Skip to main content
Log in

Another Look at Bayesian Analysis of AMMI Models for Genotype-Environment Data

  • Published:
Journal of Agricultural, Biological, and Environmental Statistics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Linear–bilinear models are frequently used to analyze two-way data such as genotype-by-environment data. A well-known example of this class of models is the additive main effects and multiplicative interaction effects model (AMMI). We propose a new Bayesian treatment of such models offering a proper way to deal with the major problem of overparameterization. The rationale is to ignore the issue at the prior level and apply an appropriate processing at the posterior level to be able to arrive at easily interpretable inferences. Compared to previous attempts, this new strategy has the great advantage of being directly implementable in standard software packages devoted to Bayesian statistics such as WinBUGS/OpenBUGS/JAGS. The method is assessed using simulated datasets and a real dataset from plant breeding. We discuss the benefits of a Bayesian perspective to the analysis of genotype-by-environment interactions, focusing on practical questions related to general and local adaptation and stability of genotypes. We also suggest a new solution to the estimation of the risk of a genotype not exceeding a given threshold.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, E., Walczak, B., Vervaet, C., Risha, P. G., and Massart, D. L. (2002), “Principal Component Analysis of Dissolution Data with Missing Elements,” International Journal of Pharmaceutics, 234, 169–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chikuse, Y. (2003), Statistics on Special Manifolds, New York: Springer.

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Cornelius, P., and Crossa, J. (1999), “Prediction Assessment of Shrinkage Estimators of Multiplicative Models for Multi-environment Cultivar Trials,” Crop Science, 39, 998–1009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornelius, P., Crossa, J., and Seyedsadr, M. (1996), “Statistical Tests and Estimators of Multiplicative Models for Genotype by Environment Interaction,” in Genotype by Environment Interaction, eds. M. S. Kang and H. G. Gauch, Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, pp. 199–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crossa, J., Perez-Elizalde, S., Jarquin, D., Miguel Cotes, J., Viele, K., Liu, G., and Cornelius, P. (2011), “Bayesian Estimation of the Additive Main Effects and Multiplicative Interaction Model,” Crop Science, 51, 1468–1469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denis, J. B., and Gower, J. C. (1994), “Asymptotic Covariances for the Parameters of Biadditive Models,” Utilitas Mathematica, 46, 193–205.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • — (1996), “Asymptotic Confidence Regions for Biadditive Models: Interpreting Genotype-Environment Interactions,” Applied Statistics, 45 (4), 479–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dias, S., and Krzanowski, W. (2003), “Model Selection and Cross Validation in Additive Main Effect and Multiplicative Interaction Models,” Crop Science, 43 (3), 865–873.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, J. W., and Jannink, J. L. (2006), “Bayesian Modeling of Heterogeneous Error and Genotype X Environment Interaction Variances,” Crop Science, 46, 820–833.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eskridge, K., and Mumm, R. (1992), “Choosing Plant Cultivars Based on the Probability of Outperforming a Check,” Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 84, 494—500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gabriel, K. R., and Zamir, S. (1979), “Lower Rank Approximation of Matrices by Least Squares with Any Choice of Weights,” Technometrics, 21 (4), 236–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gauch, H. (1990), “Using Interaction to Improve Yield Estimates,” in Genotype by Environment Interaction, ed. M. S. Kang, Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, pp. 141–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gauch, H., and Zobel, R. (1990), “Imputing Missing Yield Trial Data,” Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 79, 753–761.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — (1996), “AMMI Analysis of Yield Trials,” in Genotype by environment interaction, eds. M. S. Kang, and H. G. Gauch, Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, pp. 141–150.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gelman, A. (2006), “Prior Distributions for Variance Parameters in Hierarchical Models,” Bayesian Analysis, 3, 515–533.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R., and Friedman, J. (2009), The Elements of Statistical Learning. Data Mining, Inference and Prediction. Springer Series in Statistics (2nd ed.).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Hoff, P. D. (2007), “Model Averaging and Dimension Selection for the Singular Value Decomposition,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 102 (478), 674–685.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • — (2009), “Simulation of the Matrix Bingham–von Mises–Fisher Distribution, with Applications to Multivariate and Relational Data,” Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 18 (2), 438–456.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • — (2012), “rstiefel: Random Orthonormal Matrix Generation on the Stiefel Manifold,” available at http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=rstiefel, R Package Version 0.9.

  • Jolliffe, I. T. (2002), Principal Component Analysis, New York: Springer.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Josse, J., and Denis, J. (2012), “Inferring Biadditive Models Within the Bayesian Paradigm,” Tech. Rep., INRA, MIA.

  • Josse, J., and Husson, F. (2011), “Multiple Imputation in PCA,” Advances in Data Analysis and Classification, 5 (3), 231–246.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • — (2012), “Selecting the Number of Components in PCA Using Cross-Validation Approximations,” Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 56 (6), 1869–1879.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • — (2013), “Handling Missing Values in Exploratory Multivariate Data Analysis Methods,” Journal de la Société Française de Statistique, 153 (2), 79–99.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Khatri, C. G., and Mardia, K. V. (1977), “The von Mises–Fisher Matrix Distribution in Orientation Statistics,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 39 (1), 95–106.

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Kiers, H. A. L. (1997), “Weighted Least Squares Fitting Using Ordinary Least Squares Algorithms,” Psychometrika, 62 (2), 251–266.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Mandel, J. (1969), “The Partitioning of Interaction in Analysis of Variance,” Journal of Research of the National Bureau of Standards. B, Mathematical Sciences, 73, 309–328.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Martyn, P. (2003), “Jags: A Program for Analysis of Bayesian Graphical Models Using Gibbs Sampling,” in Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Distributed Statistical Computing (DSC 2003), March 20–22, Vienna, Austria.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreno-Gonzalez, J., Crossa, J., and Cornelius, P. L. (2003), “Additive Main Effects and Multiplicative Interaction Model: II. Theory on Shrinkage Factors for Predicting Cell Means,” Crop Science, 43, 1976–1982.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelder, J. A. (1994), “The Statistics of Linear Models: Back to Basics,” Statistics and Computing, 4 (4), 221–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perez-Elizalde, S., Jarquin, D., and Crossa, J. (2011), “A General Bayesian Estimation Method of Linear-Bilinear Models Applied to Plant Breeding Trials with Genotype X Environment Interaction,” Journal of Agricultural, Biological, and Environmental Statistics, 17 (1), 15–37.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Piepho, H. (1996), “A Simplified Procedure for Comparing the Stability of Cropping Systems,” Biometrics, 52, 315–320.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • — (1997), “Analyzing Genotype-Environment Data by Mixed Models with Multiplicative Effects,” Biometrics, 53, 761–766.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • — (1998), “Empirical Best Linear Unbiased Prediction in Cultivar Trials Using Factor Analytic Variance-Covariance Structures,” Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 97, 195–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team (2013), “R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing,” R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, available at http://www.R-project.org/.

  • Robinson, G. K. (1991), “That BLUP Is a Good Thing: The Estimation of Random Effects,” Statistical Science, 6 (1), 15–51.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Royo, C., Rodriguez, A., and Romagosa, I. (1993), “Differential Adaptation of Complete and Substitute Triticale,” Plant Breeding, 111, 113–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smidl, V., and Quinn, A. (2007), “On Bayesian Principal Component Analysis,” Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 51, 4101–4123.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A., Cullis, B., and Thompson, R. (2001), “Analyzing Variety by Environment Data Using Multiplicative Mixed Models and Adjustments for Spatial Field Trend,” Biometrics, 57 (4), 1138–1147.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Theobald, C. M., Talbot, M., and Nabugoomu, F. (2002), “A Bayesian Approach to Regional and Local-Area Prediction from Crop Variety Trials,” Journal of Agricultural, Biological, and Environmental Statistics, 7 (3), 403–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viele, K., and Srinivasan, C. (2000), “Parsimonious Estimation of Multiplicative Interaction in Analysis of Variance Using Kullback–Leibler Information,” Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 84, 201–219.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Julie Josse.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Josse, J., van Eeuwijk, F., Piepho, HP. et al. Another Look at Bayesian Analysis of AMMI Models for Genotype-Environment Data. JABES 19, 240–257 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13253-014-0168-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13253-014-0168-z

Key Words

Navigation