Plant density affects the reliability of using F1 and F2 yield to predict F3 yield in barley
S. Th. Kotzamanidis A and D. G. Roupakias BA National Agricultural Research Foundation (NAGREF), Cereal Institute, Thermi – Thessaloniki, Greece, GR – 570 01.
B Corresponding author; Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, School of Agriculture, Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Thessaloniki, Greece, GR – 541 24; email: roupak@agro.auth.gr
Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 55(9) 961-965 https://doi.org/10.1071/AR03235
Submitted: 11 November 2003 Accepted: 20 July 2004 Published: 24 September 2004
Abstract
Prediction of F3 population yield on the basis of the parental lines, the F1, and the F2 generation yield at low and high plant density was studied in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.). Six F1 crosses together with the 7 parental cultivars were evaluated under high plant density with adjacent check plots and under low plant density in a honeycomb design. In the following year, the 6 F2 populations together with the 7 parental lines were also evaluated at high plant density with adjacent check plots. In addition, the 6 F2s together with a check (cv. Athinaida) were evaluated at low plant density in a honeycomb design. During the third year, the 6 unselected F3 populations together with cv. Athinaida were evaluated under commercial cropping conditions in a randomised complete block design with 4 replications at 2 locations. It was found that yield performance of the F3 population could not be predicted by the mid-parental value (MPV). Similarly, the F3 population yield was not effectively predicted from the yield of the F1, F2, or F1+F2 generations when they were evaluated under high plant density. In contrast, the F3 population yield was predicted effectively from the yield of the F1, F2, or F1+F2 generations when they were evaluated at low plant density. The best results were obtained when the mean yield of the F1 and F2 generations was taken into consideration. It was concluded that low plant density increases the reliability of using F1 and F2 yield per plant in predicting the yield of the F3 populations in barley under crop environment.
Additional keywords: Hordeum vulgare, prediction, F3 population.
Atkins RE, Murphy HC
(1949) Evaluation of yield potentialities of oat crosses from bulk hybrid tests. Agronomy Journal 41, 41–45.
Batzios DR, Roupakias DG
(1997) HONEY: a microcomputer program for honeycomb design analysis. Crop Science 37, 744–747.
Briggs KG, Shebeski LH
(1968) Implications concerning the frequency of control plots in wheat breeding nurseries. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 48, 149–153.
Fasoulas AC, Fasoula VA
(1995) Honeycomb selection designs. Plant Breeding Reviews 13, 87–139.
Fowler WL, Heyne EG
(1955) Evaluation of bulk hybrid tests for predicting performance of pure line selections in hard red winter wheat. Agronomy Journal 47, 430–434.
Hamblin J, Evans AM
(1976) The estimation of cross yield using early generation and parental yields in dry beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Euphytica 25, 515–520.
| Crossref |
Harrington JB
(1940) Yielding capacity of wheat crosses as indicated by bulk hybrid tests. Canadian Journal of Research Selection, C- Botanical Science 18, 578–584.
Iliades EC,
Roupakias DG, Goulas CK
(2003) Effectiveness of honeycomb selection for yield superiority at three interplant distances: a yield simulation study using chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) inbred lines. Euphytica 133, 299–311.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Immer FR
(1941) Relation between yielding ability and homozygosis in barley crosses. Journal of the American Society of Agronomy 33, 200–206.
Lupton FGH
(1965) Studies in the breeding of self-pollination cereals. 5. Use of the incomplete diallel in wheat breeding. Euphytica 14, 331–352.
| Crossref |
Roupakias D,
Zesopoulou A,
Kazolea S,
Dalkalitses D,
Mavromatis A, Lazaridou T
(1997) Effectiveness of early generation selection under two plant densities in faba bean (Vicia faba L.). Euphytica 93, 63–70.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Schut JW, Dourleijin CJ, Bos I
(1998) Cross and line prediction in barley using F4 small-plot yield trials. Prediction of cross performance in barley. Phd thesis
(Wageningen Agricultural University:
Wageningen, The Netherlands)
Thurling N, Ratinam M
(1987) Evaluation of parent selection methods for yield improvement of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L Walp.). Euphytica 36, 913–926.
| Crossref |
Utz HF,
Bohn M, Melchinger AE
(2001) Predicting progeny means and variances of winter wheat crosses from phenotypic values of their parents. Crop Science 41, 1470–1478.
Van Ooijen JW
(1989) The predictive value of quantitative genetic parameters in autogamous crops: bias caused by intergenotypic competition. 2. F∞-variance. Euphytica 44, 95–108.
| Crossref |
