Welcome to International Network for Natural Sciences | INNSpub

Paper Details

Research Paper | July 1, 2016

VIEWS 1
| Download 1

Stability of wheat entries across seasons and nitrogen rates by AMMI analysis

Radhi Dheyab Abed

Key Words:


Int. J. Agron. Agri. Res.9(1), 132-139, July 2016

Certification:

IJAAR 2016 [Generate Certificate]

Abstract

To study the stability of spring bread wheat entries across years and nitrogen rates, yield trials were conducted from 2010 to 2013 preceding by screening trail in 2009-2010 at farm of college of Baghdad agriculture. Randomized complete block design (RCBD) with split plots arrangement was followed. Across years, nitrogen rates occupied main plots whereas, genotypes were in subplots. Five promising genotypes of CIMMYT entries viz: 106s, 107s, 108s, 109s, 110s and local variety (abugraib-3) that were symbolized by letters G1, G2 to G6, respectively. Nitrogen rates were 25, 100, 175kg.N.ha-1. Each nitrogen rate within year was considered as an environment, so that, nine environments were generated. Statistical analysis results revealed that the percentage of genotypes variation from total was 65.6%, also, the percentage of environments and interaction sum of square from total variation was 26.1% and 8.3%, respectively. Sum of square of investigated variation of PCA1, PCA2 and PCA3 was 60.54%, 25.1% and 10.6%, respectively. The total of interaction variation investigated was 96.3%. Grain yield of environments ranged from 3.739 t.ha-1 that ranked the first to 2.801t.ha-1 that ranked the lowest. In addition, the grain yield of genotypes ranged from 3.783 t.ha-1 for G5 that ranked the first to 2.267 t.ha-1 for G1 that ranked the lowest. G4 was more stable than other genotypes; consequently, it was wide adapted and high yield over years. However, this statistical technique was a powerful tool for diagnosing the stable genotypes in grain yield across years of research. We can recommend cultivating G4 for its wide adapted and high stability.

VIEWS 1

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

Stability of wheat entries across seasons and nitrogen rates by AMMI analysis

Aina O, Dixon A, Paul I, Akinrinde E. 2009. G×E Interaction effects on yield and yield components of cassava (landraces and improved) genotypes in the Savanna regions of Nigeria. African Journal of Biotechnology 8(19), 4933-4945.

Alghamdi SS. 2004. Yield stability of some soybean genotypes across diverse environment .Pakistan Journal of Biology Sciences 7(12), 2109-2114.

Annicchiarico P. 2002. Defining adaptation strategies and yield stability targets in breeding programs. In: Kang MS. (eds) Quantitative Genetics, Genomics, and Plant Breeding. CABI, Wallingford, UK pp. 365-383.

Becker HC, Leon J. 1988. Stability analysis in plant breeding. Plant breeding 101, 1-23.

Crossa, J. 1990. Statistical analysis of multilocations trials. Advances in Agronomy 44, 55-86.

Ebdon JS , Gauch HG. 2002. Additive main effect and multiplicative interaction analysis of national turf grass performance trails.11 cultivars recommendations. Crop Science 42, 497-506.

Farshadfar E, Farshadfar M, Sutka J. 2000. Combining ability analysis of drought tolerance in wheat over different water regimes. Acta Agronomica Hungarica 48, 353-361.

Gauch HD, Zobel RW. 1996. AMMI Analysis of yield trails.in: genotype by environmental interaction. Kang MS, Gauch HG (eds). Boca Raton, RCR Press p. 85 -122.

Gauch HD, Zobel RW. 1997. Identifying mega-environment and targeting genotypes. Crop Science 37, 311- 326.

Johansson E, Prieto-Linde ML, Svensson G, Jönsson JÖ. 2003. Influences of cultivar, cultivation year and fertilizer rate on amount of protein groups and amount and size distribution of mono and polymeric proteins in wheat. Journal of Agriculture Science 140, 275-284.

Kadhem FA. 2014. Additive main effect and multiplicative interaction analysis of yield stability performance in sunflower genotypes grown in Iraqi environment. The Iraqi Journal of Agriculture Science 45(8), 932-939.

Kang MS. 2002. Quantitative Genetics, Genomics and Plant Breeding. CABI Publishing Wallingford, UK pp. 271.

Kaya Y, Palta C, Taner S. 2002. Additive main effects and multiplicative interactions analysis of yield performance in bread wheat genotypes across environments. Turkey Journal of Agriculture 26, 275-279.

Lin CS, Binns MR, Lefkovitch LP. 1986. Stability analysis: where do we stand? Crop Science 26, 894 – 900.

Mohammadi R, Sadeghzadeh ED, Mohammad A, Ahmed A. 2011. Evaluation of durum wheat experimental lines under different climate and water regime conditions of Iran. Crop & Pasture Science 62, 137–151.

Najafian G, Kaffashi A, Jafar-Nezhad A. 2010. Analysis of grain yield stability in hexaploid wheat genotypes grown in temperate regions of Iran using additive main effects and multiplicative interaction. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology 12, 213-222.

Padi FK. 2007. Relationship between stress tolerance and grain yield stability in cowpea. Journal of Agriculture Science. Camb. 142, 431-444.

Piepho HP. 1996. Analysis of genotype by environment interaction and phenotypic stability. In: Kang MS, Zobel HG. (eds), Genotype by Environment Interaction, 151–174. CRC Press, Boca Raton.

Purchase JL, Hatting H, Van Deventer. 2000. Genotype x environment interaction of winter wheat in South Africa: II. Stability analysis of yield performance. South African Journal of Plant and Soil 17, 101-107.

Rajaram S, Braun HJ. 2009. “Wheat Yield Potential,” In: MP. Reynolds, J. Pietragalla and HJ. Braun, (eds). International Symposium on Wheat Yield Potential: Challenges to International Wheat Breeding pp. 103-107.

Reza M, Armon M, Shabani A, Daryaei A. 2007. Identification of stability and adaptability in advanced durum genotypes using AMMI analysis. Asian Journal of Plant Science 6(8), 1261-1268.

Romagosa I, Fox PN, García del Moral LF, Ramos JM, García del Moral B, Roca de Togores F, Molinacano JL. 1993. Integration of statistical and physiological analysis of adaptation of near-isogenic barley lines. Theory Applied Genetics 86, 822-826.

Sivapalan S, Brien lO, Ferrara GO, Hollamby GL, Barcaly I, Martin PJ. 2000. An adaptation analysis of Australian and CIMMYT/ICARDA wheat germoplasm in Australian production environments. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 51, 903-915.

Stone P, Savin R. 2000. An introduction to the physiological– ecological analysis of wheat yield. p. 3-11. In Satorre Slafer EG. (eds.) Wheat: Ecology and physiology of yield determination. Chapter 1. Viva Books Private Limited, New Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai.

Tarakanovas P, Ruzgas V. 2006. Additive main effect and multiplicative interaction analysis of grain yield of wheat varieties in Lithuania. Agronomy Research 4(1), 91-98.

Yan W, Kang MS. 2003. GGE Biplot Analysis: A Graphical Tool for Geneticists, Breeders and Agronomists, CRC Press, Boca Raton, USA, FL., pp. 271.

Yan W, Rajcan I. 2002. Biplots analysis of the test sites and trait relations of soybean in Ontario. Crop Science 42, 11-20.

Zobel RW, Wright MJ, Gauch HG. 1988. Statistical analysis of a yield trial. Agronomy Journal 80, 388–393.

SUBMIT MANUSCRIPT

Style Switcher

Select Layout
Chose Color
Chose Pattren
Chose Background