AMMI and GGE Biplot Analysis of Yield Stability and Adaptability of Elite Genotypes of Bread Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) for Northern Hill Zone of India

Muniyandi, Samuel Jeberson; Aicrp, India; Kant, Lakshmi; Kishore, N.; Rana, Vijay; Walia, D. P.; Singh, Durvesh Kumar; Cskhpkv, Harec

doi:10.23910/ijbsm/2017.8.5.1838

Cited by 14 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In our study both AMMI and GGE biplot demonstrate to be very useful in evaluating the per-formance of genotypes and showed no differences in selection of best genotypes. These results are in agreement with findings of Miranda et al (2009), Mitrovic et al (2012), Hagos and Abay (2013), Rad et al (2013) and Jeberson et al (2017).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 93%

Genotype by Environment Interaction for Grain Yield of Barley Mutant Lines

Dyulgerova¹,

Dyulgerov²

2019

Agriculture (Pol'nohospodárstvo)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to examine the genotype by environment interaction for grain yield and to identify high-yielding and stable mutant lines of 6-rowed winter barley under different growing seasons. The study was carried out during 7 growing seasons from 2010 – 2011 to 2016 – 2017 in the experimental field of the Institute of Agriculture – Karnobat, Southeastern Bulgaria. Fourteen advanced mutant lines and the check variety Vesletc were studied using a complete block design with 4 replications. The AMMI analysis of variance indicated that 20.54% of the variation for grain yield was explained by the effect of genotype and 37.34% and 42.12% were attributable to the environmental effects and genotype by environment interaction. The magnitude of the genotype by environment interaction was two times larger than that of genotypes, indicating that there was a substantial difference in genotype response across environments. The AMMI and GGE biplot analyses identified G9 as the highest yielding and stable genotype. This mutant line can be recommended for further evaluation for variety release. The mutant lines G6, G13 and G15 were suggested for inclusion in the breeding program of winter barley due to its high grain yield and intermediate stability.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 93%

Genotype by Environment Interaction for Grain Yield of Barley Mutant Lines

Dyulgerova¹,

Dyulgerov²

2019

Agriculture (Pol'nohospodárstvo)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The environment showed much variability in both additive main effects and interactions. Similar results were observed by Oliveira et al, (2013) and Jeberson et al, (2017) in their studies of passion fruit and bread wheat, respectively, in which most of the variation was attributed to environmental factors and G x E interaction. This was mainly due to the fact that biophysical attributes (biotic stresses, soils, temperatures and rainfall found at each location were highly variable) (Rukuni et al, 2006).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Yield Stability and Farmer Preference of Cowpea (Vigna Uncuilata) Lines in semi-arid Eastern Kenya

Kuruma¹,

Patrick²,

Kahwaga³

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stability in yields of agronomically acceptable cultivars is generally regarded as the ultimate goal in cowpea improvement. Nine advanced cowpea lines and 3 local checks were evaluated for grain yield in eastern Kenya with the aim of identifying stable genotypes and integrating farmer preferences. The study was conducted in 3 locations over 2 years under a randomized complete block design with 3 replications. Stability was estimated using additive main effects and multiplicative interaction (AMMI) and genotype by environment (GGE) models. There was variation among genotypes, locations and their interactions for grain yield. Genotype G5, G9 and G2 were found to be stable and high yielding. Environments Kit16 and Kit15 were considered as the most suitable for selecting superior genotypes for adaptability and stability. Farmers’ criteria for selecting genotypes included early maturing, pod length, disease tolerant and high yielding varieties. Cowpea performance for grain yield was greatly influenced by inherent genotypic factors, environment and their interaction effects. KEY WORDS: COWPEA, ENVIRONMENT, GENOTYPE BY ENVIRONMENT INTERACTION, STABILITY, GRAIN YIELD

show abstract

“…3 and 9 could be considered as the most stable and adapted genotypes for days to heading and yield performance (Tables 5 and 6). These results are in line with the findings of Khan et al (2014); Verma et al (2015); Jeberson et al (2017).…”

Section: Ammi Stability Value (Asv)supporting

confidence: 93%

“…This advocates the possible presence of different genotype groups. Similar results were obtained by Kadhem and Baktash (2016); Jeberson et al (2017).…”

Section: Stress Tolerance Index (Sti)supporting

confidence: 91%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Stability Analysis of Bread Wheat Genotypes for Heading Time and Grain Yield Using AMMI Model

2020

AJAS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Additive main effects and multiplicative interactions (AMMI) model analyses were performed to assess and quantify the magnitude of genotype by environment interaction (GEI) for number of days to heading (DH) and grain yield (GY/P) stability of sixteen promising bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) genotypes. Field experiments under recommended (N) and late (L) sowing date in newly reclaimed soil were conducted in the Agricultural Research Station at Arab-Elawamer, Assiut, Egypt for three consecutive seasons (2016/2017, 2017/2018 and 2018/2019). The combined ANOVA showed highly significant differences among genotypes and among environments for both traits, while GEI was highly significant for DH and not significant for GY/P. Results of AMMI analysis indicated that the first three AMMI (PC1, PC2 and PC3) were highly significant for DH and AMMI1 was only significant in case of GY/P. In addition, the environments showed high contributions to the total sum of squares (TSS) and explained 84.7 and 85.3% for days to heading and grain yield/plot, respectively. While, the genotypes captured 10.4 and 6.8% of the TSS for the same traits, respectively. Although that the GEI showed low contribution to the total SS, but its magnitude (7.9%) was larger than that for genotypes in case of GY/P. The AMMI stability value discriminated genotypes G3, G7, G9, G12 and G14. G3 were the most promising stable and adapted genotypes according to grain yield performance over environments.

show abstract

AMMI and GGE Biplot Analysis of Yield Stability and Adaptability of Elite Genotypes of Bread Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) for Northern Hill Zone of India

Cited by 14 publications

References 14 publications

Genotype by Environment Interaction for Grain Yield of Barley Mutant Lines

Genotype by Environment Interaction for Grain Yield of Barley Mutant Lines

Yield Stability and Farmer Preference of Cowpea (Vigna Uncuilata) Lines in semi-arid Eastern Kenya

Stability Analysis of Bread Wheat Genotypes for Heading Time and Grain Yield Using AMMI Model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About