The use of corrected and uncorrected nonparametric stability measurements in durum wheat multi-environmental trials
Abstract
This study was done to evaluate yield stability of 20 improved durum wheat genotypes (G1 to G20). Tests were done in a randomized complete block design with 4 replications for 3 years at 5 sites in multi-environment trials. Data were analyzed with the five nonparametric stability measurements of Thennarasu (NP) according to ranks of corrected and uncorrected procedures. Results for the combined analysis of variance for environment (E), genotype (G) and GE interaction was significant, suggesting different responses of the various genotypes in the study and the requirement of yield stability analysis. In this study, low values determined by uncorrected NPs (UNP2, UNP3, and UNP4) were associated with high mean yield, but other nonparametric stability measurements were not positively correlated with mean yield and were thus characterized as having a static concept of stability. Although, according to both corrected and uncorrected stability parameters, genotypes G7, G8, G13 and G14 were stable but only G7 flowing to G8 had high mean yields. Results of the factor analysis, Spearman's rank correlation and the bootstrap resampling procedure of the nonparametric stability measurements and mean yield indicated that using ranks of uncorrected data would be useful for simultaneous selection for both mean high yield and stability. In conclusion, according to results of these different nonparametric stability measurements, genotype G7 is recommended for commercial release as a favorable durum wheat genotype for the environmental conditions in Iran.Downloads
References
Acikgoz E, Ustun A, Gul I, Anlarsal E, Tekeli AS, Nizam I, Avcioglu R, Geren H, Cakmakci S, Aydinoglu B et al., 2009. Genotype environment interaction and stability analysis for dry matter and seed yield in field pea (Pisum sativum L.). Span J Agric Res 7: 96106.
Baker RJ, 1990. Crossover genotypeenvironmental interaction in spring wheat. In: Genotype-by-environment interaction and plant breeding (Kang MS, ed). Louisiana Agr Cent, Baton Rouge, LA (USA), pp: 4251.
Berteroa HD, De La Vegab AJ, Correaa G, Jacobsenc SE, Mujica A, 2004. Genotype and genotype-by-environment interaction effects for grain yield and grain size of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) as revealed by pattern analysis of international multi-environment trials. Field Crops Res 89: 299318.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2004.02.006
Bredenkamp J, 1974. Nonparametriche prufung von wechsewirkungen. Psycho Beitr 16: 398416.
De Kroon J, Van Der Laan P, 1981. Distribution-free test procedures in two-way layouts: a concept of rank-interaction. Statist Neerl 35: 189213.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9574.1981.tb00730.x
Dehghani H, Sabaghpour SH, Sabaghnia N, 2008. Genotype environment interaction for grain yield of some lentil genotypes and relationship among univariate stability statistics. Span J Agric Res 6: 385394.
Ebadi-Segherloo A, Sabaghpour SH, Dehghani H, Kamrani M, 2008. Nonparametric measures of phenotypic stability in chickpea genotypes (Cicer arietinum L.). Euphytica 162: 221229.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10681-007-9552-x
FAO, 1998. World reference base for soil resources. World Soil Resources Reports 84. FAO, Rome. 88 pp.
Flores F, Moreno MT, Cubero JI, 1998. A comparison of univariate and multivariate methods to analyze environments. Field Crops Res 56: 271286.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4290(97)00095-6
Fox PN, Skovmand B, Thompson BK, Braun HJ Cormier R, 1990. Yield and adaptation of hexaploid spring triticale. Euphytica 47: 5764.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00040364
Hadjichristodoulou A, 1987. The effects of optimum heading date and its stability on yield and consistency of performance of barley and durum wheat in dry areas. J Agric Sci 108: 599608.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S002185960008000X
Hildebrand H, 1980. Asymptotosch verteilungsfreie rangtests in linearen modellen. Med Inform Stat 17: 344349.
Huehn M, 1979. Beitrage zur erfassung der phanotypischen stabilitat. EDV Med Bio 10: 112117.
Huehn M, 1990a. Nonparametric measures of phenotypic stability: Part 1. Theory. Euphytica 47: 189194.
Huehn M, 1990b. Nonparametric measures of phenotypic stability: Part 2. Application. Euphytica 47: 195201.
Huehn M, Leon J, 1985. Phenotypic yield stability depending on plant density and on mean yield per plant of winter rapeseed varieties and of their F1 and F2generations. J Agron Crop Sci 162: 172179.
Huehn M, Leon J, 1995. Non-parametric analysis of cultivar performance trials: Experimental results and comparison of different procedures based on ranks. Agron J 87: 627632.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/agronj1995.00021962008700040004x
Kang MS, 1988. A ranksum method for selecting high yielding, stable corn genotypes. Cereal Res Commu 16: 113115.
Kubinger KD, 1986. A note on non-parametric tests for the interaction on two-way layouts. Biomet J 28: 6772.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bimj.4710280113
Mathsoft, 1999. S-Plus 2000. Guide to Statistics, Volume 1. Data Analysis Products Division, Math-Soft Institute Seattle, WA, USA. 444 pp.
Mekbib F, 2002. Simultaneous selection for high yield and stability in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) genotypes. J Agric Sci 138: 249253.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0021859602001946
Piepho HP, Lotito S, 1992. Rank correlation among parametric and nonparametric measures of phenotypic stability. Euphytica 64: 221225.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00046052
Raiger HL, Prabhakaran VT, 2000. A statistical comparison between non-parametric and parametric stability measures. Indian J Genet 60: 417432.
Raiger HL, Prabhakaran VT, 2001. A study on the performance of a few non-parametric stability measures using pearl-millet data. Indian J Genet 61: 711.
Rao AR, Prabhakaran VT, 2000. On some useful interrelationships among common stability parameters. Indian J Genet 60: 2536.
Sabaghnia N, Dehghani H, Sbaghpour SH, 2006. Nonparametric methods for interpreting genotype environment interaction of lentil genotypes. Crop Sci 46: 11001106.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2005.06-0122
Sabaghnia N, Sbaghpour SH, Dehghani H, 2008. The use of an AMMI model and its parameters to analyse yield stability in multi-environment trials. J Agric Sci 146: 571581.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0021859608007831
SPSS Inc, 2004. SPSS 14. SPSS Users guide. SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL. USA. 324 pp.
Steel RGD, Torrie JH, 1980. Principles and procedures of statistics. McGraw Hill Book Company, NY. USA. 437 pp.
Thennarasu K, 1995. On certain nonparametric procedures for studying genotype environment interactions and yield stability. PhD thesis. P.J. School, IARI, New Delhi, India.
Truberg B, Huehn M, 2000. Contribution to the analysis of genotype by environment interactions: comparison of different parametric and nonparametric tests for interactions with emphasis on crossover interactions. J Agron Crop Sci 185: 267274.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1439-037x.2000.00437.x
Yan W, Kang MS, 2003. GGE biplot analysis: A graphical tool for breeders, geneticists, and agronomists. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA. 286 pp.
Yue GL, Roozeboom, KL, Schapaugh WT, Liang GH, 1997. Evaluation of soybean cultivars using parametric and nonparametric stability estimates. Plant Breed 116: 271275.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0523.1997.tb00995.x
© CSIC. Manuscripts published in both the print and online versions of this journal are the property of the Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, and quoting this source is a requirement for any partial or full reproduction.
All contents of this electronic edition, except where otherwise noted, are distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence. You may read the basic information and the legal text of the licence. The indication of the CC BY 4.0 licence must be expressly stated in this way when necessary.
Self-archiving in repositories, personal webpages or similar, of any version other than the final version of the work produced by the publisher, is not allowed.
