Cited by 20Genetic and phenotypic traits in livestockGenetics and Plant BreedingGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

On Hadamard and Kronecker products in covariance structures for genotype × environment interaction

Open access
Martini, Johannes W. R., Crossa, Jose, Toledo, Fernando H., Cuevas, Jaime·2020·The Plant Genome

Abstract

When including genotype × environment interactions (G × E) in genomic prediction models, Hadamard or Kronecker products have been used to model the covariance structure of interactions. The relation between these two types of modeling has not been made clear in genomic prediction literature. Here, we demonstrate that a certain model based on a Hadamard formulation and another using the Kronecker product lead to exactly the same statistical model. Moreover, we illustrate how a multiplication of entries of covariance matrices is related to modeling locus × environmental‐variable interactions explicitly. Finally, we use a wheat and a maize data set to illustrate that the environmental covariance E can be specified easily, also if no information on environmental variables – such as temperature or precipitation – is available. Given that lines have been tested in different environments, the corresponding environmental covariance can simply be estimated from the training set as phenotypic covariance between environments. To achieve a high level of increase in predictive ability, the environmental covariance has to be defined appropriately and records on the performance of the lines of the test set under different environmental conditions have to be included in the training set.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/tpg2.20033

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • If the data are balanced and ordered so that genotypes are nested within environments within managements, notation using Hadamard products can be freely exchanged with notation using Kronecker products.

    “Also note that if the data are balanced, i.e., there are exactly n = pqr records in y , and ordered so that genotypes are nested within environments within managements, the notation using Hadamard products in (2) can be freely exchanged with notation using Kronecker products (Martini et al. , 2020):”

    From REML implementations of kernel-based genomic prediction models for genotype x environment x management interactions (2025) · cites this paper as Martini et al. , 2020

    The First theoretical result and its Remark (page unavailable) establish that balanced, appropriately ordered genotype-by-environment data have equivalent Hadamard and Kronecker covariance formulations. The Discussion (page unavailable) also stresses that the product order must match the ordering of the records. The paper does not state the cited sentence’s three-factor formulation involving managements or its n = pqr condition. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 47

  1. Acosta‐Pech R., 2017, Genomic models with genotype × environment interaction for predicting hybrid performance: An application in maize hybrids, Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 130, 1431, 10.1007/s00122-017-2898-0 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 10.18637/jss.v067.i01 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Bates D., 2019, Matrix: Sparse and dense matrix classes and methods, R package version, 1, 2
  4. Burgueño J., 2007, Modeling additive × environment and additive × additive × environment using genetic covariances of relatives of wheat genotypes, Crop Science, 43, 311, 10.2135/cropsci2006.09.0564 · DOI
  5. 10.2135/cropsci2011.06.0299 · DOI
  6. Cornelius P. L., 1996, Genotype‐by‐environment interaction, 199
  7. 10.2135/cropsci1999.0011183X003900040007x · DOI
  8. Cornelius P. L. Crossa J. Seyedsadr M. S. Liu G. &Viele K.(2001).Contributions to multiplicative model analysis of genotype‐environment data. Statistical Consulting Section American Statistical Association Joint Statistical Meetings Proceedings American Statistical Association 2001.
  9. 10.2135/cropsci1997.0011183X003700020017x · DOI
  10. Crossa J. vanEeuwijk F. Vargas M. &Cornelius P. L.(2001).Linear bilinear and linear bilinear models for analyzing genotype‐environment interaction. Statistical Consulting Section American Statistical Association Joint Statistical Meetings Proceedings American Statistical Association 2001.
  11. Crossa J., 2010, Prediction of genetic values of quantitative traits in plant breeding using pedigree and molecular markers, Genetics, 18, 713, 10.1534/genetics.110.118521 · DOI
  12. 10.1080/15427528.2011.558767 · DOI
  13. 10.1016/j.tplants.2017.08.011 · DOI · Paper page
  14. 10.2135/cropsci2005.11-0427 · DOI
  15. Cuevas J., 2016, Genomic prediction of genotype × environment interaction kernel regression models, The Plant Genome, 9, 10.3835/plantgenome2016.03.0024 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Cuevas J., 2017, Bayesian genomic prediction with genotype× environment interaction kernel models, G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics, 7, 41, 10.1534/g3.116.035584 · DOI · Paper page
  17. los Campos G., 2009, Reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces regression: A general framework for genetic evaluation, Journal of Animal Science, 87, 1883, 10.2527/jas.2008-1259 · DOI
  18. Gao N., 2017, Incorporating gene annotation into genomic prediction of complex phenotypes, Genetics, 207, 489, 10.1534/genetics.117.300198 · DOI
  19. Gonzales‐Barrios P., 2019, Mega‐environmental design: Using genotype × environment interaction to optimize resources for cultivar testing, Crop Science, 59, 1899, 10.2135/cropsci2018.11.0692 · DOI
  20. 10.3168/jds.2008-1646 · DOI
  21. Henderson C. R., 1975, Best linear unbiased estimation and prediction under a selection model, Biometrics, 1975, 423, 10.2307/2529430 · DOI
  22. 10.1093/bfgp/elq001 · DOI
  23. 10.1007/s00122-013-2243-1 · DOI · Paper page
  24. 10.1534/genetics.115.177907 · DOI
  25. 10.1137/07070111X · DOI
  26. Liu S., &, 2008, Hadamard, Khatri‐Rao, Kronecker and other matrix products, International Journal of Information and Systems Sciences, 4, 160
  27. 10.1534/g3.114.016097 · DOI
  28. 10.1007/s00122-016-2675-5 · DOI
  29. 10.1186/s12859-016-1439-1 · DOI
  30. Martini J. W. R., 2019, Lost in translation: On the problem of data coding in penalized whole genome regression with interactions, G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics, 9, 1117, 10.1534/g3.118.200961 · DOI
  31. Martini J. W. R., 2020, On the approximation of interaction effect models by Hadamard powers of the additive genomic relationship, Theoretical Population Biology, 132, 16, 10.1016/j.tpb.2020.01.004 · DOI
  32. 10.1093/genetics/157.4.1819 · DOI · Paper page
  33. Neudecker H., 1969, A note on Kronecker matrix products and matrix equation systems, SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 17, 603, 10.1137/0117057 · DOI
  34. 10.1534/genetics.111.128694 · DOI
  35. 10.1534/genetics.114.164442 · DOI
  36. 10.2135/cropsci2014.08.0577 · DOI
  37. Perez‐Rodriguez P., 2017, Single‐step genomic and pedigree genotype × environment interaction models for predicting wheat lines in international environments, The Plant Genome, 10, 10.3835/plantgenome2016.09.0089 · DOI
  38. Petković M. D., 2009, Generalized matrix inversion is not harder than matrix multiplication, Journal of computational and applied mathematics, 230, 270, 10.1016/j.cam.2008.11.012 · DOI
  39. R Core Team, 2013, R: A language and environment for statistical computing
  40. Sousa M. B., 2017, Genomic‐enabled prediction in maize using kernel models with genotype × environment interaction, G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics, 7, 1995, 10.1534/g3.117.042341 · DOI
  41. Sukumaran S., 2017, Genomic prediction with pedigree and genotype × environment interaction in spring wheat grown in South and West Asia, North Africa, and Mexico, G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics, 7, 481, 10.1534/g3.116.036251 · DOI
  42. 10.3168/jds.2007-0980 · DOI · Paper page
  43. 10.3389/fgene.2018.00078 · DOI
  44. Visick G., 2000, A quantitative version of the observation that the Hadamard product is a principal submatrix of the Kronecker product, Linear Algebra and Its Applications, 304, 45, 10.1016/S0024-3795(99)00187-1 · DOI
  45. 10.1534/genetics.116.199406 · DOI
  46. 10.1201/b10621 · DOI
  47. Yao C., 2017, Use of genotype × environment interaction model to accommodate genetic heterogeneity for residual feed intake, dry matter intake, net energy in milk, and metabolic body weight in dairy cattle, Journal of Dairy Science, 100, 2007, 10.3168/jds.2016-11606 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Martini, J. W. R., Crossa, J., Toledo, F. H., & Cuevas, J.
Affiliations
  • Centro Internacional de Mejoramiento de Maíz Y Trigo (MX)
  • International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) Km. 45, El Batán 56237 Texcoco Mexico
  • University of Quintana Roo (MX)
Corresponding author
Martini, Johannes W. R.
Venue
The Plant Genome
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-07-15
Volume
13
Issue
3
Pages
e20033-e20033
ISSN
1940-3372 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3043533128
Cited by
20
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3
FWCI
1.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Plant Genome (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Foundation for Research Levy on Agricultural Products
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Genetics and Plant Breeding
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
Keywords
gene-environment interaction, Hadamard product, Kronecker product, covariance structure, genomic prediction, environmental covariance, wheat, maize, predictive power
MeSH terms
Genotype, Models, Genetic, Triticum, Genomics, Gene-Environment Interaction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review