Genotype-by-environment interaction and stability analysis of grain yield of bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) genotypes using AMMI and GGE biplot analyses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bread wheat is a vital staple crop worldwide; including in Ethiopia, but its production is prone to various environmental constraints and yield reduction associated with adaptation. To identify adaptable genotypes, a total of 12 bread wheat genotypes (G1 to G12) were evaluated for their genotype-environment interaction (GEI) and stability across three different environments for two years using Additive Main Effect and Multiplicative Interaction (AMMI) and genotype main effect plus genotype-by-environment interaction (GGE) biplots analysis. GEI is a common phenomenon in crop improvement and is of significant importance in genotype assessment and recommendation. According to combined analysis of variance, grain yield was considerably impacted by environments, genotypes, and GEI. AMMI and GGE biplots analysis also provided insights into the performance and stability of the genotypes across diverse environmental conditions. Among the 12 genotypes, G6 was selected by AMMI biplot analysis as adaptive and high-yielding genotype; G5 and G7 demonstrated high stability and minimal interaction with the environment, as evidenced by their IPCA1 values. G7 was identified as the most stable and high-yielding genotype. The GGE biplot's polygon view revealed that the highest grain yield was obtained from G6 in environment three (E3). E3 was selected as the ideal environment by the GGE biplot. The top three stable genotypes identified by AMMI stability value (ASV) were G5, G7, and G10, while the most stable genotype determined by Genotype Selection Index (GSI) was G7. Even though G6 was a high yielder, it was found to be unstable according to ASV and ranked third in stability according to GSI. Based on the study's findings, the GGE biplot genotype view for grain yield identified Tay genotype (G6) to be the most ideal genotype due to its high grain yield and stability in diverse environments. G7 showed similar characteristics and was also stable. These findings provide valuable insights to breeders and researchers for selecting high-yielding and stable, as well as high-yielding specifically adapted genotypes.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".