Targeting Promising Bread Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) Lines for Cold Climate Growing Environments Using AMMI and SREG GGE Biplot Analyses

Authors
J. Ahmadi 1
A. Mohammadi 2
T. Najafi Mirak 3
1 Department of Genetic and Plant Breeding, International University of Imam Khomeini, Qazvin, Islamic Republic of Iran.
2 Islami Azad University of Karaj
3 Seed and Plant Improvement Institute, Karaj, Islamic Republic of Iran.
Abstract
Genotype×environment interactions (GEIs) can affect breeding programs because they often complicate the evaluation and selection of superior genotypes. This drawback can be reduced by gaining insights into GEI processes and genotype adaptation. The objectives of this research were to evaluate: (1) the yield stability of promising wheat lines across locations and (2) the relationship among the test environments for selecting superior lines within the cold climate mega-environments of Iran. A total of 35 wheat promising lines were grown at 7 locations during the 2008-2009 cropping season. Combined analysis of variance showed that the environment (E) accounted for 75.7% of the model sum of squares. The magnitude of the GEI sum of squares was about three times larger than that for genotypes. To determine the effects of GEI on yields, the data were subjected to the additive main effects and multiplicative interaction (AMMI) and genotype+(genotype×environment) interaction (GGE) biplot analysis. The AMMI1 model was found to explain up to 88% of the main and interaction effects. According to the AMMI1 and GGE biplots, the lines G5 and G4 were found to produce high and stable yields across environments. There were three mega-environments (Euromieh and Ardebil as mega-environment I, Mashhad, Arak, Hamedan and Jolgerokh as mega-environment II, and Karaj as mega-environment III) according to the site regression genotype (SREG) GGE model. Application of AMMI and GGE biplots facilitated visual comparison and identification of superior genotypes for each target set of environments.

Keywords

1. Admassu, S., Nigussie, M. and Zelleke, H. 2008. Genotype-environment Interaction and Stability Analysis for Grain Yield of Maize (Zea mays L.) in Ethiopia. Asian J. Plant Sci., 7: 163-169.
2. Akcura, M., Kaya, Y. and Taner, S. 2005. Genotype-environment Interaction and Phenotypic Stability Analysis for Grain Yield of Durum Wheat in the Central Anatolian Region. Turk. J. Agr. Fores., 29: 369-375.
3. Asrat, A., Fistum, A., Fekadu, G. and Mulugeta, A. 2009. AMMI and SREG GGE Biplot Analysis for Matching Varieties onto Soybean Production Environments in Ethiopia. Sci. Res. Essay, 4(11): 1322-1330.
4. Ceccarelli, S. 1996. Positive Interpretation of Genotype by Environment Interaction in Relation to Sustainability and Biodiversity. In: "Plant Adaptation and Crop Improvement", (Eds.): Cooper, M. and Hammer, G. L.. CABI, Wallingford, UK, PP. 467-486.
5. Cooper, M. and Hammer, G. L. 1996. Plant Adaptation and Crop Improvement. CAB International, Wallingford, UK, P. 650.
6. Crossa, J., Cornelius, P. L. and Yan, W. 2002. Biplots of Linear-bilinear Models for Studying Crossover Genotype×Environment Interaction. Crop Sci., 42: 619–633.
7. Dehghani, H., Ebadi, A. and Yousefi, A. 2006. Biplot Analysis of Genotype by Environment Interaction for Barley Yield in Iran. Agron. J., 98: 388–393.
8. DeLacy, I. H., Basford, K. E., Cooper, M., Bull, J. K. and McLaren, C. G. 1996. Analysis of Multi-Environmental Trials, a Historical Perspective. In: "Plant Adaptation and Crop Improvement", (Eds.): Cooper, M. and Hammer, G. L.. CABI, Wallingford, UK, PP. 39-124.
9. Ebdon, J. S. and Gauch, H. G. 2002. Additive Main Effect and Multiplicative Interaction Analysis of National Turfgrass Performance Trials. I. Interpretation of Genotype×Environment Interaction. Crop Sci., 42: 489–496.
10. Fan, X. M., Kang, M. S., Chen, H., Zhang, Y., Tan, J. and Xu, C. 2007. Yield Stability of Maize Hybrids Evaluated in Multi-environment Trials in Yunnan, China. Agron. J., 99: 220-228.
11. Gauch, H. G. 2006. Statistical Analysis of Yield Trials by AMMI and GGE. Crop Sci., 46: 1488-1500.
12. Gauch, G. H. and Zobel, R. W. 1997. Interpreting Mega-environments and Targeting Genotypes. Crop Sci., 37: 311-326.
13. Gauch, H. G., Piepho, H. P. and Annicchiarico, P. 2008. Statistical Analysis of Yield Trials by AMMI And GGE: Further Considerations. Crop Sci., 48: 866-889.
14. Hernandez, M. V. and Crossa, J. 2000. The AMMI Analysis and Graphing the Biplot. Crop Sci., 40: 597–605.
15. Kang, M. S. 1990. Genotype-by-environment Interaction and Plant Breeding. Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA.
16. Kang, M. S., Aggarwal, V. D. and Chirwa, R. M. 2006. Adaptability and Stability of Bean Cultivars as Determined via Yield-stability Statistic and GGE Biplot Analysis. J. Crop Improv., 15: 97–120.
17. Kang, M. S. and Gauch, H. G. 1996. Genotype-by-environment Interaction. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, P. 416.
18. Kaya, Y., Akcura, M. and Taner, S. 2006. GGE-biplot Analysis of Multi-environment Yield Trials in Bread Wheat. Turkish Journal Agriculture Foresty, 30: 325–337.
19. Kaya, Y., Taner, S. and Ceri, S. 2003. Nonparametric Stability Analysis of Yield Performances in Oats (Avena Sativa L.) Genotypes across Environments. Asian J. Plant Sci., 2: 286-289.
20. Mohammadi, R., Abdulahi, A., Haghparast, R. and Armioon, M. 2007. Interpreting Genotype×Environment Interactions for Durum Wheat Grain Yields Using Nonparametric Methods. Euphytica, 157: 239-251.
21. Morris, C. F., Campbell, K. G. and King, G. E. 2004. Characterization of the End-Use Quality of Soft Wheat Cultivars from the Eastern and Western US Germplasm Pools. Plant Genet. Resour., 2: 59-69.
22. Sabaghnia, N., Dehghani, H. and Sabaghpour, S. H. 2006. Nonparametric Methods for Interpreting Genotype×Environment Interaction of Lentil Genotypes. Crop Sci., 46: 1100-1106.
23. Sabaghnia, N., Dehghani, H. and Sabaghpour, S. H. 2008. Graphic Analysis of Genotype by Environment Interaction for Lentil Yield in Iran. Agron. J., 100: 760-764.
24. Samonte, S. O. B., Wilson, T., McClung, A. M. and Medley, J. C. 2005. Targeting Cultivars onto Rice Growing Environments Using AMMI And SREG GGE Biplot Analyses. Crop Sci., 45: 2414-2424.
25. SAS Institute. 1996. SAS User’s Guide. Version 6, 4th Edition,. SAS Inst. Cary, NC.
26. Setimela, P. S., Vivek, B., Banziger, M., Crossa, J. and Maideni, F. 2007. Evaluation of Early to Medium Maturing Open Pollinated Maize Varieties in SADC Region Using GGE Biplot Based on the SREG Model. Field Crops Res., 103: 161-169.
27. Voltas, J., van Eeuwijk, F. A., Igartua, E., Garcia del Moral, L. F., Molina-Cano, J.L. and Romagosa I. 2002. Genotype by Environment Interaction and Adaptation in Barley Breeding: Basic Concepts and Methods of Analysis. In: "Barley Science: Recent Advances from Molecular Biology to Agronomy of Yield and Quality", (Eds.): Slafer, G. A., Molina-Cano, J. L., Savin, R., Araus, J. L., Romagosa, I.. Food Product Press, New York, PP. 205-241.
28. Yan, W. 1999. A Study of the Methodology of Cultivar Evaluation Based on Yield Trial Data with Special Reference to Winter Wheat in Ontario. PhD. Thesis, University of Guelph, Guelph.
29. Yan, W. 2001. GGE Biplot: A Windows Application for Graphical Analysis of Multienvironment Trial Data and Other Types of Two-Way Data. Agron. J., 93: 1111-1118.
30. Yan, W. 2002. Singular Value Partitioning in Biplot Analysis of Multievironment Trial Data. Agron. J., 94: 990-996.
31. Yan, W. and Wallace, D. H. 1996. Breeding for Negatively Associated Traits. Plant Breed. Rev., 13: 141-177.
32. Yan, W., Cornelius, P. L., Crossa, J. and Hunt, L. A. 2001. Two Types of GGE Biplots for Analyzing Multi-environment Trial Data. Crop Sci., 41: 656-663.
33. Yan, W., Hunt, L. A., Sheng, Q. and Szlavnics, Z. 2000. Cultivar Evaluation and Mega-environment Investigation Based on the GGE Biplot. Crop Sci., 40: 597-605.
34. Yan, W. and Hunt, L.A. 2002. Biplot Analysis of Multi-Environment Trial Data. In: "Quantitative Genetics, Genomics, and Plant Breeding", (Ed.): Kang, M. S.. CABI Publishing, New York, PP. 289–303.
35. Yan, W. and Kang, M. S. 2003. GGE Biplot Analysis: A Graphical Tool for Breeders, Geneticists, and Agronomists. CRC Press. Boca Raton, FL, P.288.
36. Yan, W., Kang, M. S., Ma, B., Woods, S. and Cornelius, P. L. 2007. GGE Biplot Vs. AMMI Analysis of Genotype-by-environment Data. Crop Sci., 47: 643-655.
37. Yan, W. and Rajcan, I. 2002. Biplot Evaluation of Test Sites and Trait Relations of Soybean in Ontario. Crop Sci., 42: 11-20.
38. Yan, W. and Tinker, N. 2005. An Intergraded Analysis System for Displaying, Interpreting, and Exploring Genotype×Environment Interaction. Crop Sci., 45: 1004-1016.
Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology
Volume 14, Issue 3
May and June 2012
Pages 645-657