MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3119105515 · doi:10.5539/jas.v13n2p78

Stability Assessment of Single-Cross Maize Hybrids Using GGE-Biplot Analysis

2021· article· en· W3119105515 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lennin Musundire, John Derera, S. Dari, A. Lagat, Pangirayi Tongoona

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGenetics and Plant Breeding
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHybridMating designInbred strainPopulationBiologyAgronomyGrain yieldBiplotBiotechnologyMathematicsHeterosisGenotypeGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Grain yield potential of new maize hybrid varieties across target environments contributes to the uptake of these varieties by farmers. Evaluation of single-cross hybrids developed from test crossing introgressed inbred lines bred for three distinct environments to elite tropical inbred line testers was carried out. The study’s objective was to assess grain yield stability and genotype adaptability of the single-cross hybrids across South African environments relative to adapted commercial hybrid checks. One hundred and twenty-two introgressed inbred lines developed using the pedigree breeding program were crossed to four tropical elite inbred line testers using line × tester mating design to obtain 488 experimental single cross hybrids. Subject to availability of adequate seed for evaluation, a panel of 444 experimental single-cross hybrids was evaluated using an augmented design in two experiments defined as Population A and B for the study’s convenience in South African environments. Data for grain yield (t/ha) performance for experimental single-cross hybrids and commercial check hybrids in Population A and B across environments and individual environments identified experimental single-cross hybrids that had significant comparable grain yield (t/ha) performance relative to best commercial check hybrid (PAN6Q445B) on the market. The selected experimental single-cross hybrids 225, 89, 246 and 43 (Population A) and 112 (Population B) also had a better average rank position for grain yield (t/ha) relative to best commercial check hybrid. These selected experimental single-cross hybrids had a grain yield (t/ha) advantage range of 0.9-6.7% for Population A and 7.3% for Population A and B, respectively, relative to the adapted commercial check hybrid. GGE biplot patterns for which won-where for Population A indicated that at Potchefstroom Research Station and Ukulinga Research Station experimental single-cross hybrids 127 and135 were the vertex (winning) hybrids. Cedera Research Station did not have a vertex hybrid for Population A. For Population B, experimental single-cross hybrids 112, 117 and 18 were the vertex hybrids at Cedera Research Station, Ukulinga Research Station and Potchefstroom Research Station, respectively. Experimental single-cross hybrid 257 was identified as ideal genotype for Population A, while experimental single-cross hybrid 121 in Population B was the ideal genotype. Ideal environments were also identified as Ukulinga Research Station for Population A, and Cedera Research Station for Population B. Average-environment coordination (AEC) view of the GGE biplot in Population A indicated that experimental single-cross hybrids 1 was highly stable across environments. In comparison, Population B experimental single-cross hybrid 161 was highly stable across environments. In conclusion, selected single-cross hybrids in the current study can also be advanced for further evaluation with a possibility for identifying high yielding and stable single-cross hybrids for variety registration and release in target environments in South Africa.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.712
Threshold uncertainty score0.239

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.214 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicGenetics and Plant BreedingFrench-language works237,207