Determining the Most Stable Potato Genotypes Using AMMI Yield Stability Analysis Method

Abstract

Genotype-environment interaction (GEI) is very important for breeders. It is considered a complicated issue in breeding programs to obtain stable and high-yielding genotypes to release new genotypes. This study was conducted to achieve a stable high-yielding genotype that is adaptive to climatic conditions of potato-producing regions in Iran. A total of 20 potato breeding lines along with five commercial varieties (Savalan, Agria, Caesar, Luta and Satina) were evaluated in a randomized complete block design with three replicates in the Agricultural Research and Natural Resources Stations of five location (Ardabil, Razavi Khorasan, Karaj, Isfahan and Hamadan) in Iran, for two years (2016 and 2017). Combined ANOVA of yield data for studied genotypes and environments indicates significant differences among potato genotypes, environments, and GE interaction was significant. Thus, the AMMI method and its parameters were used to analyze yield stability. The results indicated that only four interaction principal components were significant (P<0.01), which accounted for 81.2% of the GEI sum of squares. Based on type 1 parameters (SIPC1, FA1, Za1, Dz1, EV1, and Da1), genotypes G7, G10, G14, G20 and G24 were identified as to be stable. Moreover, according to the results of type 2, 3 and 4 parameters, genotypes G2, G6, G7, G14, G15 and G20, as well as cultivars Agria (G24) and Luta (G23), were found to be stable. Genotypes G6, G7, G14, G15, G20, and G24 were stable according to the ASV parameter, and genotypes G6 and G7 were stable based on the MASV parameter. Amongst the stable genotypes identified by the AMMI parameters, while genotype G6 was high-yielding, G14 and G24 (Agria) were moderate-yielding.

Keywords

• AMMI Parameters
• Potato Genotypes
• Stability
• Tuber Yield

References

1. Annicchiarico P (1997). Joint regression vs AMMI analysis of genotype × environment interactions for cereals in Italy. Euphytica 94: 53-62.
2. Byarugaba A A, Benon M, Tibanyedera D & Barekye A (2018). Genotype by environment interaction (GxE) as a measure of yield stability of dutch potato varieties in uganda. African Journal of. Agricultural Research 13(17): 890-896.
3. Crossa J, Gauch H G & Zobel R W (1990). Additive main effects and multiplicative interaction analysis of two international maiz cultivar trials. Crop Science 30: 493-500.
4. Crossa J, Fox P N, Pfeiffer W H, Rajaram S & Gauch H G (1991). AMMI adjustment for statistical analysis of an international wheat yield trial. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 81: 27-37.
5. Devaux A, Kromann P & Oriza O (2014). Potatoes for sustainable global food security. Potato Research 57: 185-199.
6. Fufa M (2013). Ammi analysis of tuber yield of potato genotypes grown in bale, southeastern ethiopia. Advances in Crop Science and Technology 2: 1-3.
7. Gauch H G (1988). Model selection and validation for yield trials with interaction. Biometrics 44: 705-715.
8. Gauch H G & Zobel R W (1988). Predictive and postdictive success of statistical analyses of yield trials. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 76: 1-10.

9. Hassanabadi H, Mosapor-Gorgi A, Hasanpanah D, Ahmadvand R, Parvizi KH, Kazemi M, Hajianfar R & Abdi H R (2013). Khavaran, a new potato cultivar with high yielding and quality. Research Achievements for Field and Horticulture Crops 2(1): 67-79.
10. Hassanpanah D, Hassanpanah D, Hassanabadi H, Hosseinzadeh A, Soheili B & Mohammadi R (2016). Factor Analysis, AMMI Stability Value (ASV) Parameter and GGE Bi-Plot Graphical Method of Quantitative and Qualitative Traits in Potato Genotypes. Journal of Crop Ecophysiology 10(3): 731-748.
11. Hassanpanah D, Hassanabadi H, Parvizi K, Kazemi M, Jalali A H, Mobser S, Kahbazi M, Hasani M, Mohammadi R & Khashmi M R (2018). Evaluation of quantitative and qualitative traits and stability of commercial cultivars and promising clonese of potato. Seed and Plant Improvment Journal 3: 455-474.
12. Kadhem F A & Baktash F Y (2016). Analysis of adaptability and yield stsbility of promising lines of bread wheat (Triticum aestavum L.). Iraqi Journal of Agricultural Science 47: 35-43.
13. Karimizadeh R, Mohammadi M, Sabaghnia N & Shefazadeh M K (2012). Using Huehn’s Nonparametric Stability Statistics to Investigate Genotype × Environment Interaction. Notulae Botanicae Horti Agrobotanici 40: 195-200.
14. Karimizadeh R, Asghari A, CHinipardaz R, Sofalian O & Ghaffari A (2016). Determining yield stability and model selection by ammi method in rain-fed durum wheat genotypes. Turkish Journal of Field Crops 21(2): 174-183.
15. Karimizadeh R, Asghari A, CHinipardaz R, Sofalian O, Ghaffari A, Shabazi K, Hosseinpour T, Ghojog H & Armion M (2019). Use of principal coordinate analysis for measuring GE nteractions in rain-fed durum wheat genotypes. Journal of Agricultural Science 25: 38-46.
16. Khomari A, Mostafavi KH & Mohammadi A (2016). Stability study of yield in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) cultivars using AMMI method. Journal of Crop Breeding 9(23): 117-124.Lin C S, Binns M R & Lefkoveitch L P (1986). Stability analysis: Where do we stand?. Crop Science 26: 894-900.
17. Mohebodini M, Dehghani H & Sabaghpour S H (2006). Stability of performance in lentil (Lens culinaris Medik.) genotypes in Iran. Euphytica 149: 343-352.
18. Omrani S, Naji A M & Esmaeil Zadeh Moghadam M (2018). Evaluation of yield stability of bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) genotypes using additive main effects and multiplicative Interaction (AMMI). Journal of Crop Breeding 10: 73-80.
19. Pourdad S S & Jamshid Moghaddam M (2013). Study on genotype×environment interaction through GGE Biplot for seed yield in spring rapeseed (Brassica Napus L.) in rain-fed condition. Journal of Crop Breeding 5(12): 1-14.
20. Purchase J L (1997). Parametric analysis to describe G × E interaction and yield stability in winter wheat. Ph.D. thesis. Dep. of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Univ. of the Orange Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa.
21. Raju B M K (2002). A study on AMMI model and its biplots. Journal of the Indian Society of Agricultural Statistics 55: 297‐322.
22. Sabaghnia N, Sabaghpour S H & Dehghani H (2008). The use of an AMMI model and its parameters to analyse yield stability in multi-environment trials. Indian Agricultural Science 146: 571-581.
23. Sabaghnia, N, Mohammadi M & Karimizadeh R (2013). Parameters of AMMI model for yield stability analysis in durum wheat. Agriculturae conspectus Scientificus 78: 119-124.
24. Safavi S M & Bahraminejad S (2017). The evaluation of genotype × environment interactions for grain yield of oat genotypes using AMMI model. Journal of Crop Breeding 9: 125-132.
25. Shafii B & Price W J (1998). Analysis of genotype-by-environment interaction using the additive main effecta and multiplicative interaction model and stability estimates. Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics 3: 335-345.
26. Sneller C H, Kilgore Norquest L & Dombek D (1997). Repeatability of yield stability statistics in soybean. Crop Science 37: 383–390.
27. Tarakanovas P & Ruzgas V (2006). Additive main effect and multiplication analysis of grain yield of wheat varieties in lithunia. Agricultural Research 4: 91-94.
28. Tollenaar M & Lee E A (2002). Yield potential, yield stability and stress tolerance in maize. Field Crop Research 75: 161-169.
29. Worku A, Mulugeta G, Berhun B, Abebe T, Giorgis G W, Chindie A & Kebede G (2018). Performance and yield stability analysis of potato genotypes in ethiopia. Advances in Crop Science and Technology 6(1): 1-8.
30. Zali H, Farshadfar E, Sabaghpour S H & Karimizadeh R (2012). Evaluation of genotype× environment interaction in chickpea using measures of stability from AMMI model. Annals of Biological Research 3(7): 3126-3136.
31. Zhang, Z., Lu, C., Xiang, Z.H., 1998. Stability analysis for varieties by ammi model. Acta Agronomica Sinica 24: 304-309.
32. Zobel R W (1994). Stress resistance and root systems. In: 1–4 Aug. 1993. Of the Workshop on Adaptation of Plants to Soil Stresses, INTSORMIL Publ. 94–2. Inst., Univ Nebraska, Lincoln, pp. 80–99.