Environmental stability and plasticity of spring barley cultivars
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30835/2413-7510.2019.190449Keywords:
barley, environmental stability and plasticity, differentiating capacity of the environment, ideal genotype, ranking, GGE biplotAbstract
Purpose and onjectives. To distinguish stable and plastic varieties under contrast weather conditions of the eastern forest-steppe of Ukraine, to evaluate the weather conditions of the study years as environments with informative and differentiative capacity.
Material and methods. The yields of spring barley cultivars harvested in 2008–2015 with contrast conditions were compared to determine the strength and direction of a cultivar response to weather conditions. Cultivars bred at the Plant Production named after V.Ya. Yuriev of NAAS were taken as the test material: Parnas, Ahrarii, Modern, Alehro, Dyvohliad, Schedryi (Experiment 1) – in 2008–2011; Avhur, Balzam, Grin, Modern (Experiment 2) – in 2013–2015. The standard was cultivar Vzirets.
The study was conducted in the research crop rotation fields of the Plant Production Institute named after V.Ya. Yuriev of NAAS, in the competitive trial nurseries in four replicates, with the plot area of 10 m2. The yield data were statistically processed by ANOVA. The informative and differentiating capacity of the environments (years), as well as the breeding value of the cultivars, were determined by GGE biplot.
Results and discussion. 2008 and 2014 were favorable; 2010 and 2013 – unfavorable. The precipitation was uneven and showery, and, therefore, could not meet the barley plants’ need for water, especially at high temperatures. All the cultivars lowered their yields under the unfavorable conditions (drought), and the yield drop depended on the genotype.
The study found that barley varieties Parnas and Avhur fully utilized their potential under favorable growing conditions, as their yields reached 4.92 t/ha and 5.12 t/ha, respectively. They are intense varieties. The most stable yields were given by varieties Alehro, Parnas, Avhur, and Balzam. The decrease in the yields of these varieties under unfavorable weather conditions was 55–65%. The yields of varieties Vzitets, Hrin and awnless variety Modern were the most variable, with a decrease in their yields of 66–72%, i.e. these varieties are plastic. At the same time, Vzirets can reach its potential even in arid conditions.
Conclusions. Thus, the Plant Production Institute named after V.Ya. Yuriev of NAAS created barley cultivars for different growing conditions: both for regions with optimal conditions and for arid and risky farming regions. This is relevant, given possible climate changes towards warming.
References
Gallais A, Neveu A. Changement climatique et production agricole. 2015. URL: http:// www.inra.fr.
Hakala K, Jauhiainen L, Himanen S et al. Climate Change agriculture paper. Sensitivity of barley varieties to weather in Finland. Journal of Agriculture Science. 2012; 150: 145–160. DOI: 10.1017/S0021859611000694.
Luck J, Campbell ID, Magarey R et al. Chapter 21: Climate change and plant biosecurity: Implications for Policy. In: Gordh G, McKirdly S, editors. The Handbook of plant biosecurity.Dordrecht; Springer Science & Business Media. 2014. P. 655–691.
Carvalho P, Azam-Ali S, Foulkes MJ. Quantifying relationships between rooting traits and water uptake under drought in Mediterranean barley and durum wheat. J. of integrative plant biology. 2014; 56(5): 455–469. DOI: 10.1111/jipb.12109.
Giancarla V, Madosa E, Ciulca S, Ciulca A, Petolescu C, Bitea N. Assessment of drought tolerance in some barley genotypes cultivated in West part of Romania. J. of Horticulture, Forestry and Biotechnology. 2010; 14(3): 114–118.
Hudzenko VM, Vasylkivskyi SP. Main lines and objectives of winter barley breeding in the Central forest-steppe of Ukraine. Novitni Ahrotekhnologii. 2016; 1. URL: http://plant.gov.ua/uk/2016-1-2.
Blum A. Drought resistance, water-use efficiency, and yield potential – are they compatible, dissonant, or mutually exclusive ? Australian Journal of Agriculture Research. 2005; 56: 1159–1169. DOI: 10.1071/AR05069.
Cattiveli L, Rizza F, Badeck F-W, Mazzucotelli E, Mastrangelo AM, Francia E, Maré C, Tondelli A, Stanca AM. Drought tolerance in crop plants: an integrated view from breeding to genomics. Field Crops Research.2008; 105: 1–14. DOI: 10.1016/j.fcr.2007.07.004.
Kraakman ATW, Martinez F, Mussiraliev B, Van Eewijk FA, Niks RE.Linkage disequilibrium mapping of morphological, resistance, and other agronomically relevant traits in modern spring barley cultivars. Molecular Breeding. 2006; 17: 41–58. DOI: 10.1007/S11032-005-1119-8.
Nazari L, Pakniyat H. Assessment of drought tolerance in barley genotypes. J. of Applied Science. 2010; 10(2): 151–156. DOI: 10.3923/jas.2010.151.156.
Vashchenko VV, Shevchenko OO. Adaptability and stability of spring barley varieties in terms of performance paraneters. Visnyk Dnipropetrovskogo DAU. 2013; 1(31): 11–15.
Kosová K, Vitámvás P, Urban MO, Kholová J, Prášil IT. Breeding for enhanced drought resistance in barley and wheat – drought-associated traits, genetic resources and their potential utilization in breeding programmes. Czech J. Genet. Plant Breed. 2014; 50(4): 247–261.
Mittler R. Abiotic stress, the field environment and stress combination. Trends in Plant Science.2006; 11: 15–19. DOI: 10.1016/j.tplants.2005.11.002.
Babash AB. Fulfillment of adaptive systems of drought tolerance of spring barley to the Black Sea Steppe conditions. Zbirnyk naukovykh prats SGI–NTsNS. 2008; 12(52): 167–173.
Marukhniak AYa. Assessment of adaptive features of spring barley varieties.Vestnik Belorusskoy gosudarstvennoy selskokhoziaystvennoy akademii. 2018; 1: 67–72.
Vazhenina OE. Ecological stability of spring barley varieties on productivity and the creation of a valuable source of material. Sel. Nasinn. 2014; 106: 5–12. DOI: 10.30835/2014.42096.
Verma A, Singh J, Kumar V, Kharab AS, Singh GP. Nonparametric analysis in multi-environmental trials of feed barley genotypes. Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci. 2017; 6(6): 1201–1210. DOI: 10.2054/ijcmas.2017.606.139.
Mirosavljević M, Pržulj N, Čanak P. Analysis of new experimental barley genotype performance for grain yield using AMMI biplot. Selekcija i Semenarstvo. 2014; 20(1): 27–36. DOI: 10.5937/SelSem14.1027M.
Mohammadi M, Karimizadeh R, Noorinia AA, Ghojogh H, Hosseinpour T, Khalilzadeh GR, Mehraban A, Roustaii M, Hosni MH. Analysis of yield stability in multi-environment trials of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) genotypes using AMMI model. Curr. Opin. Agric. 2013; 2(1): 20–24.
Verma RPS, Kharab AS, Singh J, Kumar V, Sharma I, Verma A. AMMI model to analyse GxE for dual purpose barley in multi-environment trials. Agric. Sci. Digest. 2016; 36(1): 9–16. DOI: 10.18805/asd.v36i3.11444.
Demydov OA, Hudzenko VM, Sardak МО, Іshchenko VA, Demjaniuk OS. Environmental variety trial of barley at the final stage of breeding. Agroekоlogichnyi zhurnal. 2017;4: 58–65.
Kendal E. GGE biplot analysis of multi-environment yield trials in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) cultivars. Journal of Crop Breeding and Genetics. 2016; 2(1): 90–99.
Mohammadi M, Noorinia AA, Khalilzadeh GR, Hosseinpoo T. Application of GGE biplot analysis to investigate GE interaction on barley grain yield. Curr. Opin. Agric. 2015; 4(1): 25–32.
Sarkar B, Sharma RC, Verma RPS, Sarkar A, Sharma I. Identifying superior feed barley genotypes using GGE biplot for diverse environments in India. Indian J. Genet. 2014; 74(1): 26–33. DOI: 10.5958/j.0975-6906.74.1.004.
Khanzadeh H, Vaezi B, Mohammadi R, Mehraban A, Hosseinpor T, Shahbazi K. Grain yield stability of barley genotypes in uniform regional yield trails in warm and semi warm dry land area. Indian J. Agric. Res. 2018; 52(1): 16–21. DOI: 10.18805/IJARe.A-290.
Mortazavian SMM, Nikkhah HR, Hassani FA, Sharif-al-Hosseini M, Taheri M, Mahlooji M. GGE biplot and AMMI analysis of yield performance of barley genotypes across different environments in Iran. J. Agr. Sci. Tech. 2014; 16: 609–622.
Vaezi B, Pour-Aboughadareh A, Mohammadi R, Armion M, Mehraban A, Hossein-Pour T, Dorii M. GGE biplot and AMMI analysis of barley yield performance in Iran. Cer. Res. Com. 2017; 45(3): 500–511. DOI: 10.1556/0806.45.2017.019.
Hudzenko VM, Vasylkivskyi SP, Demydov AA. Use of AMMI and GGE biplot models for estimation of winter barley breeding lines in the Forest-Steppe of Ukraine. Vestnik Belorusskoy gosudarstvennoy selskokhoziaystvennoy akademii. 2017; № 1.С. 67–70.
Demydov ОА, Hudzenko VM, Sardak МО, Ishchenko VA, Smulska IV, Koliadenko SS. Multi-environmental trial of barley for yield and stability. Plant Varieties Studying and Protection. 2017; 13(4): 343–350. DOI: 10. 21498/2518-1017.13.4.2017.117727.
Hudzenko VM. Yield and stability of Myronivka winter barley varieties. Sel. Nasinn. 2018; 113: 55–77. DOI: 10.30835/2413-7510.2018.134358.
Solonechnyi PM, Kozachenko MR, Vasko NI, Naumov OG, Vazhenina OE, Solonechna OV, Dmytrenko PP, Kovalenko OL. GGE biplot analysis of genotype x environment interaction in spring barley varieties. Sel. Nasinn. 2014; 106: 93–102.
Solonechnyi P, Vasko N, Naumov A, Solonechnaya O, Vazhenina O, Bondareva O, Logvinenko Yu. GGE biplot analysis of genotype by environment interaction of spring barley varieties. Zemdirbyste-Agriculture. 2015; 102(4): 431–436. DOI: 10.13080/z-a.2015.102.055.
Solonechnyi PN, Kozachenko MR, Vasko NI, Naumov AG, Vazhenina OE, Solonechnaia OV. GGE biplot analysis of environmental variety trial data. Vestnik Belorusskoy gosudarstvennoy selskokhoziaystvennoy akademii.2015; 3: 110–114.
Solonechnyi PM, Kozachenko MR, Vasko NI, Naumov OG, Bondareva OВ, LogvynenkoYuV. Evaluation of the genotype × environment interaction in spring barley cultivars using GGE biplot analysis. Visnyk Kharkivskogo NAU. Ser. «Plant Production, Plant Breeding and Seed Production».2015; 1: 79–86.
Solonechnyi PM, Kozachenko MR, Vasko NI, Naumov OG, Solonechna OV, Vazhenina OE, Bondareva OB, Kovalenko AI. GGE biplot assessment of phenotypic stability of spring barley varieties. Sel. Nasinn. 2015; 107: 205–214. DOI: 10.30835/2015.54059.
Solonechnyi PM, Kozachenko MR, Vasko NI, Naumov OG, Solonechna OV, Vazhenina OYe, Kompanets KV. AMMI (additive main effect and multiplicative interaction) model for assessment of yield stability of spring barley genotypes. Sel. Nasinn. 2016;110: 131–141. DOI: 10.30835/2016.87620.
Solonechnyi PM. AMMI and GGE biplot analyses of the genotype-environment interaction in spring barley lines. Vavilovskiy zhurnal genetiki I selektsii. 2017; 21(6): 657–662. DOI: 10.18699/VJ17.283.
Solonechnyi P, Kozachenko M, Vasko N, Hudzenko V, Ishenko V, Kozelets G, Usova N, Logvinenko Y, Vinyukov A. AMMI and GGE biplot analysis of yield performance of spring barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) varieties in multi environment trials. Agriculture & Forestry. 2018; 64(1): 121–132. DOI: 10.17707/AgricultForest.64.1.15.
Yan W, Kang MS. GGE biplot analysis: A graphical tool for breeders, geneticists and Agronomists. CRC press, Boca Raton, FL, 2003.
Yan W, Tinker NA. Biplot analysis of multi-environment trial data: Principles and applications. Can. J. Plant Sci.2006; 86: 623–645. DOI: 10.4141/P05-169.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2019 N. I. Vasko, P. M. Solonechnyi, M. R. Kozachenko, O. E. Vazhenina, O. V. Solonechna, O. G. Naumov, O. V. Zymogliad
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
When placing the text in electronic resources, the copyright is reserved by the author of a publication.
Authors may not agree with referee’s(s’) comments and remarks of the Editorial Board, rationalizing their point of view.
Authors may require clarification from or the Editorial Board or changes in the event of significant errors in their article.
Authors can use materials published in the journal Selection and Seed Industry in their work, mandatorily referring to our journal.
