Post on 20-Mar-2021
transcript
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
Management of the French VCUS registration rules using genetic progress assessment by
different statiscal methods (WOSR, Sugar Beet and Turf)
P.Bagot, S.Lassalvy, V.Gensollen, B.Richard, A.Lucciani
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 2
Organization of the French national listing, Role of the CTPS
Different methods to assess the genetic progress
Examples of genetic progress assessment
Example of VCUS registration rules management by genetic
progress assessment
Steps of the presentation
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 3
CTPS : Technical and
Permanent Committee
for Selection
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 4
From European rules, each state member conducts technical studies triggering varieties registration on the national list.
• DUS studies (Distinctness, Uniformity and Stability) o Harmonized at an European and International level ( by the way of
CPVO and UPOV)
o Lead to an identity card of every new variety
• VCUS studies (Value for Cultivation Use and Sustainability) applied on agricultural crops
In France, each variety registration on the national list is validated and published by the Ministry of Agriculture.
The Ministry decides on the basis of the proposition of the consultative committee CTPS (Technical and Permanent Committee for Selection) and on the basis of trial results provided by GEVES.
Varieties registration (NL)
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 5
Varieties registration (NL)
Studies CTPS (experts) Asks GEVES to conduct the trials and
then looks at the results
Ministry of Agriculture decides
National list
BREEDER Application of a variety
GEVES performs DUS and
VCUS studies
Results
Registration in the NL = homologation (Creation of the official French catalog of species and varieties in 1932)
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 6
CTPS : Technical and Permanent Committee for Selection
800 experts all species Parity Public / Private The entire sector is represented: creator to the user of the variety
Consultative committee for the Ministry to define, implement and develop its policy of "varieties, seeds and plants."
Genetic progress assessment
Ministry of Agriculture
CTPS Scientific Committee
12 members
14 specialist sections
40 to 60 members per section
DUS Commission VCUS Commission
Commission of validation of the VCU trials
Proposes the registration or refusal of candidate varieties.
Proposes changes in the technical rules for registration.
Provision of advice and technical support.
Orientation, Arbitration.
Scientific advice, Proposals for research programms.
Provides results
Breeder
Combines the results of DUS and VCU studies
Application of new varieties.
Sets up of experiments
Registration.
Technical rules for registration.
Special commissions : f.e. Disease Commission
IND
EX
EXPERIMENTS
GEVES
Listing Commission
CTPS Plenary Committee
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 7
The CTPS follows and gives direction to the genetic progress
by the way of permanent evolution of registration rules.
These evolutions aim to meet new technical, economic,
environmental and societal needs and depend on the
possibility for breeder to answer these changes.
New goals:
To obtain varieties adapted to an agriculture which needs
less inputs
To allow access to the NL for varieties that meet the criteria
of organic farming and for the conservation varieties
To deepen knowledge on varieties (for example, to point out
specific behaviors according to various agricultural contexts)
Varieties registration (NL)
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 8
Example : Case of WOSR
VCUS registration rules:
Kernel Yield+Oil content+Proteins content+glucosinolates content+susceptibility to Phoma
y = -0,134x + 4,4441 R² = 0,7829
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Ave
rage
sco
re f
or
susc
ep
tib
ility
ph
om
a
Year of application
Evolution of Phoma susceptibility for varieties listed in the NL (1 : resistant; 9 susceptible)
Variétés inscrites
Témoins
Introduction of a bonus for resistance to Phoma
Introduction of resistance standards
Lowering the refusal threshold : SS + LSD 20% (by 10%)
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 9
Methods of genetic
progress assessment
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 10
Agronomic: Field Trials with old varieties and new ones
Estimation of the results of absent varieties on the basis
of the results of common varieties which are present over
years.
Estimation of an average varietal result over years by
variance analysis (model with year, location and GEI
controlled effects)
Measurement methods used in genetic progress in France:
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 11
Advantage: All varieties are compared directly and we can compare, for
example, the results of the varieties listed in 1994 compared to those listed in
2013.
Disadvantages:
• The varieties listed in 1994, for example, were adapted to:
– The climate of testing years
– The crop management of these years (High Input)
– The pathogens present these years
• High cost and difficulties to get reference seeds
When varietal progress is calculated a significant part of this assessment is due to
other effect than genetic changes:
Ex : genetic progress on the average root yield of sugar beet is due, in a large
part, to climate changes. In southern France, the stagnation of progress in wheat
yield is due to the increased number of heat stress days.
Agronomic Method: Field Trials with old and current varieties
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 12
Estimation of the results of absent varieties on the basis of the results of
common varieties which are present over years: ODEON
Two-way ANOVA on check varieties data :
Agronomic trait = Variety + Year + Residual
Estimation of missing values in check data :
Est(trait)=Est(Variety) + Est(Year)
A tool used in GEVES : GEVES Software ODEON for comparing turf varieties not sown together
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 13
Status A1 A2 A3 A4
V1
Check varieties
Y11 Y12 Y13 .
V2 . . . Y24
V3 . Y32 Y33 Y34
V4 . . Y43 Y44
N1
New varieties
. . Z13 .
N2 . . . Z24
N3 . Z32 . .
Input data : varieties years table
Estimation of the results of absent varieties on the basis of the results of
common varieties which are present over years: ODEON
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 14
Scores calculation
Status A1 A2 A3 A4 Calculated scores
V1
Check varieties
Est(Y)11 Est(Y)12 Est(Y)13 Est(Y)14 Est(Y)1.
V2 Est(Y)21 Est(Y)22 Est(Y)23 Est(Y)24 Est(Y)2.
V3 Est(Y)31 Est(Y)32 Est(Y)33 Est(Y)34 Est(Y)1.
V4 Est(Y)41 Est(Y)42 Est(Y)43 Est(Y)44 Est(Y)2.
Over years means Est(Y).1 Est(Y).2 Est(Y).3 Est(Y).4 Est(Y)..
N1
New varieties
Z13 Z13/Est(Y).3xEst(Y)..
N2 Z24 Z24/Est(Y).4xEst(Y)..
N3 Z32 Z32/Est(Y).2xEst(Y)..
Check varieties
New varieties
Estimation of the results of absent varieties on the basis of the results of
common varieties which are present over years: ODEON
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 15
Cultivar ID Denomination Status Type Trait 1987 1988 … 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Over years
means
Final
scores
104 798 Agio check Observation General Merit 4.1 4.7 … 4.4 4.1
104 808 Ensylva check Observation General Merit … 5.8 5.6 5.9 6.0 5.9
159 604 Mystic check Observation General Merit … 6.1 5.8 5.8 6.0 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.4 5.8 6.2
104 803 Pernille check Observation General Merit … 5.7 5.5 5.2 5.1 5.7 5.7
156 487 Salsa check Observation General Merit … 6.4 6.2 6.3 6.1 5.9 6.3 6.1 5.8 5.8 5.8 6.1 6.5
check Observed means General Merit 4.1 4.7 … 6.0 5.8 6.1 5.9 5.8 6.2 6.0 5.5 5.5 5.6 5.8
104 798 Agio check Calculation General Merit 4.1 4.7 … 4.0 3.8 4.0 3.7 3.6 3.9 3.7 3.5 3.5 3.4 4.1 4.1
104 808 Ensylva check Calculation General Merit 5.9 6.5 … 5.8 5.6 5.8 5.5 5.4 5.7 5.5 5.2 5.3 5.1 5.9 5.9
159 604 Mystic check Calculation General Merit 6.2 6.8 … 6.1 5.9 6.1 5.8 5.7 6.0 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.5 6.2 6.2
104 803 Pernille check Calculation General Merit 5.8 6.4 … 5.7 5.5 5.7 5.3 5.3 5.6 5.4 5.1 5.1 5.0 5.7 5.7
156 487 Salsa check Calculation General Merit 6.5 7.1 … 6.4 6.2 6.4 6.1 6.0 6.3 6.1 5.9 5.9 5.7 6.5 6.5
check Calculated means General Merit 5.7 6.3 … 5.6 5.4 5.6 5.3 5.2 5.5 5.3 5.1 5.1 4.9 5.7
167 921 Adinda new variety Observation General Merit … 6.0
1 007 561 ADV Frr 344 new variety Observation General Merit … 5.9 6.1
1 005 446 ADV FRR 361 new variety Observation General Merit … 5.9 6.0
1 005 448 Almerita new variety Observation General Merit … 6.1 6.2
1 022 812 Aponga new variety Observation General Merit … 5.9 6.6
1 000 933 BAR FRR 99432 new variety Observation General Merit … 5.6
Calculation details from ODEON
Species: Strong creeping red fescue, Characteristic: General Merit
Estimation of the results of absent varieties on the basis of the results of
common varieties which are present over years: ODEON
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 16
Sequential correction of the year effect with respect to a reference
year Ai
Method applied on a set of yearly mean yields for several genotypes.
Each couple of years must have genotypes in common to allow year effect correction.
mean yield of variety j on year Ai.
nAiAi+1 number of varieties common to years Ai and Ai +1.
corrected mean yield of variety j on year Ai+1.
Ai reference year.
iA
jy
1iA
jyc
Estimation of the results of absent varieties on the basis of the results of
common varieties which are present over years: FX. Oury Method
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 17
Corrected mean for year Ai+1
1
11
ii
ii
AA
A
j
A
j dyyc
1
1
1
1
1
ii
iAiA
ii
ii
AA
n
j
A
j
A
j
AAn
yy
d
Corrected mean for year Ai+2
21
22
ii
ii
AA
A
j
A
j dcyyc
nAi+1Ai+2 number of varieties common to years Ai+1 and Ai +2.
21
21
21
21
1
ii
iAiA
ii
ii
AA
n
j
A
j
A
j
AAn
yyc
dc
Oury, F. X., Godin, C., Mailliard, A., Chassin, A., Gardet, O., Giraud, A., ... & Charmet, G. (2012). A study of genetic progress due to selection reveals a negative effect of climate change on bread wheat yield in France. European Journal of Agronomy, 40, 28-38.
Estimation of the results of absent varieties on the basis of the results of
common varieties which are present over years: FX. Oury Method
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 18
Estimation of the results of absent varieties on the basis of the results of common
varieties which are present over years: FX. Oury Method
Winter Wheat : Genetic progress for the kernel yield
Untreated factor Treated factor
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 19
Calculation of the genetic progress
For a single set of corrected yields, the genetic progress is estimated as the
slope coefficient of the regression of the corrected yields on the years of
trial.
Choosing for reference year every possible year of trial leads to build as
many series of corrected yields as possible reference years.
– And leads to compute a series of slopes, each slope related to a
corrected series.
– Finally the genetic progress measurement is computed as the mean of
all slopes.
The method has been validated by simulations.
Estimation of the results of absent varieties on the basis of the results of
common varieties which are present over years: FX. Oury Method
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 20
Y = variety + environment + variety*environment + Error
Fixed effect factor
Random effects factor
Estimation of random effects to calculate the variety adjusted mean that no longer depends only on the fixed effect of varieties. adjusted mean : status*variety
Y = status (Candidate or Standard) + year of application*status + year of application*status**variety + year of harvest + location + year of harvest*location + variety*location + E
Use of a mixed-design analysis of variance model (SPANOVA)
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 21
Examples of genetic
progress assessment
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 22
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113
Index Y+OP
Index Y
Varieties registered since 2009 (63)
HR sans RLM7
HR avec RLM7
AV
HRDN
Lignées
Var>103 with OP
Var > 103 with Y, <103 with OP and > 103 with Phoma
Var > 103 with Y
Var >103 with Phoma and OP
79%
1 %
8 %
103
103
12%
Example : WOSR, Management of the VCUS registration rules in 2013
Index : Yield(%S) +Oil(≠S)+Protein((≠S)/2)+Phoma(bonus between 0 to 1.5)
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 23
Mean type var
Year CV HSD H OL
1988 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 4.60
1989 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 3.18
1990 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 3.99
1991 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 4.95
1992 5.04 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 4.90
1993 4.12 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 4.26
1994 3.68 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 2.61
1995 3.80 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 3.23
1996 2.75 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 3.47
1997 3.62 4.27 #DIV/0! 3.58
1998 3.73 #DIV/0! 3.94 2.84
1999 3.20 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 2.66
2000 #DIV/0! 4.96 #DIV/0! 2.89
2002 #DIV/0! 3.34 #DIV/0! 2.71
2003 2.92 3.23 0.66 2.48
2004 #DIV/0! 3.36 0.52 2.31
2005 2.79 3.48 2.28 1.92
2006 2.07 3.90 3.33 1.99
2007 1.05 3.46 2.66 2.36
2008 #DIV/0! 2.85 2.58 2.48
2009 2.81 2.43 1.39 2.63
2010 2.08 2.42 2.24 1.65
2011 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 1.95 3.05
Total général 3.16 3.45 2.45 2.75
-57% -43% -51% -43% -53%
/year -3% -3% -4% -2% -2% 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Phoma susceptibility
Témoins
Decrease 0.15 points / year (less 3 points of susceptibilty over the period) or 2% year
Example : WOSR, Genetic progress assessment with SPANOVA in 2013
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 24
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
HR 42,93 44,43 43,60 43,93 44,17 44,63 47,39 46,97 48,41
LIG 42,81 43,52 43,28 44,65 43,99 45,72 46,75 45,55
Témoin HR 41,77 41,31 40,88 41,81 42,17 43,04 44,72 45,98 46,15
Témoins LIG 42,25 41,90 41,90 41,90 42,26 43,48 44,50 45,17 45,53
NB HR 1 2 4 14 12 21 9 7 4
NB LIG 4 9 11 14 21 12 3 1 0
38,00
40,00
42,00
44,00
46,00
48,00
50,00
Yield of registered varieties and standards ( Hybrids and open lines since2003 (149))
HR
LIG
Témoin HR
Témoins LIG
NB HR
NB LIG
74
75
Example : WOSR, Genetic progress assessment with SPANOVA in 2013
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 25
Year of application
Number of
Var Yield 11%
2003 5 42.83
2004 11 43.68
2005 15 43.36
2006 28 44.29
2007 33 44.06
2008 33 45.02
2009 12 47.23
2010 8 46.79
2011 4 48.41
Total 149 44.70
typevar
Year of application HR LIG Témoins HR Témoins LIG
2003 42.93 42.81 41.77 42.25
2004 44.43 43.52 41.31 41.90
2005 43.60 43.28 40.88 41.90
2006 43.93 44.65 41.81 41.90
2007 44.17 43.99 42.17 42.26
2008 44.63 45.72 43.04 43.48
2009 47.39 46.75 44.72 44.50
2010 46.97 45.55 45.98 45.17
2011 48.41 46.15 45.53
Total 45.11 44.32 43.09 43.21
min 42.93 42.81 40.88 41.90
max 48.41 46.75 46.15 45.53
diff in dt 5.48 3.95 5.27 3.63
Progress/year in dt/ha 0.61 0.49 0.75 0.45
diff en % 13% 9% 13% 9%
Progress/year in % 1.4% 1.2% 1.8% 1.1%
Progress +0.55 dt/ha/year or 1.3% / year +4.7q/ha in 9 years
- Reminder: Significant Progress +0.54 dt / ha / year between 1988 and 2000 or +1.4% / year
-NB: mean of 36dt/ha in 1989
Example : WOSR, Genetic progress assessment with SPANOVA in 2013
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 26
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
HR 43,6 43,1 43,6 43,6 43,9 43,7 44,2 44,4 44,1
LIG 43 44 43,9 44,8 44,4 44,5 44,4 44,2 44,1
Nb HR 1 2 4 15 11 21 9 7 4
Nb LIG 9 4 9 12 13 21 12 3 1
Tem HR 43,5 43,6 43,5 43,4 43,3 43,4 43,5 43,5 43,6
Tem LIG 43,9 44,1 44 43,9 43,8 44 44,1 44,3 44,5
41
42
43
44
45
46
47 Oil content of registered varieties and standards ( Hybrids and open lines since20032(158)
Example : WOSR, Genetic progress assessment with SPANOVA in 2013
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 27
Differences between year of application : Hybrids
Mean of
Estimate _depot
depot 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Total général
2003 -0.5 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.6 0.8 0.5 0.2
2004 0.5 0.5 0.8 0.6 1.1 1.3 1.1 0.8
2005 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.6 0.8 0.6 0.4
2006 0.3 0.1 0.6 0.8 0.5 0.5
2007 -0.2 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.2
2008 0.5 0.8 0.5 0.6
2009 0.2 -0.1 0.1
2010 -0.3 -0.3
Total général -0.5 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.6 0.8 0.4 0.4
Differences between year of application :Openlines
Mean of
estimate _depot
depot 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Total général
2002 1.0 0.9 1.8 1.3 1.5 1.4 1.2 1.0 1.3
2003 -0.1 0.8 0.3 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.3
2004 0.9 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.5
2005 -0.4 -0.3 -0.4 -0.6 -0.7 -0.5
2006 0.2 0.1 -0.2 -0.3 -0.1
2007 -0.1 -0.3 -0.5 -0.3
2008 -0.2 -0.4 -0.3
2009 -0.1 -0.1
Total général 1.0 0.4 1.1 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.1 -0.1 0.3
Slight overall progress and continuity in progress since 2003. Increase between 2004 and 2010 for Hybrids over 1pt but decline in 2011. Steep increase for Open lines until 2005 and then decline.
Example : WOSR, Genetic progress assessment with SPANOVA in 2013
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 28
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
HR 35,7 35 34,6 34,4 34,2 34,4 34,2 34,4 34,1
LIG 35,2 35,1 35,1 34,1 34,4 34 34,3 35,1
Nb HR 1 2 4 15 11 21 9 7 4
Nb LIG 4 9 12 13 21 12 3 1 0
Tem HR 35,6 35,5 35,3 35,2 35 34,5 34,4 34,6 34,8
Tem LIG 35,4 35,3 35,2 35 34,6 34,4 34,5 34,5 34,4
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
Proteins content of registered varieties and standards ( Hybrids and open lines since2003 (149)
HR
LIG
Nb HR
Nb LIG
Tem HR
Tem LIG
Example : WOSR, Genetic progress assessment with SPANOVA in 2013
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 29
Significant decrease between 2003 and 2006, since stagnation in Hybrids and slight recovery in Open lines but serrated
Differences between year of application : Hybrids
Mean of Estimate _depot
depot 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Total général
2003 -0.8 -1.1 -1.4 -1.5 -1.4 -1.6 -1.3 -1.6 -1.3
2004 -0.4 -0.6 -0.8 -0.6 -0.8 -0.5 -0.8 -0.7
2005 -0.2 -0.4 -0.2 -0.4 -0.1 -0.4 -0.3
2006 -0.2 0.0 -0.2 0.1 -0.2 -0.1
2007 0.2 0.0 0.2 -0.1 0.1
2008 -0.2 0.1 -0.2 -0.1
2009 0.3 0.0 0.1
2010 -0.3 -0.3
Total général -0.8 -0.8 -0.7 -0.7 -0.4 -0.5 -0.2 -0.5 -0.5
Differences between year of application : Openlines
Mean of Estimate _depot
depot 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Total général
2002 -0.3 -0.4 -0.3 -1.4 -1.1 -1.5 -1.1 -0.3 -0.8
2003 0.0 0.0 -1.0 -0.8 -1.2 -0.8 0.0 -0.6
2004 0.0 -1.0 -0.7 -1.1 -0.8 0.0 -0.6
2005 -1.0 -0.7 -1.1 -0.8 0.0 -0.7
2006 0.3 -0.1 0.2 1.0 0.4
2007 -0.4 -0.1 0.8 0.1
2008 0.3 1.2 0.8
2009 0.8 0.8
Total général -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 -1.1 -0.6 -0.9 -0.4 0.4 -0.4
Example : WOSR, Genetic progress assessment with SPANOVA in 2013
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 30
Example : WOSR, Genetic progress assessment with SPANOVA in 2013
From this study, CTPS led a thinking on its rules Genetic progress observed for the yield criteria keep the 103 threshold with the same attention to the standards choice
Genetic progress observed for phoma resistance good system with Bonus and elimination, status quo with a more stringent level of elimination
For Oil and Proteins, no genetic progress is observed CTPS decided to keep the current bonus/malus to maintain pressure on the criterias without being too pushy (as farmers are paid on yield and not on oil or proteins)
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 31
Correlation for admitted
varieties:
R = 0.84 .
Regression model:
y = 0.05x – 101.06
R2 = 0.7
Slope in percentage of
varieties set mean: 0.9713 %
Correlation for all varieties:
R = 0.8 .
Regression model:
y = 0.05x – 93.65
R2 = 0.63
Slope in percentage of
varieties set mean: 0.9224 %
Example : Turf, Genetic progress assessment with Odeon
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 32
Correlation for admitted
varieties:
R = 0.86 .
Regression model:
y = 0.05x - 86.44
R2 = 0.74
Slope in percentage of
varieties set mean: 0.6937 %
Correlation for all varieties:
R = 0.79 .
Regression model:
y = 0.04x - 75.07
R2 = 0.62
Slope in percentage of
varieties set mean: 0.6157 %
Example : Turf, Genetic progress assessment with Odeon
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 33
Example of VCUS
registration rules
management by genetic
progress assessment
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 34
1984 A 2013
T/ha
Root Yield y = 0,8259x - 1587,6 1984 50,9856
R²=0,80 2013 74,9367
soit + 47%
T/ha
Sugar Yield y = 0,1698x - 327,98 1984 8,9032
R²=0,80 2013 13,8274
soit + 55%
Share increase root yield 85%
Share increase sugar content 15%
Evolution root yield and sugar content between 1984 and 2013
Example : Sugar Beet
Genetic progress assessment in 2013
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 35
Example : Sugar Beet
Current context
Role of CTPS: to enhance genetic progress
Importance of the choice of standards (orientation).
Context of sugar beet
– End of quotas in 2017
– Competitiveness problem compared to sugar cane: difference of 30%.
– Importance of sugar yield and sugar content:
• Increase productivity Root yield
• Take into account the costs of transport and transformation: sugar
content.
– Choice of standards: empirical result of a compromise current rule
(« ¾ - ¼ »)
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 36
Example : Sugar Beet
Choice of standards
For the main category (varieties resistant to Rhizomania): 4
varieties
Standards in this category are selected among varieties tested
during at least 2 years by the interprofessional sector.
the second point is to ensure that the mean of the 4 standard
varieties improve sugar yield obtained for about 3/4 by root
weight and about 1/4 by sugar content, without degradation of
industrial quality compared with the previous standards.
Current system until 2013, strong constraints = "rule of ¾ - ¼"
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 37
Example : Sugar Beet
2012, 2013: the system of standards choice is breathless
– Few satisfactory combinations meet the criteria ¾ / ¼.
– Progress is limited because of the constraints of
standards choice.
constraints Maximum progress for root yield
Respect for the rule +/- 10 % 1.38 %
Respect for the rule +/- 20 % 1.40 %
No constraints 2.90 %
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 38
Example : Sugar Beet
Some aspects of genetics and selection
y = -8,5239x + 248,61r = -0,79
84.00
86.00
88.00
90.00
92.00
94.00
96.00
98.00
100.00
17.80 18.00 18.20 18.40 18.60 18.80 19.00 19.20
Ro
ot Y
ield
Sugar content
Less variability root yield with high level of sugar content 1 point sugar content costs 7-8 t root yield Observed by each breeder
Sugar yield very positively related to theroot yield (r ~ 0.90) Sugar yield negatively linked to the sugar content (~ r -0.25 to -0.45) Consequence: to obtain fast progress on the sugar yield, the increase of root yield would be more effective than the increase of the sugar content.
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 39
Example : Sugar Beet
New orientation built for the future :
To separate registration thresholds from standards choice:
1) Choose the standard varieties for their representation of the
market, the diversity of genetic origins, stability, etc..
2) Set thresholds for registration according to the wanted
progress every year on different criteria.
For this, the standard panel is selected on the criteria 1).
Then the threshold is adjusted according to these new
standards and to the targets that have been set.
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 40
97,5
98
98,5
99
99,5
100
100,5
101
101,5
99,5 100 100,5 101 101,5 102 102,5
Suga
r co
nte
nt
Root yield
Standard Y n-1
Values of the new standards
standards% in year n-1
Index 100
Year n+1
Variety A :
Yield 102 year n-1
100.5 year n+1
+0.5
+1
.1
Example : Sugar Beet
Choosing a virtual standard with such objective:
+1.5% root yield , 0% sugar content / year N-1
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 41
The assessment of genetic progress is essential for managing registration rules:
The social and political context changes: The varieties of tomorrow are varieties
adapted to culture conditions with less inputs, more sustainability and with the same
production or at least more productive.
Climate change context
Crop systems change, etc ....
To do this, several methods exist and each have +/- lacks in the estimation of
GEI. Currently we have to consider trends to change our rules, but a more
precise assessment would allow us to establish rules directly integrating the
objectives of genetic progress (ex : sugar beet)
Conclusion
Saisissez votre texte
Saisissez votre texte
10 th Working Seminar on Statiscal Methods in Variety Testing- 2014 – P.Bagot – GEVES 42
Thank you for your attention
Acknowlegments to: S.Lassalvy, V.Gensollen, B.Richard, A.Luciani, AL.Corbel, F.Masson, MH.Bernicot