ArticleRice (New York, N.Y.)2025
Modelling and Using Spatial Effects in Nationwide Historical Data Improve Genomic Prediction of Rice Heading Date in Japan.
Article in Rice (New York, N.Y.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dissecting Agronomically favorable genotypes in temperate japonica rice via haplotype analysis of a Japan-MAGIC population.The Plant journal : for cell and molecular biology · 2026Article
- The current state of the use of DNA markers for improving the efficiency of rice breeding in Japan.Breeding science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genomic prediction is a promising strategy for enhancing crop breeding efficiency. Historical data of breeding and cultivation tests from geographically wide regions presumably contain rich information for training genomic prediction models. Therefore, it is essential to explore methodologies to effectively handle such data. To improve the prediction accuracy of models using historical data, we incorporated a spatial model to account for spatial structures among field stations, in addition to conventional genomic prediction models. Targeting the rice heading date from historical data across Japan, we first constructed conventional genomic prediction models using genomic and/or meteorological elements as predictors. Next, we obtain the residual terms. Assuming that the residual terms were partly explained by the spatial effects assigned to each field station, a spatial model was applied to the residual terms and the spatial effects were calculated. Our genomic prediction models performed best when the genome, meteorological elements, and genome-meteorology interactions were included (model 3), and they performed second best when the genome and meteorological elements were included (model 2). For these genomic prediction models, residual terms were spatially biased and corrected for spatial effects. For the best model (model 3), the root mean squared errors (RMSE) of genomic prediction combined with spatial effects were approximately 3.6 days under tenfold cross-validation and approximately 5.1 days under leave-one-line-out cross-validation. The inclusion of the spatial effects improved the RMSEs by approximately 15% and 9% for the former and latter, respectively. Lines with highly improved predictions of the spatial effects were developed, mainly in the northern Tohoku region. The spatial effects were heterogeneous and regional patterns were detected. These findings imply that spatial effects are important not only for improving prediction performance but also for dissecting the model itself to identify the factors contributing to model improvement.
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.