Stability analysis of advanced bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.( lines using AMMI method

Document Type : scientific research article

Authors

1 Ph.D. Student, Dept. of Plant Breeding and Biotechnology, Faculty of Plant Production, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Gorgan, Iran

2 Corresponding Author, Dept. of Plant Breeding and Biotechnology, Faculty of Plant Production, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Gorgan, Iran.

3 Dept. of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Faculty of Agriculture, Shahed University, Tehran, Iran.

4 . Dept. of Plant Breeding and Biotechnology, Faculty of Plant Production, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Gorgan, Iran.

Abstract

Background and purpose: The interaction of genotype × environment complicates performance prediction and is a challenge for crop and breeding programs. Performance stability is critical to achievingg high and uniform performance across a wide range of environments. The aim of this study was to investigate the interaction between genotype × environment and to study the compatibility and stability of advanced seven-line grain yield of bread wheat (BC2F6) resulting from cross-breeding of Tabasi local cultivar and modified Typhoon European variety using AMMI model and some stability statistics.
Materials and Methods: The experiment was conducted in a randomized complete block design with three replications during the cropping years (2017-2018 ) and (2018-2019) in Gorgan, Tehran and Kermanshah and stability analysis was performed for 6 environments. In the field, each plot was planted with a density of four hundred seeds per square meter. Each line was planted in plots with eight four-meter lines with 25 cm line spacing. At the end of the growing season, eight rows of four-meter spikes from each plot were harvested and threshed by hand, and the weight of the obtained grains was measured by a digital scale and reported in square meters.
Results: The results of analysis of variance of the main effects of collectible and multiplicative interaction (AMMI model) showed a significant difference in the level of one percent probability for the environment and the interaction of genotype × environment, which indicates different performance of genotypes in different environments. Therefore, sustainability can be examined. Genotype × environment interaction was divided into two main components by AMMI model. The first two components together accounted for 81.36% and the remaining components in the model accounted for 18.63% of the total variation of genotype × environment interaction. According to AMMI1 model, L4 and L6 lines and according to AMMI2 model, L4 and L7 lines were introduced as high performance and stability lines. Based on the results of Amy Stability Value Index (ASV), L4 and L5 lines and based on Genotype Selection Index (GSI), L4 and L6 lines were introduced as stable lines. The results of Rick equivalence method showed that lines L4, L7 and L3 had the lowest value of this index. According to AMMI1 model, L2 and L7 lines with E1 environment (Gorgan, 2017-2018), and E4 (Tehran, 2018-2019) and L1, L5 and L3 lines with E3 environment (Tehran, 2017-2018) and According to the AMMI2 model, L2 line with E1 environment (Gorgan, 2017-2018), E2 (Gorgan, 2018-2019) and E4 (Tehran, 2018-2019) and L3 and L5 lines with E3 environment (Tehran, 2017-2018) And L1 line had private compatibility with E6 (Kermanshah, 2018-2019) and E5 (Kermanshah, 2017-2018) environments.
Conclusion: Based on all methods of measuring stability in this study and considering the grain yield potential, L4 line had the highest general stability to the evaluated environments and was introduced as a stable line with high yield. Therefore, this line can be suggested for use in future breeding programs to introduce new cultivars. According to both AMMI1 and AMMI2 models, L2 line with E1 and E4 environments and L3 and L5 lines with E3 environment had the most private compatibility. If the cause of the interaction of genotype × environment is predictive factors such as soil type, cultivation operation, the interaction of genotype × environment can be reduced by selecting genotypes with their private and specific adaptation to the environment, and have maximum production.

Keywords

References

1.Ghodrati-Niari, F. and Abdolshahi, R. 2014. Evaluation of yield stability of40 bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) genotypes using additive main effects and multiplicative interaction (AMMI). J. Crop Sci. 16: 4. 322-333. (In Persian)
2.Mohammadi, R., Haghparast, R., Amri, A. and Ceccarelli, S. 2010. Yield stability of rainfed durum wheat and GGE biplot analysis of multi-environment trials. J. Crop Pasture Sci. 61: 92-101.
3.Gauch, H.G. and Zobel, R.W. 1996. AMMI analyses of yield trials. In Kang, M.S., and Gauch, H.G. (Eds.), Genotype by Environment Interaction. CRC. Boca Raton, Florida, pp. 85-122.
4.Farshadfar, E. 2015. The interaction effect of genotype and environment in plant breeding. first volume. Islamic Azad University Press. Kermanshah. (In Persian)
5.Sadegzadeh Ahari, D., Hossaini, K. and Alizadeh, K. 2005. Study of adaptability and stability of durum wheat lines in tropical and sub-tropical dry land areas. J. Plant and Seed. 21: 561-576. (In Persian)
6.Phoelman, J.M. and Sleper, D.A. 1996. Breeding Field Crops (4th edition). Iowa State University Press, Ames, USA.
7.Croosa, J., Gauch, H.G. and Zobell, R.W. 1990. Additive main effects and multiplicative interaction analysis of international maize cultivar trials. J. Crop Sci. 30: 493-500.
8.Gauch, H.G. 1992. Statistical analysis of regional trials. AMMI analysis of factorial designs. Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands. 287p.
9.Roustaei, M., Sadegh Zadeh Ahari, D., Hesami, A., Soleimani, K., Pashapour, H., Nader Mahmoudi, K., Pour Siyah Bidi, M.M., Ahmadi, M.M., Hasanpour Hasani, M. and Abedi Asl, Gh. 2003. Checking compatibility and performance stableness of, bread wheat genotypes in cold and temperate dry regions. J. Plant and Seed. 2: 263-280. (In Persian)
10.Dohlert, D.C., Mc Mullen, M.S. and Hammond, J.I. 2001. Genotypic and environmental effects on grain yield and quality of oat grown in North Dakota. J. Crop Sci. 41: 1066-1072.
11.Farshadfar, E. 2010. New agument in biometery genetic. Islamic Azad university publication.
12.Yan, W. and Hunt, L.A. 2001. Interpretation of genotype × environment interaction for winter wheat yield in Ontario. J. Crop Sci.41: 656-663.
13.Hayward, M., Bosemark, D. and  Romagosa, L. 1993. Plant breeding. London: Chapman and Hall, U. K.
14.Ebdon, J.S. and Gauch, H.G. 2002. AMMI analysis of national turfgrass performance trials. II. Genotype recommendation. J. Crop Sci. 42: 497-506.
15.Farshadfar, E. 2008. In corporation of AMMI stability value and grain yield in a single Non- parametric Index (GSI)
in Bread wheat. Pakistan J. Biol. Sci.11: 14. 1791-1796.
16.Wricke, G. 1962. Uber eine method zur Erfassung der okologischen Streubreite in Feldversuchen. Z. Pflanzenzuchtg.
47: 92-96.
17.Kendal, E., Karamian, M., Tekdal, S. and Dogan, S. 2019. Analysis of promising barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) lines performance by AMMI and GGE BIPLOT in multiple traits and environment. Appl. Ecol. Environ. Res. 17: 2. 5219-5233.
18.Homma, S. 2015. AMMI, stabilityand GGE biplot analysis of durumwheat grain yield for genotypes tested under some optimum and high moisture areas of Ethiopia. Acad. J. Entomol.8: 3. 132-139.
19.Moayedi, A.A., Najafi Mirak, T., Taherian, M., Sasani, S. and Azarm, A. 2020. Evaluation of grain yield stability of durum wheat promising lines in moderate regions of Iran. J. Agron.12: 2. 365-378. (In Persian with English Summary)
20.Badooei Delfard, R., Mostafavi, Kh. and Mohammadi, A. 2016. Genotype-environment interaction and yield stability of winter barley varieties (Hordeum vulgare L.). J. Crop Breed.8: 20. 99-106. (In Persian)
21.Schoeman, L.J. 2003. Genotype × environment interaction in sunflower (Helianthus annuus) in South Africa. MSc. Thesis, Department of Agronomy, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, 84p.
22.Albert, M.J.A. 2004. A comparison of statistical methods to describe genotype × environment interaction and yield stability in multi- location maize trials. MSc. Thesis. Department of Plant Sciences. The University of the Free State. Bloemfontein. 100p.
23.Gauch, H.G. and Zobel, R.W. 1989. Accuracy and selection success in yield trials analysis. J. Theor. Appl. Genet.  77: 443-481.
24.Purchase, J.L. 1997. Parametric analysis to describe G x E interaction and yield stability in winter wheat. Ph.D. Thesis. Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, University of the Orange Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa.
25.Kang, M.S., Gorman, D.P. andPham, H.N. 1991. Application of a stability statistic to international maize yield trials. J. Theor. Appl. Genet.81: 162-165.
26.Barati, A., Tabatabae, S.A., Mahlooji, M. and Saberi, M.H. 2018. Assessment of grain yield stability of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) promising lines under salinity stress using non-parametric and AMMI analysis methods. J. Crop Sci. 20: 3. 209-221. (In Persian with English Abstract)
27.Gauch, H.G. 2006. Statistical analysis of yield trials by AMMI and GGE. J. Crop Sci. 46: 1488-1500.
28.Romagosa, M. and Fox, P.N. 1993. Integration of statistical and physiological adaptation in barley cultivars. J. Theor. Appl. Genet.86: 822- 826.
29.Nachit, M.M., Nachit, G., Ketata, H., Gauch., H.G. and Zobel, R.W.1992. Use of AMMI andlinear regression models to analyze genotype- environments interaction in Durum wheat. J. Theor. Appl. Genet.83: 597-601.
30.Najafian, G., Kaffashi, A.K. and Jafar-Nezhad, A. 2010. Analysis of grain yield stability in hexaploid wheat genotypes grown in temperate regions of Iran using additive main effects and multiplicative interaction. J. Agri. Sci. 12: 213-222.
Journal of Plant Production Research
Volume 29, Issue 3
November 2022
Pages 127-141

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics