Back

Applications of spatial models to ordinal data: Geospatial Statistics for Soybean Iron Deficiency Chlorosis

Xu, Z.; Cannon, S. B.; Beavis, W. D.

2020-09-21 plant biology
10.1101/2020.09.21.306001 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Models have been developed to account for heterogeneous spatial variation in field trials. These spatial models have been shown to successfully increase the quality of phenotypic data resulting in improved effectiveness of selection by plant breeders. The models were developed for continuous data types such as grain yield and plant height, but data for most traits, such as in iron deficiency chlorosis (IDC), are recorded on ordinal scales. Is it reasonable to make spatial adjustments to ordinal data by simply applying methods developed for continuous data? The objective of the research described herein is to evaluate methods for spatial adjustment on ordinal data, using soybean IDC as an example. Spatial adjustment models are classified into three different groups: group I, moving average grid adjustment; group II, geospatial autoregressive regression (SAR) models; and group III, tensor product penalized P-splines. Comparisons of eight models sampled from these three classes demonstrate that spatial adjustments depend on severity of field heterogeneity, the irregularity of the spatial patterns, and the model used. SAR models generally produce better performance metrics than other classes of models. However, none of the eight evaluated models fully removed spatial patterns indicating that there is a need to either adjust existing models or develop novel models for spatial adjustments of ordinal data collected in fields exhibiting discontinuous transitions between heterogeneous patches.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 9%
18.6%
2
Crop Science
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.3%
3
Frontiers in Plant Science
240 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
10.1%
4
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 14%
6.8%
5
Frontiers in Genetics
197 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
6.3%
50% of probability mass above
6
Theoretical and Applied Genetics
46 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.7%
7
The Plant Phenome Journal
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
8
Plant Phenomics
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.1%
9
Phytopathology®
28 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.1%
10
Plant Direct
81 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
11
Plant Methods
39 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
12
G3 Genes|Genomes|Genetics
351 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
13
GigaScience
172 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
14
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.7%
15
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 19%
1.3%
16
The Plant Genome
53 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.3%
17
G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics
222 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
18
Scientific Data
174 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
19
G3
33 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
20
Ecological Modelling
24 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.8%
21
in silico Plants
24 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
22
New Phytologist
309 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
23
Genetics Selection Evolution
33 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.7%
24
PLANTS, PEOPLE, PLANET
21 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.6%
25
Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation
10 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.6%