The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
High‐throughput Phenotyping and Genomic Selection: The Frontiers of Crop Breeding ConvergeF
Abstract
Genomic selection (GS) and high‐throughput phenotyping have recently been captivating the interest of the crop breeding community from both the public and private sectors world‐wide. Both approaches promise to revolutionize the prediction of complex traits, including growth, yield and adaptation to stress. Whereas high‐throughput phenotyping may help to improve understanding of crop physiology, most powerful techniques for high‐throughput field phenotyping are empirical rather than analytical and comparable to genomic selection. Despite the fact that the two methodological approaches represent the extremes of what is understood as the breeding process (phenotype versus genome), they both consider the targeted traits (e.g. grain yield, growth, phenology, plant adaptation to stress) as a black box instead of dissecting them as a set of secondary traits (i.e. physiological) putatively related to the target trait. Both GS and high‐throughput phenotyping have in common their empirical approach enabling breeders to use genome profile or phenotype without understanding the underlying biology. This short review discusses the main aspects of both approaches and focuses on the case of genomic selection of maize flowering traits and near‐infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) and plant spectral reflectance as high‐throughput field phenotyping methods for complex traits such as crop growth and yield. image [ José Luis Araus (Corresponding author)]
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Prediction of Total Genetic Value Using Genome-Wide Dense Marker Maps
Meuwissen, T. H. E., Hayes, B. J., & Goddard, M. E. (2001) · Genetics · doi:10.1093/genetics/157.4.1819 · Cited by 7,917
A Robust, Simple Genotyping-by-Sequencing (GBS) Approach for High Diversity Species
Elshire, R. J., Glaubitz, J. C., Sun, Q., Poland, J. A., Kawamoto, K., Buckler, E. S., & Mitchell, S. E. (2011) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0019379 · Cited by 6,501
Common SNPs explain a large proportion of the heritability for human height
Yang, J., Benyamin, B., McEvoy, B. P., Gordon, S., Henders, A. K., Nyholt, D. R., Madden, P. A., Heath, A. C., Martin, N. G., Montgomery, G. W., et al. (2010) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng.608 · Cited by 4,446
Genome-wide genetic marker discovery and genotyping using next-generation sequencing
Davey, J. W., Hohenlohe, P. A., Etter, P. D., Boone, J. Q., Catchen, J. M., & Blaxter, M. L. (2011) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg3012 · Cited by 2,481
Phenomics – technologies to relieve the phenotyping bottleneck
Furbank, R. T., & Tester, M. (2011) · Trends in Plant Science · doi:10.1016/j.tplants.2011.09.005 · Cited by 1,675
Plant breeding and drought in C3 cereals: What should we breed for?
ARAUS, J. L. (2002) · Annals of Botany · doi:10.1093/aob/mcf049 · Cited by 1,243 · cited 3×
“Other VIs such as the photochemical reflectance index (PRI) and the water index (WI) may allow inference in photosynthetic efficiency and plant water status (Araus et al. 2001, 2002; Babar et al. 2006).”
BackgroundProspects for Genomewide Selection for Quantitative Traits in Maize
Bernardo, R., & Yu, J. (2007) · Crop Science · doi:10.2135/cropsci2006.11.0690 · Cited by 868
Breeding for Yield Potential and Stress Adaptation in Cereals
Araus, J. L., Slafer, G. A., Royo, C., & Serret, M. D. (2008) · Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences · doi:10.1080/07352680802467736 · Cited by 806
Self-citationCrossa, J., Campos, G. D. L., Pérez, P., Gianola, D., Burgueño, J., Araus, J. L., Makumbi, D., Singh, R. P., Dreisigacker, S., Yan, J., et al. (2010) · Genetics · doi:10.1534/genetics.110.118521 · Cited by 798
Self-citationSources of variability in canopy reflectance and the convergent properties of plants
Ollinger, S. V. (2011) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.2010.03536.x · Cited by 798
Cited by
Field high-throughput phenotyping: the new crop breeding frontier
Araus, J. L., & Cairns, J. E. (2014) · Trends in Plant Science · doi:10.1016/j.tplants.2013.09.008 · Cited by 1,817
Self-citationBuschmann, A. H., Camus, C., Infante, J., Neori, A., Israel, Á., Hernández-González, M. C., Pereda, S. V., Gomez-Pinchetti, J. L., Golberg, A., Tadmor-Shalev, N., et al. (2017) · European Journal of Phycology · doi:10.1080/09670262.2017.1365175 · Cited by 767
Genomic selection: genome-wide prediction in plant improvement
Desta, Z. A., & Ortiz, R. (2014) · Trends in Plant Science · doi:10.1016/j.tplants.2014.05.006 · Cited by 688
Cobb, J. N., DeClerck, G., Greenberg, A., Clark, R., & McCouch, S. (2013) · Theoretical and Applied Genetics · doi:10.1007/s00122-013-2066-0 · Cited by 666
Low-altitude, high-resolution aerial imaging systems for row and field crop phenotyping: A review
Sankaran, S., Khot, L. R., Espinoza, C. Z., Jarolmasjed, S., Sathuvalli, V. R., Vandemark, G. J., Miklas, P. N., Carter, A. H., Pumphrey, M. O., Knowles, N. R., et al. (2015) · European Journal of Agronomy · doi:10.1016/j.eja.2015.07.004 · Cited by 507
Metadata
- Authors
- Cabrera‐Bosquet, L., Crossa, J., von Zitzewitz, J., Serret, M. D., & Luis Araus, J.
- Venue
- Journal of Integrative Plant Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-05
- Volume
- 54
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 312-320
- ISSN
- 0577-7496 (ISSN-L)
- 1672-9072
- 1744-7909
- OpenAlex
- W1550524705
- Cited by
- 321
- References
- 48
- FWCI
- 12.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: High‐throughput Phenotyping and Genomic Selection: The Frontiers of Crop Breeding ConvergeF. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1744-7909.2012.01116.x
- The paper
- Cabrera‐Bosquet, L., Crossa, J., von Zitzewitz, J., Serret, M. D., & Luis Araus, J. (2012). High‐throughput Phenotyping and Genomic Selection: The Frontiers of Crop Breeding ConvergeF. Journal of Integrative Plant Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7909.2012.01116.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
