Assessment of genetic parameters and yield trait stability in sweet sorghum genotypes through AMMI and GGE biplot approaches
Paper Details
Assessment of genetic parameters and yield trait stability in sweet sorghum genotypes through AMMI and GGE biplot approaches
Abstract
Biofuel from sweet sorghum is an alternative and viable source of renewable energy. This study was conducted to determine the interaction between genotype and environment on yield traits, assess stability and identify the most suitable sweet sorghum genotypes for biofuel production. Genotypes comprised of 80 sorghums (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) genotypes (63 sweet sorghum genotypes, 12 improved grain sorghum and 5 sweet sorghum landraces) grown in four environments in the Sudano–Sahelian region of Nigeria. The combined analysis of variance of the sweet sorghum genotypes in two years (2018 and 2019) over the two environments revealed that year(Y), genotype(G), environment(E) and genotype by environment interaction (G × E) were significant in the entire biofuel yield attributes except the Brix at maturity and bagasse. AMMI analysis of variance effects of G, E, and G × E. These significant effects of G, E, and G × E were used to identify the best-performing, most adaptable and most stable genotypes. Genotype contributed 77.2% of the total sum of squares for Brix, followed by environment (1.37%) and interaction (0.47%). For grain yield, environmental effects accounted for 89.5% of the total sum of squares, whilst genotype and interaction accounted for 3.6% and 1.1% respectively. Genotypic variances for stalk fresh yield are 5.5% and those for environment and interaction are 88.3% and 0.8%, respectively. The total sum of squares of the environment for juice volume is 39.5%, with genotype contributing 32.4%, and the interaction contributing 4.2%. Environment and interaction contribute to bagasse are 82.6% and 1.4% respectively, and that of genotypes is 7.1%. This suggests a better chance of progress in the genetic improvement of these traits. The genotype SEREDO, SPV 422-NB, IESV 92008 DL, ICSB 324 and F7.5SSM09-5-3/3-2-2-2 combined high yields with stability in grain, juice, stover, bagasse and Brix, respectively, according to the stability index ranking across environments. On the other hand, genotypes SERENA-ML and Gwaram, though high-yielding, were unstable according to AMMI stability value scores.
Abubakar L, Bubuche TS. 2013. Genotype environment interaction on biomass production in sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench) in North-Western Nigeria. African Journal of Agricultural Research 8(35), 4460–4465.
Annicchiarico P. 2002. Genotype × environment interaction: Challenges and opportunities for plant breeding and cultivar recommendations. FAO Plant Production and Protection Paper, Italy.
Bahadure DM, Marker S, Umakanth A, Prabhakar B, Patil JV, Synren GJ. 2014. Assessment of genetic diversity for biomass related traits in sweet sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench). Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Science 7, 32–34.
Baraki F, Tsehaye Y, Abay F. 2014. AMMI analysis of genotype × environment interaction and stability of sesame genotypes in Northern Ethiopia. Asian Journal of Plant Sciences 13(4), 178–183.
Begna T. 2021. Genotype × environment interaction and stability analysis. International Journal of Agriculture and Bioscience 10(2), 120–127.
Belum VSR, Rao PS, Kumar AA, Reddy PS, Rao PP, Sharma KK, Blummel M, Reddy CR. 2010. Sweet sorghum as a biofuel crop: Where are we now? International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru 502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Bose LK, Jambhulkar NN, Pande K, Singh ON. 2014. Use of AMMI and other stability statistics in the simultaneous selection of rice genotypes for yield and stability under direct seeded conditions. Chilean Journal of Agricultural Research 74(1), 1–9.
Chapman SC, Cooper M, Butler DG, Henzell RG. 2000. Genotype by environment interactions affecting grain sorghum. I. Characteristics that confound interpretation of hybrid yield. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 51, 197–207.
Egesi CN, Asiedu R. 2002. Analysis of yam yields using the additive main effects and multiplicative interaction (AMMI) model. African Crop Science Journal 10(3), 195–201.
Falconer DS, Mackay TFC. 1996. Introduction to quantitative genetics. Longman, New York, NY, USA.
Farshadfar E, Mahmodi N, Yaghotipoor A. 2011. AMMI stability value and simultaneous estimation of yield and yield stability in bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Australian Journal of Crop Science 5(13), 1837–1844.
Farshadfar E, Safari H, Jamshidi B. 2012. GGE biplot analysis of adaptability in wheat substitution lines. International Journal of Agriculture and Crop Sciences 4(13), 877–881.
Farshadfar E. 2008. Incorporation of AMMI stability value and grain yield in a single nonparametric index (GSI) in bread wheat. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences 11(14), 1791–1796.
Hagos HG, Abay F. 2013. AMMI and GGE biplot analysis of bread wheat genotypes in the northern part of Ethiopia. Journal of Plant Breeding and Genetics 1, 12–18.
Hanson CH, Robinson HF, Comstock RE. 1956. Biometrical studies on yield in segregating population of Korean lespedeza. Agronomy Journal 48, 268–272.
Lekgari A, Dweikat I. 2014. Assessment of genetic variability of 142 sweet sorghum germplasm of diverse origin with molecular and morphological markers. Open Journal of Ecology 4, 371–393.
Maarouf IM, Moataz AM. 2009. Evaluation of newly developed sweet sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) genotypes for some forage attributes. American-Eurasian Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Science 6(4), 434–440.
Mukherjee D, Abdur Roquib Md, Das ND, Mukherjee S. 2016. A study on genetic variability, character association and path co-efficient analysis on morphological and yield attributing characters of taro (Colocasia esculenta (L.) Schott). American Journal of Plant Sciences 7(3), 479–488.
Oliveira E, Godoy I. 2006. Pod yield stability analysis of runner peanut lines using AMMI. Crop Breeding and Applied Biotechnology 6(4), 311–317.
Olweny CO, Abayo GO, Dida MM, Okori P. 2016. Genotype × environment interaction on sugar and biomass production in sweet sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) in western Kenya. Journal of Plant Breeding and Crop Science 8(2), 13–22.
Przystalski M, Osman A, Thiemt EM, Bernard B, Rolland L, Ericson L, Levy L, Wolfe M, Büchse A, Piepho HP, Krajewski P. 2008. Comparing the performance of cereal varieties in organic and non-organic cropping systems in different European countries. Euphytica 163(3), 417–433.
Purchase JL, Hatting H, van Deventer CS. 2000. Genotype × environment interaction of wheat in South Africa: Stability analysis of yield performance. South African Journal of Plant and Soil 17(3), 101–107.
Rajvanshi AK, Patil SM, Mendonca B. 2007. Low-concentration ethanol stove for rural areas in India. Energy for Sustainable Development 11(1), 94–99.
Rao PS, Reddy PS, Ratore A, Reddy BVS, Panwar S. 2011. Application of GGE biplot and AMMI model to evaluate sweet sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) hybrids for genotype × environment interaction and seasonal adaptation. Indian Journal of Agricultural Science 81, 438–444.
Reddy BVS, Ramesh S, Sanjana Reddy P, Ramaiah B, Salimath PM, Rajashekar K. 2005. Sweet sorghum: A potential alternative raw material for bioethanol and bioenergy. International Sorghum and Millets Newsletter 46, 79–86.
Regassa T, Wortmann CS. 2014. Sweet sorghum as a bioenergy crop: Literature review. Biomass and Bioenergy 64, 348–355.
Romagosa I, Borràs-Gelonch G, Slafer G, van Eeuwijk FA. 2013. Genotype by environment interaction and adaptation. In: Christou P, Savin R (eds). Sustainable food production, Springer, pp. 846–870.
Tumuhimbise R, Melis R, Shanahan P, Kawuki R. 2014. Genotype × environment interaction effects on early fresh storage root yield and related traits in cassava. The Crop Journal 2(5), 329–337.
Udoh D, Rasmussen SK, Jacobsen S, Iwo GA, Milliano W. 2018. Yield stability of sweet sorghum genotypes for bioenergy production under contrasting temperate and tropical environments. Journal of Agricultural Science 10(12).
VSN International. 2018. Genstat for Windows 19th edition. VSN International, Hemel Hempstead, UK. Available at: https://www.genstat.co.uk
Woods J. 2000. Integrating sweet sorghum and sugarcane for bioenergy: Modeling the potential for electricity and ethanol production in SE Zimbabwe. PhD thesis, King’s College London.
A. H. Inuwa, H. A. Ajeigbe, Y. Mustapha, B. S. Aliyu, I. I. Angarawai, 2025. Assessment of genetic parameters and yield trait stability in sweet sorghum genotypes through AMMI and GGE biplot approaches. Int. J. Biosci., 27(4), 69-81.
Copyright © 2025 by the Authors. This article is an open access article and distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) license.