Back

Clonal breeding strategies to harness heterosis: insights from stochastic simulation

Labroo, M. R.; Endelman, J. B.; Gemenet, D. C.; Werner, C. R.; Gaynor, R. C.; Covarrubias-Pazaran, G. E.

2022-07-03 genetics
10.1101/2022.07.01.497810 bioRxiv
Show abstract

To produce genetic gain, hybrid crop breeding can change the additive as well as dominance genetic value of populations, which can lead to utilization of heterosis. A common hybrid breeding strategy is reciprocal recurrent selection (RRS), in which parents of hybrids are typically recycled within pools based on general combining ability (GCA). However, the relative performance of RRS and other possible breeding strategies have not been thoroughly compared. RRS can have relatively increased costs and longer cycle lengths which reduce genetic gain, but these are sometimes outweighed by its ability to harness heterosis due to dominance and increase genetic gain. Here, we used stochastic simulation to compare gain per unit cost of various clonal breeding strategies with different amounts of population inbreeding depression and heterosis due to dominance, relative cycle lengths, time horizons, estimation methods, selection intensities, and ploidy levels. In diploids with phenotypic selection at high intensity, whether RRS was the optimal breeding strategy depended on the initial population heterosis. However, in diploids with rapid cycling genomic selection at high intensity, RRS was the optimal breeding strategy after 50 years over almost all amounts of initial population heterosis under the study assumptions. RRS required more population heterosis to outperform other strategies as its relative cycle length increased and as selection intensity decreased. Use of diploid fully inbred parents vs. outbred parents with RRS typically did not affect genetic gain. In autopolyploids, RRS typically was not beneficial regardless of the amount of population inbreeding depression. Key MessageReciprocal recurrent selection sometimes increases genetic gain per unit cost in clonal diploids with heterosis due to dominance, but it typically does not benefit autopolyploids.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Frontiers in Plant Science
240 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
18.9%
2
The Plant Genome
53 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.8%
3
Crop Science
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.8%
50% of probability mass above
4
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 22%
8.5%
5
Theoretical and Applied Genetics
46 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.9%
6
G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics
222 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.0%
7
Frontiers in Genetics
197 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.7%
8
Agronomy
18 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.6%
9
G3 Genes|Genomes|Genetics
351 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.9%
10
Pest Management Science
32 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.7%
11
Genetics
225 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
12
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 66%
1.2%
13
Horticulture Research
43 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
14
in silico Plants
24 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.1%
15
Plant Biotechnology Journal
56 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.0%
16
American Journal of Botany
41 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
17
Journal of Experimental Botany
195 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
18
The Plant Phenome Journal
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
19
G3
33 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.8%
20
BMC Genomics
328 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.8%
21
GENETICS
189 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
22
Plant Methods
39 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.5%
23
Plant Direct
81 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%
24
BMC Plant Biology
47 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%