Volume 10, Issue 26 (9-2018)                   jcb 2018, 10(26): 139-145 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Taherian M, Eskandari torbaghan M, Najjar H. (2018). Stability Analysis of Seed Yield in Safflower Genotypes under Dryland Conditions. jcb. 10(26), 139-145. doi:10.29252/jcb.10.26.139
URL: http://jcb.sanru.ac.ir/article-1-744-en.html
Horticulture Crop Research Department, Khorasan Razavi Agricultural and Natural Resources Resaerch and Education Center, AREEO, Mashhad, Iran.
Abstract:   (3199 Views)

The objectives of this study were to analyze genotype by environment (GE) interactions on the seed yield of 19 safflower genotypes by the additive main effects and multiplicative interactions (AMMI) model and to evaluate genotype (G), environment (E) and GE interactions using statistics parameter i.e. AMMI stability value (ASV) and ecovalence (W2i). The trials were conducted at three locations: Shirvan, Sararood and Khoramabad for two successive cropping seasons (2010-12). Main effects due to E, G, and GE interactions as well as two first interaction principal components (IPCA1-2) were found to be significant. AMMI biplot was able to distinguish stable genotypes and environments, with high and low genotype discrimination ability. The genotypes 6 and 10 with higher mean seed yield than total mean were to be most stable genotypes, while the genotypes 18 and 3 with the highest contribution to GE interaction were to be most instable.
 
 
 
 

Full-Text [PDF 1511 kb]   (856 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: اصلاح نباتات، بیومتری
Received: 2017/03/11 | Revised: 2018/09/26 | Accepted: 2017/07/1 | Published: 2018/09/26

References
1. Albert, M.J.A. 2004. A comparison of statistical methods to describe genotype x environment interaction and yield stability in multi-location maize trials. Ph.D. Diss., department of plant sciences (plant breeding), faculty of natural and agricultural sciences of University of the Free State. Bloemfontein, South Africa, pp: 7- 35.
2. Annicchiarico, P. 1997. Joint regression vs. AMMI analysis of genotype-environment interactions for cereals in Italy. Euphytica, 94: 53-62. [DOI:10.1023/A:1002954824178]
3. Basafa, M. and M. Taherian. 2016. Analysis of stability and adaptability of forage yield among silage corn hybrids. Journal of Crop Breeding, 8(19): 185-191.
4. Basford, K.E. and M. Cooper. 1998. Genotype by environment interactions and some considerations of their implication for wheat breeding in Australia. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 49: 154-175 (In Persian). [DOI:10.1071/A97035]
5. Cornelius, P., J. Crossa, M. Seyedsadr, M. Kang and H. Gauch. 1996. Statistical tests and estimators of multiplicative models for genotype-by-environment interaction. Genotype-by-Environment Interaction. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, PP. 199-234. [DOI:10.1201/9781420049374.ch8]
6. Crossa, J., J. Franco and G.O. Edmeades, 1996. Experimental designs and the analysis of multilocation trials of maize grown under drought stress. CIMMYT. Pp, 524-536.
7. Ebdon, J. and H. Gauch. 2002. Additive main effect and multiplicative interaction analysis of national turfgrass performance trials. I. Interpretation of genotype×environment interaction. Crop Science, 42(2): 489-496. [DOI:10.2135/cropsci2002.4890]
8. Eberhart, S.A. and W.A. Russell. 1966. Stability parameters for comparing varieties. Crop Science, 6: 36-40. [DOI:10.2135/cropsci1966.0011183X000600010011x]
9. Finlay, K.W. and G.N. Wilkinson. 1963. The analysis of adaptation in a plant breeding program. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 14: 742-754. [DOI:10.1071/AR9630742]
10. Gauch, H.G. and R.W. Zobel. 1996. AMMI analysis of yield trials. pp: 85-122. In: Kang, M.S., Gauch, H.G. (eds.) Genotype by environment interaction, 1-14 pp., CRC press. Boca Raton. [DOI:10.1201/9781420049374.ch4]
11. Grausgruber, H., M. Oberforster, M. Werteker, P. Ruckenbauer and J. Vollmann. 2000. Stability of quality traits in Austrian-grown winter wheats. Field Crops Research, 66: 257-267. [DOI:10.1016/S0378-4290(00)00079-4]
12. Huehn, M. (1996). Nonparametric analysis of genotype x environment interactions by ranks. Genotype by environment interaction. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 213-228 [DOI:10.1201/9781420049374.ch9]
13. Isik, K. and J. Kleinschmit. 2005. Similarities and effectiveness of test environments in selecting and deploying of desirable genotypes. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 110: 311-322. [DOI:10.1007/s00122-004-1840-4]
14. Jamshid Moghaddam, M., M. Eskandari Torbaghan and A. Mirzaee. 2014. Analysis of genotype × environment interaction for seed yield in spineless safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.) genotypes. Crop Breeding Journal, 4(1): 47-56.
15. Kang, M.S., 1993. Simultaneous selection for yield and stability in crop performance trials: consequences for growers. Agronomy Journal, 85: 754-757. [DOI:10.2134/agronj1993.00021962008500030042x]
16. Kang, M.S. and R. Magari. 1996. New developments in selecting for phenotypic stability in crop breeding. In: Kang, M.S., and H.G. Zobel (eds.) Genotype by environment interaction, 1-14 pp., CRC press. Boca Raton. [DOI:10.1201/9781420049374.ch1]
17. Mohammadi, M., P. Sharifi and R. Karimizadeh. 2015. Stability analysis of seed yield of safflower genotypes (Carthamus tinctorius L.). Journal of Crop Breeding, 7(16): 104-114 (In Persian).
18. Mohammadi, R., S.S. Pourdad and A. Amri. 2008. Grain yield stability of spring safflower. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research. [DOI:10.1071/AR07273]
19. Purchase, J.L., 1997. Parametric analysis to describe genotype x environment interaction and yield stability in winter wheat. Ph. D. Thesis, University of the Free State. South Africa.
20. Purchase, J.L., H. Hatting and C.S. Van Deventer. 2000. Genotype x environment interaction of winter wheat in South Africa: II. Stability analysis of yield performance. South Africa journal of plant and soil, 17(3): 101-107. [DOI:10.1080/02571862.2000.10634878]
21. Schoeman, L.J. 2003. Genotype x environment interaction in sunflower in South Africa (M.Sc. thesis), University of Free State, Bloemfontein.
22. Shafii, B., K.A. Mahler, W.J. Price and D. L. Auld. 1992. Genotype - environment interaction effects on winter rapeseed yield and oil content. Crop Science, 32: 922-927. [DOI:10.2135/cropsci1992.0011183X003200040017x]
23. Suadric, A., D. Simic and M. Vratric. 2006. Characterization of genotype by environment interactions in soybean breeding programmes of southeast Europe. Plant Breeding, 125: 191-125. [DOI:10.1111/j.1439-0523.2006.01185.x]
24. Wricke, G. 1962. Uber eine method zur refassung der okologischen streubretite in feldversuchen ,Flazenzenzuecht, 47: 92-96
25. Yan, W., and I. Rajcan. 2002. Biplot analysis of test sites and trait relations of soybean in Ontario. Crop Science, 42: 11-20. [DOI:10.2135/cropsci2002.0011]
26. Yan, W., L.A. Hunt, Q. Sheng and Z. Szlavnics. 2000. Cultivar evaluation and mega-environment investigation based on the GGE biplot. Crop Science, 40: 597-605. [DOI:10.2135/cropsci2000.403597x]
27. Yan, W. 2001. GGE biplot-a windows application for graphical analysis of multi-environment trial data and other types of two-way data. Agronomy Journal, 93: 1111-1118. [DOI:10.2134/agronj2001.9351111x]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Journal of Crop Breeding

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb