EurekaMag.com logo
+ Site Statistics
References:
53,214,146
Abstracts:
29,074,682
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
EurekaMag Most Shared ContentMost Shared
EurekaMag PDF Full Text ContentPDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full TextRequest PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on FacebookFollow on Facebook
Follow on TwitterFollow on Twitter
Follow on Google+Follow on Google+
Follow on LinkedInFollow on LinkedIn

+ Translate

Best linear unbiased prediction of the performance of crosses between untested maize inbreds


Crop Science 36(4): 872-876
Best linear unbiased prediction of the performance of crosses between untested maize inbreds
In some situations, maize (Zea mays L.) inbreds may not have testcross data available for best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) of single-cross performance. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of BLUP when the parents of a single cross have not been tested in hybrid combination within a given heterotic pattern. Yield, moisture, stalk lodging, and root lodging data were obtained for 4099 single crosses evaluated by Limagrain Genetics in multilocation trials in 1990 to 1994. For each of 16 heterotic patterns, the performance of an i times j single cross was predicted as follows: (i) with all available testcross data for both i and j and their relatives; (ii) disregarding all testcross data for i; (iii) disregarding all testcross data for j; and (iv) disregarding all testcross data for both i and j. Correlations between predicted and observed performance, obtained with a cross-validation procedure, were highest when testcross data for both parents of a single cross were utilized. Except for moisture, these correlations were severely reduced to lt 0.50 when both i and j were assumed untested. Prediction of performance of the cross between two untested inbreds seems unwarranted, but this situation is rare because new inbreds are usually crossed to extensively tested inbreds. The performance of the cross between an untested inbred and a tested inbred was predicted effectively when the number of tested single crosses in the heterotic pattern was large. In this situation, the highest correlations were apprxeq 90% of the corresponding correlations obtained when data were available for both parents of the single cross.

(PDF same-day service: $19.90)

Accession: 002763963

DOI: 10.2135/cropsci1996.0011183X003600040009x



Related references

Best linear unbiased prediction of maize single-cross performance. Crop Science 36(1): 50-56, 1996

Best linear unbiased prediction of maize single-cross performance given erroneous inbred relationships. Crop Science 36(4): 862-866, 1996

Modified full-sib selection and best linear unbiased prediction of progeny performance in a European F2 maize population. Plant Breeding 125(3): 248-253, 2006

Testcross additive and dominance effects in best linear unbiased prediction of maize single-cross performance. Tag. Theoretical and Applied Genetics. Theoretische und Angewandte Genetik 93(7): 1098-1102, 1996

Modified full-sib selection and best linear unbiased prediction of progeny performance in a European F subscript 2(B maize population. Plant breeding 125(3): 248-253, 2006

New method for analysing two-way network crosses - best linear unbiased prediction. Journal of Northeast Agricultural University Chinese Edition 25(2): 126-131, 1994

Prediction of maize double-cross hybrids using the best linear unbiased prediction with microsatellite marker information. Genetics and Molecular Research 10(1): 25-35, 2011

Trends in population parameters and best linear unbiased prediction of progeny performance in a European F(2) maize population under modified recurrent full-sib selection. Tag. Theoretical and Applied Genetics. Theoretische und Angewandte Genetik 112(3): 483-491, 2005

Prediction of hybrid performance in rice: comparisons among best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) procedure, midparent value, and molecular marker distance. International Rice Research Notes 25(3): 12-13, 2000

Best linear unbiased prediction of triticale hybrid performance. Euphytica 191(2): 223-230, 2013