Browsing by Subject "Randomized complete block design"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2

Assessing the efficiency and heritability of blocked tree breeding trials
(2024) Piepho, Hans-Peter; Williams, Emlyn; Prus, Maryna
Progeny trials in tree breeding are often laid out using blocked experimental designs, in which families are randomly assigned to plots and several trees are planted per plot. Such designs are optimized for the assessment of family effects. However, tree breeders are primarily interested in assessing breeding values of individual trees. This paper considers the assessment of heritability at both the family and tree levels. We assess heritability based on pairwise comparisons among individual trees. The approach shows that there is considerable heterogeneity in pairwise heritabilities, primarily due to the differences in both genetic as well as error variances among within- and between-family comparisons. Our results further show that efficient blocking positively affects all types of comparison except those among trees within the same plot.
Efficacy assessment in crop protection: a tutorial on the use of Abbott’s formula
(2024) Piepho, Hans-Peter; Malik, Waqas Ahmed; Bischoff, Robert; El-Hasan, Abbas; Scheer, Christian; Sedlmeier, Jan Erik; Gerhards, Roland; Petschenka, Georg; Voegele, Ralf T.
In 1925, the American entomologist Walter Sidney Abbott proposed an equation for assessing efficacy, and it is still widely used today for analysing controlled experiments in crop protection and phytomedicine. Typically, this equation is applied to each experimental unit and the efficacy estimates thus obtained are then used in analysis of variance and least squares regression procedures. However, particularly regarding the common assumptions of homogeneity of variance and normality, this approach is often inaccurate. In this tutorial paper, we therefore revisit Abbott’s equation and outline an alternative route to analysis via generalized linear mixed models that can satisfactorily deal with these distributional issues. Nine examples from entomology, weed science and phytopathology, each with a different focus and methodological peculiarity, are used to illustrate the framework.