Advertisement

Cereal Research Communications

, Volume 38, Issue 2, pp 259–265 | Cite as

Interpretation of GEI effect analysis for some agronomic and quality traits in ten winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivars

  • G. DreznerEmail author
  • J. Gunjača
  • D. Novoselović
  • D. Horvat
Article

Abstract

Ten winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivars were tested in randomized complete block design (RCBD) trials at one location (Osijek) for several agronomic and quality traits through six growing seasons (1996/97–2001/02). Data were employed to develop modeling strategy for exploring genotype by environment interaction (GEI) by using models based on information on genotypic and environmental variables. The relative size, hence importance of the GEI compared to main effects of genotypes and environments was estimated for all effects from simple additive model (genotypes, environments and residuals, last including both GEI and experimental error) while the AMMI2 model was used as a basis for comparison of the GEI patterns. The final step in modeling strategy was fitting factorial regression models to all analyzed traits using available genotypic and environmental covariates, until the best fit solution was found for each analyzed trait.

Comparing the relative sizes of genotypic and GEI effects, the last one was sizeable smaller, for all traits except grain yield (GY), thousand-kernel weight (TKW), and Hagberg falling number (HFN). Fitting of genotypic and environmental covariates resulted in various solutions for different traits, most frequently employing single genotypic covariate — Glu-A1.

Regardless of their relatively small size, the GEI effects in wheat quality traits can offer a better insight into fluctuations of varietal quality over a range of environmental conditions, as they can be successfully modeled using various genotypic and environmental covariates. The advantage of described approach is attainable in virtually any breeding program, because during the implementation of the program breeders routinely score for a number of genotypic and environmental variables.

Keywords

winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) AMMI models genotype by environment interaction quality yield 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anonymous 1994a. Determination of sedimentation value (ac. to Zeleny) as an approximate measure of baking quality. ICC Standard No. 116/1, ICC, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  2. Anonymous 1994b. Determination of the “Falling Number” according to Hagberg-Perten as a measure of the degree of alpha-amylase activity in grain and flour. 1995. ICC Standard No. 107/1, International Association for Cereal Science and Technology, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  3. Anonymous 1994c. Determination of wet gluten quantity and quality (Gluten Index ac. to Perten) of Whole Wheat Meal and Wheat Flour (Triticum aestivum). 1994. ICC Standard No. 155, International Association for Cereal Science and Technology, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  4. Finlay, K.W., Wilkinson, G.N. 1963. The analysis of adaptation in a plant-breeding programme. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 14:742–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gauch, H.G. 1992. Statistical analysis of regional yield trials: AMMI analysis of factorial designs. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  6. Gut, M., Bichonski, A. 2007. Technological quality and yield’s components of winter wheat lines under Polish climatic conditions. Cereal Res. Commun. 35:151–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Nachit, M.M., Nachit, G., Ketata, H., Gauch, H.G., Zobel, R.W. 1992. Use of AMMI and linear regression models to analyze genotype-environment interaction in durum wheat. Theor. Appl. Genet. 83:597–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Peña, R.J., Trethowan, R., Pfeiffer, W.H., van Ginkel, M. 2002. Quality (end-use) improvement in wheat: compositional, genetic, and environmental factors. J. Crop Production 5:1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Peterson, C.J., Graybosch, R.A., Shelton, D.R., Baenziger, P.S. 1998. Baking quality of hard winter wheat: Response of cultivars to environment in the Great Plains. Euphytica 100:157–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Rharrabti, Y., Villegas, D., Royo, C., Martos-Nunez, V., Garcia del Moral, L.F. 2003a. Durum wheat quality in Mediterranean environments. II. Influence of climatic variables and relationships between quality parameters. Field Crops Res. 80:133–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Rharrabti, Y., Garcia del Moral, L.F., Villegas, D., Royo, C. 2003b. Durum wheat quality in Mediterranean environments. III. Stability and comparative methods in analyzing G × E interaction. Field Crops Res. 80:141–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Robert, N., Denis, J.B. 1996. Stability of baking quality in bread wheat using several statistical parameters. Theor. Appl. Genet. 93:172–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Robert, N. 1997. Structuring genotype × environment interaction for quality traits in bread wheat, in two multi-location series of trials. Euphytica 97:53–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. SAS Institute, 2009. SAS/STAT(R) 9.2 User’s Guide, Second Edition. http://support.sas.com/documentation/onlinedoc/stat/
  15. Shukla, G.K. 1972. Some statistical aspects of partitioning genotype-environmental components of variability. Heredity 29:237–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Tabiki, T., Ikeguchi, S., Ikeda, T.M. 2006. Effects of high-molecular weight and low-molecular weight glutenin subunit alleles on common wheat flour quality. Breeding Sci. 56:131–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. van Eeuwijk, F.A., Denis, J.-B., Kang, M.S. 1996. Incorporating additional information on genotypes and environments in models for two-way genotype by environment tables. In: Kang, M.S., Gauch, H.G. (eds.), Genotype-by-Environment Interaction. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA, pp. 15–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Williams, R.M., O’Brien, L.O., Eagles, H.A., Solah, V.A., Jayasena, V. 2008. The influences of genotype, environment, and genotype × environment interaction on wheat quality. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 59:95–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. Drezner
    • 1
    Email author
  • J. Gunjača
    • 2
  • D. Novoselović
    • 1
  • D. Horvat
    • 1
  1. 1.Agricultural Institute OsijekOsijekCroatia
  2. 2.Department of Plant Breeding, Genetics and Biometrics, Faculty of AgricultureUniversity of ZagrebZagrebCroatia

Personalised recommendations