EVALUATION OF GENOTYPE BY ENVIRONMENT INTERACTION FOR GRAIN YIELD IN DURUM WHEAT USING NON-PARAMETRIC STABILITY STATISTICS

Yıl 2016, , 51 - 59, 01.06.2016

Yuksel Kaya Musa Turkoz

https://doi.org/10.17557/tjfc.48198

Cited By: 8

Öz

If genotype (G) ranks change from one environment (E) to another, genotype by environment interactions
(GEI) reflects the need for testing Gs in numerous Es in order to obtain reliable results. The aim of this study
was to compare 16 non-parametric stability statistics (NPSSs) for GEI on grain yields of 15 durum wheat
genotypes, consisting of 11 advanced lines selected from Turkish National Durum Wheat Breeding Program
(TNDWBP) and four checks, tested in 12 rain-fed environments during the 2 cropping seasons (2009–2010 and
2010-2011) in Turkey. The combined ANOVA indicated that G, E and GEI effects were significant for grain
yield. According to analyses of NPSSs, the highest in ranking (TOP), percentage of adaptability (PA), rank
mean (RM) and yield-stability (YS) statistics were positively associated with grain yield and therefore
characterized under the dynamic concept of stability. In addition, spearman rank correlation analysis revealed
that only TOP, PA, RM and YS statistics would be useful for simultaneous selection for high grain yield and
stability. Based on the 16 NPSSs used in this study, Dumlupinar cultivar (G15) was both the most stable and
one of the highest yielding ones. On the other hand, G5 and G7 were the most stable ones among the advanced
lines tested, but their yield performances were lower. As a result, this study showed that the crossing block of
TNDWBP should be enriched by germplasm being capable of dynamic stability, wide adaptation and higher
yielding.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Durum Wheat (T. durum L.), Grain Yield, Genotype by Environment Interaction, Non-parametric Stability Statistics

Kaynakça

• Akcura, M., Y. Kaya and S. Taner. 2009. Evaluation of durum wheat genotypes using parametric and nonparametric stability statistics. Turk. J. Field Crops, 14(2): 111-122.
• Becker, H.C. 1981. Correlations among some statistical measures of phenotypic stability. Euphytica, 30: 835-840. Becker, H.C. and J. Leon. 1988. Stability analysis in plant breeding. Plant Breed. 101: 1-23.
• Duarte, B.J. and M.J.O. Zimmermann. 1995. Correlation among yield stability parameters in common bean. Crop Sci. 35: 905-912.
• Ebdon, J.S. and H.G. Gauch. 2002. Additive main effects and multiplicative interaction analysis of National Turfgrass performance trials: II. Genotype recommendation. Crop Sci. 42: 497-506.
• Flores, E., M.T. Moreno and J.I. Cubero. 1998. A comparison of univariate and multivariate methods to analyze environments. Field Crop Res. 56: 271-286.
• Fox, P.N., B. Skovmand, B.K. Thompson, H.J. Braun and R. Cormier. 1990. Yield and adaptation of hexaploid spring triticale. Euphytica, 47: 57-64.
• Habash, D.Z., Z. Kehel and M. Nachit. 2009. Genomic approaches for designing durum wheat ready for climate change with a focus on drought. J Exp Bot 60(10): 2805- 2815.
• Huehn, M. 1979. Beitrage zur Erfassung der phanotypischen Stabilitat. EDV Med. Biol 10:112-117.
• Huehn, M. 1990. Nonparametric measures of phenotypic stability: I. Theory. Euphytica, 47: 189-194.
• Huehn, M. 1996. Non-parametric analysis of genotype x environment interactions by ranks. In: Genotype by Environment Interaction, ed. Kang, M.S. and Gauch J.H.G., 235-271, CRC. FL.
• Hussein, M.A., A. Bjornstad and A.H. Aastveit. 2000. SASG x ESTAB: A SAS program for computing genotype x environment stability statistics. Agron J 92: 454-459.
• Kang, M.S. 2002. Genotype-Environment Interaction: Progress and Prospects. In: Quantitative genetics, genomics and plant breeding. ed. Kang, M.S. 221-243. CAB.
• Kang, S.M. and R. Magari. 1995. STABLE: A BASIC program for calculating stability and yield-stability statistics. Agron J 87: 276-277.
• Ketata, H. 1988. Genotype x environment interaction. Proceeding of the workshop on biometrical techniques for cereal breeders. 16-32, ICARDA, Aleppo, Syria.
• Langer, S., K.J. Frey and T. Baily. 1979. Association of different stability models in wheat. Euphytica, 28: 17-24.
• Lipkovich, I.A. and E.P. Smith. 2002. Biplot and Singular Value Decomposition Macros for Excel©. J Stat Softw 7(5):1-15.
• Lu, H.S. 1995. PC-SAS Program for estimating Huhn’s nonparametric stability statistics. Agron J 87: 888-891.
• Mohammadi, R., A. Abdulahi, R. Haghparast and M. Armion. 2007. Interpreting genotype x environment interactions for durum wheat grain yields using non-parametric methods. Euphytica, 157: 239-251.
• Mohammadi, M., R. Karimizadeh, N. Sabaghnia and M. K. Shefazadeh. 2012. Genotype × environment interaction and yield stability analysis of new improved bread wheat genotypes. Turk J Field Crops, 17 (1): 67-73.
• Mohammadi, R. and A. Ahmed. 2013. Genotype x environment interaction and genetic improvement for yield and yield stability of rain-fed durum wheat in Iran. Euphytica, 192: 227-249.
• Nassar, R. and M. Huehn. 1987. Studies on estimation of phenotypic stability: tests of significance for nonparametric non-parametric measures of phenotypic stability. Biometrics, 43: 45-53.
• Nesbitt, M. And D. Samuel. 1996. From staple crop to extinction? The archaeology and history of hulled wheat. In: Hulled Wheats. ed. Padulosi, S., K. Hammer and J. Heller. 40-99. IPGRI.
• Royo, C., M.E. Elias and F.A. Manthey. 2009. Durum Wheat Breeding. In: Cereals. ed. Carena, M.J. 199-226. Springer.
• Sabaghnia, N., H. Dehghani and S.H. Sabaghpour. 2006. Nonparametric methods for interpreting genotype x environment interaction of Lentil genotypes. Crop Sci. 46: 1100-1106.
• Scapim, C.A., V.R. Oliveira, A.L. Braccinil, C.D. Cruz, C.A.B. Andrade and M.C.G. Vidigal. 2000. Yield stability in maize (Zea mays L.) and correlations among the parameters of the Eberhart and Russell, Lin and Binns and Huehn models. Genet Mol Biol 23: 387-393.
• Segherloo, A.E., S.H. Sabaghpour, H. Dehghani and M. Kamrani. 2008. Non-parametric measures of phenotypic stability in chickpea genotypes (Cicer arietinum L.). Euphytica, 162: 221-229.
• Shukla, G.K. 1972. Some aspects of partitioning genotypeenvironmental components of variability. Heredity, 28: 237-245.
• St-Pierre, C.A., H.R. Klinck and F.M. Gauthier. 1967. Early generation selection under different environments as it influences adaptation of barley. Can J Plant Sci. 47: 507-517.
• Thennarasu, K. 1995. On certain non-parametric procedures for studying genotype-environment interactions and yield stability. PJ School, IARI, New Delhi, India. PhD Diss.
• Yan, W. and M.S. Kang. 2003. GGE biplot analysis: a graphical tool for breeders, geneticists, and agronomists. CRC Press, Boca Raton.
• Yildirim, A., O.A. Sonmezoglu, A. Sayaslan, M. Koyuncu, T. Gulec and N. Kandemir. 2013. Marker-assisted breeding of a durum wheat cultivar for γ-gliadin and LMW-glutenin proteins affecting pasta quality. Turk J Agric For 37: 527- 533.
• Yong-jian, L., D. Chuan, T. Meng-liang, H. Er-liang and H. Yubi. 2010. Yield stability of maize hybrids evaluated in maize regional trials in southwestern China using nonparametric methods. Agric Sci China 9 (10): 1413-1422