×

Weighted estimation of AMMI and GGE models. (English) Zbl 1391.62219

Summary: The AMMI/GGE model can be used to describe a two-way table of genotype-environment means. When the genotype-environment means are independent and homoscedastic, ordinary least squares (OLS) gives optimal estimates of the model. In plant breeding, the assumption of independence and homoscedasticity of the genotype-environment means is frequently violated, however, such that generalized least squares (GLS) estimation is more appropriate. This paper introduces three different GLS algorithms that use a weighting matrix to take the correlation between the genotype-environment means as well as heteroscedasticity into account. To investigate the effectiveness of the GLS estimation, the proposed algorithms were implemented using three different weighting matrices, including (i) an identity matrix (OLS estimation), (ii) an approximation of the complete inverse covariance matrix of the genotype-environment means, and (iii) the complete inverse covariance matrix of the genotype-environment means. Using simulated data modeled on real experiments, the different weighting methods were compared in terms of the mean-squared error of the genotype-environment means, interaction effects, and singular vectors. The results show that weighted estimation generally outperformed unweighted estimation in terms of the mean-squared error. Furthermore, the effectiveness of the weighted estimation increased when the heterogeneity of the variances of the genotype-environment means increased.

MSC:

62P10 Applications of statistics to biology and medical sciences; meta analysis
62P12 Applications of statistics to environmental and related topics
PDFBibTeX XMLCite
Full Text: DOI

References:

[1] Besag, J; Higdon, D, Bayesian analysis of agricultural field experiments, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Statistical Methodology), 61, 691-746, (1999) · Zbl 0951.62091 · doi:10.1111/1467-9868.00201
[2] Bro, R; Kjeldahl, K; Smilde, AK; Kiers, HAL, Cross-validation of component models: A critical look at current methods, Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry, 390, 1241-1251, (2008) · doi:10.1007/s00216-007-1790-1
[3] Caliński, T; Czajka, S; Denis, JB; Kaczmarek, Z, EM and ALS algorithms applied to estimation of missing data in series of variety trials, Biuletyn Oceny Odmian, 24-25, 8-31, (1992)
[4] Cornelius, PL; Seydsadr, M; Crossa, J, Using the shifted multiplicative model to search for separability in crop cultivar trials, Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 84, 161-172, (1992) · doi:10.1007/BF00223996
[5] Damesa, MT; Möhring, J; Worku, M; Piepho, HP, One step at a time: stage wise analysis of a series of experiments, Agronomy Journal, 109, 845-857, (2017) · doi:10.2134/agronj2016.07.0395
[6] Dias, CTdS; Krzanowski, WJ, Model selection and cross validation in additive main effect and multiplicative interaction models, Crop Science, 43, 865-873, (2003) · doi:10.2135/cropsci2003.8650
[7] Digby, P.G.N., and Kempton, R.A. (1987), “Multivariate analysis of ecological communities,” Chapman & Hall, London. · doi:10.1007/978-94-009-3133-6
[8] Forkman, J; Piepho, HP, Parametric bootstrap methods for testing multiplicative terms in GGE and AMMI models, Biometrics, 70, 639-647, (2014) · Zbl 1299.65014 · doi:10.1111/biom.12162
[9] Gabriel, KR; Zamir, S, Lower rank approximation of matrices by least squares with any choice of weights, Technometrics, 21, 489-498, (1979) · Zbl 0471.62004 · doi:10.1080/00401706.1979.10489819
[10] Gauch, HG, Model selection and validation for yield trials with interaction, Biometrics, 44, 705-715, (1988) · Zbl 0707.62236 · doi:10.2307/2531585
[11] Gauch, HG; Zobel, RW, Imputing missing yield trial data, Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 79, 753-761, (1990) · doi:10.1007/BF00224240
[12] Gauch, H.G. Jr. (1992), “Statistical analysis of regional yield trials,” Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam.
[13] Gollob, HF, A statistical model which combines features of factor analytic and analysis of variance techniques, Psychometrika, 33, 73-115, (1968) · Zbl 0167.48601 · doi:10.1007/BF02289676
[14] Green, BF, The orthogonal approximation of an oblique structure in factor analysis, Psychometrika, 17, 429-440, (1952) · Zbl 0049.37601 · doi:10.1007/BF02288918
[15] Hadasch, S., Forkman, J., Piepho, H.P. (2016), “Cross-validation in AMMI and GGE models: A comparison of methods,” Crop Science, 57, 264-274. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2016.07.0613. · Zbl 0195.17404
[16] Josse, J; Eeuwijk, FA; Piepho, HP; Denis, JB, Another look at Bayesian analysis of AMMI models for genotype-environment data, Journal of Agricultural, Biological, and Environmental Statistics, 19, 240-257, (2014) · Zbl 1303.62079
[17] Kotz, S., Balakrishnan, N., Read, C.B., Vidakovic, B., and Johnson, N.L. (2006), “Encyclopedia of statistical sciences, second edition ”John Wiley & Sons, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey. · Zbl 1136.62001
[18] Kruskal, JB, Analysis of factorial experiments by estimating monotonic transformations of the data, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 27, 251-263, (1965)
[19] Mandel, J, The partitioning of interaction in analysis of variance, Technometrics, 73, 309-328, (1969) · Zbl 0195.17404
[20] Meng, XL; Rubin, DB, Maximum likelihood estimation via the ECM algorithm: A general framework, Biometrika, 80, 267-278, (1993) · Zbl 0778.62022 · doi:10.1093/biomet/80.2.267
[21] Perez-Elizalde, S; Jarquin, D; Crossa, J, A general Bayesian estimation method of linear-bilinear models applied to plant breeding trials with genotype x environment interaction, Journal of Agricultural, Biological, and Environmental Statistics, 17, 15-37, (2012) · Zbl 1302.62275 · doi:10.1007/s13253-011-0063-9
[22] Piepho, HP, Best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) for regional yield trials: a comparison to additive main effects and multiplicative interaction (AMMI) analysis, Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 89, 647-654, (1994) · doi:10.1007/BF00222462
[23] Piepho, HP, Analyzing genotype-environment data by mixed models with multiplicative effects, Biometrics, 53, 761-766, (1997) · Zbl 0885.62123 · doi:10.2307/2533976
[24] Piepho, HP, An algorithm for a letter-based representation of all-pairwise comparisons, Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 13, 456-466, (2004) · doi:10.1198/1061860043515
[25] Piepho, HP; Möhring, J; Schulz-Streeck, T; Ogutu, JO, A stage-wise approach for the analysis of multi-environment trials, Biometrical Journal, 54, 844-860, (2012) · Zbl 1253.62090 · doi:10.1002/bimj.201100219
[26] Rodrigues, PC; Malosetti, M; Gauch, HG; Eeuwijk, FA, A weighted AMMI algorithm to study genotype-by-environment interaction and QTL-by-environment interaction, Crop Science, 54, 1555-1569, (2014) · doi:10.2135/cropsci2013.07.0462
[27] Schönemann, P.H. (1966), “A generalized solution to the orthogonal procrustes problem,” Psychometrica. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02289451.
[28] Searle, S.R, Casella, G., and McCulloch, C.E. (1992), “Variance components,”John Wiley & Sons, New York. · Zbl 1108.62064 · doi:10.1002/9780470316856
[29] Smith, A; Cullis, B; Gilmour, A, The analysis of cop variety evaluation data in Australia, Australian and New Zealand Journal of Statistics, 43, 129-145, (2001) · Zbl 1055.62563 · doi:10.1111/1467-842X.00163
[30] Smith, A; Cullis, BR; Thompson, R, Analysing variety by environment data using multiplicative mixed models and adjustment for spatial field trend, Biometrics, 57, 1138-1147, (2001) · Zbl 1209.62366 · doi:10.1111/j.0006-341X.2001.01138.x
[31] Srebro, N., and Jaakkola, T. (2003), “Weighted low-rank approximations,” Proceedings of the Twentieth International Conference on Machine Learning, Washington DC. · Zbl 0951.62091
[32] Yan, W; Hunt, LA; Sheng, Q; Szlavnics, Z, Cultivar evaluation and mega-environment investigation based on the GGE biplot, Crop Science, 40, 597-605, (2000) · doi:10.2135/cropsci2000.403597x
[33] Yan, W., and Kang, M.S. (2002), “GGE biplot analysis,” CRC Press, Boca Raton. · doi:10.1201/9781420040371
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.