Effectiveness of Selection in Upland Cotton in Stress Environments¹

Abstract

Much of the Upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) acreage growni n the UnitedS tates is producedin environments where lack of moisture and low temperatures frequently limit production. The purpose of the current research was to test the effectiveness of selecting for lint yield in such stress environments as compared with an optimal environment. Random F3 plants from a composite cross population were advanced two generations by self‐pollination. The F4 and F5 progenies were grown at Lubbock, Big Spring, and College Station, Tex. in 1976, and the F5 progenies were grown at the same locations in 1977. In both years, all locations were classified as deficient or adequate in temperature and moisture based on input heat units and available water. Genotype × environmenitn teractions, within‐location herltabifities, and genetic advance for lint yield were estimated.In 1976, Lubbockw as deficient in heat units and adequate in precipitation, Big Spring was adequate in heat units and deficient in precipitation, and College Station was adequate in both heat units and moisture. Entries were not significantly different for lint yield at either Lubbock or Big Spring, although the genotype × environment interaction was significant for these locations. At College Station, entries were significantly different, whereas the genotypes × environment interaction was not significant. We concluded that selection within the stress environments was largely based upon genotype × environment interactions. A significant genetic advance for lint yield was realized at all locations when the selection was made at College Station in an environment considered optimal for the growth of Upland cotton.

Genetic analysis and selection for wheat yield in drought-stressed and irrigated environments

“…Therefore, within the normal range of selection intensity, no line possessed the best combination of favorable genes for high yield in both irrigated and drought-stressed environments . These results agree with findings of many researchers (Ceccarelli, 1987 ;Ehdaie et al ., 1988 ;Ceccarelii,1989 ;Atlin & Frey 1989), yet they contrast with others (Frey, 1964 ;Roy & Murty, 1970 ;Quisenberry et al ., 1980 ;Johnson & Geadelmann, 1989 ;Whitehead & Allen, 1990) .…”

“…Several researchers have concluded that selection under favorable conditions produces lines suitable in both stress and nonstress environments (Frey, 1964 ;Roy & Murty, 1970 ;Laing & Fischer, 1979 ;Quisenberry et al ., 1980 ;Johnson & Geadelmann, 1989 ;Whitehead & Allen, 1990) . On the other hand, others have concluded that yield improvement under high-stress conditions requires selection strictly under those conditions (Arboleda-Rivera & Compton, 1974 ;Ceccarelli, 1987 ;Ceccarelli, 1989 ;Atlin & Frey, 1989) .…”

Selection of oat lines for use in low-productivity environments

“…In subsequent experiments in oats, selection in HPE has frequently been demonstrated to produce the greatest gains in yield averaged over all productivity levels (Barrales, 1985;Shabana et al, 1980;Vega and Frey, 1981). Similar results have been reported with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) by Quisenberry et al (1980), with alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) by Salter et al (1984), and with wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) by Roy and Murty (1970). On the other hand Byth et al (1969) reported that selection in HPE resulted in no greater yield gains in two soybean [Glycine max L. (Merrill)] populations than did selection in LPE.…”

“…Similarly, Van Sanford and Matzinger (1983), in a study comparing recurrent selection on low-and high-nutrient media for Increased seedling weight in tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.), observed that the greatest gains resulted from selection on high-nutrient medium, irrespective of the level at which response was evaluated. An advantage for selection in the absence of stress for performance under conditions of stress has also been reported in cotton (Quisenberry et al, 1980), oats (Shabana et al, 1980), and alfalfa (Salter et al, 1984). On the other hand, Arboleda- Rivera and Compton (1974) reported that direct selection in drought-stress environments was superior to indirect selection in the absence of drought for pro ducing a drought-hardy maize (zea mays L.) synthetic, and both Falconer and Latyszewski (1952) and Bateman (1974) observed that direct selection on a poor diet for increased body size in mice was superior to indirect selection at an optimum nutritional level.…”

Maturity and Leaf Shape as Traits Influencing Cotton Cultivar Adaptation to Dryland Conditions

“…Many researchers have reported on the best environments for selection, but conclusions vary. Quisenberry et al (1980) concluded that selection within early generation populations was most effective when performed at locations where environmental components do not limit yield, i.e., selection for yield potential as suggested by Rosielle and Hamblin (1981) Other researchers such as Arboleda‐Rivera and Compton (1974) reported success when selecting only under water stress conditions. Our data indicate that both strategies may have a role in identifying superior dryland cultivars.…”