Person: Bandeira e Sousa, M.
Loading...
Email Address
Birth Date
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Job Title
Last Name
Bandeira e Sousa
First Name
M.
Name
Bandeira e Sousa, M.
ORCID ID
0000-0001-7887-9543 3 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
- Effect of F1 and F2 generations on genetic variability and working steps of doubled haploid production in maize(Public Library of Science, 2019) Couto, E.; Cury, M.N.; Bandeira e Sousa, M.; Granato, I.; Vidotti, M.S.; Garbuglio, D.D.; Crossa, J.; Burgueño, J.; Fritsche-Neto, R.
Publication - Genomic-enabled prediction Kernel models with random intercepts for multi-environment trials(Genetics Society of America, 2018) Cuevas, J.; Granato, I.; Fritsche-Neto, R.; Montesinos-Lopez, O.A.; Burgueño, J.; Bandeira e Sousa, M.; Crossa, J.In this study, we compared the prediction accuracy of the main genotypic effect model (MM) without G×E interactions, the multi-environment single variance G×E deviation model (MDs), and the multienvironment environment-specific variance G×E deviation model (MDe) where the random genetic effects of the lines are modeled with the markers (or pedigree). With the objective of further modeling the genetic residual of the lines, we incorporated the random intercepts of the lines (l) and generated another three models. Each of these 6 models were fitted with a linear kernel method (Genomic Best Linear Unbiased Predictor, GB) and a Gaussian Kernel (GK) method. We compared these 12 model-method combinations with another two multi-environment G×E interactions models with unstructured variance-covariances (MUC) using GB and GK kernels (4 model-method). Thus, we compared the genomic-enabled prediction accuracy of a total of 16 model-method combinations on two maize data sets with positive phenotypic correlations among environments, and on two wheat data sets with complex G×E that includes some negative and close to zero phenotypic correlations among environments. The two models (MDs and MDE with the random intercept of the lines and the GK method) were computationally efficient and gave high prediction accuracy in the two maize data sets. Regarding the more complex G×E wheat data sets, the prediction accuracy of the model-method combination with G×E, MDs and MDe, including the random intercepts of the lines with GK method had important savings in computing time as compared with the G×E interaction multi-environment models with unstructured variance-covariances but with lower genomic prediction accuracy.
Publication - Genomic-enabled prediction in maize using kernel models with genotype x environment interaction(Genetics Society of America, 2017) Bandeira e Sousa, M.; Cuevas, J.; Couto, E.; Pérez-Rodríguez, P.; Jarquin, D.; Fritsche-Neto, R.; Burgueño, J.; Crossa, J.Multi-environment trials are routinely conducted in plant breeding to select candidates for the next selection cycle. In this study, we compare the prediction accuracy of four developed genomic-enabled prediction models: (1) single-environment, main genotypic effect model (SM); (2) multi-environment, main genotypic effects model (MM); (3) multi-environment, single variance G×E deviation model (MDs); and (4) multi-environment, environment-specific variance G×E deviation model (MDe). Each of these four models were fitted using two kernel methods: a linear kernel Genomic Best Linear Unbiased Predictor, GBLUP (GB), and a nonlinear kernel Gaussian kernel (GK). The eight model-method combinations were applied to two extensive Brazilian maize data sets (HEL and USP data sets), having different numbers of maize hybrids evaluated in different environments for grain yield (GY), plant height (PH), and ear height (EH). Results show that the MDe and the MDs models fitted with the Gaussian kernel (MDe-GK, and MDs-GK) had the highest prediction accuracy. For GY in the HEL data set, the increase in prediction accuracy of SM-GK over SM-GB ranged from 9 to 32%. For the MM, MDs, and MDe models, the increase in prediction accuracy of GK over GB ranged from 9 to 49%. For GY in the USP data set, the increase in prediction accuracy of SM-GK over SM-GB ranged from 0 to 7%. For the MM, MDs, and MDe models, the increase in prediction accuracy of GK over GB ranged from 34 to 70%. For traits PH and EH, gains in prediction accuracy of models with GK compared to models with GB were smaller than those achieved in GY. Also, these gains in prediction accuracy decreased when a more difficult prediction problem was studied.
Publication