Genotype x environment interaction and genetic gain for grain yield and grain quality traits in Turkish spring wheat released between 1964 and 2010

Abstract

The study was conducted to determine the effects of genotype (G), environment (E), their interaction (GEI) and genetic gain on yield and grain quality traits in Turkish spring wheat cultivars released between 1964 and 2010. We conducted a multi-environment trial at three testing locations: Adana, Adapazarı, and Izmir, during the 2009, 2011 and 2013 cropping seasons and tested 35 cultivars released by the respective breeding programs. Allelic variations of high and low molecular weight glutenin subunits (HMW-GS and LMW-GS) and 1B/1R translocation was also determined and evaluated in all cultivars. Comparing yield across three locations, Adana (6416 kg ha -1 ) yield was relatively higher than in Izmir (5887 kg ha -1 ) and Adapazarı (5205 kg ha -1 ) (P<0.001). Overall, GY was influenced by the varieties, testing location and breeding programs (P<0.001). Cultivars from Izmir breeding program performed relatively better (6174 kg ha -1 ) than those from Adana (5996 kg ha -1 ) and Adapazarı (5351 kg ha -1 ) (<0.001). We recommend Ziyabey-98, Menemen, and Basribey-95, for stable grain yield in spring wheat production across the studied regions because of their wide adaptability, and Pamukova-97 for future breeding to improve grain quality parameters. We found three breeding programs have successfully increased the grain yield and quality traits for 46 years. As a group, cultivars released after 2000 had the highest yield indicating breeding progress. Genetic gain for GY was 30.9 kg ha −1 per year from 1964 with annual increase compared to the yield of older cultivar Akova B-2 (4102 kg ha -1 ) which constitutes a 0.75% rate of genetic gain. Improvement in grain quality was related to change in protein composition rather than an increase in protein content whereas yield improvement seems to mainly be related to increases in test weight and 1000 kernel weight. High molecular weight glutenin subunit (HMW-GS) 5+10 showed an increase in frequency whereas 2+12 showed a decrease over the breeding period.

Genotype × Environment Interaction of Yield and Grain Quality Traits of Maize Hybrids in Greece

“…It was observed that the effect of environment on the fiber content of corn grains was stronger as compared to the genotype. This finding is in accordance with other scientific studies [18,37].…”

“…The protein content was mainly affected by the environment rather than the genotype. This finding is in accordance with other scientific studies [18,35,36]. The protein content of corn grain is illustrated the quality of corn flour and is a desirable trait for the food industry.…”

“…The environment, the genotype and the GE interaction are also responsible for variations in the quality properties of grains, including the color, the texture, the protein and the fiber content. Among the quality parameters, the protein content of the grains is highly affected by the environment [18]. The evaluation of different genotypes on quality traits associating with the improvement of the yield can also contribute to future breeding strategies.…”

Root and canopy traits and adaptability genes explain drought tolerance mechanism in winter wheat

“…Genetic variation in GY in wheat has previously been associated with green canopy area duration under drought in wheat (41,(47)(48)(49)(50), sorghum (51). The role of senescence dynamics -start, end and rate of senescence -is important as they relate to grain filling duration and post-anthesis water and N uptake (50,52). Under irrigated conditions, GY was associated positively with senescence start (SenSt) in 2018.…”

Effect of L‐cysteine on the rheology and baking quality of doughs formulated with flour from five contrasting Canada spring wheat cultivars

“…Canadian wheat cultivars have properties that meet the specific end‐use requirements (Canadian Grain Commission, ). However, processing and end‐use quality are affected by the environment (Malik, Kuktaite, & Johansson, ; Nehe et al, ), which can alter the flour attributes and alter the end‐product quality. Dough improvers can alleviate flour quality deficiencies in bread‐making, to consistently produce desirable quality end‐products to meet customer preferences.…”