The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
GAPIT Version 2: An Enhanced Integrated Tool for Genomic Association and Prediction
Open accessAbstract
Most human diseases and agriculturally important traits are complex. Dissecting their genetic architecture requires continued development of innovative and powerful statistical methods. Corresponding advances in computing tools are critical to efficiently use these statistical innovations and to enhance and accelerate biomedical and agricultural research and applications. The genome association and prediction integrated tool (GAPIT) was first released in 2012 and became widely used for genome‐wide association studies (GWAS) and genomic prediction. The GAPIT implemented computationally efficient statistical methods, including the compressed mixed linear model (CMLM) and genomic prediction by using genomic best linear unbiased prediction (gBLUP). New state‐of‐the‐art statistical methods have now been implemented in a new, enhanced version of GAPIT. These methods include factored spectrally transformed linear mixed models (FaST‐LMM), enriched CMLM (ECMLM), FaST‐LMM‐Select, and settlement of mixed linear models under progressively exclusive relationship (SUPER). The genomic prediction methods implemented in this new release of the GAPIT include gBLUP based on CMLM, ECMLM, and SUPER. Additionally, the GAPIT was updated to improve its existing output display features and to add new data display and evaluation functions, including new graphing options and capabilities, phenotype simulation, power analysis, and cross‐validation. These enhancements make the GAPIT a valuable resource for determining appropriate experimental designs and performing GWAS and genomic prediction. The enhanced R‐based GAPIT software package uses state‐of‐the‐art methods to conduct GWAS and genomic prediction. The GAPIT also provides new functions for developing experimental designs and creating publication‐ready tabular summaries and graphs to improve the efficiency and application of genomic research.
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
PLINK: a tool set for whole-genome association and population-based linkage analyses.
Purcell, S., Neale, B., Todd-Brown, K., Thomas, L., Ferreira, M. A. R., Bender, D., Maller, J., Sklar, P., de Bakker, P. I. W., Daly, M. J., et al. (2007) · The American Journal of Human Genetics · doi:10.1086/519795 · Cited by 34,089
Genome-wide efficient mixed-model analysis for association studies
Zhou, X., & Stephens, M. (2012) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng.2310 · Cited by 3,627 · cited 1×
“…et al., 2008), EMMA expedited and population parameter previously determined (Kang et al., 2010; Zhang et al., 2010), genome-wide EMMA (Zhou and Stephens, 2012), FaST-LMM (Lippert et al., 2011), and GenABEL (Svishcheva et al., 2012), methods to improve statistical power were limited before…”
MethodVariance component model to account for sample structure in genome-wide association studies
Kang, H. M., Sul, J. H., Service, S. K., Zaitlen, N. A., Kong, S.-Y., Freimer, N. B., Sabatti, C., & Eskin, E. (2010) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng.548 · Cited by 2,817
Ridge Regression and Other Kernels for Genomic Selection with R Package rrBLUP
Endelman, J. B. (2011) · The Plant Genome · doi:10.3835/plantgenome2011.08.0024 · Cited by 2,094
Genome-wide association study of 107 phenotypes in Arabidopsis thaliana inbred lines
Atwell, S., Huang, Y. S., Vilhjálmsson, B. J., Willems, G., Horton, M., Li, Y., Meng, D., Platt, A., Tarone, A. M., Hu, T. T., et al. (2010) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature08800 · Cited by 1,780
FaST linear mixed models for genome-wide association studies
Lippert, C., Listgarten, J., Liu, Y., Kadie, C. M., Davidson, R. I., & Heckerman, D. (2011) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth.1681 · Cited by 1,209
Advantages and pitfalls in the application of mixed-model association methods
Yang, J., Zaitlen, N. A., Goddard, M. E., Visscher, P. M., & Price, A. L. (2014) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng.2876 · Cited by 981
Cited by
Huang, M., Liu, X., Zhou, Y., Summers, R. M., & Zhang, Z. (2019) · GigaScience · doi:10.1093/gigascience/giy154 · Cited by 855
Self-citationVarshney, R. K., Thudi, M., Roorkiwal, M., He, W., Upadhyaya, H. D., Yang, W., Bajaj, P., Cubry, P., Rathore, A., Jian, J., et al. (2019) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/s41588-019-0401-3 · Cited by 312
Self-citationXu, T., Meng, S., Zhu, X., Di, J., Zhu, Y., Yang, X., & Yan, W. (2023) · Frontiers in Plant Science · doi:10.3389/fpls.2022.1004477 · Cited by 17
Metadata
- Authors
- Tang, Y., Liu, X., Wang, J., Li, M., Wang, Q., Tian, F., Su, Z., Pan, Y., Liu, D., Lipka, A. E., Buckler, E. S., & Zhang, Z.
- Venue
- The Plant Genome
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2016-07
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 2
- ISSN
- 1940-3372 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2313931749
- Cited by
- 419
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 18.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: GAPIT Version 2: An Enhanced Integrated Tool for Genomic Association and Prediction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3835/plantgenome2015.11.0120
- The paper
- Tang, Y., Liu, X., Wang, J., Li, M., Wang, Q., Tian, F., Su, Z., Pan, Y., Liu, D., Lipka, A. E., Buckler, E. S., & Zhang, Z. (2016). GAPIT Version 2: An Enhanced Integrated Tool for Genomic Association and Prediction. The Plant Genome. https://doi.org/10.3835/plantgenome2015.11.0120
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.