Genotype × Environment Interaction of Mosaic Disease, Root Yields and Total Carotene Concentration of Yellow-Fleshed Cassava in Nigeria
Twenty-one yellow-fleshed cassava genotypes were evaluated over two years in five major cassava growing agroecological zones in Nigeria. The trials were established in a randomized complete block design with four replications to assess genotype performance and Genotype × Environment interaction for...
Saved in:
Published in | International Journal of Agronomy Vol. 2012; no. 2012; pp. 212 - 219 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
Cairo, Egypt
Hindawi Limiteds
01.01.2012
Hindawi Puplishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Limited Wiley |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | Twenty-one yellow-fleshed cassava genotypes were evaluated over two years in five major cassava growing agroecological zones in Nigeria. The trials were established in a randomized complete block design with four replications to assess genotype performance and Genotype × Environment interaction for cassava mosaic disease (CMD), fresh and dry root yield (FYLD; DYLD), root dry matter content (DMC), and total carotene concentration (TCC). Combined analysis of variance showed significant differences (P<0.001) among genotypes (G), environment (E), and Genotype × Environment interaction (GE) for all the traits tested. For reaction to CMD, the best genotypes showing stable resistance were TMS 07/0539 and TMS 07/0628. For root yield, the best genotypes were TMS 01/1368 and TMS 07/0553. Genotype TMS 07/0593 was the best for DMC and TCC across the 10 environments. Variation among genotypes accounted for most of the Total Sum of Squares for CMD (72.1%) and TCC (34.4%). Environmental variation accounted for most of the Total Sum of Squares for FYLD (42.8%), DYLD (39.6%), and DMC (29.2%). This study revealed that TMS 07/0593 has the highest and most stable TCC, DMC with the lowest CMD severity score and appeared to be the best genotype. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-2 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-1 content type line 23 |
ISSN: | 1687-8159 1687-8167 |
DOI: | 10.1155/2012/434675 |