Genotype × environment interaction and stability of yield components for potato lines

YE Xi-Miao1 CHENG Xin1 AN Cong-Cong1 YUAN Jian-Long1 YU Bin1 WEN Guo-Hong2 LI Gao-Feng2 CHENG Li-Xiang1 WANG Yu-Ping1 ZHANG Feng1

(1.Gansu Agricultural University/Gansu Provincial Key Laboratory of Aridland Crop Science/Gansu Key Laboratory of Crop Improvement & Germplasm Enhancement, Lanzhou, Gansu 730070)
(2.Gansu Academy of Agricultural Sciences/Potato Institute, Lanzhou, Gansu 730070)

【Abstract】This study mainly focused on the application of GGE (genotype plus genotype-by-environment interaction) biplot in potato breeding, to evaluate the productivity, stability and adaptability of yield components of potato lines in different environments comprehensively, and screen out the excellent lines adapted to different mega-environments. The representativeness and discriminating ability of each test-environment were also evaluated, providing a basis for the selection of test-environment. A total of 101 advanced lines from International Potato Center (CIP) and the potato variety Qingshu 9 were planted in Neiguan Town, Lujiagou Town and Wuzhu Town of Gansu province in 2015 and 2016. The plot yield, plot yield of large-sized tubers, plot yield of small-sized tubers, yield per plant, large-sized tuber yield per plant, small-sized tuber yield per plant, tuber number per plant, large-sized tuber number per plant and small-sized tuber number per plant were measured. The genotype and environment interactions were analyzed by the combined analysis of variance and GGE biplot. Except that plot yield of small-sized tubers was insignificantly affected by genotype × environment interaction, all the other yield components were significantly (P < 0.01) affected by genotype effect, environmental effect and genotype × environment interaction. The square sum of environmental effect on the plot yield, plot yield of large-sized tubers, plot yield of small-sized tubers, yield per plant, large-sized tuber yield per plant, and tuber number per plant, as well as the square sum of genotype × environment interaction effect on the plot yield of small-sized tubers, the large-sized tuber number per plant, and the small-sized tuber number per plant had the largest proportion in the square sum of total variance. The most adaptable line was G86 in Lujiagou Town, G65 in Wuzhu Town, and G86 in Neiguan Town. The high-yield lines were G86, G116, and G124; the stable-yield lines were G124, G125, and G10; the high- and stable-yield lines were G86, G116, G124, and Qingshu 9. The lines with more large-sized tuber number per plant were G45, G86, and G67, and the lines with good stability were G67, G116, and G51. Qingshu 9 did not have stable large-sized tuber yield per plant. According to the comprehensive discrimination and representativeness, the order of test-environments were Lujiagou Town in 2016, Lujiagou Town in 2015, Wuzhu Town in 2015, Wuzhu Town in 2016, Neiguan Town in 2015, and Neiguan Town in 2016. GGE model can intuitively display the results in the genotype-location-year framework, and objectively evaluate the productivity, stability and adaptability of tested lines, as well as the representativeness and discriminating ability of test-environment. According to the comprehensive evaluation of GGE model, the high-yield and stable lines were G116, G124, G125, G122, and Qingshu 9, and the high-yield and unstable lines were G86, G10, G121, G106, G107, and G72. The most ideal mega-environment is Lujiagou Town, and Wuzhu Town is the test-environment with the strongest discriminating ability for potato lines.

【Keywords】 yield component; GGE biplot; multi-years and sites; pilot evaluation;


【Funds】 National Key R&D Program of China (2017YFD0101905) National Natural Science Foundation of China (31471433) Gansu High Educational Scientific Special Project (2018C-17) Gansu Province Science and Technology Major Special Projects (17ZD2NA016)

Download this article


    [1] Zaheer K, Akhta M H. Potato production, usage, and nutrition—a review. Crit Rev Food Sci, 2014, 56: 711–721.

    [2] Wang Y P, Sui J H, Liang Y C, Lu X. Screening for potato processing lines with tuber qulity index from two ecoregions. J Gansu Agric Univ, 2016, 51 (5): 39–45 (in Chinese with English abstract).

    [3] Mulema J M K, Adipala E, Olanya O M. Yield stability analysis of late blight resistant potato selections. Crop Sci, 2016, 56: 1645–1661.

    [4] Padi F K. Relationship between stress tolerance and grain yield stability in cowpea. J Agric Sci, 2004, 142: 431–443.

    [5] Bednarz C W, Bridges D C, Brown S M. Analysis of cotton yield stability across population densities. Semigroup Forum, 2000, 92: 128–135.

    [6] Fan X M, Kang M S, Chen H M. Yield stability of maize hybrids evaluated in multi-environment trials in Yunnan, China. Agron J, 2007, 99: 220–228.

    [7] Mekbib F. Yield stability in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) genotypes. Euphytica, 2003, 130: 147–153.

    [8] Aastveit A H, Martens H. ANOVA interactions interpreted by partial least squares regression. Biometrics, 1986, 42: 829–844.

    [9] EberhartSA, RusselWA. Stability parameters for comparing varieties. Crop Sci, 1966, 6: 36–40.

    [10] Blouin D C, Webster E P, Bond J A. On the analysis of combined experiments. Weed Technol, 2015, 25: 165–169.

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

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

    [13] Yan W K, Fetch J M, Fregeau-reid J. Genotype × location interaction patterns and testing strategies for oat in the Canadian. Prairies, 2011, 51: 1903–1914.

    [14] Yan W K, Kang M S, Ma B L. GGE biplot vs. AMMI analysis of genotype-by-environment data. Crop Sci, 2007, 47: 641–653.

    [15] Nzuve F, Githiri S, Mulunya D M. Analysis of genotype × environment interaction for grain yield in maize hybrids. J Agric Sci, 2013, 5: 75–85.

    [16] SotoBJ, DuquidS, BookerH. Genomic regions underlying agronomic traits in linseed (Linum usitatissimum L.) as revealed by association mapping. J Integr Plant Biol, 2014, 56: 75–87.

    [17] Murphy S E, Lee E A, Woodrow L. Genotype × environment interaction and stability for isoflavone content in soybean. Crop Sci, 2009, 49: 1313–1321.

    [18] Wachira F, Ngetich W, Omolo J. Genotype × environment interactions for tea yields. Euphytica, 2002, 127: 289–297.

    [19] Burgueño J, Campos G D L, Weigel K. Genomic prediction of breeding values when modeling genotype × environment interaction using pedigree and dense molecular markers. Crop Sci, 2012, 52: 707–712.

    [20] Phuke R M, Anuradha K, Radhika K, Jabeen F, Anuradha G, Ramesh T, Hariprasanna K, Mehtre S P, Deshpande S P, Anil G, Das R R, Rathore A, Hash T, Reddy B V S, Kumar A A. Genotype × environment interaction, correlation, and GGE Biplot analysis for grain iron and zinc concentration and other agronomic traits in RIL population of sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench). Front Plant Sci, 2017, 5: 712–716.

    [21] Zolfaghar S, Bahram H, Dadkhodaie A. Dissection of genotype × environment interactions for mucilage and seed yield in Plantago species: application of AMMI and GGE biplot analyses. PLoS One, 2018, 13: e0196095.

    [22] Zhang Y C, Tian F. Potato Experiment Test Research Method. Beijing: China Agriculture Science and Technology Press, 2007. pp 90–93 (in Chinese).

    [23] Yan W K. Crop Variety Trials Data Management and Analysis. Beijing: China Agriculture Science and Technology Press, 2015. pp 133–146 (in Chinese).

    [24] Dia M, Weherr T C, Hasssel R, Price D S. Genotype × environment interaction and stability analysis for watermelon fruit yield in the United States. Crop Sci, 2016, 56: 1645–1661.

    [25] Wang R H, Hu D H, Zheng H Q, Yun S. Genotype × environmental interaction by AMMI and GGE biplot analysis for the provenances of Michelia chapensis in South China. J For Res, 2016, 27: 659–664.

    [26] Muthoni J, Shimelis H, Melis R. Genotype × environment interaction and stability of potato tuber yield and bacterial wilt resistance in Kenya. Am J Potato Res, 2015, 92: 367–378.

    [27] Yan W K. Optimal use of biplots in analysis of multi-location variety test data. Acta Agron Sin, 2010, 36: 1805–1819 (in Chinese with English abstract).

    [28] Yan W K, Sheng Q L, Hu Y G, Hunt L A. GGE Biplot: an ideal tool for studying genotype by environment interaction of regional yield trial data. Acta Agron Sin, 2001, 27: 21–28 (in Chinese with English abstract).

This Article



Vol 46, No. 03, Pages 354-364

March 2020


Article Outline


  • 1 Materials and methods
  • 2 Results
  • 3 Discussion
  • 4 Conclusions
  • References