Efficiency of Spatial Analyses of Field Pea Variety Trials

• Published in: Crop science Vol. 44; no. 1; pp. 49 - 55
• Main Authors: Yang, Rong-Cai, Ye, Terrance Z., Blade, Stanford F., Bandara, Manjula
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Madison, WI Crop Science Society of America 2004; American Society of Agronomy
• Subjects: Adaptation to environment and cultivation conditions; Agricultural production; Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions; Alberta; Biological and medical sciences; British Columbia; crop yield; equations; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; Genetics and breeding of economic plants; mathematical models; model validation; Peas; Pisum sativum; Spatial analysis; spatial variation; statistical analysis; Varietal selection. Specialized plant breeding, plant breeding aims; varieties; variety trials; Canada; Alberta; North America; America; British Columbia; Performance evaluation; Genetic variability; Spatial analysis; Field experiment; Grain legume; Leguminosae; Genotype environment interaction; Dicotyledones; Pisum sativum; Angiospermae; Spermatophyta; Measurement method; Yield component
• ISSN: 1435-0653; 0011-183X; 1435-0653
• DOI: 10.2135/cropsci2004.0049

Several spatial analyses of neighboring plots are now available for improving the precision of variety trials. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficiency of three commonly used spatial analyses, a nearest neighbor adjustment (NNA), a least squares smoothing (LSS), and a first-order autoregressive model (AR1), in removing field trends from 157 field pea (Pisum sativum L.) variety trials tested in different growing zones across Alberta, Canada, during 1997 tn 2001. All trials were conducted with a randomized complete block (RCB) design with three or four replications. A complete replication (block) was planted in a single field tier. Yield data from each of the 157 trials were subject to the conventional RCB analysis and the three spatial analyses. The LSS, NNA, and AR1 analyses removed an average of 22, 16, and 7% residual variation compared with the RCB analysis, respectively, but the amount of removal by the three analyses varied considerably among the trials. Each spatial analysis achieved more error reduction in 1997 and 1998, where trials contained larger block sizes than in 1999 to 2001, where trials contained smaller block sizes. The efficiency in spatial variation removal was great with large block sizes that involved large numbers of varieties. Furthermore, the LSS and NNA analyses were more effective in such removal than the AR1 analysis.