3.8 Article

Analysis of line x environment interactions for yield in navy beans. 2. Pattern analysis of lines and environment within years

Journal

AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH
Volume 51, Issue 5, Pages 607-617

Publisher

C S I R O PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1071/AR97136

Keywords

Phaseolus vulgaris; yield; cluster analysis; ordination analysis; environments

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Seven years of multi-environment yield trials of navy bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) grown in Queensland were examined. As is common with plant breeding evaluation trials, test entries and locations varied between years. Grain yield data were analysed for each year using cluster and ordination analyses (pattern analyses). These methods facilitate descriptions of genotype performance across environments and the discrimination among genotypes provided by the environments. The observed trends for genotypic yield performance across environments were partly consistent with agronomic and disease reactions at specific environments and also partly explainable by breeding and selection history. In some cases, similarities in discrimination among environments were related to geographic proximity, in others management practices, and in others similarities occurred between geographically widely separated environments which differed in management practices. One location was identified as having atypical line discrimination. The analysis indicated that the number of test locations was below requirements for adequate representation of line x environment interaction. The pattern analyses methods used were an effective aid in describing the patterns in data for each year and illustrated the variations in adaptive patterns from year to year. The study has implications for assessing the number and location of test sites for plant breeding multi-environment trials, and for the understanding of genetic traits contributing to line x environment interactions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available