Stability, the Last Frontier: Forage Yield Dynamics of Peas under Two Cultivation Systems

Abstract

The stability of performance may be proved to be the last frontier for adopting certain genotypes in various cultivation systems and environments. The main objective of the present study was to analyze the forage yield stability performance of seven pea (Pisum sativum L.) genotypes based on various stability indices. The genotype behavior was studied based on the yield of peas under both conventional and low-input cultivation systems. Five cultivars of peas (broadly distributed) and two lines were used in a strip-plot design. Significant positive correlations were detected between forage yield and some other traits. This way, forage yield stability may be indirectly improved by improving certain traits showing qualitative inheritance. Comparisons revealed that genotypes exhibited stable performance, even in low-input farming systems. AMMI analysis, GGE biplot, and analysis of variance (ANOVA) combination showed statistically significant differences between genotypes and environments and the farming system. Our analysis depicted specific cultivars of peas for different areas and farming systems to attain highly stable performance. Vermio was confirmed to be a stable genotype for forage yield performance in low-input farming in Trikala and Kalambaka areas, while Pisso was indicated as the best in Florina and Giannitsa areas in low-input farming. The two pea lines exhibited stable performance in Giannitsa and Florina areas, especially in low-input conditions. The stable behavior of some genotypes in these conditions may be useful for farmers that raise livestock in mountainous areas. The genetic parameters show that the selection for fresh forage yield and dry matter yield in breeding programs is expected to be effective.

Genotype-by-Environment Interaction Analysis for Quantity and Quality Traits in Faba Beans Using AMMI, GGE Models, and Stability Indices

“…There are various benefits to using the AMMI or GGE biplot to explain GEIs. However, there are also drawbacks [30] and their combinations with stability indices allow for the selection of genotypes for multiple traits [31][32][33][34][35][36][37]. The genotype main effect plus genotype per se × environment (GGE) biplot enables simultaneous analysis of genotypes by considering high-yielding ability and stability.…”

Modeling Stability of Alfalfa Yield and Main Quality Traits

“…Using molecular markers and clustering, Alzahrani et al [4] managed to separate cultivars According to the ANOVA table, G × E interactions were highly significant in our research. Greveniotis et al [24][25][26][27]46,47] reported that G × E interactions often occur in the cultivations of many plants aiming to support livestock, meaning different behavior in different places or years. The main traits of alfalfa breeders and farmers, taking into account green mass yield, dry matter yield, and protein content (%), are subjective to GEI [5].…”

“…The stability index was calculated using, as follows, [24][25][26][27]38,[43][44][45][46][47]] (x/s) 2 , where x represents the mean value of each parameter examined for every genetic material utilized in this study and s the respective standard deviation. ANOVA was used to assess the data across environments to reveal significant differences for each measured parameter.…”

“…Cluster analysis was performed to find relationships among the studied alfalfa genotypes and a heat map (Figure 5) was generated. Cluster analysis alone or in combination with principal components analysis is generally used for the classification of various genetic materials (e.g., peas and grapes) [26,57]. Samples from alfalfa genotypes were divided into six groups (noted with different colors: purple, light blue, brown, blue, green, and red) of increasing dissimilarity.…”

“…As it is known, yield is strongly affected by factors such as genotype (G), environment (E), and genotype x environment interaction (GEI) [24][25][26][27], but, among them, GEI leads genotypes to respond differently in different environments [28]. The literature reports that the cultivation year significantly influences green mass and dry matter yield, as well as the protein content (%) in some species [29].…”