Crop Science
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published online 25 July 2006
Published in Crop Sci 46:1972-1980 (2006)
© 2006 Crop Science Society of America
677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text Free
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (5)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bernardo, R.
Right arrow Articles by Charcosset, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Bernardo, R.
Right arrow Articles by Charcosset, A.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Bernardo, R.
Right arrow Articles by Charcosset, A.
Related Collections
Right arrow Biometrics

Number and Fitness of Selected Individuals in Marker-Assisted and Phenotypic Recurrent Selection

Rex Bernardoa,*, Laurence Moreaub and Alain Charcossetb

a Dep. of Agronomy and Plant Genetics, Univ. of Minnesota, 411 Borlaug Hall, 1991 Upper Buford Cir., St. Paul, MN 55108
b Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, Station de génétique végétale, Ferme du Moulon, 91190 Gif-sur-Yvette, France


Figure 1
View larger version (20K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 1. Equal Fitness and Better Half methods. The numbers refer to the ranks of the parents, and an X indicates the corresponding pair of parents contributing progenies to the next cycle of selection. Selfs and reciprocal crosses are excluded.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (15K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 2. Optimizing the fitness in crosses among selected parents.

 

Figure 3
View larger version (10K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 3. Frequencies of maximum responses (across different NSel) being higher due to varying the fitness of selected individuals. The dotted lines indicate that the maximum response is numerically higher, whereas the solid lines indicate the maximum response is significantly higher at P = 0.05. Comparisons for short-term selection (cycles 1–5) are across four genetic models (10 QTL, N = 100; 40 QTL, N = 100; 100 QTL, N = 100; and 40 QTL, N = 400) and three levels of heritability (H = 0.20, 0.50, and 0.80). Comparisons for medium-term (cycles 6–15) and long-term (cycles 16–30) selection are across three genetic models (10 QTL, N = 100 excluded) and the three levels of H.

 

Figure 4
View larger version (16K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 4. Values of NSel that led to the maximum response to selection at different cycles of recurrent selection. NSel values of 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, and 40 were considered. The size of the plotted circles corresponds to the number of times, across the different genetic models studied, a particular NSel value led to the maximum response. The dotted lines depict the proposed rule-of-thumb that for cycle NSel – 1, the optimum number of individuals to select and recombine in each cycle is equal to NSel.

 





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Vadose Zone Journal
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Soil Science Society of America Journal
Journal of Plant Registrations Journal of
Environmental Quality
The Plant Genome
Copyright © 2006 by the Crop Science Society of America.