Use este identificador para citar ou linkar para este item: http://repositorio.ufla.br/jspui/handle/1/48048
Registro completo de metadados
Campo DCValorIdioma
dc.creatorHoefler, Raegan-
dc.creatorGonzález-Barrios, Pablo-
dc.creatorBhatta, Madhav-
dc.creatorNunes, Jose Airton Rodrigues-
dc.creatorBerro, Ines-
dc.creatorNalin, Rafael S.-
dc.creatorBorges, Alejandra-
dc.creatorCovarrubias, Eduardo-
dc.creatorDiaz-Garcia, Luis-
dc.creatorQuincke, Martin-
dc.creatorGutierrez, Lucia-
dc.date.accessioned2021-09-03T19:29:03Z-
dc.date.available2021-09-03T19:29:03Z-
dc.date.issued2020-08-
dc.identifier.citationHOEFLER, R. et al. Do Spatial Designs Outperform Classic Experimental Designs? Journal of Agricultural, Biological, and Environmental Statistics, [S. I.], v. 25, p. 523–552, Dec. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13253-020-00406-2.pt_BR
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1007/s13253-020-00406-2pt_BR
dc.identifier.urihttp://repositorio.ufla.br/jspui/handle/1/48048-
dc.description.abstractControlling spatial variation in agricultural field trials is the most important step to compare treatments efficiently and accurately. Spatial variability can be controlled at the experimental design level with the assignment of treatments to experimental units and at the modeling level with the use of spatial corrections and other modeling strategies. The goal of this study was to compare the efficiency of methods used to control spatial variation in a wide range of scenarios using a simulation approach based on real wheat data. Specifically, classic and spatial experimental designs with and without a two-dimensional autoregressive spatial correction were evaluated in scenarios that include differing experimental unit sizes, experiment sizes, relationships among genotypes, genotype by environment interaction levels, and trait heritabilities. Fully replicated designs outperformed partially and unreplicated designs in terms of accuracy; the alpha-lattice incomplete block design was best in all scenarios of the medium-sized experiments. However, in terms of response to selection, partially replicated experiments that evaluate large population sizes were superior in most scenarios. The AR1 × AR1 spatial correction had little benefit in most scenarios except for the medium-sized experiments with the largest experimental unit size and low GE. Overall, the results from this study provide a guide to researchers designing and analyzing large field experiments.pt_BR
dc.languageenpt_BR
dc.publisherSpringer Naturept_BR
dc.rightsrestrictAccesspt_BR
dc.sourceJournal of Agricultural, Biological, and Environmental Statisticspt_BR
dc.subjectExperimental designpt_BR
dc.subjectAutoregressive processpt_BR
dc.subjectPrediction accuracypt_BR
dc.subjectResponse to selectionpt_BR
dc.subjectSpatial correctionpt_BR
dc.subjectRandomization-based experimental designspt_BR
dc.subjectDesign experimentalpt_BR
dc.subjectProcesso autorregressivopt_BR
dc.subjectPrecisão de prediçãopt_BR
dc.subjectCorreção espacialpt_BR
dc.subjectRandomizaçãopt_BR
dc.titleDo Spatial Designs Outperform Classic Experimental Designs?pt_BR
dc.typeArtigopt_BR
Aparece nas coleções:DBI - Artigos publicados em periódicos

Arquivos associados a este item:
Não existem arquivos associados a este item.


Os itens no repositório estão protegidos por copyright, com todos os direitos reservados, salvo quando é indicado o contrário.