Premium
A COMPARISON OF ANALYSIS METHODS FOR LATE‐STAGE VARIETY EVALUATION TRIALS
Author(s) -
Welham Sue J.,
Gogel Beverley J.,
Smith Alison B.,
Thompson Robin,
Cullis Brian R.
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
australian and new zealand journal of statistics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.434
H-Index - 41
eISSN - 1467-842X
pISSN - 1369-1473
DOI - 10.1111/j.1467-842x.2010.00570.x
Subject(s) - variety (cybernetics) , statistics , mathematics , stage (stratigraphy) , measure (data warehouse) , heritability , range (aeronautics) , econometrics , data mining , computer science , engineering , biology , paleontology , genetics , aerospace engineering
Summary The statistical analysis of late‐stage variety evaluation trials using a mixed model is described, with one‐ or two‐stage approaches to the analysis. Two sets of trials, from Australia and the UK, were used to provide realistic scenarios for a simulation study to evaluate the different methods of analysis. This study showed that a one‐stage approach gave the most accurate predictions of variety performance overall or within each environment, across a range of models, as measured by mean squared error of prediction or realized genetic gain. A weighted two‐stage approach performed adequately for variety predictions both overall and within environments, but a two‐stage unweighted approach performed poorly in both cases. A generalized heritability measure was developed to compare methods.