Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-18T18:56:51.463Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stability analysis to identify improved lines of cluster bean (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba L. Taub.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 March 2024

Smaranika Mishra Open the ORCID record for Smaranika Mishra [Opens in a new window] ,
Koundinya A.V.V. ,
Aghora T.S.  and
Senthil Kumar M.
Smaranika Mishra*
Affiliation:
Indian Institute of Horticultural Research, Hesaraghatta Lake Post, Bengaluru 560089, India
Koundinya A.V.V.
Affiliation:
Central Horticultural Experimentation Station, Bhubaneswar, Odisha 751019, India
Aghora T.S.
Affiliation:
Indian Institute of Horticultural Research, Hesaraghatta Lake Post, Bengaluru 560089, India
Senthil Kumar M.
Affiliation:
Central Coffee Research Institute, Balehonnur, Karnataka 577112, India
*
Corresponding author: Smaranika Mishra, E-mail: mishrasmaranika@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

To select a stable and best-performing cluster bean line over seasons, an experiment was carried out using five shortlisted advanced breeding lines of vegetable cluster bean in randomized block design with four replications in Kharif and Summer seasons of 2019–20 and 2020–21 at ICAR-Indian Institute of Horticultural Research, Bengaluru. Additive mean effect and multiplicative interaction analysis of variation indicated a significant genotype and environment (G × E) interaction for all the traits. A high environment effect of 33.73% of the total sum of squares was observed for the trait pods per cluster followed by yield per hectare, single pod weight, pods per plant and clusters per plant. The first two interactive principal component axes (IPCA) cumulatively contributed 87.9, 97.3, 94.6, 98.6 and 85.6% variations for yield per hectare, number of clusters per plant, pods per plant, pods per cluster and single pod weight, respectively, leaving a small but significant amount of variation in the third IPCA. A mean versus weighted average of absolute score (WAAS) biplot indicated that genotype IIHRCB 26-2-1 is stable and best for the trait clusters per plant (>20 clusters/plant) while, IIHRCB 22-1-1 is superior and stable (WAAS mean nearly 0.00) for pods per cluster with >5 pods/cluster, pods per plant with >90 pods/plant, single pod weight with >3.0 g and yield per hectare around 24 t/ha. For all the environments, genotype IIHRCB 22-1-1 was found ‘all-time winner’ for yield per hectare and single pod weight. Based on multitrait stability index, IIHRCB 22-1-1 was found the best performer and the most stable genotype.

Keywords

cluster beangreen pod yieldphenotypic stabilityyield components
Type
Research Article
Information
Plant Genetic Resources , Volume 22 , Issue 3 , June 2024 , pp. 173 - 180
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of National Institute of Agricultural Botany

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adjebeng-Danquah, J, Manu-Aduening, J, Gracen, VE, Asante, IK and Offei, SK (2017) AMMI stability analysis and estimation of genetic parameters for growth and yield components in cassava in the forest and guinea savannah ecologies of Ghana. International Journal of Agronomy 2017, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahmad, B, Hassan, S and Bakhsh, K (2005) Factors affecting yield and profitability of carrot in two districts of Punjab. International Journal of Agricultural Biology 7, 794–798.Google Scholar
Ashwini, KVR, Ramesh, S and Sunitha, NC (2021) Comparative BLUP, YREM-based performance and AMMI model-based stability of horse gram (Macrotyloma uniflorum Lam. Verdc.) genotypes differing in growth habit. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 68, 457–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eberhart, ST and Russell, WA (1966) Stability parameters for comparing varieties. Crop Science 6, 36–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jain, SK and Patel, PR (2012) Stability analysis for seed yield and their component traits in breeding lines of guar (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba L.). Legume Research 35, 327–331.Google Scholar
Koundinya, AVV, Pandit, MK, Ramesh, D and Mishra, P (2019) Phenotypic stability of eggplant for yield and quality through AMMI, GGE and cluster analyses. Scientia Horticulturae 247, 216–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koundinya, AVV, Ajeesh, BR, Hegde, V, Sheela, MN, Mohan, C and Asha, KI (2021) Genetic parameters, stability and selection of cassava genotypes between rainy and water stress conditions using AMMI, WAAS, BLUP and MTSI. Scientia Horticulturae 281, 10994–10999.Google Scholar
Kvitschal, MV, Filho, PSV, Scapim, CA, Vidigal, MCG, Pequeno, MG, Sagrilo, E and Rimoldi, F (2006) Evaluation of phenotypic stability of cassava clones by AMMI analysis in northwestern Parana state. Crop Breeding and Applied Biotechnology 6, 236–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mishra, S, Aghora, TS and Venugopalan, R (2019) Divergence studies in Indian cluster bean (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba L. Taub.) for developing variety for vegetable purpose. Journal of Plant Development Science 11, 237–242.Google Scholar
Mishra, S, Aghora, TS and Senthil Kumar, M (2020) Genetic variability, character association and path analysis for quantitative traits to breed vegetable type cluster bean (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba L. Taub.). Indian Journal of Agricultural Science 20, 537–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olivoto, T (2019) Metan: Multi Environment Trials Analysis. R Package Version 1.1.0. Available at https://github.com/TiagoOlivoto/metanGoogle Scholar
Olivoto, T, Lúcio, ADC, da Silva, JAG, Marchioro, VS, de Souza, VQ and Jost, E (2019a) Mean performance and stability in multi-environment trials I: combining features of AMMI and BLUP techniques. Agronomy Journal 111, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olivoto, T, Lúcio, ADC, da Silva, JAG, Sari, BG and Diel, MI (2019b) Mean performance and stability in multi-environment trials II: selection based on multiple traits. Agronomy Journal 111, 2961–2969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pawan, K, Garg, DK and Manoj, K (2016) Stability analysis for economic traits in cluster bean [Cyamopsis tetragonoloba (L.) Taub.] genotypes. Environment and Ecology 34, 2575–2579.Google Scholar
Rashidi, M, Farshadfar, E and Jowkar, MM (2013) AMMI analysis of phenotypic stability in chickpea genotypes over stress and non-stress environments. International Journal of Agricultural Science 5, 253.Google Scholar
Sharma, SP, Leskovar, DI, Crosby, KM and Ibrahim, AMH (2020) GGE biplot analysis of genotype-by-environment interaction for melon fruit yield and quality traits. Horticultural Science 55, 1–10.Google Scholar
Shimray, PW, Bharadwaj, C, Patil, BS, Sankar, SM, Kumar, N, Reddy, SPP, Singhal, T, Hegde, V, Parida, SK, Roorkiwal, M and Varshney, RK (2022) Evaluation and identification of stable chickpea lines for yield-contributing traits from an association mapping panel. Agronomy 12, 3115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singamsetti, A, Shahi, JP, Zaidi, PH, Seetharam, K, Vinayan, MT, Kumar, M, Singla, S, Shikha, K and Madankar, K (2021) Genotype × environment interaction and selection of maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids across moisture regimes. Field Crops Research 270, 108224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teja, RR, Saidaiah, P, Kumar, AK, Geetha, A and Bhasker, K (2022) Stability analysis of yield and yield attributing traits of promising genotypes of cluster bean [Cyamopsis tetragonoloba (L.) Taub.]. Legume Research 45, 536–544.Google Scholar
Yan, W and Tinker, NA (2006) Biplot analysis of multi-environment trial data: principles and applications. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 86, 623–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zobel, RW, Wright, MJ and Gauch, HG Jr (1988) Statistical analysis of a yield trial. Agronomy Journal 80, 388–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zuffo, AM, Steiner, F, Aguilera, JA, Teodoro, PE, Teodoro, LPR and Busch, A (2020) Multi-trait stability index: a tool for simultaneous selection of soya bean genotypes in drought and saline stress. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 206, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Mishra et al. supplementary material

Mishra et al. supplementary material
Download Mishra et al. supplementary material(File)
File 19.4 KB