Theoretical and Applied Genetics

, Volume 126, Issue 1, pp 189–201 | Cite as

Performance prediction of F1 hybrids between recombinant inbred lines derived from two elite maize inbred lines

  • Tingting Guo
  • Huihui Li
  • Jianbing Yan
  • Jihua Tang
  • Jiansheng Li
  • Zhiwu Zhang
  • Luyan Zhang
  • Jiankang Wang
Original Paper


Selection of recombinant inbred lines (RILs) from elite hybrids is a key method in maize breeding especially in developing countries. The RILs are normally derived by repeated self-pollination and selection. In this study, we first investigated the accuracy of different models in predicting the performance of F1 hybrids between RILs derived from two elite maize inbred lines Zong3 and 87-1, and then compared these models through simulation using a wider range of genetic models. Results indicated that appropriate prediction models depended on genetic architecture, e.g., combined model using breeding value and genome-wide prediction (BV+GWP) has the highest prediction accuracy for high V D/V A ratio (>0.5) traits. Theoretical studies demonstrated that different components of genetic variance were captured by different prediction models, which in turn explained the accuracy of these models in predicting the F1 hybrid performance. Based on genome-wide prediction model (GWP), 114 untested F1 hybrids possibly having higher grain yield than the original F1 hybrid Yuyu22 (the single cross between Zong3 and 87-1) have been identified and recommended for further field test.



This research was supported by National Hi-Tech Research and Development Program of China (2012AA101104-1). We thank Professor Rex Bernardo, Department of Agronomy and Plant Genetics, University of Minnesota for his constructive comments and suggestions to previous versions of this paper.

Supplementary material

122_2012_1973_MOESM1_ESM.doc (480 kb)
Figure S1 (DOC 479 kb)
122_2012_1973_MOESM2_ESM.xls (23 kb)
Table S1 (XLS 23 kb)
122_2012_1973_MOESM3_ESM.doc (27 kb)
Table S2 (DOC 27 kb)
122_2012_1973_MOESM4_ESM.xls (52 kb)
Table S3 (XLS 52 kb)
122_2012_1973_MOESM5_ESM.xls (28 kb)
Table S4 (XLS 27 kb)
122_2012_1973_MOESM6_ESM.xls (144 kb)
Table S5 (XLS 144 kb)
122_2012_1973_MOESM7_ESM.doc (52 kb)
Table S5 (DOC 51 kb)


  1. Allard RW (1960) Principles of plant breeding. Wiley, New York 485 ppGoogle Scholar
  2. Bernardo R (1994) Prediction of maize single-cross performance using RFLPs and information from related hybrids. Crop Sci 34:20–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernardo R (1995) Genetic models for predicting maize single-cross performance inunbalanced yield trial data. Crop Sci 35:141–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bernardo R (1996a) Best linear unbiased prediction of maize single-cross performance. Crop Sci 36:50–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bernardo R (1996b) Best linear unbiased prediction of the performance of crosses between untested maize inbreds. Crop Sci 36:872–876CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bernardo R (1998) A model for marker-assisted selection among single crosses with multiple genetic markers. Theor Appl Genet 97:473–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bernardo R (1999) Marker-assisted best linear unbiased prediction of single-cross performance. Crop Sci 39:1277–1282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bernardo R, Yu J (2007) Prospects for genomewide selection for quantitative traits in maize. Crop Sci 47:1082–1090CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Charcosset A, Essioux L (1994) The effect of population structure on the relationship between heterosis and heterozygosity at marker loci. Theor Appl Genet 89:336–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cockerham CC (1967) Prediction of double crosses from single crosses. Der Züchter 37:160–169Google Scholar
  11. Comstock RE, Robinson HF (1948) The components of genetic variance in populations. Biometrics 4:254–266PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Comstock RE, Robinson HF (1952) Estimation of average dominance of genes. In: Gowen JW (ed) Heterosis. ISU Press, Ames, pp 494–516Google Scholar
  13. De Los Campos G, Naya H, Gianola D, Crossa J, Legarra A, Manfredi E, Weigel K, Cotes JM (2009) Predicting quantitative traits with regression models for dense molecular markers and pedigree. Genetics 182:375–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Frisch M, Thiemann A, Fu J, Schrag TA, Scholten S, Melchinger AE (2010) Transcriptome-based distance measures for grouping of germplasm and prediction of hybrid performance in maize. Theor Appl Genet 120:441–450PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gardner CO, Eberhart SA (1966) Analysis and interpretation of the variety cross diallel and related populations. Biometrics 22:439–452PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Griffing B (1956a) Concept of general and specific combing ability in relation to diallel crossing systems. Aust J Biol Sci 9:463–493Google Scholar
  17. Griffing B (1956b) A generalized treatment of the use of diallel crosses in quantitative inheritance. Heredity 10:31–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hallauer AR (1990) Methods used in developing maize inbreds. Maydica 35:1–16Google Scholar
  19. Hallauer AR, Carena MJ, Filho JBM (2010) Quantitative genetics in maize breeding. Iowa State University Press, AmesGoogle Scholar
  20. Hardy OJ, Vekemans X (2002) SPAGeDi: a versatile computer program to analyse spatial genetic structure at the individual or population levels. Mol Eco Notes 2:618–620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Henderson CR (1975) Best linear unbiased estimation and prediction under a selection model. Biometrics 31:423–447PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Henderson CR (1984) Applications of linear models in animal breeding. University of Guelph, GuelphGoogle Scholar
  23. Hua J, Xing Y, Wu W, Xu C, Sun X, Yu S, Zhang Q (2003) Single-locus heterotic effects and dominance by dominance interactions can adequately explain the genetic basis of heterosis in an elite rice hybrid. Proc Nat Acad Sci 100:2574–2579PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jenkins MT (1934) Methods of estimating the performance of double crosses in corn. J Am Soc Agron 26:199–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jordan DR, Tao Y, Godwin ID, Henzell RG, Cooper M, McIntyre CL (2003) Prediction of hybrid performance in grain sorghum using RFLP markers. Theor Appl Genet 106:559–567PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Kearsey MJ, Jinks JL (1968) A general method of detecting additive, dominance and epistatic variation for metrical traits. I: theory. Heredity 23:403–409PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lai J, Li R, Xu X, Jin W, Xu M, Zhao H, Xiang Z, Song W, Ying K, Zhang M, Jiao Y, Ni P, Zhang J et al (2010) Genome-wide patterns of genetic variation among elite maize inbred lines. Nat Genet 42:1027–1030PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Li Y, Wang T (2010) Germplasm base of maize breeding in China and formation of key parents in maize breeding in China (in Chinese with English abstract). J Maize Sci 18(5):1–8Google Scholar
  29. Li H, Ye G, Wang J (2007) A modified algorithm for the improvement of composite interval mapping. Genetics 175:361–374PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lorenzana RE, Bernardo R (2009) Accuracy of genotypic value predictions for marker-based selection in biparental plant populations. Theor Appl Genet 120:151–161PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Maenhout S, Baets BD, Haesaert G (2010) Prediction of maize single-cross hybrid performance: support vector machine regression versus best linear prediction. Theor Appl Genet 120:415–427PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Melchinger AE (1999) Genetic diversity and heterosis. In: Coors JG, Pandey S (eds) The genetics and exploitation of heterosis in crops. ASA-CSSA, Madison, pp 99–118Google Scholar
  33. Melchinger AE, Geiger HH, Seitz G, Schmidt GA (1987) Optimum prediction of three-way crosses from single crosses in forage maize (Zea mays L.). Theor Appl Genet 74:339–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Meuwissen THE, Hayes BJ, Goddard ME (2001) Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps. Genetics 157:1819–1829PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Quaas RL, Pollak EJ (1980) Modified equations for sire models with groups. J Dairy Sci 54:1868–1872Google Scholar
  36. Schrag TA, Melchinger AE, Sørensen AP, Frisch M (2006) Prediction of single-cross hybrid performance for grain yield and grain dry matter content in maize using AFLP markers associated with QTL. Theor Appl Genet 113:1037–1047PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Smith OS (1986) Covariance between line per se and testcross performance. Crop Sci 26:540–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Tang J, Yan J, Ma X, Teng W, Wu W, Dai J, Dhillon BS, Melchinger AE, Li J (2010) Dissection of the genetic basis of heterosis in an elite maize hybrid by QTL mapping in an immortalized F2 population. Theor Appl Genet 120:333–340PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Teng W, Cao J, Chen Y, Liu X, Jing X, Zhang F, Li J (2004) Analysis of maize heterotic groups and patterns during past decade in China (in Chinese with English abstract). Scienta Agricultura Sinica 37(12):1804–1811Google Scholar
  40. Vuylsteke M, Kuiper M, Stam P (2000) Chromosomal regions involved in hybrid performance and heterosis: their AFLP (R)-based identification and practical use in prediction models. Heredity 85:208–218PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wang J, van Ginkel M, Podlich D, Ye G, Trethowan R, Pfeiffer W, DeLacy IH, Cooper M, Rajaram S (2003) Comparison of two breeding strategies by computer simulation. Crop Sci 43:1764–1773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wang J, van Ginkel M, Trethowan R, Ye G, Delacy I, Podlich D, Cooper M (2004) Simulating the effects of dominance and epistasis on selection response in the CIMMYT Wheat Breeding Program using QuCim. Crop Sci 44:2006–2018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Yu Y, Wang R, Shi Y, Song Y, Wang T, Li Y (2007) Genetic diversity and structure of the core collection for maize lines in China. Maydica 52:181–194Google Scholar
  44. Zaidi PH, Srinivasan G, Sanchez C (2003) Relationship between line per se and cross performance under low nitrogen fertility in tropical maize (Zea mays L.). Maydica 48:221–231Google Scholar
  45. Zhang L, Li H, Li Z, Wang J (2008) Interactions between markers can be caused by the dominance effect of quantitative trait loci. Genetics 180:1177–1190PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tingting Guo
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Huihui Li
    • 2
    • 3
  • Jianbing Yan
    • 5
  • Jihua Tang
    • 6
  • Jiansheng Li
    • 1
  • Zhiwu Zhang
    • 4
  • Luyan Zhang
    • 2
    • 3
  • Jiankang Wang
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.National Maize Improvement CenterChina Agricultural UniversityBeijingChina
  2. 2.The National Key Facility for Crop Gene Resources and Genetic Improvement, Institute of Crop ScienceChinese Academy of Agricultural SciencesBeijingChina
  3. 3.CIMMYT China, Chinese Academy of Agricultural SciencesBeijingChina
  4. 4.Institute for Genomic DiversityCornell UniversityIthacaUSA
  5. 5.National Key Laboratory of Crop Genetic Improvement, Huazhong Agricultural UniversityWuhanChina
  6. 6.Department of AgronomyHenan Agricultural UniversityZhengzhouChina

Personalised recommendations