Skip to main content
Log in

Environment of selection and type of germplasm in barley breeding for low-yielding conditions

  • Published:
Euphytica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Thee groups consisting of 332, 243 and 280 barley breeding lines (entries) of known selection history were evaluated in 10, 9 and 8 environments, respectively, to determine the relationship between grain yield in low yielding (LYE) or high yielding (HYE) environment, and selection history and type of germplasm. One cycle of selection in LYE produced on average five times more entries outyielding the best check in LYE than selection in HYE. A retrospective analysis indicated that the highest yielding lines in LYE were lower yielding (15%–28%) in HYE when compared with the best check, and by 20% and 38% compared with the best entries in HYE. In contrast, the highest yielding lines in HYE were lower yielding (4%–33%) in LYE when compared with the best check, and by 33% and 40% when compared with the best entries in LYE. The highest yielding lines in LYE did not differ consistently from the highest yielding lines in HYE for a number of morphological and developmental traits including days to heading. This suggests there are many paths to high yield in LYE and that analytical breeding based on individual traits may not be appropriate for variable environments. Only 0.07% of the highest yielding entries in LYE was selected for high yield in HYE conditions confirming previous results indicating that selection for high yield in HYE is an inefficient strategy for improving yield in low yielding conditions. This frequency is 28 times lower than the frequency of high yielding entries in LYE selected from landraces or crosses with landraces in low yielding conditions. The results imply that the most cost-effective strategy for barley breeding in low yielding conditions is to select repeatedly in low yielding conditions and to include adapted germplasm (landraces) in the breeding material.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Acevedo, E., P.Q., Craufurd, R.B., Austin & P., Perez-Marco, 1991. Traits associated with high yield in barley in low-rainfall environments. J. Agric. Sci., Camb. 116: 23–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, F.L., R.E., Comstock & D.C., Rasmusson, 1978. Optimal environment for yield testing. Crop Sci. 18: 747–751.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atlin, G.N. & K.J., Frey, 1989a. Predicting the relative effectiveness of direct versus indirect selection for oat yield in three types of stress environments. Euphytica 44: 137–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atlin, G.N. & K.J., Frey, 1989b. Breeding crop varieties for low-input agriculture. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 4: 53–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atlin, G.N. & K.J., Frey, 1990. Selecting oat lines for yield in low-productivity environments. Crop Sci. 30: 556–561.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bidinger, F.R., V., Mahalakshmi & G.D.P., Rao, 1987a. Assessment of drought resistance in Pearl Millet (Pennisetum americanum (L.) Leeke). I. Factors affecting yields under stress. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 38: 37–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bidinger, F.R., V., Mahalakshmi & G.D.P., Rao, 1987b. Assessment of drought resistance in Pearl Millet (Pennisetum americanum (L.) Leeke). II. Estimation of genotype response to stress. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 38: 49–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blum, A., 1988. Plant breeding for stress environments. CRC Press, Inc., Florida.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ceccarelli, S., 1989. Wide adaptation: How wide? Euphytica 40: 197–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ceccarelli, S., S., Grando & J.A.G., van, Leur, 1987a. Genetic diversity in barley landraces from Syria and Jordan. Euphytica 36: 389–405.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ceccarelli, S., M., Nachit, G.O., Ferrara, M.S., Mekni, M., Tahir, J.A.G., van, Leur & J.P., Srivastava, 1987b. Breeding strategies for improving cereal yield and stability under drought. In: J.P., Srivastava, E., Porceddu, E., Acevedo & S., Varma (Eds). ‘Drought tolerance in winter cereals’. pp. 101–114. John Wiley and Sons, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ceccarelli, S. & S., Grando, 1989. Efficiency of empirical selection under stress conditions in barley. J. Genet. and Breed. 43: 25–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ceccarelli, S., E., Acevedo & S., Grando, 1991. Breeding for yield stability in unpredictable environments: single traits, interaction between traits, and architecture of genotypes. Euphytica 56: 169–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochran, W.G., 1964. Quoted by G.W. Snedecor & W.G. Cochran, 1967. Statistical methods. Iowa State University Press.

  • Cooper, P.J.M., P.J., Gregory, D., Tully & H.C., Harris, 1987. Improving water use efficiency of annual crops in the rainfed farming systems of West Asia and North Africa. Expl. Agriculture 23: 113–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falconer, D.S., 1960. Introduction to quantitative genetics. Ronald Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falconer, D.S., 1990. Selection in different environments: effects on environmental sensitivity (reaction norm) and on mean performance. Genet. Res. Camb. 56: 57–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R.A. & J.R., Wood, 1979. Drought resistance in spring wheat cultivars. III. Yield associations with morpho-physiological traits. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 30: 1001–1020.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsiao, T.C., 1982. The soil-plant-atmosphere continuum in relation to drought and crop production. In: ‘Drought Resistance in Crops with Emphasis on Rice’. IRRI, Los Banos, Philippines, pp. 39–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurd, E.A., 1971. Can we breed for drought resistance? In: Larson, K.L. & Eastin, J.D. (Eds). ‘Drought injury and resistance in crops’ Spec. Publ. N. 2, Crop Sci. Soc. Am., Madison, Wisconsin, pp. 77–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawn, R.J., 1988. Breeding for improved plant performance in drought-prone environments. In: F.R., Bidinger & C., Johansen (Eds). ‘Drought Research Priorities for the Dryland Tropics’ ICRISAT, Patancheru, India, pp. 213–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, C.S. & G., Poushinsky, 1983. A modified augmented design for an early stage of plant selection involving a large number of test lines without replications. Biometrics 39: 553–561.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keim, D.L. & W.E., Kronstad, 1979. Drought resistance and dryland adaptation in winter wheat. Crop Sci. 19: 574–576.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nageswara Rao, R.C., J.H., Williams, & Murari, Singh, 1989. Genotypic sensitivity to drought and yield potential of Peanut. Agron. J. 81: 887–893.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosielle, A.A. & J., Hamblin, 1981. Theoretical aspects of selection for yield in stress and non-stress environments. Crop Sci. 21: 943–946.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simmonds, N.W., 1984. Decentralized selection. Sugar Cane 6: 8–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snedecor, G.W. & W.G. Cochran, 1967. Statistical methods. Iowa State University Press.

  • Whitehead, W.L. & F.L., Allen, 1990. High-vs. low-stress yield test environments for selecting superior soybean lines. Crop Sci. 30: 912–918.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ceccarelli, S., Grando, S. Environment of selection and type of germplasm in barley breeding for low-yielding conditions. Euphytica 57, 207–219 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00039667

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00039667

Key words

Navigation