Comparative Study to Determine Stable Performance in Sweetpotato

Genotype × environment interaction and stability analysis of sweetpotato (Ipomoea batatas) genotypes

“…however, the magnitude of genotype, environment and ge interaction effects in the total variability were inconsistent in the previous studies. in most of the earlier studies (Bacusmo et al 1988;kanua & floyd 1988;ngeve & Bouwkamp 1993) environment main effect contributed more to total variability, whereas higher genotypic mean effect was highlighted in the recent studies (Manrique & hermann 2002;abidin et al 2005;grüneberg et al 2005). in our study, genotype SS was over 3-fold and c. 2-fold higher than environment SS for tSry and for aSrW, respectively.…”

“…therefore, breeding for high yielding, widely adapted sweetpotato genotypes could be possible, but yield performance in low yielding or marginal environments merits specific consideration. Previous studies also revealed significant GE interaction effects on the yield and yield components of sweetpotato (Collins et al 1987;Bacusmo et al 1988;kanua & floyd 1988;ngeve 1993;Manrique & hermann 2002;abidin et al 2005;grüneberg et al 2005). however, the magnitude of genotype, environment and ge interaction effects in the total variability were inconsistent in the previous studies.…”

“…however, it has also been observed to be very sensitive to environmental variation. Many authors report the presence of a significant genotype x environment (ge) interaction in sweetpotato in both yield and quality traits (Collins et al 1987;Bacusmo et al 1988;kanua & floyd 1988;ngeve 1993;Manrique & hermann 2002;abidin et al 2005;grüneberg et al 2005). the joint regression analysis was used to explain the ge interaction in sweetpotato in earlier studies (Collins et al 1987;Bacusmo et al 1988;kanua & floyd 1988;ngeve 1993;abidin et al 2005).…”

“…the joint regression analysis was used to explain the ge interaction in sweetpotato in earlier studies (Collins et al 1987;Bacusmo et al 1988;kanua & floyd 1988;ngeve 1993;abidin et al 2005). however, the additive Main effects and Multiplicative interaction (aMMi) is gaining popularity and is widely preferred in recent GE studies (Manrique & hermann 2002;grüneberg et al 2005). the aMMi model combines the analysis of variance for the genotype and environment main effects with principal components analysis of the ge interaction.…”

“…Similarly, ngeve & Bouwkamp (1993) used four stability assessment methods: eberhart & russell (1966), Perkins & Jinks (1968), Shukla (1972), andfrancis &kannenberg (1978) and concluded that Shukla's and Francis & Kannenberg's methods were the most effective and useful. Manrique & hermann (2002) suggested joint use of the interaction principal component axis (IPCA) values of AMMI model and Tai's (1971) parameters to evaluate relative stability of sweetpotato genotypes in regional trials. Purchase (1997) proposed a new stability parameter called aMMi stability value (aSV) derived from iPCas of aMMi to quantify and rank genotypes according their yield stability.…”