A comparison of statistical methods for assessing winter wheat grain yield stability

The multitude of existing methods for assessing the phenotypic stability of plants makes breeders be faced with the problem of choosing an appropriate variant. The purpose of this study was to compare different methods of analyzing the genotype x environment interaction and, on their basis, assess the stability of the yield of 7 varieties of winter wheat. The article compares 17 stability statistics by applying them to data obtained from agrotechnical experiments carried in 2009-2011 for evaluating the grain yield of 7 varieties of winter common wheat of Siberian selection (Novosibirskaya 32, Novosibirskaya 40, Novosibirskaya 51, Novosibirskaya 3, Novosibirskaya 2, Obskaya winter, Omskaya 6). Analysis of variance revealed a significant (p < 0.001) genotype x environment interaction in the experiments, which indicates a different reaction of genotypes to changes in environmental conditions. Genotypes were ranked according to the level of stability. Based on the analysis of the rank correlation matrix, the stability statistics were categorized in five groups. Recommendations were made on which group of methods to use depending on the objectives of the study. In the case when the goal of breeding research is the selection of the most biologically stable varieties with the minimum variance across a range of environments, one should use the methods of the static concept. If it is necessary to choose a genotype with a predictable reaction to changes of environmental conditions, corresponding to the calculated level or forecast, the regression approach is the most appropriate. The stability statistics generally identified Novosibirskaya 32 as the most stable variety from a biological point of view. The regression approach showed that Novosibirskaya 3 was the genotype with the smallest deviation from mean yield in all environments, while methods accessing the contribution of each genotype to the genotype x environment interaction defined Novosibirskaya 51 as the most stable variety.

1. Adugna W., Labuschagne M.T. Parametric and nonparametric measures of phenotypic stability in linseed (Linum usitatissimum L.). Euphytica. 2003;129:211-218. DOI 10.1023/A:1021979303319.

2. Becker H.C., Leon J. Stability analysis in plant breeding. Plant Breed.

3. ;101:1-23. DOI 10.1111/j.1439-0523.1988.tb00261.x.

4. Dragavtsev V.A., Averyanova A.F. Redefinition of genetic formulas of quantitative traits in different environmental conditions. Genetika = Genetics. 1983;19(11):1806-1810. (in Russian)

5. Eberhart S.A., Russell W.A. Stability parameters for comparing varieties. Crop Sci. 1966;6:36-40. DOI 10.2135/cropsci1966.0011183X000600010011x.

6. Finlay K.W., Wilkinson G.N. The analysis of adaptation in a plant breeding programme. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 1963;14:742-754. DOI 10.1071/AR9630742.

7. Flores F., Moreno M.T., Cubero J.I. A comparison of univariate and multivariate methods to analyze GxE interaction. Field Crops Res. 1998;56:271-286. DOI 10.1016/S0378-4290(97)00095-6.

8. Fox P.N., Rosielle A.A. Reducing the influence of environmental main-effects on pattern analysis of plant breeding environments. Euphytica. 1982;31:645-656. DOI 10.1007/BF00039203.

9. Fox P.N., Skovmand B., Thompson B.K., Braun H.J., Cormier R. Yield and adaptation of hexaploid spring triticale. Euphytica. 1990;47:57-64. DOI 10.1007/BF00040364.

10. Francis T.R., Kannenberg L.W. Yield stability studies in short-season maize. I. A descriptive method for grouping genotypes. Can. J. Plant Sci. 1978;58:1029-1034. DOI 10.4141/cjps78-157.

11. Gauch H.G. Statistical analysis of yield trials by AMMI and GGE. Crop Sci. 2006;46:1488-1500. DOI 10.2135/cropsci2005.07-0193.

12. Kang M.S. Using genotype-by-environment interaction for crop cul-tivar development. Adv. Agron. 1997;62:199-252. DOI 10.1016/S0065-2113(08)60569-6.

13. Kang M.S., Miller J.D., Darrah L.L. A note on relationship between stability variance and ecovalence. J. Hered. 1987;78:107. DOI 10.1093/oxfordjournals.jhered.a110322.

14. Kang M.S., Pham H.N. Simultaneous selection for high yielding and stable crop genotypes. Agron. J. 1991;83:161-165. DOI 10.2134/agronj1991.00021962008300010037x.

15. Khangildin V.V., Shayakhmetov I.F., Mardamshin A.G. Homeostasis of crop components and prerequisites for creating a model of a spring wheat variety. In: Genetic Analysis of Quantitative Traits of Plants. Ufa, 1979;5-39. (in Russian)

16. Kilchevsky A.V., Khotyleva L.V Genotype and Environment in Plant Breeding. Minsk: Nauka i Tekhnika Publ., 1989. (in Russian) Levene H. Robust tests for equality of variances. In: Olkin I., Ghu-rye S.G., Hoeffding W., Madow W.G., Mann H.B. (Eds.). Contributions to Probability and Statistics: Essays in Honor of Harold Hotelling. Stanford Univ. Press, 1960;278-292.

17. Lin C.S., Binns M.R. A superiority measure of cultivar performance for cultivar x location data. Can. J. Plant Sci. 1988;68:193-198. DOI 10.4141/cjps88-018.

18. Lin C.S., Binns M.R. Assessment of a method for cultivar selection based on regional trial data. Theor. Appl. Genet. 1991;82:379-388. DOI 10.1007/BF02190626.

19. Lin C.S., Binns M.R., Lefkovitch L.P. Stability analysis: where do we stand? Crop Sci. 1986;26:894-900. DOI 10.2135/cropsci1986.0011183X002600050012x.

20. Martynov S.P. A method for the estimation of crop varieties stability. Biom. J. 1990;7:887-893.

21. Mohammadi R., Amri F. Comparison of parametric and non-parametric methods for selecting stable and adapted durum wheat genotypes in variable environments. Euphytica. 2008;159:419-432. DOI 10.1007/s10681-007-9600-6.

22. Mohammadi R., Farshadfar E., Amri A. Comparison of rank-based stability statistics for grain yield in rainfed durum wheat. N. Z. J. Crop Hortic. Sci. 2016;44:25-40. DOI 10.1080/01140671.2015.1100126.

23. Nassar R., Huehn M. Studies on estimation of phenotypic stability: tests of significance for nonparametric measures of phenotypic stability. Biometrics. 1987;43:45-53. DOI 10.2307/2531947.

24. Purchase J.L., Hatting H., Van Deventer C.S. Genotype x environment interaction of winter wheat in South Africa: II. Stability analysis of yield performance. S. Afr. J. Plant Soil. 2000;17:101-107. DOI 10.1080/02571862.2000.10634878.

25. R Development Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria, 2014. Available at: http://www.R-project.org/

26. Shapiro S.S., Wilk M.B. An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika. 1965;52(3-4):591-611. DOI 10.1093/biomet/52.3-4.591.

27. Shukla G.K. Some statistical aspects of partitioning genotype-environmental components of variability. Heredity. 1972;29:237-245. DOI 10.1038/hdy.1972.87.

28. Tai G.C.C. Genotypic stability analysis and application to potato regional trials. Crop Sci. 1971;11:184-190. DOI 10.2135/cropsci1971.0011183X001100020006x.

29. Tai G.C.C., Young D.A. Genotypic stability analysis of eight potato varieties tested in a series of ten trials. Am. Potato J. 1972;49:138-150. DOI 10.1007/BF02861594.

30. Udachin R.A. Methods of assessing the ecological plasticity of wheat varieties. Selektsiya i Semenovodstvo = Selection and Seed Production. 1990;5:2-6. (in Russian)

31. Wricke G. Tjber eine Methode zur Erfassung der okologischen Streub-reite in Feldversuchen. Z. Pflanzenzuchtg. 1962;47:92-96.

32. Zobel R.W., Wright M.J., Gauch H.G., Jr. Statistical analysis of a yield trial. Agron. J. 1988;80:388-393. DOI 10.2134/agronj1988.00021962008000030002x.