Welcome to International Network for Natural Sciences | INNSpub

Genotype season interaction effects on the performance ofsoybean lines

Research Paper | November 1, 2016

| Download 4

Luis Pereira, Trikoesoemaningtyas, DestaWirnas

Key Words:

Int. J. Agron. Agri. Res.9( 5), 42-50, November 2016


IJAAR 2016 [Generate Certificate]


The purpose of this study was toobta in information on yield potentialof soybean line stested in the first dry season (MK1) and the second dry season (MK2). The information was used to select soybean lines which are most stable under the two different seasonsto bereleased as varieties. This research was conducted in two growing seasons from March to September 2014 in Bogor.The genetic materials used were 7 promising linesand3 national varieties. The designused wasa randomized completely block design with genotypeastreatmentrepeated3 times in each season. Observations were made on agronomic characters of plant height, number of branches, number of nodes, number of pods, number oftotalpods, days to flowering, days to harvesting, weight of 100grains, grain weight per plant, and productivity. The results showed that Weight per plant and productivity was not affected by the interaction between genotype and season. The average productivity for all genotypesin the first season was 3.1 tonsha-1 is greater than the second seas on that is equal to1.8tonsha1.SC-1-8 was recommeded for both seasons.


Copyright © 2016
By Authors and International Network for
Natural Sciences (INNSPUB)
This article is published under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution Liscense 4.0

Genotype season interaction effects on the performance ofsoybean lines

Adie MM. 1992. Genotype × environment interaction on soybean selection.Thesis, Bogor Agriculture University, Indonesia.19-37.

ArsyadDM,AdieMM,KuswantoroH. 2007. Superior Varieties of Soybean Specific Assembly Agroekologi. In:Sumarno, Suyamto, Widjono A, Hermanto, KasimH (Eds.). Soybean. Agricultural Researchand Development Agency, the Centre for Research and Development of Food Crops, Bogor p. 205-228.

Association of Meteorology, climatology, and geophysics. 2014. Climate data Bogor area, Indonesia.

Cucolotto M, Pípolo VC, Garbuglio DD, Junior NSF, Destro D, Kamikoga MK. 2006. Genotype × environment interaction in soybean: evaluation through three methodologies. Crop Breeding and Applied Biotechnology 7, 270-277.

Desclaux D, Huynh TT, Roumet P. 2000. Identification of soybean plant characteristic that indicate the timing of drought stress. Crop Science40, 716-722.

Djaelani AK, Nasrullah, Soemartono.2001. Interaction G × E, adaptability and stabilities of soybean lines in multi-location testing. Zuriat12(1), 27-33.

Dogan EH, Kirnak, Copur O. 2007.Deficit irrigation during reproductive stage and CROPGRO-soybean simulations under semi-arid climatic condition. Field Research 103, 154-159.

Fattah A, Nur A, Arsyad DM. 2005. Yield trials of soybean lines in Sulawesi Selatan. Agrivigor5, 85-91.

Husni A, Kosmiatin M, Mariska I. 2006. Increasing tolerance of sindoro soybean against drought through in vitro selection.BulletinAgronomi34 (1),25-31.

Komalasari WB. 2008. Prediction of soybean offer and demand with series time analysis12: 1195-1209.

Liu FCR, Jensen, M.R. Anderson. 2004. Drought stress effect on carbohydrate concentration in soybean leaves and pods during early reproductive development: its implication altering pod set. Field crop Research 86, 1-13.

[MOA] Ministry Agriculture of Ministry.2007.Individual guideline testing, newness, unique, uniformity and soybean stability (Glycine max (L.) www.deptan.go.id [15 October 2013].

Ojo DK, Ajayi AO, Oduwaye OA. 2012. Genetic relationships among soybean accessions based on morphological and RAPDs techniques. Pertanika Journal of TropicalAgriculturalScience35,237-248.

Rao MSS, Mullinix BG, Rangappa M, Cebert E, Bhagsari AS, Sapra VT, Joshi JM, Dadson RB. 2002. Genotype × environment interactions and yield stability of food-grade soybean genotypes. AgronomyJournal94, 72-80.

Sihaloho AN,Trikoesoemaningtyas, Sopandie D, Wirnas D.2014.Analysis segregation and prediction of gene action controlling soybean tolerance to aluminum toxicity.Journal of Biodiversity and Environmental Sciences 5(4),409-418.

Sneller CH, Norquest KL, Dombek D. 1997.Repeatability of yield stability statistics in soybean. Crop Science37,383-390.

Soepandi D, Trikoesoemaningtyas, Khumaida N. 2006. Physiology, Genetic, and molecular adaptation of soybean against low light: developing superior soybean variety as intercrop. Final report IPB.

[SCA] Statistic Center Association.2012. Product, harvest area and palawijaproductivity onIndonesia. www.deptan.go.id/infoeksekutif/tan/TPARA.

Sumarno, Suyamto, AWidjono, Hermanto, H Kasim.2007.Soybean: Production technique and Development Bogor p. 70-71.

Tarakanovas P, Rusgas V. 2006. Additive main effect and multiplicative interaction analysis of grain yield of wheat varieties in Lithuania. Agronomy Reseearch4(1), 91-98.

Truong Q, Koch K, Yoon JM, Everad JD, Shanks JV. 2013 Influence of Carbon to Nitrogen Ratios on soybean Somatic embrio (cv. Jack) growth and Composition. (USA). Journal of Experimental Botany 64 (10),2985-2995.

Vargas M, Sayrek, Reynolds M, Ramirez ME, Talbot M.1998.Interpreting genotype×environment interaction in wheat by partial least square regression. Crop Science38, 379-689.

Wirnas D, Trikoesoemaningtyas, Sutjahjo SH, Sopandie D, Rohaeni WR, Marwiyah S, Sumiati. 2012. Variance Component of Yield and Related Traits of Black Soybean Genotypes. Journal Agronomy Indonesia 40 (3), 184-189.

Yunita R, Trikoesoemaningtyas, D Wirnas. 2009. [Tesis] Yield Trial of Shading Tolerant Soybean Lines (Glycine max (L.) Merr.)Under Rubber Intercroping in Sebapo, Muaro Jambi IPB.