. 2014 Dec 2;15(1):1048. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-15-1048

Table 7.

Potential genetic gain as estimated empirically from a 5% selection intensity made within families using EBVs (based on pedigree information) and GEBV (based on all SNPs [ m = 6,932]), and expected gain per time unit under the assumption that with use of markers and somatic embryogenesis, the breeding cycle could be reduced from 30 to 10 years by avoiding the 20-year field test and production phases

		Empirical genetic gain
Subpopulation*	Trait^†	EBV_CV1	GEBV_CV1	EBV_CV1/yr^a	GEBV_CV1/yr^b	Ratio GEBV_CV1/yr/EBV_CV1/yr (%)
BG1	ADEN	27.79	24.31	0.93	2.43	262
	AMFA	−1.61	−1.31	0.05	0.13	245
	HT17	44.51	37.26	1.48	3.73	251
	DBH17	4.15	3.29	0.14	0.33	237
S1	ADEN	25.23	21.82	0.84	2.18	259
	AMFA	−1.72	−1.51	0.06	0.15	263
	HT17	43.43	38.36	1.45	3.84	265
	DBH17	9.27	8.70	0.31	0.87	282

*BG1: both training and testing sets from breeding group 1; S1: both training and testing sets from site 1.

^†ADEN: average wood density; AMFA: average microfibril angle; HT17: 17-year height; DBH17: 17-year diameter at breast height.

^aEBV_CV1/T_C, where T_C =30, and T_C is the number of years to complete a breeding cycle with conventional breeding methods.

^bGEBV_CV1/T_E, where T_E =10, and T_E is the number of years to complete a breeding cycle with genomic selection and somatic embryogenesis to propagate the superior selected material.