Genotype-Environment Interaction and Stability Analysis for Yield and Yield Contributing Characters in Soybean(Glycine max L.)

  • 발행 : 2007.12.30

초록

GE interaction is the expression of differential genotypic adaptation across environments. GE interactions through different stability parameters and performance of the traits of genotypes were studied. The traits were days to maturity, pod length, number of pods/ plant, 100-seed weight and seed yield/plant in ten soybean genotypes across five environments. Significant differences were observed for genotypes, environments and GE interactions. Stability analysis after Eberhart and Russell's model suggested that the genotypes used in this study were all more or less responsive to environmental changes. Most of the genotypes perform better in Env.3. Based on phenotypic indices(Pi), regression ($S^2di$) genotype Garurab was found fairly stable for days to maturity. BS-23 and G-2120 may be considered as stable genotype for pod length. All the genotypes except G-2120 showed that the genotypes were relatively unstable under environmental fluctuation for the number of pod/plant. Genotype BS-23 was found most stable among all the genotypes for 100-seed weight. BS-3 and Gaurab was the most stable and desirable genotypes for seed yield in soybean.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Dabholkar, A.R. 1992. Elements of Biornetrical Genetics. Concept publishing company. New Delhi. pp. 338-359
  2. Eberhart, S.A. and W.A. Russell.1966. Stability parameters for comparing varieties. Crop Sci. 6: 36-40 https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1966.0011183X000600010011x
  3. Epinat-Le Signor, C., S. Dousse, J. Lorgeou, J.B. Denis, R. Bonhomme, P. Carolo and A. Charcosset. 2001. Interpretation of genotype x environment interactions for early maize hybrids over 12 years. Crop Sci. 41: 663-669 https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2001.413663x
  4. FAO. and UNDP. 1998. Land resources appraisal of Bangladesh for agricultural development. Agro-ecological regions of Bangladesh report 4.UNDP/FAO. Rome pp, 212-221
  5. Gupta, M.K.,V.K. Mishra and J.P. Singh. 1998. Phenotype stability in pea. Crop Res.16: 97-101
  6. Ibrahim, K. and P. Bukenbaur. 1987. Stability parameters of important characters in various types of Faba bean. FABIS News letter 17: 10-13
  7. Islam, A. K. M. A. and M. A. Newaz. 2001.Genotype-environment interaction for seed yield and yield contributing characters in Dry Bean (P. vulgaris L.). Bangladesh J. PI. Breed. Genet. 14: 43-48
  8. Kang, M.S. 1998. Using genotype-by-environment interaction for crop cultivar development. Adv. Agron. 35: 199-240
  9. Kang M.S. 2002. Genotype-environment interaction: progress and prospects. In: Quantitative Genetics, Genomics and Plant Breeding, (M.S. Kang, ed). CABI Pulishing. Wallingford. New York pp. 221-243
  10. Langer, S., K.J. Frey and T.B. Bailey. 1979. Association among productivity production response and stability index in oat varieties. Euphytica. 28: 17-24 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00029168
  11. Morales, A.C, A. A. Paragas and V. R. Carangal. 1991. Phenotypic stability for grain yield in mungbean (Vigna radiata L. Wilczek). FLCG Newsletter 16: 12-15
  12. Noren Singh K., P. R. Sharma and M. R. K. Singh. 2003. Stability analysis in mungbean [Vigna radiata L. Wilczek]. Res. on Crops. 4: 97-103
  13. Paterson, A.H., Y. Saranga, M. Menz, C.X. Jiang and R.J. Wright. 2003. QTL analysis of genotype x environment interactions affecting cotton fiber quality. TheorI. AppI. Genet. 106: 384-396 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00122-002-1025-y
  14. Sharma,J. K and L. Swam. 2002. Stability analysis in sweat buckwheat. Crop Res. 23: 12-14
  15. Simmonds, N.W. 1991. Selection for local adaptation in a plant breeding progranune. TheoI. AppI. Genet. 82: 363-367 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02190624
  16. Singh, R.K. and B.D. Chaudhary. 1985. Biometrical Method in Quantitative Genetic Analysis (rev.Ed.) Kalyani Publishers. New Delhi. India pp. 252-269