Journals / Turkish Journal Of Field Crops / 2011 / Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 1

Ammi-biplot analysis of yield performances of bread wheat cultivars grown at different locations

Pages
64–68
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It could be concluded that the Basribey 95 had the highest yield performance and also the stable genotype in the test locations. Đzmir 85 and Ziyabey 98 were poorly stable although they showed high yield performances in some of test environments.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The purpose of the study was to determine the stability and yield performances of 20 bread wheat cultivars grown in nine different environments.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Additive main effects and multiplicative interactions analysis (AMMI-biplot) indicated that the yield performances of bread wheat cultivars were highly affected by the major environmental factors.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It could be concluded that the Basribey 95 had the highest yield performance and also the stable genotype in the test locations. Đzmir 85 and Ziyabey 98 were poorly stable although they showed high yield performances in some of test environments.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to determine the stability and yield performances of 20 bread wheat cultivars grown in nine different environments. The trials were arranged in a Randomized Complete Block Design with four replications. Additive main effects and multiplicative interactions analysis (AMMI-biplot) indicated that the yield performances of bread wheat cultivars were highly affected by the major environmental factors. The first two principal component axes (PCA 1 and PCA 2) were significant and they explained 60.9 % of the total genotype x environment interaction. A biplot generated using genotypic and environmental scores of the first two AMMI components demonstrated that cultivars with larger PCA 1 and lower PCA 2 scores were high yielding and stable cultivars and cultivars with lower PCA 1 and larger PCA 2 scores were low yielding and unstable cultivars in tested locations. It could be concluded that the Basribey 95 had the highest yield performance and also the stable genotype in the test locations. Đzmir 85 and Ziyabey 98 were poorly stable although they showed high yield performances in some of test environments. Momtchill had the lowest yield performance in all test locations. It was detected that Menemen location could be the most representative among the tested locations to determine the stability of bread wheat cultivars to recommend the farmers in the Western Coastal Zones in the Aegean Region under Mediterranean climatical conditions of Turkey.

🔖

Cite This Article

İLKER, E., TOSUN, M., GEREN, H., ÜNSAL, R., TONK, A. F., SEVİM, İ. (2022). Ammi-biplot analysis of yield performances of bread wheat cultivars grown at different locations. Turkish Journal Of Field Crops, Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 1, 64–68. https://ajindex.com/articles/605897

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Addinsoft, 2010.
  2. XLSTAT, Data analysis and statistics software for Microsoft Excel, http://www.xlstat.com.
  3. Paris, France. Akcura, M., Y. Kaya, S. Taner, 2009. Evaluation of durum wheat genotypes using parametric and nonparametric stability statistics. Turkish J. of Field Crops, 14(2): 111 – 122. Akcura, M., S. Taner, Y. Kaya, 2011. Evaluation of bread wheat genotypes under irrigated multi-environment conditions using GGE biplot analyses. Žemdirbyst=Agriculture, 98(1): 35 – 40. Alberts, M.J.A., 2004. A comparison of statistical methods to describe genotype x environment interaction and yield stability in multi-location maize trials. MSc Thesis, University of Free State, South Africa, 96p. Annicchiarico, P., 1997. Joint regression vs. AMMI analysis of genotype-environment interactions for cereals in Italy. Euphytica 94:53-62.
  4. Bayram, M.E., L. Demir, 2009. Yield stability of some bread wheat (Triticum Aestivum L.) cultivars grown in Marmara ecology, (In Turkish language with english abstract). Uludag Univ. Zir. Fak. Derg. 23 (1):1-12.
  5. Gauch, H.G. and R.W. Zobel, 1996. AMMI analysis of yield trials. In Genotype-by-environment Interaction (Kang, M.S. and H.G. Gauch, eds.), CRC Press,
  6. Boca Raton, FL, p:85-122.
  7. Hill J, H.C., Becker, P.M.A. Tigerstedt, 1998. Quantitative and ecological aspects of plant breeding. Chapman & Hall, London, 269p. Ilker, E., F.A. Tonk, O. Caylak, M. Tosun, I. Ozmen, 2009. Assessment of Genotype x Environment interactions for grain yield in maize hybrids using AMMI and GGE biplot analyses. Turkish J. of Field Crops, 14(2): 123 – 135. Kaya, Y., C. Patla and S. Taner, 2002. Additive main effects and multiplicative interactions analysis of yield performance in bread wheat genotypes a cross environments. Turk. J. Agric. For., 26:275-279.
  8. Nachit, M.N., M.E. Sorrells, R.W. Zobel, H.G. Gauch, R.A. Fischer and W.R. Coffman, 1992. Association of environmental variables with sites’mean grain yield and components of genotype-environment interaction in durum wheat. J. Genet. Breed. 46:369-372.
  9. Solomon, A., M. Nigussie and H. Zelleke, 2008. Genotypeenvironment interaction and stability analysis for grain yield of maize (Zea mays L.) in Ethiopia. Asian J. of Plant Sci. 7 (2):163-169.
  10. Yau, S.K., 1995. Regression and AMMI analyses of genotype x environment interactions: An empirical comparison. Agron. J. 87: 121-126.
  11. Yildirim, M.B., N. Budak, C. Caliskan, O. Caylak, 1999. Investigation of Genotype X Planting Time Interaction by Using AMMI Statistical M