| Peer-Reviewed

Genotype × Environment Interaction and Selection of High Yielding Wheat Genotypes for Different Wheat-growing Areas of Ethiopia

Received: 9 February 2021    Accepted: 24 March 2021    Published: 23 April 2021
Views:       Downloads:
Abstract

Evaluation of wheat genotypes under different environments is essential for testing stability of their performance and range of adaptations. Where, enhanced grain yield has been achieved in bread wheat (Tritium aestivum L.) through the development of adaptable, high-yielding, and rust-resistant genotypes by evaluating advanced genotypes for yield in multi-environment trials. The adaptability of a genotype over diverse environments is usually tested by the degree of its interaction with different environments under which it is grown. This study examines fifteen bread wheat genotypes for two consecutive years (2016 and 2017) across eight locations in Ethiopia. The experiment was laid out using a Randomized Complete Block design and replicated three times intending to determine high-yielding advanced genotype and release best performing genotypes as a variety for the end-user. Highly significant (P ≤ 0.001) effects of genotype, environment, and genotype by environment interaction were observed for grain yield. The AMMI analysis of variance indicated that environments accounted for 52.34% of the total sum of squares for grain yield (genotype yields ranged from 5.76 t/ha at E-11 to 1.31 t/ha at E-7). followed by interaction (22.95%) and genotypes (11.31%).The genotype ETBW8260 (G4) exhibited high mean grain yield and well performed to the tested environments. The ETBW8260 (G4) was selected as early maturing, high yielding, resistant to yellow rust and fitting for low to midland wheat growing areas and has a yield advantage over the standard Ogolcho and the local Kakaba. Both locations and genotypes are dispersed widely in all quadrants in the AMMI-1 biplot. As per the YSI Ogolcho (#15) ETBW8303 (G2), ETBW8454 (G12), ETBW8261 (G5), ETBW8406 (G10), ETBW8310 (G3), and ETBW8260 (G4), the genotypes of bread wheat were stable. Besides, the genotype ETBW8260 (G4 has highest mean yield with good stability. Therefore, after a one-year variety verification trial, ETBW8260 is released as a commercial variety in 2019 and a designated local name called “Balcha” and recommended for low-medium part of wheat production agroecology of the country.

Published in American Journal of BioScience (Volume 9, Issue 2)
DOI 10.11648/j.ajbio.20210902.15
Page(s) 63-71
Creative Commons

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.

Copyright

Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

AMMI, Environment, Yield, Variety

References
[1] Harlan JR. 1971. Agricultural origins: Centers and Non-centers. Science 174 (4008): 468-473.
[2] Demeke, M., & Marcantonio, D. 2013. Analysis of incentives and disincentives for wheat in Ethiopia. Technical notes series. MAFAP, FAO.
[3] Bergh, K., Chew, A., Gugerty, M. K., & Anderson, C. L. 2012. Wheat value chain: Ethiopia (Evince School Policy Analysis and Research, EPAR Brief number 104). Univerity of Washington.
[4] Nigussie, A., Kedir, A., Adisu, A., Belay, G., Gebrie, D., & Desalegn, K. 2015. Bread wheat production in small scale irrigation users agro-pastoral households in Ethiopia: Case of Afar and Oromia regional state. Journal of Development and Agricultural Economics, 7 (4), 123–130.
[5] Central Statistical Agency (CSA). 2018. Agricultural sample survey 2017/18 (2010 E. C.) Volume 1. Report on area and production of major crops (Private peasant holdings, Mehere season). Statistical Bulletin 586. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
[6] Moldovan, V., Moldovan M., and Kadar R. 2000. Item from Romania. S. C. A. Agricultural Research Station. Turda, 3350, str. Agriculturii 27 Jud Chuj, Romania.
[7] Annicchiarico, P., 2002. Genotype x environment interactions: challenges and opportunities for plant breeding and cultivar recommendations (No. 174). Food & Agriculture Org.
[8] Ashraf, M., Ahmad, A. and Mc Neilly, T., 2001. Growth and photosynthetic characteristics in pearl millet under water stress and different potassium supply. Photosynthetica, 39 (3), pp. 389-394.
[9] Ayalneh, T., Letta, T. and Abinasa, M., 2014. Assessment of Stability, Adaptability and Yield Performance of Bread Wheat (Tritium Aestivum L.) Cultivars in South Estern Ethiopia. Plant Breeding and Seed Science, 67 (1), pp. 3-11.
[10] Dawit. A. Tigabu, Zerihun Tadesse, Habtemariam Zegeye and Alemayehu Assefa. 2017. Seasonal variability and genetic response of elite bread wheat lines in drought prone environments of Ethiopia. J. Plant Breed. Genet. 05 (01). 15-21.
[11] Gadisa A. Wardofa, Hussein M, Dawit A, and Tesfahun A. 2019. Genotype x environment interaction and yield stability of bread wheat genotypes in Central Ethiopia. Journal of Plant Breeding and Genetics, 7 (2), pp. 87-94.
[12] Mohammad. F., O. S. Abdalla, S. Rajaram, A. Yaljarouka, N. U. Khan, A. Z. Khan, S. K. Khalil, I. H. Khalil, I. Ahmad and S. A. Jadoon. 2011. Additive main effect and multiplicative analysis of synthetic-derived wheat under varying moisture regimes. Pak. J. Bot. 43 (2): 1205-1210.
[13] Yan, W., L. A. Hunt, O. Sheng and Z. Szlavnics 2000. Cultivar evaluation and mega environment investigation based on the GGE biplot. Crop Sci., 40: 597-605.
[14] Crossa, J. 1990. Statistical analysis of multi-location trials. Advances in Agronomy, 44: 55- 85.
[15] Purchase, J. L., H. Hatting and Cs. Van de venter. 2000. Genotype by environments interaction of wheat in South Africa: stability analysis of yield performance. South Africa Journal of plant science 17: 101-107.
[16] Mohamed, N. E. and A. A. Ahmed. 2013. Additive main effects and multiplicative interaction and GGE biplot analysis of genotype × environment interactions for grain yield in bread wheat (Tritium aestivum L.). African Journal of Agricultural Research, 8: 5197-203.
[17] Temesgen, M., S. Alamerew and F. Eticha. 2015. GGE Biplot Analysis of Genotype by Environment Interaction and Grain Yield Stability of Bread Wheat Genotypes in South East Ethiopia. World Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 11: 183-90.
[18] Heidari, S., Azizinezhad, R. and Haghparast, R., 2017. Determination of Yield Stability in Durum Wheat Genotypes under Rainfed and Supplementary Irrigation Conditions. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 19 (6), pp. 1355-1368.
[19] Kang, M. S. and Pham, H. N., 1991. Simultaneous selection for high yielding and stable crop genotypes. Agronomy journal, 83 (1), pp. 161-165.
[20] Gauch Jr, H. G., 1988. Model selection and validation for yield trials with interaction. Biometrics, pp. 705-715.
[21] Zobel, R. W., Wright, M. J., & Gauch, H. G. 1988. Statistical analysis of a yield trial. Agronomy Journal, 80 (3), 388-393.
[22] Golkari, S., Hagparast, R., Roohi, E., Mobasser, S., Ahmadi, M. M., Soleimani, K., Khalilzadeh, G., Abedi-Asl, G., & Babaei, T. 2016. Multi-environment evaluation of winter bread wheat genotypes under rainfed conditions of Iran-using AMMI model. Crop Breeding Journal, 4 (6), 17-31.
[23] Neisse, A. C., Kirch, J. L., & Hongyu, K. 2018. AMMI and GGE Biplot for genotype× environment interaction: a medoid–based hierarchical cluster analysis approach for high–dimensional data. Biometrical Letters, 55 (2), 97-121.
[24] Agegnehu Mekonnen, Firew Mekbib and Arega Gashaw. 2019. AMMI and GGE biplot analysis of grain yield of bread wheat (Tritium aestivum L.) genotypes at moisture deficit environment of Wollo, Ethiopia. Journal of Agricultural Science and Practice Volume 4 (1), pp. 9-19, https://doi.org/10.31248/JASP2019.123.
[25] Tamene, M., Tesfaye, L., Tilahun, B., Mohamed, A., Ayalneh, T., Bekele, H., Wubishet, A., Mulatu, A. 2018. Bread Wheat Varietal Development and Release in Southeastern Highlands of Ethiopia. American Journal of Biological and Environmental Statistics, 4 (1), 15-19.
[26] Purchase, J. L. 1997. Parametric analysis to describe genotype x environment interaction and yield stability in winter wheat, University of Free State. Bloemfontein, South Africa.
[27] Mohammadi, R., M. Roostaei, Y. Ansari, M. Aghaee and A. Amri. 2010. Relationships of phenotypic stability measures for genotypes of three cereal crops. Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 90: 819-30. https://doi.org/10.4141/cjps09102
[28] Farshadfar, E. 2008. Incorporation of AMMI Stability Value and Grain Yield in a Single NonParametric Index (GSI) in Bread Wheat. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences, 11: 1791-96. https://doi.org/10.3923/pjbs.2008.1791.1796
[29] Atta, B. M., T. M. Shah, G. Abbas and M. A. Haq. 2009. Genotype x environment interaction for seed yield in kabuli chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) genotypes developed through mutation breeding. Pakistan Journal of Botany, 41: 188390.
[30] Fan, X.-M., M. S. Kang, H. Chen, Y. Zhang, J. Tan and C. Xu. 2007. Yield Stability of Maize Hybrids Evaluated in Multi-Environment Trials in Yunnan, China. Agronomy Journal, 99: 220. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2006.0144
Cite This Article
  • APA Style

    Gadisa Alemu, Alemu Dabi, Nagesh Geleta, Ruth Duga, Tafesse Solomon, et al. (2021). Genotype × Environment Interaction and Selection of High Yielding Wheat Genotypes for Different Wheat-growing Areas of Ethiopia. American Journal of BioScience, 9(2), 63-71. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajbio.20210902.15

    Copy | Download

    ACS Style

    Gadisa Alemu; Alemu Dabi; Nagesh Geleta; Ruth Duga; Tafesse Solomon, et al. Genotype × Environment Interaction and Selection of High Yielding Wheat Genotypes for Different Wheat-growing Areas of Ethiopia. Am. J. BioScience 2021, 9(2), 63-71. doi: 10.11648/j.ajbio.20210902.15

    Copy | Download

    AMA Style

    Gadisa Alemu, Alemu Dabi, Nagesh Geleta, Ruth Duga, Tafesse Solomon, et al. Genotype × Environment Interaction and Selection of High Yielding Wheat Genotypes for Different Wheat-growing Areas of Ethiopia. Am J BioScience. 2021;9(2):63-71. doi: 10.11648/j.ajbio.20210902.15

    Copy | Download

  • @article{10.11648/j.ajbio.20210902.15,
      author = {Gadisa Alemu and Alemu Dabi and Nagesh Geleta and Ruth Duga and Tafesse Solomon and Habtemariam Zegaye and Abebe Getamesay and Abebe Delesa and Dawit Asnake and Bayisa Asefa and Yewubdar Shewaye and Bekele Geleta Abeyo and Ayele Badebo},
      title = {Genotype × Environment Interaction and Selection of High Yielding Wheat Genotypes for Different Wheat-growing Areas of Ethiopia},
      journal = {American Journal of BioScience},
      volume = {9},
      number = {2},
      pages = {63-71},
      doi = {10.11648/j.ajbio.20210902.15},
      url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajbio.20210902.15},
      eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajbio.20210902.15},
      abstract = {Evaluation of wheat genotypes under different environments is essential for testing stability of their performance and range of adaptations. Where, enhanced grain yield has been achieved in bread wheat (Tritium aestivum L.) through the development of adaptable, high-yielding, and rust-resistant genotypes by evaluating advanced genotypes for yield in multi-environment trials. The adaptability of a genotype over diverse environments is usually tested by the degree of its interaction with different environments under which it is grown. This study examines fifteen bread wheat genotypes for two consecutive years (2016 and 2017) across eight locations in Ethiopia. The experiment was laid out using a Randomized Complete Block design and replicated three times intending to determine high-yielding advanced genotype and release best performing genotypes as a variety for the end-user. Highly significant (P ≤ 0.001) effects of genotype, environment, and genotype by environment interaction were observed for grain yield. The AMMI analysis of variance indicated that environments accounted for 52.34% of the total sum of squares for grain yield (genotype yields ranged from 5.76 t/ha at E-11 to 1.31 t/ha at E-7). followed by interaction (22.95%) and genotypes (11.31%).The genotype ETBW8260 (G4) exhibited high mean grain yield and well performed to the tested environments. The ETBW8260 (G4) was selected as early maturing, high yielding, resistant to yellow rust and fitting for low to midland wheat growing areas and has a yield advantage over the standard Ogolcho and the local Kakaba. Both locations and genotypes are dispersed widely in all quadrants in the AMMI-1 biplot. As per the YSI Ogolcho (#15) ETBW8303 (G2), ETBW8454 (G12), ETBW8261 (G5), ETBW8406 (G10), ETBW8310 (G3), and ETBW8260 (G4), the genotypes of bread wheat were stable. Besides, the genotype ETBW8260 (G4 has highest mean yield with good stability. Therefore, after a one-year variety verification trial, ETBW8260 is released as a commercial variety in 2019 and a designated local name called “Balcha” and recommended for low-medium part of wheat production agroecology of the country.},
     year = {2021}
    }
    

    Copy | Download

  • TY  - JOUR
    T1  - Genotype × Environment Interaction and Selection of High Yielding Wheat Genotypes for Different Wheat-growing Areas of Ethiopia
    AU  - Gadisa Alemu
    AU  - Alemu Dabi
    AU  - Nagesh Geleta
    AU  - Ruth Duga
    AU  - Tafesse Solomon
    AU  - Habtemariam Zegaye
    AU  - Abebe Getamesay
    AU  - Abebe Delesa
    AU  - Dawit Asnake
    AU  - Bayisa Asefa
    AU  - Yewubdar Shewaye
    AU  - Bekele Geleta Abeyo
    AU  - Ayele Badebo
    Y1  - 2021/04/23
    PY  - 2021
    N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajbio.20210902.15
    DO  - 10.11648/j.ajbio.20210902.15
    T2  - American Journal of BioScience
    JF  - American Journal of BioScience
    JO  - American Journal of BioScience
    SP  - 63
    EP  - 71
    PB  - Science Publishing Group
    SN  - 2330-0167
    UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajbio.20210902.15
    AB  - Evaluation of wheat genotypes under different environments is essential for testing stability of their performance and range of adaptations. Where, enhanced grain yield has been achieved in bread wheat (Tritium aestivum L.) through the development of adaptable, high-yielding, and rust-resistant genotypes by evaluating advanced genotypes for yield in multi-environment trials. The adaptability of a genotype over diverse environments is usually tested by the degree of its interaction with different environments under which it is grown. This study examines fifteen bread wheat genotypes for two consecutive years (2016 and 2017) across eight locations in Ethiopia. The experiment was laid out using a Randomized Complete Block design and replicated three times intending to determine high-yielding advanced genotype and release best performing genotypes as a variety for the end-user. Highly significant (P ≤ 0.001) effects of genotype, environment, and genotype by environment interaction were observed for grain yield. The AMMI analysis of variance indicated that environments accounted for 52.34% of the total sum of squares for grain yield (genotype yields ranged from 5.76 t/ha at E-11 to 1.31 t/ha at E-7). followed by interaction (22.95%) and genotypes (11.31%).The genotype ETBW8260 (G4) exhibited high mean grain yield and well performed to the tested environments. The ETBW8260 (G4) was selected as early maturing, high yielding, resistant to yellow rust and fitting for low to midland wheat growing areas and has a yield advantage over the standard Ogolcho and the local Kakaba. Both locations and genotypes are dispersed widely in all quadrants in the AMMI-1 biplot. As per the YSI Ogolcho (#15) ETBW8303 (G2), ETBW8454 (G12), ETBW8261 (G5), ETBW8406 (G10), ETBW8310 (G3), and ETBW8260 (G4), the genotypes of bread wheat were stable. Besides, the genotype ETBW8260 (G4 has highest mean yield with good stability. Therefore, after a one-year variety verification trial, ETBW8260 is released as a commercial variety in 2019 and a designated local name called “Balcha” and recommended for low-medium part of wheat production agroecology of the country.
    VL  - 9
    IS  - 2
    ER  - 

    Copy | Download

Author Information
  • Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Kulumsa Agricultural Research Center, Asella, Ethiopia

  • Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Kulumsa Agricultural Research Center, Asella, Ethiopia

  • Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Kulumsa Agricultural Research Center, Asella, Ethiopia

  • Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Kulumsa Agricultural Research Center, Asella, Ethiopia

  • Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Kulumsa Agricultural Research Center, Asella, Ethiopia

  • Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Kulumsa Agricultural Research Center, Asella, Ethiopia

  • Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Kulumsa Agricultural Research Center, Asella, Ethiopia

  • Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Kulumsa Agricultural Research Center, Asella, Ethiopia

  • Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Kulumsa Agricultural Research Center, Asella, Ethiopia

  • Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Kulumsa Agricultural Research Center, Asella, Ethiopia

  • Dabra Zeit Agricultural Research Center, Bishoftu, Ethiopia

  • CIMMYT, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

  • CIMMYT, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

  • Sections