ability in genomic selection.The plant genome · 2026Article
- AdaptiveGS: an explainable genomic selection framework based on adaptive stacking ensemble machine learning.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2025Article
- Improved genomic prediction performance with ensembles of diverse models.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2025Article
- Obscured-ensemble models for genomic prediction.PloS one · 2025Article
- Using machine learning to combine genetic and environmental data for maize grain yield predictions across multi-environment trials.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2024Article
- Identification of QTL-allele systems of seed size and oil content for simultaneous genomic improvement in Northeast China soybeans.Frontiers in plant science · 2024Article
- Comparing artificial-intelligence techniques with state-of-the-art parametric prediction models for predicting soybean traits.The plant genome · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] is a significant source of protein and oil and is also widely used as animal feed. Thus, developing lines that are superior in terms of yield, protein, and oil content is important to feed the ever-growing population. As opposed to high-cost phenotyping, genotyping is both cost and time efficient for breeders because evaluating new lines in different environments (location-year combinations) can be costly. Several genomic prediction (GP) methods have been developed to use the marker and environment data effectively to predict the yield or other relevant phenotypic traits of crops. Our study compares a conventional GP method (genomic best linear unbiased predictor [GBLUP]), a kernel method (Gaussian kernel [GK]), an artificial-intelligence (AI) method (deep learning [DL]), and a hybrid method that corresponds to the emulation of a DL model using a kernel method (an arc-cosine kernel [AK]) in terms of their prediction accuracies for predicting grain yield, oil, and protein using data from the soybean nested association mapping experiment (1,379 genotypes tested in six environments, all genotypes in all environments). The relative performance of the four methods varied with the response variable and whether the model includes the genotype × environmental interaction (G×E) effects or not. The GBLUP consistently showed better performances, whereas GK and AK followed a similar pattern to GBLUP and DL performed slightly worse than the other three methods in most of the cases; however, this may also be attributed to suboptimal hyperparameters. The DL method performed particularly worse than the other three methods in presence of the G×E effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.