Genotype by environment interaction and stability for grain yield in corn (Zea mays L)

Paper Details

Research Paper 01/10/2018
Views (787)
current_issue_feature_image
publication_file

Genotype by environment interaction and stability for grain yield in corn (Zea mays L)

Riyadh Jabbar Al-Maliki
Int. J. Biosci. 13(4), 357-362, October 2018.
Copyright Statement: Copyright 2018; The Author(s).
License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Abstract

This study was carried out with the aim of identifying eight inbreed line of maize through season 2016 in three different environmental location (Wasit, Diwaniyah and Nasiriyah) to determine the most stable inbreed. The study involved planting this breeds (Inp-6, Pio-17, Syn-9, Zm-17, Pio-3, S-10, MGW-1 and Ast-B). Using RCBD design to three replicate. The results showed significant differences between each of the inbreeds and location approved for the studied traits (ear length and number of rows in ear and the number of grains in the row and the grain yield of the plant). The result of the stability analysis, four of them (Inp-6, Pio-17, S-10, and Ast-B) showed high averages relative to the general average and the slope coefficients were to one within the two confidence intervals. It is the best in adapting to all environmental conditions. Inp-6 inbreed is superior to the ear length, which is 19.19cm in length, while the Ast-B is superior in both rows of ear and plant yield, with 23.35 rows and 322.83g respectively. While inbreedInp-6 and Pio-17 in the number of grains per row were 15.41 seed per row and some inbreed showed that It is adapted to the new environmental conditions as in the inbreed (Ast-B, S-10 of Australian origin and Pio-17 Yugoslav origin, which exceeded the individual grain yield of the localin breeds at 322.83, 312.87 and 284.57g / plant). The ast–B inbreed highest components and adapted to the conditions of the studied environments.

Badu-Apraku B, Abamu FJ, Menkir A, Fakorade MAB, Obeng-Antwi K. 2003. Genotype by environment interactions in the regional early maize variety trials in West and Central Africa. Maydica 48, 93-104.

Comstock RE, Moll RH. 1963. Genotype-Environment Interactions, Symposium on Statistical Genetics and Plant Breeding, NASNRC Publication 982, pp. 164-196.

Demisie D. 2016. Genotype by Environment Interaction and Yield Stability Analysis of Ethiopian Bread Wheat Using Mixed Model. Haramaya University, Haramaya. pp. 78.

Eberhart SA, Russel WA. 1966. Stability parameters for comparing varieties. Crop Sci 6, 36-40.

Elsahookie MM. 1996. Applications on stability analysis of genotypes.The Iraqi Jour. for Agri. Sci   27, 11-20.

Finlay KW, Wilkinson GN. 1963. The analysis of adaptation in a plant breeding programme Australian. J. Agric. Res 14, 742-754.

Francis TR, Kannenberg LW. 1978. Genotype grouping and stability measurement. Can. J. Plant Sci 58, 1029-1034.

Kang MS. 1988. A rank – Sum Method For Selecting high yielding Stable Corn n.genotypes Cereal Res. Comm 16, 113-115.

Knight R. 1970. The measurement and interpretation of genotype environment interactions. Euphytica 19, 225-35.

Lin CS. Binns MR, Lefkovitch L. 1986. Stability analysis: Where do weStand Crop Sci 26, 894-900.

Perkins JM, Jinks JL. 1968. Environmental and genotype environmental components of variability. III. Multiple lines and crosses. Heredity 23, 339-356.

Shukla GK. 1972. Some statistical aspects of partitioning genotype-environmentcomponents of variability. Heredity 29, 237-45.

Surma M, Adamski T, Banaszak Z, Kaczmarek Z, Kuczyńska H, Tugowska MB, Obuchowskił W, Salmanowicz B, Krystkowiak K. 2015. Effect of genotype, environment and their interaction on quality parameters of wheat breeding lines of diverse grain hardness.Plant Prod. Sci. 15(3), 192-203.

Related Articles

Evaluation of the effectiveness of some plant extracts against cowpea charcoal rot

Manan Djamila Baikoro*, Dianyagou Paul Ouali, Wendoléan Romain Soalla, Pawindé Elisabeth Zida, Bouma James Neya, Marie Laure Guissou, Int. J. Biosci. 28(6), 118-127, June 2026.

Physicochemical profiling and quality evaluation of commercial mustard oils brands in Bangladesh: Indicators of stability and consumer safety

Umme Salma Nahida, Md. Al-Amin Mia, Afroza Bashar*, Tauhida Tasnim, Marjina Akter, Int. J. Biosci. 28(6), 108-117, June 2026.

Optimizing soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.) performance through rhizobial inoculation and planting density in Kétou, Benin

Mahougnon Charlotte Carmelle Zoundji*, Ibouraïman Balogoun, Pascal Gbenou, Tobi Moriaque Akplo, Carlosse Djeho, Félix Kouélo Alladassi, Int. J. Biosci. 28(6), 99-107, June 2026.

Genetic admixture and the philosophy of diplomacy in central Asia: Evidence from intercultural dialogue, governance and genomic data

Shafee Ur Rehman, Waqar Ahmed Khan, Iqra Jamil, Muhammad Abdullah, Int. J. Biosci. 28(6), 89-98, June 2026.

Synthesizing and integrating environmental awareness and bio-intensive gardening under the Gulayan sa Paaralan (SIBUG) extension project

Violeta F. Collado*, Analyn V. Sagun, Angelina T. Gonzales, Marilyn D. Respicio, Int. J. Biosci. 28(6), 82-88, June 2026.

Diversity of insects related to maize (Zea mays) production in Ferkéssédougou region, Côte d’Ivoire

Fondio Drissa, Dao Hassane, Soro Lacina*, Sib Ollo, Kouadio Roger Hosphade Kouassi, Soro Senan, Yeboue N’guessan Lucie, Int. J. Biosci. 28(6), 75-81, June 2026.

Diuretic activity assessment of an aqueous extract of Zanthoxylum gilletii (Rutaceae) stem bark in rats

Akoua Jeanne Kanga*, Essoi Kouametchi Hermann, Françoise Assamala Fossou, Kacou Jules Marius Djetouan, Kouao Augustin Amonkan, Int. J. Biosci. 28(6), 68-74, June 2026.

Phytochemical investigation and in vitro evaluation of cholinesterase inhibitory and antioxidant properties of Aglaonema hookerianum stems

K. M. Monirul Islam, Simin Shabnam Lopa, Joya Rani, Md. Aslam Sheikh, Md. Golam Sadik*, Int. J. Biosci. 28(6), 60-67, June 2026.