Genomic selection of eight fruit traits in pear  

作　　者：Manyi Sun Mingyue Zhang Satish Kumar Mengfan Qin Yueyuan Liu Runze Wang Kaijie Qi Shaoling Zhang Wenjing Chang Jiaming Li Jun Wu 

机构地区：[1]College of Horticulture,State Key Laboratory of Crop Genetics&Germplasm Enhancement and Utilization,Nanjing Agricultural University,Nanjing,Jiangsu 210095,China [2]State Key Laboratory of Crop Biology,College of Horticulture Science and Engineering,Shandong Agricultural University,Tai'an,Shandong 271018,China [3]The New Zealand Institute for Plant and Food Research Limited,Private Bag 1401,Havelock North 4157,New Zealand [4]Zhongshan Biological Breeding Laboratory,Nanjing,Jiangsu 210014,China

出　　处：《Horticultural Plant Journal》2024年第2期318-326,共9页园艺学报（英文版）

基　　金：supported by the National Key Research and Development Program (Grant No.2022YFD1200503);Jiangsu Agricultural Science and Technology Innovation Fund [Grant No.CX(22)3043];the Earmarked Fund for China Agriculture Research System (Grant No.CARS-28);the Earmarked Fund for Jiangsu Agricultural Industry Technology System (Grant No.JATS [2022]454)。

摘　　要：Genomic selection (GS) has the potential to improve selection efficiency and shorten the breeding cycle in fruit tree breeding. In this study,we evaluated the effect of prediction methods, marker density and the training population (TP) size on pear GS for improving its performance and reducing cost. We evaluated GS under two scenarios:(1) five-fold cross-validation in an interspecific pear family;(2) independent validation. Based on the cross-validation scheme, the prediction accuracy (PA) of eight fruit traits varied between 0.33 (fruit core vertical diameter)and 0.65 (stone cell content). Except for single fruit weight, a slightly better prediction accuracy (PA) was observed for the five parametrical methods compared with the two non-parametrical methods. In our TP of 310 individuals, 2 000 single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers were sufficient to make reasonably accurate predictions. PAs for different traits increased by 18.21%-46.98%when the TP size increased from 50to 100, but the increment was smaller (-4.13%-33.91%) when the TP size increased from 200 to 250. For independent validation, the PAs ranged from 0.11 to 0.45 using rrBLUP method. In summary, our results showed that the TP size and SNP numbers had a greater impact on the PA than prediction methods. Furthermore, relatedness among the training and validation sets, and the complexity of traits should be considered when designing a TP to predict the test panel.

关 键 词：PEAR PYRUS Prediction method TP size SNP marker number 

分 类 号：S661.2[农业科学—果树学]