Spatial analysis methods for forest genetic trials

Canadian Journal of Forest Research

Volumn 32, Issue 12, 2002, Pages 2201-2214

  Dutkowski, Gregory W ^a   Costa e Silva, João ^b   Gilmour, Arthur R ^c   Lopez, Gustavo A ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TASMANIA   (Australia)

^b INSTITUTO SUPERIOR DE AGRONOMIA   (Portugal)

^c NSW DEPARTMENT OF PRIMARY INDUSTRIES   (Australia)

^d INSTITUTO NACIONAL DE TECNOLOGÍA AGROPECUARIA INTA   (Argentina)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGRICULTURE; RESIDUAL FUELS;

FOREST GENETIC TRIALS;

FORESTRY;

GENETIC VARIATION; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT; SILVICULTURE; SPATIAL ANALYSIS;

EMBRYOPHYTA;

EID: 0037003913     PISSN: 00455067     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1139/x02-111     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Akaike, H. 1973. Information theory and an extension of the maximum principle. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on Information Theory. Edited by B.N. Petrov and F. Czaki. Akademia Kiado, Budapest, Hungary. pp. 267-281.
2. Anekonda, T.S., and Libby, W.J. 1996. Effectiveness of nearest-neighbor data adjustment in a clonal test of redwood. Silvae Genet. 45: 46-51.
3. Azais, J.M., Monod, H., and Bailey, R.A. 1996. The influence of design on validity and efficiency of neighbour methods. Aust. J. Stat. 38: 91-106.
4. Baird, D., and Mead, R. 1991. The empirical efficiency and validity of two neighbour models. Biometrics, 47: 1473-1487.
5. Bartlett, M.S. 1978. Nearest neighbour models in the analysis of field experiments. J. R. Stat. Soc. B, 40: 147-174.
6. Basford, K.E., Williams, E.R., Cullis, B.R., Gilmour, A., and Hammer, G.L. 1996. Experimental design and analysis for variety trials. In Plant adaptation and crop improvement. Edited by M. Cooper and G.L. Hammer. CAB International, Wallingford, U.K. pp. 125-138.
7. Besag, J., and Kempton, R. 1986. Statistical analysis of field experiments using neighbouring plots. Biometrics, 42: 231-251.
8. Borralho, N.M.G. 1995. The impact of individual tree mixed models (BLUP) in tree breeding strategies. In Eucalypt Plantations: Improving Fibre Yield and Quality. Proceedings of the CRCTHF-IUFRO Conference, 19-24 Feb. 1995, Hobart, Tasmania. Edited by B.M. Potts, N.M.G. Borralho, J.B. Reid, R.N. Cromer, W.N. Tibbits, and C.A. Raymond. CRC for Temperate Hardwood Forestry - International Union of Forest Research Organizations (CRCTHF-IUFRO), Hobart, Tasmania. pp. 141-145.
9. Box, G.E.P., and Jenkins, G.M. 1970. Time series analysis, forecasting and control. Holden-Day, San Francisco, Calif.
10. Brownie, C., and Gumpertz, M.L. 1997. Validity of spatial analyses for large field trials. J. Agric. Biol. Environ. Stat. 2: 1-23.
11. Clarke, F.R., and Baker, R.J. 1996. Spatial analysis improves comparison of seed lot comparisons. Crop Sci. 36: 1180-1184.
12. Costa e Silva, J., Dutkowski, G.W., and Gilmour, A.R. 2001. Analysis of early tree height in forest genetic trials is enhanced by including a spatially correlated residual. Can. J. For. Res. 31: 1887-1893.
13. Cullis, B., and Gleeson, A.C. 1989. Efficiency of neighbour analysis for replicated field trials in Australia. J. Agric. Sci. 113: 233-239.
14. Cullis, B.R., and Gleeson, A.C. 1991. Spatial analysis of field experiments - an extension to two dimensions. Biometrics, 47: 1449-1460.
15. Cullis, B.R., Lill, W.J., Fisher, J.A., Read, B.J., and Gleeson, A.C. 1989. A new procedure for the analysis of early generation variety trials. Appl. Stat. 38: 361-375.
16. Cullis, B.R., Gleeson, A.C., and Thomson, F.M. 1992. The response to selection of different procedures for the analysis of early generation variety trials. J. Agric. Sci. 118: 141-148.
17. Cullis, B., Gogel, B., Verbyla, A., and Thompson, R. 1998. Spatial analysis of multi-environment early generation variety trials. Biometrics, 54: 1-18.
18. Ericsson, T. 1997. Enhanced heritabilities and best linear unbiased predictors through appropriate blocking of progeny trials. Can. J. For. Res. 27: 2097-2101.
19. Federer, W.T. 1998. Recovery of interblock, intergradient and intervariety information in incomplete block and lattice rectangle designed experiments. Biometrics, 54: 471-481.
20. Fu, Y.B., Yanchuk, A.D., and Namkoong, G. 1999. Spatial patterns of tree height variations in a series of Douglas-fir progeny trials: implications for genetic testing. Can. J. For. Res. 29: 714-723.
21. Gilmour, A.R., Cullis, B.R., and Verbyla, A.P. 1997. Accounting for natural and extraneous variation in the analysis of field experiments. J. Agric. Biol. Environ. Stat. 2: 269-293.
22. Gilmour, A.R., Cullis, B.R., Welham, S.J., and Thomson, R. 1999. ASREML reference manual. Orange Agriculture Institute, Forest Road, Orange, New South Wales, Australia. NSW Agric. Biom. Bull. 3.
23. Gleeson, A.C., and Cullis, B.R. 1987. Residual maximum likelihood (REML) estimation of a neighbour model for field experiments. Biometrics, 43: 277-288.
24. Grondona, M.O., Crossa, J., Fox, P.N., and Pfeiffer, W.H. 1996. Analysis of variety yield trials using two-dimensional separable ARIMA processes. Biometrics, 52: 763-770.
25. Hamann, A., Koshy, M.P., and Namkoong, G. 2002. Improving precision of breeding values by removing spatially auto-correlated variation in forestry field experiments. Silvae Genet. In press.
26. Henderson, C.R. 1976. A simple method for computing the inverse of a numerator relationship matrix used in the prediction of breeding values. Biometrics, 32: 69-83.
27. Henderson, C.R. 1984. Applications of linear models in animal breeding. University of Guelph, Guelph, Ont.
28. Jarvis, S.F., Borralho, N.M.G., and Potts, B.M. 1995. Implementation of a multivariate BLUP model for genetic evaluation of Eucalyptus globulus in Australia. In Eucalypt Plantations: Improving Fibre Yield and Quality, Proceedings of the CRCTHF-IUFRO Conference, 19-24 Feb. 1995, Hobart, Tasmania. Edited by B.M. Potts, N.M.G. Borralho, J.B. Reid, R.N. Cromer, W.N. Tibbits, and C.A. Raymond. CRC for Temperate Hardwood Forestry - International Union of Forest Research Organizations (CRCTHF-IUFRO), Hobart, Tasmania. pp. 212-216.
29. Kenward, M.G., and Roger, J.H. 1997. The precision of fixed effects from restricted maximum likelihood. Biometrics, 53: 983-997.
30. Kirk, H.J., Haynes, F.L., and Monroe, R.J. 1980. Application of trend analysis to horticultural field trials. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 105: 189-193.
31. Kusnandar, D., and Galwey, N. 2000. A proposed method for estimation of genetic parameters on forest trees without raising progeny: critical evaluation and refinement. Silvae Genet. 49: 15-21.
32. Lill, W.J., Gleeson, A.C., and Cullis, B.R. 1988. Relative accuracy of a neighbour method for field trials. J. Agric. Sci. 111: 339-346.
33. Liu, J.P., and Burkhart, H.E. 1994. Spatial characteristics of diameter and total height in juvenile loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L) plantations. For. Sci. 40: 774-786.
34. Magnussen, S. 1989. Effects and adjustments of competition bias in progeny trials with single-tree plots. For. Sci. 35: 532-547.
35. Magnussen, S. 1990. Application and comparison of spatial models in analyzing tree-genetics field trials. Can. J. For. Res. 20: 536-546.
36. Magnussen, S. 1993. Bias in genetic varience due to spatial autocorrelation. Theor. Appl. Genet. 86: 349-355.
37. Magnussen, S. 1994. A method to adjust simultaneously for spatial microsite and competition effects. Can. J. For. Res. 24: 985-995.
38. Moreau, L., Monod, H., Charcosset, A., and Gallais, A. 1999. Marker-assisted selection with spatial analysis of unreplicated field trials. Theor. Appl. Genet. 98: 234-242.
39. Nguyen, N., and Williams, E.R. 1993. An algorithm for constructing optimal resolvable row-column designs. Aust. J. Stat. 35: 363-370.
40. Papadakis, J.S. 1937. Méthode statistique pour des expériences sur champ. Bull. Inst. Amélioration Plantes Salonique 23.
41. Patterson, H.D., and Thompson, R. 1971. Recovery of inter-block information when block sizes are unequal. Biometrika, 58: 545-554.
42. Qiao, C.G., Basford, K.E., DeLacy, I.H., and Cooper, M. 2000. Evaluation of experimental designs and spatial analyses in wheat breeding trials. Theor. Appl. Genet. 100: 9-16.
43. Stram, D.O., and Lee, J.W. 1994. Variance components testing in the longitudinal mixed effects model. Biometrics, 50: 1171-1177.
44. Tamura, R.N., Nelson, L.A., and Naderman, G.C. 1988. An investigation of the validity and usefuleness of trend surface analysis for field plot data. Agron. J. 80: 712-718.
45. Verbyla, A.P., Cullis, B.R., Kenward, M.G., and Welham, S.J. 1997. The analysis of designed experiments and longitudinal data using smoothing splines. The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia. Res. Rep. 97/4.
46. Wilkinson, G.N., Eckert, S.R., Hancock, T.W., and Mayo, O. 1983. Nearest neighbour (NN) analysis of field experiments. J. R. Stat. Soc. 45: 151-211.
47. Williams, E.R. 1986. A neighbour model for field experiments. Biometrika, 73: 279-287.
48. Williams, E.R., and Matheson, A.C. 1994. Experimental design and analysis for use in tree improvement. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, Melbourne, Australia.
49. Zimmerman, D.L., and Harville, D.A. 1991. A random field approach to the analysis of field-plot experiments and other spatial experiments. Biometrics, 47: 223-239.