Prediction of grain yield performance of commercially released finger millet (Eleusine coracana L.) varieties based on singleversus multiple-year BLUPs and YREMs

Main Article Content

T.E. Nagaraja
C. Nandini
Sujata Bhat
S. Gazala Parveen
J. Meenakshi

Abstract

Breeders effectuate trials to evaluate the performance of the germplasm lines or advanced breeding lines across multiple locations and years to recognize the promising line(s) for commercial cultivation across farmers’ fields. The majority of the theories state that cultivars’ multiple-year data from a specified location has a higher predictive ability of their future performance than single-year data. To verify this hypothesis, we predicted the cultivars’ present performance based on their previous 1- (2020), 2- (2020, 2019), 3- (2020, 2019 and 2018) and 4- (2020, 2019, 2018 and 2017) years’ grain yield performance of 77 commercially released finger millet (Eleusine coracana L.) varieties for cultivation across various cropping zones in India using (best linear unbiased predictors) BLUP and yield relative to environment maximum (YREM). The results indicated that single-year grain yield data had a reduced ability to recognize superior finger millet varieties. Further inclusion of multiple (4 and 3 years) year grain yield data seemed to predict better than singleyear grain yield data. The coefficient of determination of 5-year BLUP and YREM with maximum and minimum yearly BLUP and YREM could be used as a yardstick to accept and reject the cultivars, respectively. The varieties VL 204, RAU 8, ML365, RAU 3, VR 708 and L5 depicted high YREM and BLUP estimates with high mean grain yield and, therefore, they can be adapted to Karnataka state and can be recommended to the farmers for cultivation.

Article Details

How to Cite
Nagaraja, T., Nandini, C., Bhat, S., Parveen, S. G., & Meenakshi, J. (2024). Prediction of grain yield performance of commercially released finger millet (Eleusine coracana L.) varieties based on singleversus multiple-year BLUPs and YREMs. INDIAN JOURNAL OF GENETICS AND PLANT BREEDING, 84(04), 579–586. https://doi.org/10.31742/ISGPB.84.4.8
Section
Research Article

References

Annicchiarico P., Bellah F. and Chiari T. 2006. Repeatable genotype 9 location interaction and its exploitation by conventional and GIS-based cultivar recommendation for durum wheat in Algeria. European J Agron., 24:70–81.

Bowman D.T. 1998. Using crop performance data to select hybrids and varieties. JProd Agric., 11(2):256-259.

Cross H. Z. and Helm J. L. 1986. Hybrid maize selection strategies based on state yield trials. JAgron Educ., 15(2):110-113.

DeLacy I. H., Basford K. E., Cooper M., Bull J. K. and McLaren C. G. 1996. Analysis of multi-environment trials–an historical perspective. Plant Adaptation and Crop Improvement. 39124:39-124.

Gauch H. G. 2013. A simple protocol for AMMI analysis of yield trials. Crop Sci., 53:1860–1869.

Gellner J. L. 1989. Predicting superior yielding spring wheat and oat cultivars using past yield data. Agron J., 81:194–197.

Gilmour A. R., Cullis, B. R. and Verbyla A. P. 1997. Accounting for natural and extraneous variation in the analysis of field experiments. Journal of Agricultural, Biological, and Environmental Statistics, 269-293.

Harrington J. B. 1939. The number of replicated small plot tests required in regional variety. Journal of American Society and Agronomy,31:287-299.

Kang. M.S. 1993. Simultaneous selection for high yield and stability in crop performance trials: Consequences for growers. Agron J.,85:754–757.

Ma D. andStutzel H. 2014. Prediction of winter wheat cultivar performance in Germany: at national, regional and location scale. European Journal of Agronomy, 52:210–217.

Molenaar H. Boehm R. andPiepho H. P. 2018. Phenotypic selection in ornamental breeding: it’s better to have the BLUPs than to have the BLUEs. Front Plant Sci., 9:1–14.

Pazdernik D.L., HardmanL.L. andOrf J.H. 1997. Agronomic performance and stability of soybean varieties grown in three maturity zones of Minnesota.JProdAgric., 10:425–430.

Piepho H. P., Mo¨hring J., Melchinger A. E. andBu¨chse A. 2008. BLUP for phenotypic selection in plant breeding and variety testing. Euphytica, 161:209–228.

Piepho H. P. 1994. Best Linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) for regional yield trials: A comparison to additive main effects multiplicative interaction (AMMI) analysis. Theor Appl Genet.,89:647-654.

Robinson G. K. (1991). That BLUP is a good thing—the estimation of random effects. Statistical Sci., 6:15–51.

Spoorthi V., Ramesh S., Sunitha N. C. andVaijayanthi P. V. (2021). Are genotypes’ single-year YREMs and BLUPs good predictors of their performance in future years? An empirical analysis in dolichos bean [Lablab purpureus (L.) Sweet var. Lignosus]. GenetRes Crop Evol., 68:1401-1409.

Sprague G. F. & Federer W. T. (1951). A Comparison of Variance Components in Corn Yield Trials: II. Error, Year x Variety, Location x Variety, and Variety Components 1. AgronJ., 43(11):535-541.

Yan W. (1999). A study on the methodology of cultivar evaluation based on yield trial data. PhD thesis, University of Guelph, Canada.

Yan W. &Rajcan I. (2003). Prediction of cultivar performance based on single-versus multiple-year tests in soybean. Crop Sci., 43:549–555.