Genomic and pedigree‐based predictive ability for quality traits in tea (Camellia sinensis (L.) O. Kuntze)

Genetic improvement of quality traits in tea ( Camellia sinensis (L.) O. Kuntze) through conventional breeding methods has been limited, because tea quality is a difficult and expensive trait to measure. Genomic selection (GS) is suitable for predicting such complex traits, as it uses genome wide ma...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Euphytica 2021-03, Vol.217 (3), Article 32
Hauptverfasser: Lubanga, Nelson, Massawe, Festo, Mayes, Sean
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 3
container_start_page
container_title Euphytica
container_volume 217
creator Lubanga, Nelson
Massawe, Festo
Mayes, Sean
description Genetic improvement of quality traits in tea ( Camellia sinensis (L.) O. Kuntze) through conventional breeding methods has been limited, because tea quality is a difficult and expensive trait to measure. Genomic selection (GS) is suitable for predicting such complex traits, as it uses genome wide markers to estimate the genetic values of individuals. We compared the prediction accuracies of six genomic prediction models including Bayesian ridge regression (BRR), genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP), BayesA, BayesB, BayesC and reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces models incorporating the pedigree relationship namely; RKHS-pedigree, RKHS-markers and RKHS markers and pedigree (RKHS-MP) to determine the breeding values for 12 tea quality traits. One hundred and three tea genotypes were genotyped using genotyping-by-sequencing and phenotyped using nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy in replicated trials. We also compared the effect of trait heritability and training population size on prediction accuracies. The traits with the highest prediction accuracies were; theogallin (0.59), epicatechin gallate (ECG) (0.56) and theobromine (0.61), while the traits with the lowest prediction accuracies were theanine (0.32) and caffeine (0.39). The performance of all the GS models were almost the same, with BRR (0.53), BayesA (0.52), GBLUP (0.50) and RKHS-MP (0.50) performing slightly better than the others. Heritability estimates were moderate to high (0.35–0.92). Prediction accuracies increased with increasing training population size and trait heritability. We conclude that the moderate to high prediction accuracies observed suggests GS is a promising approach in tea improvement and could be implemented in breeding programmes.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s10681-021-02774-3
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2487650118</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2487650118</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-30653753fa01e09cdba0a15a438acd32685544402d15f89080f62eb32a4399c83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMFKw0AQhhdRsFZfwNOCl3pInd3NbpKjFK1ioRc9L5tkUrakm3Y3EerJR_AZfRLTRvDmYZjh5___gY-QawZTBpDcBQYqZRHwwyRJHIkTMmIyEZEEBadkBMDiiAuhzslFCGsAyBIJI1LP0TUbW1DjSrrF0q484vfnV24C9oLvlaK170hNbmvb7mnVeLrrzPFuvbFtoNbRFg2dzMwG69oaGqxDF2ygk8X0li6n9KVz7QfeXpKzytQBr373mLw9PrzOnqLFcv48u19EhVCijQQoKRIpKgMMISvK3IBh0sQiNUUpuEqljOMYeMlklWaQQqU45oL3jiwrUjEmN0Pv1je7DkOr103nXf9S8zhNlATGDi4-uArfhOCx0ltvN8bvNQN9oKoHqrqnqo9UtehDYgiF3uxW6P-q_0n9ADG4eY0</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2487650118</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Genomic and pedigree‐based predictive ability for quality traits in tea (Camellia sinensis (L.) O. Kuntze)</title><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Lubanga, Nelson ; Massawe, Festo ; Mayes, Sean</creator><creatorcontrib>Lubanga, Nelson ; Massawe, Festo ; Mayes, Sean</creatorcontrib><description>Genetic improvement of quality traits in tea ( Camellia sinensis (L.) O. Kuntze) through conventional breeding methods has been limited, because tea quality is a difficult and expensive trait to measure. Genomic selection (GS) is suitable for predicting such complex traits, as it uses genome wide markers to estimate the genetic values of individuals. We compared the prediction accuracies of six genomic prediction models including Bayesian ridge regression (BRR), genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP), BayesA, BayesB, BayesC and reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces models incorporating the pedigree relationship namely; RKHS-pedigree, RKHS-markers and RKHS markers and pedigree (RKHS-MP) to determine the breeding values for 12 tea quality traits. One hundred and three tea genotypes were genotyped using genotyping-by-sequencing and phenotyped using nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy in replicated trials. We also compared the effect of trait heritability and training population size on prediction accuracies. The traits with the highest prediction accuracies were; theogallin (0.59), epicatechin gallate (ECG) (0.56) and theobromine (0.61), while the traits with the lowest prediction accuracies were theanine (0.32) and caffeine (0.39). The performance of all the GS models were almost the same, with BRR (0.53), BayesA (0.52), GBLUP (0.50) and RKHS-MP (0.50) performing slightly better than the others. Heritability estimates were moderate to high (0.35–0.92). Prediction accuracies increased with increasing training population size and trait heritability. We conclude that the moderate to high prediction accuracies observed suggests GS is a promising approach in tea improvement and could be implemented in breeding programmes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0014-2336</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-5060</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10681-021-02774-3</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands</publisher><subject>Bayesian analysis ; Biomedical and Life Sciences ; Biotechnology ; Breeding ; Breeding methods ; Caffeine ; Camellia sinensis ; Epicatechin ; Genetic improvement ; Genomes ; Genomics ; Genotypes ; Genotyping ; Heritability ; Hilbert space ; Life Sciences ; Magnetic resonance spectroscopy ; Markers ; Mathematical models ; Model accuracy ; NMR ; NMR spectroscopy ; Nuclear magnetic resonance ; Pedigree ; Plant Genetics and Genomics ; Plant Pathology ; Plant Physiology ; Plant Sciences ; Population number ; Prediction models ; Regression analysis ; Tea ; Theanine ; Training</subject><ispartof>Euphytica, 2021-03, Vol.217 (3), Article 32</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2021</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2021. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-30653753fa01e09cdba0a15a438acd32685544402d15f89080f62eb32a4399c83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-30653753fa01e09cdba0a15a438acd32685544402d15f89080f62eb32a4399c83</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10681-021-02774-3$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10681-021-02774-3$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lubanga, Nelson</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Massawe, Festo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mayes, Sean</creatorcontrib><title>Genomic and pedigree‐based predictive ability for quality traits in tea (Camellia sinensis (L.) O. Kuntze)</title><title>Euphytica</title><addtitle>Euphytica</addtitle><description>Genetic improvement of quality traits in tea ( Camellia sinensis (L.) O. Kuntze) through conventional breeding methods has been limited, because tea quality is a difficult and expensive trait to measure. Genomic selection (GS) is suitable for predicting such complex traits, as it uses genome wide markers to estimate the genetic values of individuals. We compared the prediction accuracies of six genomic prediction models including Bayesian ridge regression (BRR), genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP), BayesA, BayesB, BayesC and reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces models incorporating the pedigree relationship namely; RKHS-pedigree, RKHS-markers and RKHS markers and pedigree (RKHS-MP) to determine the breeding values for 12 tea quality traits. One hundred and three tea genotypes were genotyped using genotyping-by-sequencing and phenotyped using nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy in replicated trials. We also compared the effect of trait heritability and training population size on prediction accuracies. The traits with the highest prediction accuracies were; theogallin (0.59), epicatechin gallate (ECG) (0.56) and theobromine (0.61), while the traits with the lowest prediction accuracies were theanine (0.32) and caffeine (0.39). The performance of all the GS models were almost the same, with BRR (0.53), BayesA (0.52), GBLUP (0.50) and RKHS-MP (0.50) performing slightly better than the others. Heritability estimates were moderate to high (0.35–0.92). Prediction accuracies increased with increasing training population size and trait heritability. We conclude that the moderate to high prediction accuracies observed suggests GS is a promising approach in tea improvement and could be implemented in breeding programmes.</description><subject>Bayesian analysis</subject><subject>Biomedical and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Biotechnology</subject><subject>Breeding</subject><subject>Breeding methods</subject><subject>Caffeine</subject><subject>Camellia sinensis</subject><subject>Epicatechin</subject><subject>Genetic improvement</subject><subject>Genomes</subject><subject>Genomics</subject><subject>Genotypes</subject><subject>Genotyping</subject><subject>Heritability</subject><subject>Hilbert space</subject><subject>Life Sciences</subject><subject>Magnetic resonance spectroscopy</subject><subject>Markers</subject><subject>Mathematical models</subject><subject>Model accuracy</subject><subject>NMR</subject><subject>NMR spectroscopy</subject><subject>Nuclear magnetic resonance</subject><subject>Pedigree</subject><subject>Plant Genetics and Genomics</subject><subject>Plant Pathology</subject><subject>Plant Physiology</subject><subject>Plant Sciences</subject><subject>Population number</subject><subject>Prediction models</subject><subject>Regression analysis</subject><subject>Tea</subject><subject>Theanine</subject><subject>Training</subject><issn>0014-2336</issn><issn>1573-5060</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kMFKw0AQhhdRsFZfwNOCl3pInd3NbpKjFK1ioRc9L5tkUrakm3Y3EerJR_AZfRLTRvDmYZjh5___gY-QawZTBpDcBQYqZRHwwyRJHIkTMmIyEZEEBadkBMDiiAuhzslFCGsAyBIJI1LP0TUbW1DjSrrF0q484vfnV24C9oLvlaK170hNbmvb7mnVeLrrzPFuvbFtoNbRFg2dzMwG69oaGqxDF2ygk8X0li6n9KVz7QfeXpKzytQBr373mLw9PrzOnqLFcv48u19EhVCijQQoKRIpKgMMISvK3IBh0sQiNUUpuEqljOMYeMlklWaQQqU45oL3jiwrUjEmN0Pv1je7DkOr103nXf9S8zhNlATGDi4-uArfhOCx0ltvN8bvNQN9oKoHqrqnqo9UtehDYgiF3uxW6P-q_0n9ADG4eY0</recordid><startdate>20210301</startdate><enddate>20210301</enddate><creator>Lubanga, Nelson</creator><creator>Massawe, Festo</creator><creator>Mayes, Sean</creator><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>RC3</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20210301</creationdate><title>Genomic and pedigree‐based predictive ability for quality traits in tea (Camellia sinensis (L.) O. Kuntze)</title><author>Lubanga, Nelson ; Massawe, Festo ; Mayes, Sean</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c363t-30653753fa01e09cdba0a15a438acd32685544402d15f89080f62eb32a4399c83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Bayesian analysis</topic><topic>Biomedical and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Biotechnology</topic><topic>Breeding</topic><topic>Breeding methods</topic><topic>Caffeine</topic><topic>Camellia sinensis</topic><topic>Epicatechin</topic><topic>Genetic improvement</topic><topic>Genomes</topic><topic>Genomics</topic><topic>Genotypes</topic><topic>Genotyping</topic><topic>Heritability</topic><topic>Hilbert space</topic><topic>Life Sciences</topic><topic>Magnetic resonance spectroscopy</topic><topic>Markers</topic><topic>Mathematical models</topic><topic>Model accuracy</topic><topic>NMR</topic><topic>NMR spectroscopy</topic><topic>Nuclear magnetic resonance</topic><topic>Pedigree</topic><topic>Plant Genetics and Genomics</topic><topic>Plant Pathology</topic><topic>Plant Physiology</topic><topic>Plant Sciences</topic><topic>Population number</topic><topic>Prediction models</topic><topic>Regression analysis</topic><topic>Tea</topic><topic>Theanine</topic><topic>Training</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lubanga, Nelson</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Massawe, Festo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mayes, Sean</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Euphytica</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lubanga, Nelson</au><au>Massawe, Festo</au><au>Mayes, Sean</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Genomic and pedigree‐based predictive ability for quality traits in tea (Camellia sinensis (L.) O. Kuntze)</atitle><jtitle>Euphytica</jtitle><stitle>Euphytica</stitle><date>2021-03-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>217</volume><issue>3</issue><artnum>32</artnum><issn>0014-2336</issn><eissn>1573-5060</eissn><abstract>Genetic improvement of quality traits in tea ( Camellia sinensis (L.) O. Kuntze) through conventional breeding methods has been limited, because tea quality is a difficult and expensive trait to measure. Genomic selection (GS) is suitable for predicting such complex traits, as it uses genome wide markers to estimate the genetic values of individuals. We compared the prediction accuracies of six genomic prediction models including Bayesian ridge regression (BRR), genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP), BayesA, BayesB, BayesC and reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces models incorporating the pedigree relationship namely; RKHS-pedigree, RKHS-markers and RKHS markers and pedigree (RKHS-MP) to determine the breeding values for 12 tea quality traits. One hundred and three tea genotypes were genotyped using genotyping-by-sequencing and phenotyped using nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy in replicated trials. We also compared the effect of trait heritability and training population size on prediction accuracies. The traits with the highest prediction accuracies were; theogallin (0.59), epicatechin gallate (ECG) (0.56) and theobromine (0.61), while the traits with the lowest prediction accuracies were theanine (0.32) and caffeine (0.39). The performance of all the GS models were almost the same, with BRR (0.53), BayesA (0.52), GBLUP (0.50) and RKHS-MP (0.50) performing slightly better than the others. Heritability estimates were moderate to high (0.35–0.92). Prediction accuracies increased with increasing training population size and trait heritability. We conclude that the moderate to high prediction accuracies observed suggests GS is a promising approach in tea improvement and could be implemented in breeding programmes.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer Netherlands</pub><doi>10.1007/s10681-021-02774-3</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0014-2336
ispartof Euphytica, 2021-03, Vol.217 (3), Article 32
issn 0014-2336
1573-5060
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2487650118
source SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings
subjects Bayesian analysis
Biomedical and Life Sciences
Biotechnology
Breeding
Breeding methods
Caffeine
Camellia sinensis
Epicatechin
Genetic improvement
Genomes
Genomics
Genotypes
Genotyping
Heritability
Hilbert space
Life Sciences
Magnetic resonance spectroscopy
Markers
Mathematical models
Model accuracy
NMR
NMR spectroscopy
Nuclear magnetic resonance
Pedigree
Plant Genetics and Genomics
Plant Pathology
Plant Physiology
Plant Sciences
Population number
Prediction models
Regression analysis
Tea
Theanine
Training
title Genomic and pedigree‐based predictive ability for quality traits in tea (Camellia sinensis (L.) O. Kuntze)
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T23%3A34%3A34IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Genomic%20and%20pedigree%E2%80%90based%20predictive%20ability%20for%20quality%20traits%20in%20tea%20(Camellia%20sinensis%20(L.)%20O.%20Kuntze)&rft.jtitle=Euphytica&rft.au=Lubanga,%20Nelson&rft.date=2021-03-01&rft.volume=217&rft.issue=3&rft.artnum=32&rft.issn=0014-2336&rft.eissn=1573-5060&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10681-021-02774-3&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2487650118%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2487650118&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true