Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 268

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Quantitative Trait Locus Mapping Based on Resampling in a Vast Maize Testcross Experiment and Its Relevance to Quantitative Genetics for Complex Traits

Schön, Chris C, Utz, H Friedrich, Groh, Susanne, Truberg, Bernd, Openshaw, Steve, Melchinger, Albrecht E·2004·Genetics

Abstract

From simulation studies it is known that the allocation of experimental resources has a crucial effect on power of QTL detection as well as on accuracy and precision of QTL estimates. In this study, we used a very large experimental data set composed of 976 F5 maize testcross progenies evaluated in 19 environments and cross-validation to assess the effect of sample size (N), number of test environments (E), and significance threshold on the number of detected QTL, the proportion of the genotypic variance explained by them, and the corresponding bias of estimates for grain yield, grain moisture, and plant height. In addition, we used computer simulations to compare the usefulness of two cross-validation schemes for obtaining unbiased estimates of QTL effects. The maximum, validated genotypic variance explained by QTL in this study was 52.3% for grain moisture despite the large number of detected QTL, thus confirming the infinitesimal model of quantitative genetics. In both simulated and experimental data, the effect of sample size on power of QTL detection as well as on accuracy and precision of QTL estimates was large. The number of detected QTL and the proportion of genotypic variance explained by QTL generally increased more with increasing N than with increasing E. The average bias of QTL estimates and its range were reduced by increasing N and E. Cross-validation performed well with respect to yielding asymptotically unbiased estimates of the genotypic variance explained by QTL. On the basis of our findings, recommendations for planning of QTL mapping experiments and allocation of experimental resources are given.

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 · 10.1534/genetics.167.1.485

Cites

4 of 4 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

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

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 268

Metadata

Authors
Schön, C. C., Utz, H. F., Groh, S., Truberg, B., Openshaw, S., & Melchinger, A. E.
Venue
Genetics
Published
2004-05-01
Volume
167
Issue
1
Pages
485-498
ISSN
  • 0016-6731 (ISSN-L)
  • 1943-2631
OpenAlex
W2158311939
Cited by
268
References
4
FWCI
7.41
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: Quantitative Trait Locus Mapping Based on Resampling in a Vast Maize Testcross Experiment and Its Relevance to Quantitative Genetics for Complex Traits. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1534/genetics.167.1.485
The paper
Schön, C. C., Utz, H. F., Groh, S., Truberg, B., Openshaw, S., & Melchinger, A. E. (2004). Quantitative Trait Locus Mapping Based on Resampling in a Vast Maize Testcross Experiment and Its Relevance to Quantitative Genetics for Complex Traits. Genetics. https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.167.1.485

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.