Skip to main content

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Plant Sci.
Sec. Plant Biotechnology
Volume 16 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fpls.2025.1506434

Incorporating gene expression and environment for genomic prediction in wheat

Provisionally accepted
JIA LIU JIA LIU 1,2*Andrew Gock Andrew Gock 2Kerrie Ramm Kerrie Ramm 2Sandra Stops Sandra Stops 2Tanya Phongkham Tanya Phongkham 2Adam Norman Adam Norman 3Russell Eastwood Russell Eastwood 3Eric Stone Eric Stone 1Shannon Dillon Shannon Dillon 2
  • 1 Australian National University, Canberra, Australia
  • 2 Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia
  • 3 Australian Grain Technologies (AGT), Urrbrae, Australia

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    The adoption of novel molecular strategies such as genomic selection (GS) in crop breeding have been key to maintaining rates of genetic gain through increased efficiency and shortening the cycle of evaluation relative to conventional selection. In the search for improved methodologies that incorporate novel sources of variation for the assessment of genetic merit, GS remains a focus of crop breeding research globally. Here we explored the role transcriptome data could play in enhancing GS in wheat. Across 286 wheat lines, we integrated phenotype and multi-omic data from controlled environment and field experiments including ca. 40K single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP), abundance data for ca. 50K transcripts as well as meta-data (e.g. categorical environments) predicted individual genetic merit for two agronomic traits, flowering time and height. Using this integrated data, we predicted individual genetic merit for the agronomic traits. We evaluated the performance of different model scenarios based on linear (GBLUP) and Gaussian/nonlinear (RKHS) regression in the Bayesian analytical framework. These models explored the relative contributions of different combinations of additive genomic (G), transcriptomic (T) and environment (E), with and without considering non-additive epistasis, dominance and the G × E random effects. In controlled environments, where traits were measured under contrasting daylength regimes (long and short days), transcriptome abundance outperformed other random effects when considered independently, while the model combining SNP, environment and G × E marginally outperformed the transcriptome. The best performing model for prediction of both flowering and height combined all data types, where the GBLUP framework showed slightly better performance overall compared with RKHS across all tests. Under field conditions, we similarly found that models combining all variables were superior. However, the relative contribution of the transcriptome was reduced. Our results show there is a predictive advantage to direct inclusion of the transcriptome for genomic evaluation in wheat breeding. However, the complexity and cost of generating transcriptome data are likely to limit its feasibility for commercial breeding. We demonstrate that combining less costly environmental covariates with conventional genomic data 1 Liu et al.provide a practical alternative with similar gains to the transcriptome when environments are well characterised.

    Keywords: Bayesian Analysis, Environmental factor, Genomic prediction, omics transcriptome, wheat

    Received: 05 Oct 2024; Accepted: 07 Feb 2025.

    Copyright: © 2025 LIU, Gock, Ramm, Stops, Phongkham, Norman, Eastwood, Stone and Dillon. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence: JIA LIU, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.