home icon user icon
Welcome to International Network for Natural Sciences | INNS Pub.
Home My Account
Submit Manuscript
double_slash
breadcumb_bg

GGEBiplot analysis of genotype × environment interaction in Agropyron intermedium

Paper Details

Research Paper 01/04/2015
Views (204) Download (6)
current_issue_feature_image
publication_file

GGEBiplot analysis of genotype × environment interaction in Agropyron intermedium

Elham Emami1, Ezatollah Farshadfar, Hooshmand Safari
J. Bio. Env. Sci.6( 4), 260-267, April 2015.
Certificate: JBES 2015 [Generate Certificate]
Key: Agropyron IntermediumForage yieldGGEbiplotStability

Abstract

In order to identify genotypes of Agropyron intermedium with high forage yield and stability an experiment was carried out in the Research station of Kermanshah Iran.The 11 accessions were sown in a randomized complete block design with three replications under rainfed and irrigated conditions during 2013-21-014 cropping deasons. Combined analysis of variance indicated high significant differences for location, genotype and G × E interaction (GEI) at 1% level of probability. Mean comparisons over environments introduced G4, G3 and G5 with maximum forage yield over rainfed and irrigated conditions. Minimum forage yield was attributed to genotype G1. GGEbiplot analysis exhibited that the first two principal components (PCA) resulted from GEI and genotype effect justified 99.37% of total variance in the data set. The four environments under investigation fell into two apparent groups: irrigated and rainfed. The presence of close associations among irrigated (E1 and E3) and rainfed (E2 and E4) conditions suggests that the same information about the genotypes could be obtained from fewer test environments, and hence the potential to reduce testing cost.The which-won-where pattern of GGEbiplot introduced genotypes G3 and G4 as stable with high forage yield for rainfed condition, while G5 was stable with high yield for irrigated condition. According to the comparison of the genotypes with the Ideal genotype accessions G4, G3 and G9 were more favorable than all the other genotypes.

VIEWS 6
Cover PDF

Arghavani A, Asghari A, Shokrpour M, Mohammaddost C. 2010. Genetic Diversity in Ecotypes of two Agropyron Species using RAPD Markers. Research Journal of Environmental Sciences 4, 50-56.

Butrón A, Velasco P, Ordás A, Malvar RA. 2004. Yield evaluation of maize cultivars across environments with different levels of pink stem borer infestation. Crop Science 44, 741-747.

Comstock RE, Moll RH. 1963. Genotype × environment interactions. Symposium on Statistical Genetics and Plant Breeding. National Academy Science and National Research Council. Washington D.C., USA, 164-196.

Dehghani H, Ebadi A, Yousefi A. 2006. Biplot analysis of genotype by environment interaction for barley yield in Iran. Agronomy Journal 98, 388-393.

Ebdon JS, Gauch HG. 2002. Additive main effect and multiplicative interaction analysis of national turfgrass performance trials: I. Interpretation of Genotype × Environment interaction. Crop Science 42, 489-496.

Hallauer RA, Carena MJ, Miranda JB. 2010. Quantitative Genetics in Maize Breeding, Springer New York. R.W.

Hammer GL, Cooper M. 1996. Plant Adaptation and Crop Improvement. CAB International. 608 p.

Kaya Y, Akcura M, Taner S. 2006. GGE-biplot analysis of multi-environment yield trials in bread wheat. Turkish Journal of Agriculture 30, 325-337.

Farshadfar M. 2012. Genetic variability and Karyotype analysis of some Agropyron species. Annals of Biological Research 3(3), 1515-1523.

Magari R, Kang MS. 1993. Genotype selection via a new yield stability statistic in maize yield trials. Euphytica 70, 105-111.

Samonte SOPB, Wilson LT, McClung AM, Medley JC. 2005. Targeting cultivars onto rice growing environments using AMMI and SREG GGEbiplot analysis. Crop Science 45(6), 2414-2424.

Sutka J, Farshadfar E, Kosegi B, Friebe B, Gill BS. 1995. Cereal Research Comunications 4, 351-357.

Xu J, Conner RL. 1994. Intravarietal variation in satellites and C-banded chromosomes of Agropyron intermedium ssp. trichophorum cv. Greenleaf. Genome 37(2), 305-310.

Yan W. 2001. GGEBiplot – A Windows application for graphical analysis of multi environment trial data and other types of two-way data. Agronomy Journal 93, 1111–1118.

Yan W. 2002. Singular-value partitioning in biplot analysis of multi-environment trial data. Agronomy Journal 94, 990-996.

Yan W, Hunt LA. 2002. Biplot analysis of diallel data. Crop Science 42(1), 21-30.

Yan W, Hunt LA, Sheng Q, Szlavnics Z. 2000. Cultivar evaluation and mega-environment investigation based on the GGE biplot. Crop Science 40, 597-605.

Yan W, Kang MS. 2003. GGE biplot analysis: a graphical tool for breeders, geneticists and agronomist. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. 271 p.

Yan W, Kang MS, Ma B, Wood S, Cornelius PL. 2009a. GGE biplot vs. AMMI analysis of genotype-by-environment data. Crop Science 47, 643-655.

Yan W, Tinker NA. 2005. An integrated system of biplot analysis for displaying, interpreting, and exploring genotype by environment interactions. Crop Science 45, 1004-1016.

Yan W, Tinker NA. 2006. Biplot analysis of multi-environment trial data: Principles and applications. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 86, 623-645.

Yang RC, Crossa J, Cornelius PL, Burgueno J. 2009. Biplot Analysis of Genotype × Environment Interaction: proceed with Caution. Crop Science 49, 1564-1576.

Submit Manuscript