Combined analysis of variance
Combined analysis of variance of 10 Jack bean genotypes tested for grain yield across four seasons indicated that Jack bean grain yield was significantly (p<0.01) affected by environments and genotypes × environment interactions (Table 1) indicating the presence of considerable interaction of genotypes with the environments for the trait under study. The 76.0% total sum of squares was ascribed to genotype effects followed by only a small portion of (3.0%) the total sum of squares was attributed to environment effects. The 13.9% of the total sum of squares was ascribed by environmental fluctuations exhibiting that the environments were diverse causing most of the variation in yield. As genotypes, environments and genotypes × environment interactions were significant, it was proceeded to calculate AMMI and GGE stability analysis.
Asfaw et al., (2012) and
Baraki et al., (2020) also reported significant GEI in grain yield of mungbean and cowpea genotypes evaluated in different environments.
Yield of jack bean genotypes in different environments
Due to the existence of significant GEI, the grain yield of the genotypes varied from environment to environment in the growing locations. The highest mean yield (Table 2) was obtained from PSR-12202 (1,623.3 g/ plant) and the lowest mean yield was obtained from CHMJB-02 (277.1 g/ plant) and this variation might be due to the genetic potential of the genotypes. Regarding the mean of the genotypes across the environments, the highest grain yield (2316.7 g/plant) was obtained from PSR-12202 in E3 (
Kharif, 2019 growing season) and the lowest grain yield (225.00 g /plant) was recorded from CHMJB-02 in E4 (grown in
Kharif, 2020) (Table 2). Regarding growing seasons,
Kharif, 2019 (E3) was comparatively the better with an average grain yield of 637.4 g/ plant, than
Kharif, 2020 (E4), with average bean yield of 564.20 g/ plant, in the three growing seasons. This might be due to the reason that
Kharif, 2019 received highest rainfall in the growing season which is favourable for jack bean production. The scarce rainfall in this growing location during the remaining seasons resulted in underdeveloped pods leading to lower yields. The performance of all the genotypes across four seasons is depicted in Fig 1.
AMMI model analysis
When genotypes are tested in multi-location yield trials, a cross over GEI most often occurs
(Ceccarelli et al., 1996). The genotypes (G), environments (E) and the genotype × environment interaction (GEI) were significant (P £ 0.01) for jack bean yield. Hence, the variation in the jack bean mean yield was affected by the above mentioned factors and the variation was due to the inherent diversity in the genotypes (76.0%), due to the environments in which the genotypes were grown (3.0%) and the interaction (GEI) (13.9%) (Table 1). This significant genotype × environment interaction effects indicate that, genotypes responded differently to the variation in environmental conditions which indicated the necessity of testing jack bean varieties during multiple seasons.
Asfaw et al., (2012) and
Waniale et al., (2014) also reported similar findings in mungbean. The AMMI model also extracted a total of four IPCAs with significant first IPCA contributing with 98.9% and 1% of the second IPCA respectively (Table 3). The performance and stability of the genotypes and the environments was depicted in AMMI1 bi-plot (Fig 2 and 3). Both the genotypes and environments become unstable as they are far away from the abscissa (with greater magnitude of IPCA1) and become stable when they are closer to the abscissa (with smaller magnitude of IPCA1). Similarly, both the Genotypes and environments become high yielding as they become far away to the right side of the ordinate and they will be low yielding as they are far away to the left side of the ordinate
(Zobel et al., 1988; Yan and Tinker, 2006). Accordingly, the genotype G10 (PSR-12202), which is located far away to the right side of the ordinate, was the highest yielding genotype. On the other hand, CHMJB-02 (G2), which is located far away to the left side of the ordinate, was the low yielding genotype (Fig 2). With regards to stability, the genotype G10 (PSR-12202), which has greater IPCA1 is the most unstable genotype and G5 (IC-512946), which had lower IPCA1 is the most stable genotype followed by G3 and G4 among the evaluated jack bean genotypes (Fig 3). Similar findings are reported in mungbean by
Waniale et al., (2014).
GGE bi-plot analysis
GGE bi-plots not only provide effective evaluation of genotypes but also allow for a comprehensive understanding of the target and test environments through various IPCAs (Table 4). GGE bi plots are helpful in understanding the target environment as a whole whether it consists of single or multiple mega environments. (
Yan and Tinker, 2006). The genotype main effect (G) plus genotype × environment (GE) interaction
i.e., (G+E) bi-plot analysis has wider adaptability in breeding programmes and is superior to AMMI in mega-environment analysis and genotype evaluation
(Yan et al., 2007). It has extra property in evaluation of test environment by discriminating power versus representativeness view which is not possible in AMMI bi-plot (
Bhushan Kumar et al., 2018).
What-won-where view of the GGE bi-plot
The what-won-where view of the GGE bi-plot
(Yan et al., 2000) is best for multi-environment trial data for studying the possible existence of different mega-environments in growing locations (
Gauch and Zobel, 1997). The polygon view of a GGE bi-plot explicitly displays the which-wins-where pattern and hence is a brief summary of the GEI pattern of a multi-environment trial data set (Fig 4). Hence, this GGE bi-plot is depicted to effectively identify the GEI pattern of the data to clearly show which genotype won in which environments. In the GGE bi-plot, there are two sectors on which at least one genotype is fall down on. Out of the three sectors, there is only one sector on which six of the different environments fall down. The genotypes in the vertex of the GGE bi-plot are the best genotypes in the respective environments or the worst genotypes in some or all of the environments (
Yan and Tinker, 2006). Accordingly, G10 (PSR12202), on which all, the environments fall down, is the winning genotype in most of the environments followed by G5 (IC-512946); whereas, G1 (CHMJB-01), G2 (CHMJB-02), G3 (IC-26174), G4 (IC-32881), G6 (NS/2009/053), G7 (NS/2009/059) and G8 (NSA-34), which fall down in the sectors without any environments, were the low yielding genotypes in some or all the environments.
Discriminating and representativeness of the test environments
A test environment which has a smaller angle with the AEA is highly representative of other test environments
(Frutos et al., 2014) and a test environment which has a long vector length is considered as discriminating environment (
Yan, 2002 and
(Yan et al., 2007). Accordingly, environments E2
(Kharif, 2018) and E4
(Kharif, 2020) having smaller angle with the AEA are declared as the most representative than E1
(Kharif, 2017) and E3
(Kharif, 2019) which are with a relatively higher degree with the AEA (Fig 5). Furthermore, environments E2 and E4 are also with longer vector length and are considered as good test environments for selecting widely adapted genotypes.
Asfaw et al., (2012) and
Baraki et al., (2020) also used the discriminating representativeness view of the GGE bi-plot to evaluate the testing environments for mungbean and cowpea genotypes, respectively.
Mean performance and Stability of genotypes
The genotype, G10 (PSR-12202) is the ideal genotype with a higher mean yield and relatively good stability (Table 5 and Fig 6). The genotype G5 (IC-512946) was also the genotype with relatively higher yield and stability, while the remaining eight genotypes are the poor yielding genotypes which are too far from the ideal genotype and are relatively stable since, they are with short vector length from the AEA.
Asfaw et al., (2012) and
Baraki et al., (2020) also used the GGE bi-plot of the mean and stability to evaluate the performance and stability of mungbean and cowpea genotypes respectively against the ideal genotypes.