| چکیده انگلیسی مقاله |
Introduction and Objective: Considering that a major part of Iran is part of arid and semi-arid regions, obtaining stable genotypes with good yield stability is one of the ways to deal with drought stress. However, due to the genotype × environment interaction effect, it is difficult to identify cultivars and genotypes that have good stability and acceptable yield in various environmental conditions. Many methods are known to determine the genotype × environment interaction effect to identify stable cultivars, which are divided into two univariate (parametric and non-parametric) and multivariate groups. Each of these methods shows different aspects of the stability of genotypes, and one method alone cannot investigate the yield of a genotype in different environments from different aspects of stability. This research aimed to select promising bread wheat genotypes with high yield and suitable stability in the water deficit conditions, in the cold climate of the country, using various univariate and multivariate stability analysis methods.
materials and methods: 14 wheat genotypes along with Mihan, Heydari, Zarineh, and Zare cultivars (18 genotypes) under water deficit conditions in a randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications in the research stations of Karaj, Mashhad, Miandoab, Arak, and Zanjan was investigated in crop years 2020-2022. To check the stability of genotypes, some parametric and non-parametric univariate methods, AMMI multivariate analysis and AMMI analysis parameters were used. Also, in order to integrate parametric and non-parametric univariate methods and AMMI stability parameters, selection index ideal genotype SIIG was used.
Findings: Place, genotype, year × place and genotype × year × place interaction effect at 1% and genotype × place interaction effect at 5% probability level were significant. The main effect of environment, genotype × environment the interaction effect and the main effect of genotype explained 43.61%, 22.92% and 8.03% of the sum of squares of the experiment, respectively. In parametric methods, G17, G5, G13 and G1 genotypes based on the regression coefficient of Finley and Wilkinson, G9, G7, G1 genotypes based on the variance of deviation from the regression line, G9, G1, G7, G17 and G4 genotypes based on Wrick's equivalence indices and Shokla stability variance, G9, G1, G17, G4 and G7 genotypes based on Plaisted and Peterson's method, G9, G1, G17 and G4 genotypes based on Plaisted's method and G9, G1, G7 and G4 genotypes based on Kang's total rank method were known as stable genotypes. In non-parametric methods, G9, G15 and G7 genotypes based on Si(1) and Si(2), G9, G1 genotypes based on Si(3) nd Si(6), G9, G1 and G7genotypes based on NP(1), G3, G9, G17 and G1 genotypes based on NP(2) statistics and G9 and G1 genotypes based on NP(3) and NP(4) statistics, were considered as stable genotypes. In AMMI analysis, according to the significance of the six main components from the first to the sixth, the first and second components showed the largest contribution (57.8%) in explaining the genotype × environment interaction effect. Based on AMMI1 biplot, G9 and G17 genotypes and Zanjan1 and Arak2 environments were recognized as the most stable genotypes and environments due to having higher than average grain yield and very low value of the first component. Based on AMMI2 biplot, a specific genotype cannot be introduced as a genotype with high general compatibility due to its lack of proximity to the coordinate origin. However, G9 and G17 genotypes showed somewhat better general compatibility than the others, and because they had a higher performance than the average, they could be recommended. Genotypes G18, G17, G15, G9 and G16 based on ASV, G9, G1, G7, G4 and G17 genotypes based on WAAS, G9, 33, G1 and G17 genotypes based on SIPC, G9, G15 and G17 genotypes based on ZA, G9, G1, G3 and G7 genotypes based on EV, G9 and G1 genotypes based on ASTB, G17, G18, G15, G9 and G16 genotypes based on ASI, G9, G1, G17 and G7 genotypes based on FA, G9, G3, G1 and G7 genotypes based on DZ, G9, G1 and G7 genotypes based on DA, G9, G17, G18 and G16 genotypes based on MASI, G9, G1 and G4 genotypes based on MASV and G9, G1 and G7 genotypes based on AVAMGE index were selected as the most stable genotypes.
Conclusion: Based on the selection index ideal genotype (SIIG index) in both univariate and multivariate methods, genotypes G9, G1, and G17 have the closest value to the one and these genotypes had yield above the average; Therefore, they were selected as the most stable genotypes. Also, the use of the SIIG index in both univariate and multivariate methods showed somewhat the same results; therefore, it is better to use this general index to summarize all the information obtained from different methods.
|