Performance of Rain Fed Lowland Rice Genotypes in Multi Environment Trials as Analyzed Using Ggebiplot
Downloads
Twenty rainfed lowland rice genotypes were evaluated at four locations of ten environments in western and north western part
of Ethiopia from 2009 to 2011 to identify stable and high yielding genotypes for possible release and to determine mega
environments. Randomized complete block design with three replications was used. GGE (G= genotype plus GE= genotype-byenvironment
interaction) biplot methodology was used for graphically display of grain yield data. The combined analysis of
variance revealed that environment (E) accounted for 43.3% of the total variation while G and GEI captured 10.3% and
25.8%, respectively. The first 2 principal components (PC1 and PC2) were used to create a 2-dimensional GGE biplot and
explained 34.7% and 22.9% of GGE sum of squares (SS), respectively. Genotypic PC1 scores >0 detected the adaptable and/or
higher-yielding genotypes, while PC1 scores <0discriminated the non-adaptable and/or lower-yielding ones. Unlike genotypic
PC1 scores, near-zero PC2 scores identified stablegenotypes, whereas absolute larger PC2 scores detected the unstable ones. On
the other hand, environmental PC1 scores were related to non-crossover type GEIs and the PC2 scores to the crossover type. Of
the tested genotypes, G17, G11, G9, and G20 were found to be desirable in terms of high yielding ability and stability. Based
on GGEbiplot analysis , the test environments were classified in to three mega-environments (Mega-1, Mega-2 and Mega-3).
Mega -1 included environments such as WO-1,WO-4 and WO-7 ( all are representing Woreta) with genotype 4 as a
winner; Mega-2 constituted environments such as AZ-2, AZ-10(Addis Zemen) and AS-5 and AS-10 (Assosa) with genotype
17 as a winner and Mega-3 contained environments including PA-3, PA-6 and PA-9 (all are representing Pawe) with
genotype 2 as winner. The two testing locations (Addis Zemen and Assosa) were found to be combined in Mega environment -2 and highly correlated, indicating as there is no need to conduct variety trial at both locations as the result in one can represent the other. By doing so research cost can be reduced. The result ofthis study cab be used as a driving force for the national rice breeding program to design breeding strategy that can address the request of different stakeholders for improved varieties through either exploiting or avoiding the effect of GEI. Among the tested genotypes in this study, three candidate genotype including genotype 17, 11 and 9 were selected and verified. Of which , considering their performance in terms of grain yield stability, farmers’ preferences and other desirable agronomic traits , genotype 9 has been officially released as wide adaptable variety with better performance for large scale production with the vernacular name ‘’HIBER’’ meaning unity
Balestre M, Vanderley BDS, Antonio AL, and Moises SR
(2010). Stability and adaptability of upland rice genotypes .
Crop breeding and applied biotechnology 10:357-363.
Ceccarelli S (1996). Adaptation to low or high input cultivation.
Euphytica 92:203-214.
Ding M, Tier B, Yan W (2007). Application of GGE biplot
analysis to evaluate Genotype (G), Environment (E) and G
× E interaction on P. radiata: a case study. Paper presented
toAustralasian Forest Genetics Conference Breeding for
Wood Quality, 1114 April 2007, Hobart, Tasmania,
Australia.
Ebdon JS, Gauch HG (2002). Additive main effect and mul
tiplicative interaction analysis of national turfgrass performance
trials: I. Interpretation of genotype × environment
interaction.Crop Sci 42:489-496.
Fan XM, MS Kang, H Chen, Y Zhang, J Tan, and C Xu
(2007) Yield stability of maize hybrids evaluated in multienvironment
trials in Yunnan, China. Agron J 99: 220–228.
Flores F, Moreno MT, Cubero JI (1998). A comparison of
univariate and multivariate methods to analyze
environments. Field Crops Res 56:271-286.
Gabriel, K. R. (1971). The biplot graphic display of matrices
withapplication to principal component analysis. Biometrika
: 453-467.
Gauch HG (2006).Statistical analysis of yield trials
byAMMI and GGE Crop Sci 46:1488- 1500.
Gauch HG, Zobel RW (1996): AMMI analysis of yield
trials. In M.S. Kang & Gauch H.G. eds.
All Content should be original and unpublished.