Girma Taye, Dan Makumbi


CIMMYT, with national programs, conducts selection of stress-tolerant genotypes under managed stress conditions; this investigation is expected to add information to the existing knowledge. Data sets used in this study comes from Intermediate to Late Hybrid Trails (ILHT) conducted in five Eastern and Central Africa (ECA) countries from 2008 to 2011. Trials, ranging from 18 in 2009 to 29 in 2010 were used. Trials are categorized into four management systems and two yield levels. Variance Components, broad sense heritability (H), Site Regression (SREG), Genotypic Regression (GREG), Completely Multiplicative Model (COMM) and Factor Analytic (FA) models were fitted. Results are discussed and compared with those stated in literature. We argue that it is preferable to first fit the fixed effect models before proceeding to the mixed effect model, as the former shows the level of complexity of the GE component and number of Axis required to explain it. The fixed effect model, SREG2, is preferable for trails targeting to compare hybrids with checks. From the GGE biplots it was noted that the first two PC did not account for sufficient percentage of variation for all years which witnessed complexity in the GE component for this data. Nevertheless, since PC1 accounted for large percentage of variation than PC2, the plot still gives some idea of which hybrids are favored and where. Most importantly, location of genotypes along PC1 can serve for judging yielding potential of the genotypes to guide in selection decision. Equivalence between Finlay – Wilkinson and GREG was established. The few environmental covariables obtained for 2009 was used to fit Partial Least Square (PLS) regression. The result indicated complexity in the GE component, as PLS latent factors accounted for small percentage of variation. It was recommended to use information from SREG2, GREG2 and FA(1) models in order to identify stable genotype.


AMMI, Biplot, Factor Analytic Model, GREG, Mixed effect model, SREG, Stability

Full Text:



Atlin, G.N., R.J. Baker, K.B. Mcrae, And X. Lu. 2000. Selection response in subdivided target regions. Crop Sci. 40:7–13. (

Baker, R.J. 1988a. Differential response to environmental stress. p.492–504. In B.S. Weir et al. (ed.) Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Quantitative Genetics. Sinauer, Sunderland, MA.

Baker, R.J. 1996. Recent research on genotype-environmental interaction. p. 235–239. In Proc. V Intl. Oat Conf. and VII Intl. Barley Genet. Sym., Vol. 1. Invited papers. Univ. Ext. Press, Univ. of Saskatchewan, SK, Canada.

Burgueño, J., J. Crossa, P.L. Cornelius, And R.-C. Yang. 2008. Using factor analytic models for joining environments and genotypes without crossover genotype × environment interaction. Crop Sci. 48:1291–1305. (,Paul‎ )

Cornelius, P.L., And J. Crossa. 1999. Prediction assessment of shrinkage estimators of multiplicative models for multi-environment cultivar trials. Crop Sci. 39:998–1009. (,Paul‎ )

Cornelius, P.L., And M.S. Seyedsadr. 1997. Estimation of general linear-bilinear models for two-way tables. J. Statist. Comput. Simulation 58:287–322. (,Paul‎ )

Cornelius, P.L., M. Seyedsadr, And J. Crossa. 1992. Using the shifted multiplicative model to search for “separability” in crop cultivar trials. Theor. Appl. Genet. 84:161–172. (,Paul‎ )

Crossa, J., J. Burgueno, P.L. Cornelius, G. Mclaren, R. Trethowan,And A. Krishnamachari. 2006. Modeling genotype × environment interaction using additive genetic covariances of relatives for predicting breeding values of wheat genotypes. Crop Sci. 46:1722–1733. ( › Journal List › Genetics › v.186(2); Oct 2010)

Crossa, J., P.L. Cornelius, K. Sayre, And J.I. Ortiz-Monasterio. 1995. A shifted multiplicative model fusion method for grouping environments without cultivar rank change. Crop Sci. 35:54–62. of cultivar effects for subdivided target regions. Crop Sci. 45:1151–1159.

Crossa, J., And P.L. Cornelius. 1997. Site regression and shifted multiplicative model clustering of cultivar trials sites under heterogeneity of error variances. Crop Sci. 37:406–415.

Crossa, J., P.L. Cornelius, And W. Yan. 2002. Biplots of linear-bilinear models for studying crossover genotype × environment interaction. Crop Sci. 42:619–633. (

Crossa, J., R.-C. Yang, and P.L. Cornelius. 2004. Studying crossover genotype × environment interaction using linear-bilinear models and mixed models. J. Agric. Biol. Environ. Stat.9:362–380.

Eberhart, S.A., And W.A. Russell. 1966. Stability parameters for comparing varieties. Crop Sci. 6:36–40.

Finlay, K.W., And G.N. Wilkinson. 1963. The analysis of adaptation in a plant-breeding programme. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 14:742–754.

Gauch, H.G. 1988. Model selection and validation for yield trials with interaction. Biometrics 44:705–715.

Gauch, H.G. 2006. Statistical analysis of yield trials by AMMI and GGE. Crop Sci. 46:1488–1500.

Gauch (ed.) Genotype-by-environment interaction. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. Cornelius, P.L., J. Crossa, M.S. Seyedsadr, G. Liu, and K. Viele.2001. Contributions to multiplicative model analysis of genotype-environment data. Statistical Consulting Section, American Statistical Association, Joint Statistical Meetings. 2001 Proceedings, American Statistical Association, Aug. 7, 2001 [CDROM]. Atlanta, GA.

Gauch, H.G., H.-P. Piepho, and P. Annicchiarico. 2008. Statistical analysis of yield trials by AMMI and GGE: Further considerations. Crop Sci. 48:866–889.

Girma Taye, Tesfaye Getachew & Geletu Begiga. 2000. AMMI adjustment for yield estimate and classification of genotypes and environments in Field pea (Pisum Sativum L.) Journal of Genetics and Breeding, vol. 54, 183-191

Girma Taye & Fufa Hundura. 2000. Use of AMMI for yield estimate and classification of genotypes and environments in Teff [Eragrostis tef]. Journal of tropical Forest resources. Vol. 15, no.2.

Gower, J.C., and D.J. Hand. 1996. Biplots. Chapman and Hall, London.

Piepho, H.P. 1998. Methods for comparing the yield stability of cropping systems—a review. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 180:193–213. ( )

Piepho, H.P., and J. Mohring. 2005. Best linear unbiased prediction

Smith, A., B.R. Cullis, and R. Thompson. 2002. Exploring variety- environment data using random effects AMMI models with adjustment for spatial field trends: Part 1: Theory. In M.S. Kang (ed.) Quantitative genetics, genomics and plant breeding. CABI Publishing, Oxford, UK.

Smith, A.B., B.R. Cullis, and R. Thompson. 2005. The analysis of crop cultivar breeding and evaluation trials: An overview of current mixed model approaches. J. Agric. Sci. 143:1–14.

Yan, W., and N.A. Tinker. 2005. An integrated system of biplot analysis for displaying, interpreting, and exploring genotype by environment interactions. Crop Sci. 45:1004–1016.

Yan, W., and N.A. Tinker. 2006. Biplot analysis of multi-environment trial data: Principles and applications. Can. J. Plant Sci. 86:623–645.

Yan, W., L.A. Hunt, Q. Sheng, and Z. Szlavnics. 2000. Cultivar evaluation and mega-environment investigation based on GGE biplot. Crop Sci. 40:596–605.

Yan, W., P.L. Cornelius, J. Crossa, and L.A. Hunt. 2001. Two types of GGE biplots for analyzing multi-environment trial data. Crop Sci. 41:656–663.

Yan, W., M.S. Kang, B. Ma, S. Woods, and P.L. Cornelius. 2007. GGE biplot vs. AMMI analysis of genotype-by-environment data. Crop Sci. 47:643–655.

Yang, R.-C. 2007. Mixed model analysis of crossover genotype environment interactions. Crop Sci. 47:1051–1062.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2014 Girma Taye, Dan Makumbi

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Journal of Plant Breeding and Genetics
ISSN: 2305-297X (Online), 2308-121X (Print)
© EScience Press. All Rights Reserved.