The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparison of Mixed-Model Approaches for Association Mapping
Open accessAbstract
Association-mapping methods promise to overcome the limitations of linkage-mapping methods. The main objectives of this study were to (i) evaluate various methods for association mapping in the autogamous species wheat using an empirical data set, (ii) determine a marker-based kinship matrix using a restricted maximum-likelihood (REML) estimate of the probability of two alleles at the same locus being identical in state but not identical by descent, and (iii) compare the results of association-mapping approaches based on adjusted entry means (two-step approaches) with the results of approaches in which the phenotypic data analysis and the association analysis were performed in one step (one-step approaches). On the basis of the phenotypic and genotypic data of 303 soft winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) inbreds, various association-mapping methods were evaluated. Spearman's rank correlation between P-values calculated on the basis of one- and two-stage association-mapping methods ranged from 0.63 to 0.93. The mixed-model association-mapping approaches using a kinship matrix estimated by REML are more appropriate for association mapping than the recently proposed QK method with respect to (i) the adherence to the nominal α-level and (ii) the adjusted power for detection of quantitative trait loci. Furthermore, we showed that our data set could be analyzed by using two-step approaches of the proposed association-mapping method without substantially increasing the empirical type I error rate in comparison to the corresponding one-step approaches.
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
Inference of Population Structure Using Multilocus Genotype Data
Pritchard, J. K., Stephens, M., & Donnelly, P. (2000) · Genetics · doi:10.1093/genetics/155.2.945 · Cited by 33,908
Detecting the number of clusters of individuals using the software structure: a simulation study
EVANNO, G., REGNAUT, S., & GOUDET, J. (2005) · Molecular Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-294x.2005.02553.x · Cited by 21,895
Introduction to Quantitative Genetics.
Edwards, A. W. F., & Falconer, D. S. (1982) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529912 · Cited by 21,447
Principal components analysis corrects for stratification in genome-wide association studies
Price, A. L., Patterson, N. J., Plenge, R. M., Weinblatt, M. E., Shadick, N. A., & Reich, D. (2006) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng1847 · Cited by 10,248
Yu, J., Pressoir, G., Briggs, W. H., Vroh Bi, I., Yamasaki, M., Doebley, J. F., McMullen, M. D., Gaut, B. S., Nielsen, D. M., Holland, J. B., et al. (2006) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng1702 · Cited by 4,133
Self-citationHardy, O. J., & Vekemans, X. (2002) · Molecular Ecology Notes · doi:10.1046/j.1471-8286.2002.00305.x · Cited by 3,557
Association Mapping in Structured Populations
Pritchard, J. K., Stephens, M., Rosenberg, N. A., & Donnelly, P. (2000) · The American Journal of Human Genetics · doi:10.1086/302959 · Cited by 2,051
Structure of Linkage Disequilibrium in Plants
Flint-Garcia, S. A., Thornsberry, J. M., & Buckler, E. S. (2003) · Annual Review of Plant Biology · doi:10.1146/annurev.arplant.54.031902.134907 · Cited by 1,712
Self-citationA tutorial on statistical methods for population association studies
Balding, D. J. (2006) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg1916 · Cited by 1,335
Genetic Structure and Diversity in Oryza sativa L.
Garris, A. J., Tai, T. H., Coburn, J., Kresovich, S., & McCouch, S. (2005) · Genetics · doi:10.1534/genetics.104.035642 · Cited by 1,137
Cited by
Association mapping: critical considerations shift from genotyping to experimental design
Myles, S., Peiffer, J., Brown, P. J., Ersoz, E. S., Zhang, Z., Costich, D. E., & Buckler, E. S. (2009) · The Plant Cell · doi:10.1105/tpc.109.068437 · Cited by 857
Self-citationGenebank genomics highlights the diversity of a global barley collection
Milner, S. G., Jost, M., Taketa, S., Mazón, E. R., Himmelbach, A., Oppermann, M., Weise, S., Knüpffer, H., Basterrechea, M., König, P., et al. (2019) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/s41588-018-0266-x · Cited by 420
Software for Genome‐Wide Association Studies in Autopolyploids and Its Application to Potato
Rosyara, U. R., De Jong, W. S., Douches, D. S., & Endelman, J. B. (2016) · The Plant Genome · doi:10.3835/plantgenome2015.08.0073 · Cited by 293
Zhang, J., Song, Q., Cregan, P. B., Nelson, R. L., Wang, X., Wu, J., & Jiang, G.-L. (2015) · BMC Genomics · doi:10.1186/s12864-015-1441-4 · Cited by 276
vonHoldt, B. M., Shuldiner, E., Koch, I. J., Kartzinel, R. Y., Hogan, A., Brubaker, L., Wanser, S., Stahler, D., Wynne, C. D. L., Ostrander, E. A., et al. (2017) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.1700398 · Cited by 186
Metadata
- Authors
- Stich, B., Möhring, J., Piepho, H.-P., Heckenberger, M., Buckler, E. S., & Melchinger, A. E.
- Venue
- Genetics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2008-03-01
- Volume
- 178
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 1745-1754
- ISSN
- 0016-6731 (ISSN-L)
- 1943-2631
- OpenAlex
- W2150448009
- Cited by
- 257
- References
- 30
- FWCI
- 11.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Comparison of Mixed-Model Approaches for Association Mapping. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1534/genetics.107.079707
- The paper
- Stich, B., Möhring, J., Piepho, H.-P., Heckenberger, M., Buckler, E. S., & Melchinger, A. E. (2008). Comparison of Mixed-Model Approaches for Association Mapping. Genetics. https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.107.079707
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.
