2001
DOI: 10.2135/cropsci2001.412358x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Family and Line Selection for Seed Yield of Soybean

Abstract: Plant‐row‐yield tests (PRYT) are used by soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] breeders for the initial evaluation of experimental lines. The highest yielding lines in the PRYT are advanced for additional testing in replicated tests. The objective of this study was to determine the reliability of selection for seed yield in unreplicated plots by the family and line methods of selection. Four F3‐derived lines from each of 21 F2 families from four populations were grown in a PRYT during 1995 and in replicated tests a… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2002
2002
2007
2007

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 14 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Hegstad et al (1999) reported that when soybean lines were evaluated for yield using only one replicate at a single site, the highest‐yielding one‐third of the lines yielded more in validation environments than the lowest‐yielding two‐thirds of the lines. Streit et al (2001) stated that yield of soybean lines selected, based on one or two replicates of a single row 108‐cm long, was not significantly better than random selection. When selection was conducted at individual locations with two‐row plots 3.7 m long, the use of one replicate was as effective as two replicates.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Hegstad et al (1999) reported that when soybean lines were evaluated for yield using only one replicate at a single site, the highest‐yielding one‐third of the lines yielded more in validation environments than the lowest‐yielding two‐thirds of the lines. Streit et al (2001) stated that yield of soybean lines selected, based on one or two replicates of a single row 108‐cm long, was not significantly better than random selection. When selection was conducted at individual locations with two‐row plots 3.7 m long, the use of one replicate was as effective as two replicates.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%