Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37731980›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in plant science2023

Haplotype blocks for genomic prediction: a comparative evaluation in multiple crop datasets.

Sven E Weber, Matthias Frisch, Rod J Snowdon, Kai P Voss-Fels

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in plant science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Genomic selection for seed yield enhances flax breeding efficiency.Molecular breeding : new strategies in plant improvement · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Haplotype stacking to improve stability of stripe rust resistance in wheat.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Sven E WeberDepartment of Plant Breeding, Justus Liebig University, Giessen, Germany.
Matthias FrischDepartment of Biometry and Population Genetics, Justus Liebig University, Giessen, Germany.
Rod J SnowdonDepartment of Plant Breeding, Justus Liebig University, Giessen, Germany.
Kai P Voss-FelsInstitute for Grapevine Breeding, Hochschule Geisenheim University, Geisenheim, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In modern plant breeding, genomic selection is becoming the gold standard for selection of superior genotypes. The basis for genomic prediction models is a set of phenotyped lines along with their genotypic profile. With high marker density and linkage disequilibrium (LD) between markers, genotype data in breeding populations tends to exhibit considerable redundancy. Therefore, interest is growing in the use of haplotype blocks to overcome redundancy by summarizing co-inherited features. Moreover, haplotype blocks can help to capture local epistasis caused by interacting loci. Here, we compared genomic prediction methods that either used single SNPs or haplotype blocks with regards to their prediction accuracy for important traits in crop datasets. We used four published datasets from canola, maize, wheat and soybean. Different approaches to construct haplotype blocks were compared, including blocks based on LD, physical distance, number of adjacent markers and the algorithms implemented in the software "

Indexed as

genomic predictiongenomic selectionhaploblockshaplotype blocksSNP markers

Identifiers

PMID37731980
PMCPMC10507710

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.