000 | 03197nab a22004097a 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
999 |
_c58994 _d58986 |
||
001 | 58994 | ||
003 | MX-TxCIM | ||
005 | 20240919020949.0 | ||
008 | 180105s2018 mdu|||p sp||| 00| 0 eng d | ||
024 | 8 | _ahttps://doi.org/10.1534/g3.117.300309 | |
040 | _aMX-TxCIM | ||
041 | _aeng | ||
100 | 1 |
_92700 _aMontesinos-Lopez, O.A. _gGenetic Resources Program _8I1706800 |
|
245 | 1 |
_aPrediction of multiple-trait and multiple-environment genomic data using recommender systems _h[Electronic Resource] |
|
260 |
_aBethesda, MD : _bGenetis Society of America, _c2018. |
||
500 | _aPeer review | ||
500 | _aOpen Access | ||
520 | _aIn genomic-enabled prediction, the task of improving the accuracy of the prediction of lines in environments is difficult because the available information is generally sparse and usually has low correlations between traits. In current genomic selection, although researchers have a large amount of information and appropriate statistical models to process it, there is still limited computing efficiency to do so. Although some statistical models are usually mathematically elegant, many of them are also computationally inefficient, and they are impractical for many traits, lines, environments, and years because they need to sample from huge normal multivariate distributions. For these reasons, this study explores two recommender systems: itembased collaborative filtering (IBCF) and the matrix factorization algorithm (MF) in the context of multiple traits and multiple environments. The IBCF and MF methods were compared with two conventional methods on simulated and real data. Results of the simulated and real data sets show that the IBCF technique was slightly better in terms of prediction accuracy than the two conventional methods and the MF method when the correlation was moderately high. The IBCF technique is very attractive because it produces good predictions when there is high correlation between items (environment–trait combinations) and its implementation is computationally feasible, which can be useful for plant breeders who deal with very large data sets. | ||
526 |
_aWC _cFP2 |
||
546 | _aText in English | ||
650 | 7 |
_91132 _aGenomics _2AGROVOC |
|
650 | 7 |
_91133 _aGenotype environment interaction _2AGROVOC |
|
650 | 7 |
_92624 _aStatistical methods _2AGROVOC |
|
650 | 7 |
_94619 _aPrecision agriculture _2AGROVOC |
|
700 | 1 |
_92702 _aMontesinos-Lopez, A. |
|
700 | 1 |
_aCrossa, J. _gGenetic Resources Program _8CCJL01 _959 |
|
700 | 1 |
_94950 _aMontesinos-Lopez, J.C. |
|
700 | 1 |
_95853 _aMota-Sanchez, D. |
|
700 | 1 |
_95854 _aEstrada-González, F. |
|
700 | 1 |
_95855 _aGillberg, J. |
|
700 | 1 |
_aSingh, R.P. _gGlobal Wheat Program _8INT0610 _9825 |
|
700 | 1 |
_aMondal, S. _gFormerly Global Wheat Program _8INT3211 _9904 |
|
700 | 1 |
_aJULIANA P. _8001710082 _gFormerly Global Wheat Program _gFormerly BISA _92690 |
|
773 | 0 |
_gv. 8, no. 1, p. 131-147 _tG3 _wu56922 |
|
856 | 4 |
_yOpen Access through DSpace _uhttps://hdl.handle.net/10883/19119 |
|
942 |
_2ddc _cJA _n0 |