scholarly journals Linear Variance, P-splines and Neighbour Differences for Spatial Adjustment in Field Trials: How are they Related?

Author(s):  
Martin P. Boer ◽  
Hans-Peter Piepho ◽  
Emlyn R. Williams

Abstract Nearest-neighbour methods based on first differences are an approach to spatial analysis of field trials with a long history, going back to the early work by Papadakis first published in 1937. These methods are closely related to a geostatistical model that assumes spatial covariance to be a linear function of distance. Recently, P-splines have been proposed as a flexible alternative to spatial analysis of field trials. On the surface, P-splines may appear like a completely new type of method, but closer scrutiny reveals intimate ties with earlier proposals based on first differences and the linear variance model. This paper studies these relations in detail, first focussing on one-dimensional spatial models and then extending to the two-dimensional case. Two yield trial datasets serve to illustrate the methods and their equivalence relations. Parsimonious linear variance and random walk models are suggested as a good point of departure for exploring possible improvements of model fit via the flexible P-spline framework.

1990 ◽  
Vol 20 (5) ◽  
pp. 536-546 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steen Magnussen

Tree height of jack pine full-sib families, originating from all possible combinations of three parental provenances and growing on three sites, was analyzed with 1 classical model and 11 nearest-neighbour spatial process models. Extension of the classical linear model with spatial interaction terms was deemed necessary in light of significant neighbourhood correlations among effect-free observations (residuals) on two of the three sites. The strength and extent of spatial and temporal correlations are demonstrated in both visual and tabular form. Only 4 of the 11 spatial models provided a substantial reduction (5–20%) in the significant difference between two estimates of full-sib family tree height. Spatial adjustments averaged 1–3% at the family level, with few families adjusted by more than 10%. The cumulative (temporal) effect of spatial covariance was demonstrated in rank correlations between adjusted and observed family means. No simple trends were obtained when adjusted variance components and heritabilities were compared with their unadjusted counter-parts, but most models tended to deflate genetic effects and reduce heritabilities. It is concluded that although spatial analyses provide an attractive tool for the experimenter, the lack of a cause and effect hypothesis in forest genetic trials necessitates model searching without the guarantee of true treatment effects. Spatial analysis provides good indicators of the need to collect additional site information for more powerful analyses. Careful planning and intensive site preparation may greatly reduce spatial covariances and the need for spatial analyses.


2015 ◽  
Vol 66 (9) ◽  
pp. 947 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanne De Faveri ◽  
Arūnas P. Verbyla ◽  
Wayne S. Pitchford ◽  
Shoba Venkatanagappa ◽  
Brian R. Cullis

Variety selection in perennial pasture crops involves identifying best varieties from data collected from multiple harvest times in field trials. For accurate selection, the statistical methods for analysing such data need to account for the spatial and temporal correlation typically present. This paper provides an approach for analysing multi-harvest data from variety selection trials in which there may be a large number of harvest times. Methods are presented for modelling the variety by harvest effects while accounting for the spatial and temporal correlation between observations. These methods provide an improvement in model fit compared to separate analyses for each harvest, and provide insight into variety by harvest interactions. The approach is illustrated using two traits from a lucerne variety selection trial. The proposed method provides variety predictions allowing for the natural sources of variation and correlation in multi-harvest data.


2019 ◽  
Vol 132 (12) ◽  
pp. 3277-3293 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Lie Selle ◽  
Ingelin Steinsland ◽  
John M. Hickey ◽  
Gregor Gorjanc

Abstract Key message Established spatial models improve the analysis of agricultural field trials with or without genomic data and can be fitted with the open-source R package INLA. Abstract The objective of this paper was to fit different established spatial models for analysing agricultural field trials using the open-source R package INLA. Spatial variation is common in field trials, and accounting for it increases the accuracy of estimated genetic effects. However, this is still hindered by the lack of available software implementations. We compare some established spatial models and show possibilities for flexible modelling with respect to field trial design and joint modelling over multiple years and locations. We use a Bayesian framework and for statistical inference the integrated nested Laplace approximations (INLA) implemented in the R package INLA. The spatial models we use are the well-known independent row and column effects, separable first-order autoregressive ($$\mathrm{AR1} \otimes \mathrm{AR1}$$ AR 1 ⊗ AR 1 ) models and a Gaussian random field (Matérn) model that is approximated via the stochastic partial differential equation approach. The Matérn model can accommodate flexible field trial designs and yields interpretable parameters. We test the models in a simulation study imitating a wheat breeding programme with different levels of spatial variation, with and without genome-wide markers and with combining data over two locations, modelling spatial and genetic effects jointly. The results show comparable predictive performance for both the $$\mathrm{AR1} \otimes \mathrm{AR1}$$ AR 1 ⊗ AR 1 and the Matérn models. We also present an example of fitting the models to a real wheat breeding data and simulated tree breeding data with the Nelder wheel design to show the flexibility of the Matérn model and the R package INLA.


1970 ◽  
Vol 64 (3) ◽  
pp. 772-791 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melvin J. Hinich ◽  
Peter C. Ordeshook

Spatial models of party competition constitute a recent and incrementally developing literature which seeks to explore the relationships between citizens' decisions and candidates' strategies. Despite the mathematical and deductive rigor of this approach, it is only now that political scientists can begin to see the incorporation of those considerations which less formal analyses identify as salient, and perhaps crucial, features of election contests.One such consideration concerns the candidates' objectives. Specifically, spatial analysis often confuses the distinction between candidates who maximize votes and candidates who maximize plurality. Downs and Garvey, for example, assume explicitly that candidates maximize votes, though plurality maximization is clearly the assumption which Garvey actually employs, while Downs frequently assumes that vote maximization, plurality maximization, and the goal of winning are equivalent. Downs, nevertheless, attempts to disentangle these objectives, observing that plurality maximization is the appropriate objective for candidates in a single-member district, while vote maximization is appropriate in proportional representation systems with many parties. All subsequent spatial analysis research, however, assumes either implicitly or explicitly that candidates maximize plurality. If Downs is correct, therefore, this research may not be relevant for a general understanding of electoral competition in diverse constitutional or historical circumstances. The question then is whether those strategies that maximize votes differ from those strategies that maximize plurality.


1965 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 105-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hansjørg Ebell
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Reid D. Landes ◽  
Kent M. Eskridge ◽  
P. Stephen Baenziger ◽  
David B. Marx
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mirko Mälicke

Abstract. Geostatistical methods are widely used in almost all geoscientific disciplines, i.e. for interpolation, re-scaling, data assimilation or modelling. At its core geostatistics aims to detect, quantify, describe, analyze and model spatial covariance of observations. The variogram, a tool to describe this spatial covariance in a formalized way, is at the heart of every such method. Unfortunately, many applications of geostatistics rather focus on the interpolation method or the result, than the quality of the estimated variogram. Not least because estimating a variogram is commonly left as a task for computers and some software implementations do not even show a variogram to the user. This is a miss, because the quality of the variogram largely determines, whether the application of geostatistics makes sense at all. Furthermore, the Python programming language was missing a mature, well-established and tested package for variogram estimation a couple of years ago. Here I present SciKit-GStat, an open source Python package for variogram estimation, that fits well into established frameworks for scientific computing and puts the focus on the variogram before more sophisticated methods are about to be applied. SciKit-GStat is written in a mutable, object-oriented way that mimics the typical geostatistical analysis workflow. Its main strength is the ease of usage and interactivity and it is therefore usable with only a little or even no knowledge in Python. During the last few years, other libraries covering geostatistics for Python developed along with SciKit-GStat. Today, the most important ones can be interfaced by SciKit-GStat. Additionally, established data structures for scientific computing are reused internally, to keep the user from learning complex data models, just for using SciKit-GStat. Common data structures along with powerful interfaces enable the user to use SciKit-GStat along with other packages in established workflows, rather than forcing the user to stick to the authors programming paradigms. SciKit-GStat ships with a large number of predefined procedures, algorithms and models, such as variogram estimators, theoretical spatial models or binning algorithms. Common approaches to estimate variograms are covered and can be used out of the box. At the same time, the base class is very flexible and can be adjusted to less common problems, as well. Last but not least, it was made sure, that a user is aided at implementing new procedures, or even extending the core functionality as much as possible, to extend SciKit-GStat to uncovered use-cases. With broad documentation, user guide, tutorials and good unit-test coverage, SciKit-GStat enables the user to focus on variogram estimation, rather than implementation details.


2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdullah Al Mahmud ◽  
Mohammad Hossain ◽  
Bimal Chandra Kundu ◽  
E.H.M. Shofiur Rahaman ◽  
Mohidul Hasan ◽  
...  

AbstractA set of International Potato Center (CIP)-bred potato clones was evaluated for their salt tolerance and productivity in replicated field trials in three coastal districts of Bangladesh, namely, Chittagong, Patuakhali and Satkhira. In each year of experimentation from 2011 to 2015, salinity levels increased progressively during the season and varied with time and place. Evaluation and selection were carried out using GGE biplot analysis and mean yield across the test sites; and the best performing clones were selected for the next year’s trial. Of the original fifteen test clones, two (CIP 301029.18 and CIP 396311.1) were selected for evaluation in the regional yield trial with cvs. Diamant and Asterix as checks. In the regional yield trial, across locations, CIP 301029.18 was the highest (21.8 ton/ha) and CIP 396311.1 (21.3 ton/ha) was the 2nd highest yielder such that CIP 301029.18 produced 64.0% higher yield and CIP 396311.1 produced 32.4% higher yield compare to their corresponding check varieties Diamant and Asterix. Similar ranking was found under farmers’ field conditions. Finally, these 2 clones CIP 301029.18 & CIP 396311.1 were found promising for their good productivity under saline conditions and CIP 396311.1 was released by the National Seed Board in Bangladesh in 2016.


2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-79
Author(s):  
MI Nazrul

A total of five separate field trials were conducted at farm farmers’ field in Sylhet area during three consecutive crops seasons of 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17, respectively to evaluate the yield performance of improved varieties with the existing cultivars of five vegetables at farmers' field. Each experiment was laid out in randomized complete block design with six dispersed replications. The unit plot size was 5m x 8m.The results showed that improved variety of tomato (var. BARI Tomato-14) produced higher average fruit (55.60 t ha-1) yield with the yield increase of 16.93% over control. In case of country bean, the local variety Goalgadda performed better and produced higher green pod yield (14.31 t ha-1) compared to that of BARI Sheem-6. The brinjal variety BARI Bt Begun-2 was the best yielder with an average fruit yield of 25.62 t ha-1 i.e. 107.62% increase over non-Bt as check. In case of yield trial with Capsicum, locally grown cultivar California Wonder performed better and produced comparatively higher yield (14.02 t ha-1) than var. BARI Mistimorich-1. In case of summer hyacinth bean viz., BARI Sheem-7 gave higher pod yield of 14.96 t ha-1 compared to that of the check variety (11.41 t ha-1) in researcher-managed trial.SAARC J. Agri., 16(1): 71-79 (2018)


2003 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 151-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. SINGH ◽  
R. S. MALHOTRA ◽  
S. CECCARELLI ◽  
A. SARKER ◽  
S. GRANDO ◽  
...  

Spatial variability in field trials is a reality. A proportion of this is accounted for as inter-block variability by using block (complete or incomplete) designs. A large amount of spatial variability still remains unaccounted for, however, and this may lead to erroneous conclusions. To capture this inexplicable variation (which is mainly due to intra-block variation), yield data from a series of variety yield trials, using cereals and legumes, were analysed using various spatial models. The most suitable of these, selected on the basis of the Akaike Information Criterion, were used to assess the relative performance of genotypes. Although incomplete-block designs have been found to be effective in variety trials, spatial models have added considerable value to trials with legumes and cereals. The ‘best’ spatial models gave efficiency values of over 330% in winter-sown chickpea (Cicer arietinum), 140% in lentil (Lens esculenta), and 150% in barley (Hordeum spp.) trials. Furthermore, the use of these best models resulted in a change in the ranking of genotypes (on the basis of mean yield), which resulted, therefore, in a different set of genotypes being selected for high yield. It is recommended that: (i) incomplete block designs be used in variety trials; (ii) the Akaike Information Criterion be used to select the best spatial model; and (iii) genotypes be selected after the use of this model. The selected model would account most effectively for spatial variability in the field trials, improve selection of the most desirable genotypes and, therefore, improve the efficiency of breeding programmes.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document