HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Related articles in Crop Science Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (4) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Cooper, M. Articles by Podlich, D. W. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Cooper, M. Articles by Podlich, D. W. Agricola Articles by Cooper, M. Articles by Podlich, D. W. Related Collections Vadose Zone Processes and Chemical Transport

Genomics, Genetics, and Plant Breeding

A Private Sector Perspective

Pioneer Hi-Bred International Inc., 7250 N.W. 62nd Avenue, P.O. Box 552, Johnston, IA 50131, USA

View larger version (50K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Best linear unbiased predictors (BLUPs ± SE) for phenotypic performance of three traits, (a) grain yield (hybrids grown at three densities, 30, 54, and 79 thousand plants/ha, and yield per hybrid is for the density giving the highest average yield), (b) percentage of plants not root-lodged, (c) anthesis to silking interval, measured in experiments conducted from 1990 to 2002, for a sequence of commercially successful Pioneer corn hybrids taken from an ERA study (unpublished data), and (d) a plot of the inbred scores on the first two principal components from analysis of SSR molecular marker profiles of the parents of the hybrids. (OPV = open pollinated variety, DC = double cross, TC = three parent cross, TC-MSC = three parent modified single cross, SC = single cross, SC-T = single cross transgenic; SS = Stiff Stalk Synthetic inbred line, NSS = non-Stiff Stalk Synthetic inbred line). The large boundaries distinguish three main groups of lines; Old = the old inbred lines used before the formation of the heterotic groups and the other two groups represent SS and NSS inbred lines. The arrows indicate the direction of the progression of inbred improvement in the SS and NSS heterotic groups.

View larger version (93K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Simulation comparison of a marker-assisted (MAS) and a phenotypic (PS) selection strategy following the methods developed in Cooper and Podlich (2002). The four diagrams plot the difference between the population mean performances achieved for a quantitative trait at cycle 5 by the MAS and PS recurrent selection strategies for a large number of putative genetic architectures of a quantitative trait [normalized difference in response (MAS-PS)] against the complexity of the trait measured as an autocorrelation on a performance landscape from walks in genetic space (at the extremes the autocorrelation 1 represents the more simple additive genetic models and the autocorrelation 0 represents the more complex genetic models of the architecture of the trait). In the four subfigures, H = broad sense heritability in the base population; the percentage of QTL identified represents the percentage of the total QTL used in the MAS strategy. The large symbols represent the grand mean of the normalized difference in response between MAS and PS and the bars represent the standard deviations of the individual estimates of the normalized difference between MAS and PS.