Agricultural Science Digest

  • Chief EditorArvind kumar

  • Print ISSN 0253-150X

  • Online ISSN 0976-0547

  • NAAS Rating 5.52

  • SJR 0.156

Frequency :
Bi-monthly (February, April, June, August, October and December)
Indexing Services :
BIOSIS Preview, Biological Abstracts, Elsevier (Scopus and Embase), AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Submit

Research Article

Agricultural Science Digest, volume 36 issue 3 (september 2016) : 191-196

GxE evaluation of salinity tolerant barley genotypes by AMMI model

R.P.S. Verma1, A.S. Kharab, Vishnu Kumar, Ajay Verma*
1<p>Indian Institute of Wheat and Barley Research,&nbsp;Karnal-132 001, India.</p>
Cite article:- Verma1 R.P.S., Kharab A.S., Kumar Vishnu, Verma* Ajay (2016). GxE evaluation of salinity tolerant barley genotypes by AMMI model . Agricultural Science Digest. 36(3): 191-196. doi: 10.18805/asd.v36i3.11444.

ABSTRACT

The highly significant variances due to interaction, environments and genotypes were observed by AMMI analysis of salinity tolerant barley genotypes under multi location trials. The genotypes G6 and G13 with negative IPCA1 values showed positive IPCA2, IPCA3, IPCA4 values. Genotype G1 showed lowest value of D with smallest negative IPCA1 score (-0.013). Genotype G18 followed by G8, G1 and G5 were the stable performer based on ASV. Yield stability index advocated G8 followed by G5, G10, G4 and G12. The results of MASV indicated that genotypes G5, G1, G15, G17, G9 and G19 were stable, whereas genotypes G5, G9, G8 and G11 were the stable genotypes with relatively more average yield. Overall mean ranks of all of the AMMI estimates, genotypes G5, G1 and G8 were the most stable genotypes followed by genotypes G17 and G18.

REFERENCES


  1. Abdipur M and Vaezi B (2014). Analysis of the genotype-by-environment interaction of winter barley tested in the Rain-    fed Regions of Iran by AMMI Adjustment. Bulgarian Journal of Agricultural Science. 20: 421-427.

  2. Adugna W and Labuschagne MT (2002). Genotype, environment interactions and phenotypic stability analyses of linseed in Ethiopia. Plant Breed. 121: 66–71. 

  3. Anonymous (2014). Progress report of All India coordinated wheat and barley improvement Project 2013-14. Vol. VI. Barley Network. Directorate of Wheat Research, Karnal, India.

  4. Bavandpori F, Ahmadi J and Hossaini S (2015).Yield Stability Analysis of Bread Wheat Lines using AMMI Model. Agricultural Communications. 3: 8-15.

  5. Bose LK, Jambhulkar NN, Pande K and Singh ON (2014). Use of AMMI and other stability statistics in the simultaneous selection of rice genotypes for yield and stability under direct-seeded conditions. Chilean Journal of Agricultural Research. 74:3-9.

  6. Dehghani, H., Sabaghpour SH and Ebadi A (2010). Study of genotype × environment interaction for chickpea yield in Iran. Agron. J. 102: 1–8. 

  7. Farshadfar E, Mahmodi N and Yaghotipoor A (2011). AMMI stability value and simultaneous estimation of yield and yield stability in bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Australian Journal of Crop Science. 5: 1837-1844.

  8. Gauch HG (2006). Statistical analysis of yield trials by AMMI and GGE. Crop Sci. 46: 1488–1500.

  9. Kandus M, Almorza D, Boggio Ronceros R and Salerno JC (2010). Statistical methods for evaluating the genotype- environment interaction in maize (Zea mays L.). Phy.Yld. 39-46.

  10. Kharub AS, Verma R P S, Kumar D, Kumar V, Selvakumar R and Sharma I (2013). Dual purpose barley (Hordeum vulgare L) in India: Performance and potential. J Wheat Res 5: 55-58.

  11. Kumar V, Khippal A, Singh J, Selvakumar R, Malik R, Kumar D, Kharub AS, Verma RPS and Sharma I (2014). Barley research in India: Retrospect & prospects. J. Wheat Res. 6:1-20.

  12. Mohammadi M, Jafarby JA, Khanzadeh H, Hosseinpur T, Mohammad MP, Roustaii M Hosni MH and Mohammadi P (2015). Stability of grain yield of durum wheat genotypes by AMMI model. Agriculture & Forestry, Podgorica. 61: 181-193.

  13. Mohammadi R, Roostaei M, Ansari Aghaee M and Amri M (2010). Relationships of phenotypic stability measures for genotypes of three cereal crops. Can. J. Plant Sci. 90: 819-830.

  14. Mortazavian SMM, Nikkhah HR, Hassani FA, Sharif-al-Hosseini M, Taheri M and Mahlooji M (2014). GGE biplot and AMMI analysis of yield performance of barley genotypes across different environments in Iran Jour. Agr. Sci. Tech. 16: 609-622.

  15. Purchase JL, Hatting H and Vandeventer CS (2000). Genotype × environment interaction of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in South Africa: Stability analysis of yield performance. South African Journal of Plant and Soil. 17: 101-107.

  16. Sabaghnia N, Sabaghpour SH and Dehghani H (2008). The use of an AMMI model and its parameters to analyse yield stability in multi-environment trials. J. Agric. Sci. 146: 571-581.

  17. Sabaghnia N, Mohammadi M and Karimizadeh R (2012). The evaluation of Genotype × environment interaction of durum wheat’s yield using of the AMMI model. Agriculture and Forestry 55: 5-21.

  18. Silveira LCI, Kist V, Paula TOM, Barbosa MHP, Peternelli LA, Daros E (2013). AMMI analysis to evaluate the adaptability and phenotypic stability of sugarcane genotypes. Scientia Agricola. 70: 27-32.

  19. Verma RPS, Kharub AS, Kumar D, Sarkar B, Selvakumar R, Singh R, Malik R, Kumar R and Sharma I(2011). Fifty years of coordinated barley research in India. Directorate of Wheat Research, Karnal-132001. Research Bulletin No. 27: 46.

  20. VSN International (2014). GenStat for Windows 17th Edition. VSN International, Hemel Hempstead, UK.

  21. Zhang Z, Lu C and Xiang ZH (1998). Analysis of variety stability based on AMMI model. Acta Agron. Sin. 24: 304-309.
Reviewed By

Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    Editorial Board

    View all (0)