Evaluation of Spring Barley Performance by Biplot Analysis
Unpredictable environmental conditions lead to occurrence of large genotype by environment (G × E) interaction. It reduces the correlation between genotypic and phenotypic values and complicates selection of superior genotypes. The objective of this study was to estimate genotype by year (G × Y) interaction using AMMI model, to identify spring barley genotypes with stable and high yield performance and to observe association of different meteorological variables with tested growing seasons. The trials with 15 spring barley genotypes were conducted during seven years (1999–2005) at the location of Rimski Šančevi. The results showed that the influence of year (Y), genotype (G) and G × Y interaction on barley grain yield were significant (p < 0.01). Meteorological variables varied significantly from year to year and Y explained the highest percent of treatment variation (81%). The first three IPCA were significant and explained 83% of interaction variation. According to this study, it could be concluded that AMMI analysis provided an enhanced understanding of G × Y interaction in barley multi-years trials. Among the tested genotypes, LAV and NS 477 could be separated as highest yielding genotypes, however LAV could be recommended for further breeding program and large-scale production due to its stable and high yielding performance. It also provided better insight in specific association between spring barley grain yield and meteorological variables.
KeywordsAMMI analysis genotype by year interaction grain yield Hordeum vulgare L. meteorological variables
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
This paper presents the results of the project TR-31066 “Modern breeding of small grains for present and future needs”, supported by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia.
- Ceccarelli, S. 1989. Wide adaptation. How wide? Euphytica 40:197–205.Google Scholar
- FAOSTAT 2012. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO): FAOSTAT. (Available at http://faostat.fao.org)
- Kaya, Y., Palta, C., Taner, S. 2002. Additive main effects and multiplicative interactions analysis of yield performances in bread wheat genotypes across environments. Turk. J. Agric. For. 26:275–279.Google Scholar
- Mitrović, B., Stanisavljević, D., Treskić, S., Stojaković, M., Ivanović, M., Bekavac, G., Rajković, M. 2012. Evaluation of experimental maize hybrids tested in multilocation trials using AMMI and GGE biplot analyses. Turk. J. Field Crops. 17:35–40.Google Scholar
- Rao, P.S., Reddy, P.S., Rathore, A., Reddy, B.V., Panwar, S. 2011. Application GGE biplot and AMMI model to evaluate sweet sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) hybrids for genotype × environment interaction and seasonal adaptation. Ind. J. Agric. Sci. 81:438–844.Google Scholar
- Romagosa, I., van Eeuwijk, F.A., Thomas, W.T.B. 2009. Statistical analyses of genotype by environment data. In: Phohens, J., Nuez, F., Carena, M.J., (eds), Handbook of Plant Breeding. Elsevier. New York, NY, USA. pp. 1–41.Google Scholar
- StatSoft, Inc. 2011. STATISTICA (data analysis software system), version 10 (http://www.statsoft.com).
- Ullrich, S.E. 2011: Significance, adaptation, production, and, trade of barley. In: Ullrich, S.E., (ed.), Barley production, improvement, and uses. John Wiley & Sons Inc. Ames, IA, USA. pp. 3–13.Google Scholar
- Wardlaw, I.F., Dawson, I.A., Munibi, P., Fewster, R. 1989. The tolerance of wheat to high temperatures during reproductive growth. Survey procedures and general response patterns. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 40:1–13.Google Scholar