GGE Biplot Analysis of Yield Stability in Multi-environment Trials of Lentil Genotypes under Rainfed Condition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This investigation was done to study GE interaction over twelve environments for seed yield in 18 genetically diverse genotypes. Grain yield performances were evaluated for three years at four locations in Iran using a randomized complete block design. The first two principal components (IPC1 and IPC2) were used to create a two-dimensional GGE biplot that accounted percentages of 49% and 20% respectively of sums of squares of the GE interaction. The combined analysis of variance indicated that year and location were the most important sources affecting yield variation and these factors accounted for percentages of 50.0% and 33.3% respectively of total G+E+GE variation. The GGE biplot suggested the existence of three lentil mega-environments with wining genotypes G1, G11 and G14. According to the ideal-genotype biplot, genotype G1 was the better genotype demonstrating high mean yield and high stability of performance across test locations. The average tester coordinate view indicated that genotype G1 had the highest average yield, and genotypes G1 and G12 recorded the best stability. The study revealed that a GGE biplot graphically displays interrelationships between test locations as well as genotypes and facilitates visual comparisons.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".