International Journal of Innovative Approaches in Agricultural Research
Abbreviation: IJIAAR | ISSN (Online): 2602-4772 | DOI: 10.29329/ijiaar

Original article    |    Open Access
International Journal of Innovative Approaches in Agricultural Research 2022, Vol. 6(1) 27-40

Genotypes by Environment Interaction of Bread Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) Genotypes on Yield and Quality Parameters under Rainfed Conditions

İrfan Öztürk

pp. 27 - 40   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/ijiaar.2022.434.3

Published online: March 31, 2022  |   Number of Views: 7  |  Number of Download: 56


Abstract

The significant genotype (G) by environment (E) interaction and genetic diversity in the breeding programs are an essential issue for the breeder to develop new cultivars. The experiment was conducted in the Trakia region, Turkey at five environments during the 2015-2016 growing cycles. In the study, 25 advanced genotypes were used in randomized complete block design with four replications. Data on grain yield, days to heading, plant height, 1000-kernel weight, test weight, protein ratio, wet gluten content, gluten index, hardness, and sedimentation value were investigated. The results of variance analyses showed that there were significant differences (P<0.01) among genotypes based on all parameters investigated. Genotypes when tested across different environmental conditions often showed significant variation in grain yield. Mean grain yield across five locations ranged from the highest 6673 kg ha-1 to the smallest 5008 kg ha-1. Burgaz location was found near the ideal test environment of the average environment coordination. Therefore, location Burgaz should be regarded as the most suitable to select widely adapted genotypes. With the longest vectors from the origin, environments Edirne1 and Edirne2 were the most discriminating location. Considering simultaneously mean yield and stability, G7 and G12 were the best genotypes. G3 is more ideal genotype because it is located in the ideal center. So these genotypes can be used as for the evaluation of bread wheat genotypes in the region. With the longest vectors from the origin, traits plant height, gluten index and protein ratio was the most discriminating parameters. In the evaluation of genotypes, G2 and Pehlivan are quite stable because they are located close to the center of the horizontal axis. Genotype G3 is very favourable because it is located near the center of the horizontal axis and on all traits. G7, G24 and Aldane are located above the axis vertical genotypes are desirable based on parameters profiles.

Keywords: Bread Wheat, Environment, Genotypes, Yield, Agronomic Characters, Biplot


How to Cite this Article

APA 6th edition
Ozturk, I. (2022). Genotypes by Environment Interaction of Bread Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) Genotypes on Yield and Quality Parameters under Rainfed Conditions . International Journal of Innovative Approaches in Agricultural Research, 6(1), 27-40. doi: 10.29329/ijiaar.2022.434.3

Harvard
Ozturk, I. (2022). Genotypes by Environment Interaction of Bread Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) Genotypes on Yield and Quality Parameters under Rainfed Conditions . International Journal of Innovative Approaches in Agricultural Research, 6(1), pp. 27-40.

Chicago 16th edition
Ozturk, Irfan (2022). "Genotypes by Environment Interaction of Bread Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) Genotypes on Yield and Quality Parameters under Rainfed Conditions ". International Journal of Innovative Approaches in Agricultural Research 6 (1):27-40. doi:10.29329/ijiaar.2022.434.3.

References
  1. Akram, H.M., Iqbal, M.S., Saeed, M., Yar. A., Ali, A., and Sahi, K.A. (2004). Drought tolerance studies of wheat genotypes. Pak. J. Biol. Sci., 7: 88-92. [Google Scholar]
  2. Alwala, S., Kwolek, T., Mc.Pherson, M.,  Pellow, J., and Meyer, D. (2010). A comprehensive comparison between Eberhart and Russell joint regression and GGE biplot analyses to identify stable and high yielding maize hybrids. Field Crops Res. 119:225-230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2010.07.010 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  3. Anonymous, (1972). ICC.Standard methods of the international association for cereal chemistry (ICC). Methods No. 106/2. Vienna Verlag Moritz Schafer. Detmold, Germany. [Google Scholar]
  4. Anonymous, (1984). ICC.Standard methods of the international association for cereal chemistry (ICC). Methods No. 116/1. Vienna Verlag Moritz Schafer. Detmold, Germany. [Google Scholar]
  5. Anonymous, (1990). AACC Approved Methods of the American Association of Cereal Chemist. USA. [Google Scholar]
  6. Anonymous, (2002). International Association for Cereal Sci. and Technology. (ICC Standart No: 110, Standart No: 105, Standart No: 106, Standart No: 155, Standart No: 116, Standart No: 115). [Google Scholar]
  7. Blakeney, A.B., Cracknell, R.L., Crosbie, G.B., Jefferies, S.P., Miskelly, D.M., O’Brien, L., Panozzo, J.F., Suter, D.A.I., Solah, V., Watts, T., Westcott, T., Williams, R.M. (2009). Understanding Wheat Quality. p: 8. GRDC, Kingston, Australia. [Google Scholar]
  8. Chaves, M.M., Pereira, J.S., Maroco, J., Rodrigues, M.L., Ricardo, C.P., Osorio, M.L., Carvalho, I., Faria, T., and Pinheiro, C. (2002). How plants cope with water stress in the field. Photosynthesis and growth. Annals Bot. 89: 907-916. [Google Scholar]
  9. Cooper, M., and Byth, D.E. (1996). Understanding plant adaptation to achieve systematic applied crop improvement: A fundamental challenge. In: Cooper, M and Hammer, GL (eds.) Plant adaptation and crop Wallingford: CABI Publishing. [Google Scholar]
  10. Coventry D.R, Gupta R.K, Yadav A, Poswal R.S, Chhokar R.S, Sharma R.K, Yadav V.K, Gill S.C, Kumar A, Mehta A, Kleemann S.G.L, Bonamano A, Cummins J.A. 2011. Wheat quality and productivity as affected by varieties and sowing time in Haryana, India. Field Crops Research, v.123, p.214-225. [Google Scholar]
  11. Gomez, K.A., & Gomez, A.A. (1984). Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. 2nd Ed. John Willey and Sons, Inc. New York. 641. [Google Scholar]
  12. Kendal, E., and Sayar, M.S. (2016). The stability of some spring triticale genotypes using biplot analysis. The Journal of Animal & Plant Sciences 26 (3): 754-765. [Google Scholar]
  13. Levitt, J. (1980). Responses of plants to environmental stresses. In: Physiological Ecology (Kozlowski, T.T., Ed) New York: Academic Press, pp: 347-448. [Google Scholar]
  14. Moldovan, V., Moldovan, M., & Kadar, R. (2000). Phenotypic stability for yield in chickpea. Pakistan of Science Research, 30: 455-465. [Google Scholar]
  15. Nasarullah, R., Uddin, F., Uddin., and Jamal, M. (2017). Interpreting GE interaction of wheat genotypes for grain yield under different regimes of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Pakistan J. Agric. Res. 30:107-121. [Google Scholar]
  16. Öztürk, İ. (2021). Genotypes × Environment Interaction and Stability of Bread Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) Cultivar under Rainfed Conditions. International Journal of Innovative Approaches in Agricultural Research 2021, Vol. 5 (3), 257-268. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijiaar.2021.378.1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  17. Öztürk, İ., and Korkut, Z.K. (2018). Evaluation of Drought Tolerance Indices and Relationship with Yield in Bread Wheat Genotypes under Different Drought Stress Conditions. Journal of International Scientific Publications. Agriculture & Food. Volume 6, p: 359-367. [Google Scholar]
  18. Pena, R.J. (2008). Improving or preserving bread making quality while enhancing grain yield in wheat. International Symposium on Wheat Yield Potential: Challenges to International Wheat Breeding’ Mexico, D.F.: CIMMYT. p: 171-174. [Google Scholar]
  19. Perten, H. (1990). Rapid Measurement of Wheat Gluten Quality by the Gluten Index. Cereal Foods World, 35: 401-402. [Google Scholar]
  20. Peterson, C.J., Graybosch, R.A., Shelton, D.R., Baenziger, P.S. (1998). Baking quality of hard red winter wheat: Response of cultivars to environments in the Great Plains, Euphytica 100 (1-3): 157-162. [Google Scholar]
  21. Pfeiffer, W.H., & Braun, H.J. (1989). Yield stability in bread wheat. In J.R. Anderson and P.B Hazel, eds. Variability in Grain Yields. Washington D.C.: John Hopkins Univ. and the Int. Food Policy Res. Inst. [Google Scholar]
  22. Sharma, R.C., Morgounov, A.I., Braun, H.J., Akin, B., Keser, M., Bedoshvili, D., Bagci, A., Martius, C., van Ginkel, M. (2010). Identifying high yielding stable winter wheat genotypes for irrigated environments in Central and West Asia. Euphytica 171: 53-64. [Google Scholar]
  23. Sissons, M.J., Egan, N.E., Gianibelli, M.C. (2005). New insights into the role of gluten on durum pasta quality using reconstitution method. Cereal Chemistry, 82, 601-608. [Google Scholar]
  24. Solomon, T., Shewaye, Y., Zegeye, H., Asnake, D., Tadesse, Z., Girma, B. (2018). Performance Evaluation of Advanced Bread Wheat Genotypes for Yield Stability Using the AMMI Stability Model. J. Agri. Res. 2018, 3(4): 000168. P: 1-7. [Google Scholar]
  25. Wang, J., Yang, J., Jia, Q., Zhu, J., Shang, Y., Hua, W., Zhou, M. (2014). A new QTL for plant height in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) showing no negative effects on grain yield. PLoS One. 2014 Feb 28; 9(2): e90144. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0090144. eCollection 2014. [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  26. Yan, W., Hunt, L.A., Sheng, Q., and Szlavnics, Z. (2000). Cultivar evaluation and mega-environment investigation based on the GGE biplot. Crop Science 40(3):597-605. [Google Scholar]
  27. Yan, W., and Tinker, N.A. (2005). An integrated biplot analysis system for displaying, interpreting, and exploring genotype × environment interaction. Crop Science 45(3):1004-1016. [Google Scholar]
  28. Yan, W., and Tinker, N.A. (2006). Biplot analysis of multi-environment trial data: Principles and applications. Can. J. Plant Sci. 86: 623–645. [Google Scholar]
  29. Yan, W., and Rajcan, I.R. (2002). Biplot analysis of test sites and trait relations of soybean in Ontario. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 42:11-20. [Google Scholar]
  30. Yan, W., and Kang, M.S. (2002). GGE Biplot Analysis: A Graphical Tool for Breeders, Geneticists, and Agronomists. New York, NY, USA: CRC Press. [Google Scholar]
  31. Yan, W., Kang, M.S., Ma, B., Woods, S., Cornelius, P.L. (2007). GGE biplot vs. AMMI analysis of genotype-by-environment data. Crop Science 47, 643–655. [Google Scholar]
  32. Yan, W., and Holland, J.B. (2010). A Heritability-adjusted GGE biplot for test environment evaluation. Euphytica, v. 171, n. 3, p. 355-369. [Google Scholar]