Submit or Track your Manuscript LOG-IN

Genotype by Environment Interaction in Bread Wheat Across Dry land Environments

SJA_35_3_985-999

 

 

 

Research Article

Genotype by Environment Interaction in Bread Wheat Across Dry land Environments

Muhammad Ilyas* and Fida Mohammad

Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, The University of Agriculture, Peshawar, 25130, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan.

Abstract | Genotype by environment (GE) interaction complicates selection process of desirable genotypes. Therefore, newly developed germplasm or genotypes needs to be evaluated in multi-environment trials (METs) to know yield potential and adaptability. This experiment was designed to interpret GE interaction using 55 F5:8 bread wheat recombinant inbred lines (RILs) with five checks. Experimental material was planted using alpha lattice design in two replicates at Peshawar (E1and E5), Kohat (E2 and E6), Sarai Naurang (E3 and E7) and Dera Ismail Khan (E4 and E8) (Khyber Pakhtunkhwa) during 2014/15 and 2015/16. Locations in each year were considered as independent environments. Pooled ANOVA revealed significant interaction due to GE for days to heading, days to maturity, grain filling duration, grain growth rate, grains spike-1, 1000-grain weight and grain yield. Averaged over eight environments, wheat RIL’s 44, 55, and 25 were desirable for days to heading, days to maturity, grain filling duration, grain growth rate, grains spike-1 and grain yield. Mean grain yield ranged from 1613 to 2471 kg ha-1 across environments. Among the tested environments, Sarai Naurang (E3 and E7) was identified as highly productive environment. The RIL25 had superior performance for various traits. Wheat RIL25 produced maximum grain yield in E2 (3123 kg ha-1), E3 (3665 kg ha-1) and E7 (3256 kg ha-1), thus emerged as promising line with wider adaptation. Conversely, RIL24 had higher grain yield in E1 (2800 kg ha-1); RIL1 in E4 (2884 kg ha-1); RIL58 in E5 (2370 kg ha-1); RIL7 in E6 (3200 kg ha-1) and RIL53 in E8 (2339 kg ha-1) suggesting their specific adaptability to respective environments. Grain yield was significantly correlated with days to heading, grain growth rate and grains spike-1. Keeping in view the significance of GE interaction, it would be worthwhile to carryout stability analysis for identifying high yielding RILs with suitable stability.


Received | April 27, 2019; Accepted | July 21, 2019; Published | September 12, 2019

*Correspondence | Muhammad Ilyas, Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, The University of Agriculture, Peshawar, 25130, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan; Email: muhammad.ilyas906@gmail.com

Citation | Ilyas, M. and F. Mohammad. 2019. Genotype by environment interaction in bread wheat across dry land environments. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture, 35(3): 985-999.

DOI | http://dx.doi.org/10.17582/journal.sja/2019/35.3.985.999

Keywords | Genotype by environment, GEI, Yield stability, Dry lands, Drought, Wheat



Introduction

Wheat is a leading food crop in Pakistan. It contributes 9.6 percent to the value added in agriculture and 1.9 percent to the GDP of Pakistan. During 2017/18, wheat crop was grown on an average of 8.74 million hectares which produced 26.12 million tons with an average yield of 2.6 tons ha-1. In Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, it was grown on 0.73 million hectares which produced 1.34 million tons with an average yield of 1.7 tons ha-1 (PBS, 2018). The average wheat production in the country, however, is well below than its true potential due to various reasons.

Crop plant is exposed to a range of environmental factors which greatly influence its yield performance. In Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, wheat is mostly planted under rainfed conditions. The situation aggravates by erratic distribution of rainfall which results in poor yield.

Higher dry root weights, longer roots, long coleoptiles and higher root to shoot ratio may results due to drought stress at seedling stage which could be used as selection criteria while breeding for drought resistance (Takele, 2000; Dhanda et al., 2004; Kashiwagi et al., 2004). Forty five percent of the world’s geographical area is under drought stress causing major reduction in agriculture productions. Unfortunately, the available wheat germplasm in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa does not possess tolerance to drought stress. Consequently, farmers have to plant low yielding varieties which have not even been bred for water scarce conditions. Therefore, development of such varieties which can effectively withstand drought stress is a viable option to stabilize yield over years. The evaluation of varieties in a series of diverse environments to test consistency in yield is therefore, an integral part of breeding for stress environments.

Genotypes when tested across different environmental conditions often show significant variation in grain yield. This fluctuation is generally known as GE interaction. However, GE interaction is likely to be more severe in stress conditions which complicate the process of selecting high yielding stable genotypes (Cooper and Byth, 1996). Therefore, breeding programs are tended to test extensively newly developed material in diverse environments to increase the chances of success (Alwala et al., 2010). The current study was therefore carried out to test newly developed 55 bread wheat RILs along with five checks at four different locations of KP under rainfed conditions across two years to identify high yielding stable wheat lines.

Materials and Methods

This experiment was designed to determine the GE interaction for grain yield and other production traits in bread wheat. A total of 55 bread wheat RILs and five check cultivars were evaluated across four locations over two years.

Description of experiment

Sixty bread wheat genotypes comprising 55 F5:8 bread wheat RILs and five check cultivars (Table A) were planted in 5 × 12 alpha lattice designs in two replicates at Peshawar, Kohat, Sarai Naurang and Dera Ismail (D.I.) Khan of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, during 2014/15 and 2015/16. Locations in each year were considered as independent environments. Hereafter, these environments will appear in the text as E1, E2, E3, E4, E5, E6, E7 and E8 (Table B). Each genotype was planted in a plot of six rows with 5 m length having row to row space of 30 cm. All cultural practices were kept uniform.

History of breeding material

Some bread wheat populations were bred in the Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics during 2002/03 (Ahmad and Mohammad, 2005). These populations were advanced in bulk till F4. Single head selection was carried out based on agronomic fitness and disease resistance in F5. The selected heads were raised in head-to-row scheme for seed multiplication and disease screening against stripe rust. The tested lines were found segregating for stripe rust resistance. Therefore, 20 resistant heads were hand harvested and planted as head-to-row during 2012/13. Heavy infestation of stripe and leaf rust fungi offered good opportunity for screening F5:7 RILs. Fifty-five F5:8 RILs were selected based on disease resistance and yield performance for further evaluation in multi-location and multi-year trials under rainfed conditions.

Traits measurement

Days to heading were taken as days from planting to the date when 50 % of the spikes got emerged completely from flag leaf. Days to maturity were counted from the date of planting to the time when more than 80 percent of the plants turned yellow. Grain filling duration was calculated by subtracting days to heading from the days to maturity (Sayre et al., 1997). Grain growth rate was estimated by dividing grain yield plot-1 by grain filling duration (Sayre et al., 1997). Grains spike-1 were recorded as reported by Sayre et al. (1997). One thousand grains were taken randomly from the bulk grain yield and were weighed using an electronic balance. Grain yield plot-1 was recorded after threshing, and then converted to kg ha-1.

Statistical analyses

Analysis of variance: Field-data were collected at proper wheat growth stages. Each location in each year was considered as single environment. Combined data for environments were subjected to pooled analysis of variance using SAS computer software (SAS, 2009). Upon significant GE interaction, separate analysis of variance for each environment was also carried out.

Table A: List of genotypes with pedigree used in the current study.

Genotype Pedigree Genotype Pedigree
G1 Ghaznavi × Khatakwal-25-33-12 G31 Tatara × Inqilab-46-26-17
G2 Ghaznavi × Khatakwal-25-33-15 G32 Tatara × Inqilab-07-04-01
G3 Takbir × Inqilab-00-45-01 G33 Tatara × Inqilab-07-04-05
G4 Takbir × Inqilab-00-45-02 G34 Tatara × Inqilab-07-04-06
G5 Takbir × Inqilab-00-45-05 G35 Tatara × Inqilab-07-04-08
G6 Takbir × Inqilab-00-45-09 G36 Tatara × Margala-00-43-01
G7 Takbir × Inqilab-00-45-12 G37 Tatara × Margala-00-43-02
G8 Takbir × Khatakwal-16-03-04 G38 Tatara × Margala-00-43-07
G9 Takbir × Khatakwal-16-03-05 G39 Tatara × Margala-00-43-13
G10 Takbir × Khatakwal-16-03-06 G40 Tatara × Margala-00-43-16
G11 Takbir × Khatakwal-16-03-07 G41 Tatara × Margala-00-43-19
G12 Takbir × Khatakwal-16-03-09 G42 Tatara × Margala-00-43-20
G13 Takbir × Khatakwal-16-03-10 G43 Tatara × Takbir-19-42-04
G14 Takbir × Khatakwal-16-03-13 G44 Tatara × Takbir-19-42-06
G15 Takbir × Khatakwal-16-03-17 G45 Tatara × Takbir-05-09-08
G16 Takbir × Khatakwal-16-03-18 G46 Tatara × Takbir-05-09-10
G17 Tatara × Ghaznavi-10-22-07 G47 Tatara × Takbir-05-09-11
G18 Tatara × Ghaznavi-10-22-12 G48 Tatara × Takbir-05-09-18
G19 Tatara × Ghaznavi-04-31-03 G49 Tatara × Takbir-05-09-12
G20 Tatara × Ghaznavi-04-31-04 G50 Wafaq × Ghaznavi-26-49-02
G21 Tatara × Ghaznavi-04-31-06 G51 Wafaq × Ghaznavi-26-49-07
G22 Tatara × Ghaznavi-04-31-12 G52 Wafaq × Ghaznavi-26-49-10
G23 Tatara × Ghaznavi-04-31-16 G53 Wafaq × Ghaznavi-26-49-12
G24 Tatara × Ghaznavi-30-48-11 G54 Wafaq × Ghaznavi-26-49-14
G25 Tatara × Ghaznavi-30-48-12 G55 Wafaq × Ghaznavi-15-8-14
G28 Tatara × Ghaznavi-30-48-15 G56 Janbaz (Check-I)
G27 Tatara × Ghaznavi-30-48-19 G57 KT-2000 (Check-II)
G28 Tatara × Inqilab-20-18-20 G58 Amin (Check-III)
G29 Tatara × Inqilab-20-18-08 G59 Hasham (Check-IV)
G30 Tatara × Inqilab-46-26-02 G60 Shahkar (Check-V)

 

Table B: Description of eight environments used for evaluation of 60 bread wheat genotypes during 2014-16 cropping season.

Locations Year Environments Average rainfall (mm) Altitude (m) Geographical Position
Latitude Longitude
Peshawar 2014/15; 2015/16 E1; E5 326; 385 359

34.010 N

71.460 E

Kohat 2014/15; 2015/16 E2; E6 421; 245 508

33.580 N

71.450 E

Sarai Naurang 2014/15; 2015/16 E3; E7 217; 189 304

32.490 N

70.460 E

Dera Ismail Khan 2014/15; 2015/16 E4; E8 250; 477 175

31.830 N

70.910 E

 

Results and Discussion

Pooled analysis of variance across environments revealed significant differences among genotypes for days to heading, days to maturity, grain filling duration, grain growth rate, and grain yield. Interaction due to GE was also significant for all traits except grains spike-1 and 1000-grain weight. Detailed description for each trait is given below.

Days to heading

Pooled analysis of variance revealed significant

Table 1: Mean squares for various traits of bread wheat RILs during 2014/15 and 2015/16.

Traits Replication(E)(df=8) S-Block (Rep*E)(df=64) Gen (df = 59) Env (df =7) Gen × Env (df = 413)
  MS MS MS %SS MS %SS MS %SS
Days to heading 69.0 9.0

63.52** 5.6

7571.1** 79.9

11.26** 7.0

Days to maturity 39.9 8.3

17.34** 0.5

28589.8** 96.0

9.98** 2.0

Grain filling duration 136.9 18.4

59.6** 4.1

9641.4** 78.3

17.64** 8.5

Grain growth rate 1177.3 88.3

259.4** 7.8

11974..1** 40.7

138.1** 26.3

Grains spke-1

192.4 44.8

90.45** 9.0

879.2** 10.3

48.23ns 33.4

1000 grains weight 226.7 27.5

33.7ns 2.7

6265.8** 60.6

27.18ns 15.5

Grain yield 2868816.3 127867.6

434319.5** 8.3

12569121.8** 28.4

243096.4** 32.4

** = Significant at 1% probability, respectively.

Table 2: Mean performance for days to heading of 60 wheat genotypes across eight environments during 2014/15 and 2015/16.

Geno-types E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 Mean Geno-types E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 Mean
G1 125 113 111 102 99 109 104 100 108 G31 126 111 111 103 100 109 104 103 108
G2 125 112 111 104 98 108 102 99 107 G32 120 113 111 101 98 108 102 100 107
G3 128 112 111 109 101 110 104 101 110 G33 115 108 103 100 99 109 102 100 105
G4 127 111 112 108 102 110 105 102 110 G34 115 105 103 100 99 107 102 104 104
G5 131 110 118 110 105 114 109 102 112 G35 115 113 104 100 99 107 101 100 105
G6 131 118 113 112 103 111 108 100 112 G36 124 115 112 103 97 108 103 104 108
G7 131 118 115 108 103 112 108 100 112 G37 123 111 115 105 101 112 109 102 110
G8 129 117 112 104 102 112 108 103 111 G38 123 111 114 102 101 110 107 102 109
G9 129 118 113 104 102 112 106 103 111 G39 125 109 115 105 102 110 105 104 109
G10 124 115 113 103 98 111 106 103 109 G40 125 114 113 105 99 109 105 95 108
G11 126 115 113 105 97 110 107 99 109 G41 125 112 113 103 99 110 105 101 109
G12 126 115 112 106 98 112 107 101 110 G42 127 117 114 111 101 111 108 103 112
G13 125 115 112 108 99 110 106 98 109 G43 126 112 119 110 102 110 106 101 111
G14 126 112 113 107 97 110 106 100 109 G44 121 109 109 106 100 110 106 100 108
G15 123 113 113 107 98 109 104 102 109 G45 125 113 112 105 99 108 103 100 108
G16 127 116 113 106 103 113 108 101 111 G46 126 115 109 103 97 107 101 102 108
G17 122 117 127 104 100 110 104 97 110 G47 123 117 108 108 99 108 104 100 108
G18 128 115 112 104 95 110 105 101 109 G48 120 116 107 107 103 111 106 101 109
G19 126 112 107 106 99 112 107 100 109 G49 118 115 111 111 99 108 104 100 108
G20 126 114 107 104 100 109 103 97 108 G50 117 119 104 104 99 108 102 103 107
G21 122 106 109 102 99 108 101 99 106 G51 115 114 104 100 99 109 102 101 106
G22 124 108 110 106 100 110 103 102 108 G52 115 113 105 102 99 109 102 102 106
G23 121 111 110 103 97 107 98 101 106 G53 119 117 105 102 97 108 101 102 106
G24 126 109 114 104 96 108 102 102 108 G54 117 116 105 102 102 108 101 102 107
G25 126 114 113 109 96 110 105 103 110 G55 116 120 106 104 96 107 100 99 106
G26 126 117 113 106 102 111 106 104 111 G56 128 118 117 104 101 111 106 101 111
G27 125 117 114 108 100 110 106 102 110 G57 130 115 117 110 98 110 102 103 111
G28 126 117 114 106 102 111 107 101 111 G58 131 118 113 111 100 112 108 102 112
G29 129 115 116 111 103 111 107 99 111 G59 121 116 106 104 97 110 106 102 108
G30 124 112 112 105 99 110 105 100 108 G60 127 115 112 106 100 111 108 102 110
Mean - - - - - - - - - - 124 114 111 105 100 110 105 101 109
Max - - - - - - - - - - 131 120 127 112 105 114 109 104 112
Min - - - - - - - - - - 115 105 103 100 95 107 98 95 104

Desi

rable

RIL

- - - - - - - - - - 34 21 34 34 18 23 23 40 34

E1=Peshawar 2014/15, E2=Kohat 2014/15, E3=Sarai Naurang 2014/15, E4=D.I. Khan 2014/15, E5=Peshawar 2015/16, E6=Kohat 2015/16, E7=Sarai Naurang 2015/16, E8=D.I Khan 2015/16.

differences among genotypes, environments and GE interaction for days to heading. Overall, genotypes, environments and genotype by environment interaction explained 5.6%, 79.9% and 7.0% of the total variation, respectively. Environmental effect emerged as important source of variation due to its larger contribution (79.9%) in the total sum of squares (Table 1). Averaged over eight environments, days to heading ranged from 104 to 112 days with an average of 109 days, while it ranged from 115 to 131 days in E1; 105 to 120 days in E2; 103 to 127 days in E3; 100 to 112 days in E4; 95 to 105 days in E5; 107 to 114 days in E6; 98 to 109 days in E7 and 98 to 109 in E8 (Table 2). Mean days to heading of 60 genotypes indicated early heading in E4 (100 days), E5 (95 days), E7 (98 days) and E8 (95 days), whereas, delayed heading was observed in E1 (131 days), E2 (120 days) and E3 (127 days). Among the tested genotypes, the RIL34 was noted with early heading, across environments. Similarly, the RIL34 was also early in heading at E1 (115 days), E3 (103 days) and E4 (100 days), thus confirmed as early heading line across eight environments (Table 2).

Early heading plays an important role in grain filling in majority of crops including wheat. Late heading provides lesser time for grain filling which ultimately reflects in lower grain weight (Nasarullah et al., 2017). Mostly, drought and heat stresses occur at the last stages of wheat crop which may adversely affect the genotype performance. Therefore, lines having early heading are desirable in dry lands. The wheat RIL34 was declared as early heading across tested environments, suggesting tolerance to the varying environmental conditions. Rainfall distribution over these environments classified E3, E4, E6 and E7 as drought stressed environments with lower precipitation rate than others. Early heading was observed in E4, E5, E7 and E8, although there was considerable variation in rainfall distribution in these environments. Whereas, delayed heading was observed at E1, E2 and E3. These environments provided with sufficient amount of rainfall as compared to other environments. Good moisture conditions facilitated genotypes with favourable environments and hence they continued their vegetative growth which resulted in delayed heading. Our results are supported by Ijaz et al. (2013) and Ikramullah et al. (2011), who also reported significant GE interaction for days to heading.

Days to maturity

Combined analysis of variance exhibited significant (p<0.05) differences among genotypes, environments and GE interaction. Environments captured 96.0% of the total variation, whereas genotypes and GE interaction explained only 0.5% and 2.0% of the total variation, respectively. Larger contribution of environment to the total sum of squares suggested greater diversity of environments for this trait (Table 1). Averaged over eight environments, data for days to maturity ranged from 157 to 162 days, with an average of 158 days across environments. Early maturity was observed in E4 (143 days), E7 (144 days) and E8 (146 days), while late maturity was noticed in E1 (172 days), E2 (184 days) and E3 (166 days). Among the tested wheat RILs, RIL 53 was noted as early maturing across environments (Table 3). Within each environment, mean data for days to maturity ranged from 156 to 172 days with an average of 161 days at E1, 156 to 166 days with an average of 160 days at E3, 143 to 150 days with an average of 147 days at E4. Minimum days to maturity were recorded for RIL28 at E1; RIL48 at E3 and RIL51 at E4 (Table 3).

The yellowness of flag leaf and spikes indicates the physiological maturity in wheat crop (Hanft and Wych, 1982). Adaptation strategies of plants to drought stress include drought escape, drought avoidance and drought tolerance. Among these strategies, escaping drought involves the completion of the life cycle before the onset of the drought period. Therefore, early maturity has been known as a major drought escaping mechanism, particularly at terminal drought stresses (Levitt, 1980; Chaves et al., 2002). Early maturity was observed at E4, E7 and E8, while late maturity was noticed in E1, E2 and E7. Late maturity could have been due to sufficient rainfall and relatively low temperature during the growing season. Water and temperature regulate many of the physiological and biochemical processes within a plant, which in turn control growth and development towards maturity. Early drought and high temperature increase stress on wheat crop, thus enforcing early maturity, while an adequate amount of moisture with optimum temperature promotes growth and development. Among the tested genotypes, the RIL51 and 53 were noted as early maturing across environments, while less number of days to maturity was recorded for RIL28 at E1, RIL 48 at E2 and RIL51 at E4. These lines could be considered as specifically adapted to their respective environments with relatively maximum rainfall distribution. Worland et al. (2004) reported that photosensitivity and vernalization sensitive genes determine the differences in maturity in different crop varieties because genes responsible for earliness are responsive to temperature. The results in the study for days to maturity are in line with the results of Ikramullah et al. (2011) who also reported significant GE interaction for days to maturity in wheat crop.

Table 3: Mean performance for days to maturity of 60 wheat genotypes across eight environments during 2014/15 and 2015/16.

Geno-types

E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 Mean Geno-types E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 Mean
G1 160 179 160 147 155 157 151 148 157 G31 163 178 162 147 155 159 151 155 159
G2 167 178 158 147 154 158 148 146 157 G32 160 178 160 147 162 159 151 150 158
G3 165 180 162 148 155 161 144 152 158 G33 161 176 160 145 156 160 149 154 158
G4 167 177 158 148 157 160 151 150 159 G34 158 180 159 145 160 159 149 153 158
G5 168 181 159 149 158 159 153 149 160 G35 160 180 159 144 159 159 152 150 158
G6 171 182 161 148 158 159 153 149 160 G36 157 181 157 145 156 160 149 150 157
G7 172 182 166 150 159 160 156 151 162 G37 156 181 158 147 156 159 151 154 158
G8 165 176 163 145 157 159 154 154 159 G38 158 182 160 149 160 161 152 152 159
G9 162 180 162 146 160 160 152 151 159 G39 160 182 159 148 158 161 151 153 159
G10 159 180 160 147 158 161 152 154 159 G40 157 181 157 145 157 161 149 149 157
G11 166 180 160 148 159 161 151 151 160 G41 158 181 158 146 154 159 149 150 157
G12 163 177 160 146 157 159 154 153 159 G42 156 180 159 149 156 160 150 153 158
G13 159 180 158 147 157 156 152 152 158 G43 161 178 159 149 160 159 151 151 159
G14 159 181 159 149 159 158 152 154 159 G44 159 181 158 146 158 159 152 148 158
G15 157 181 161 148 158 158 150 155 159 G45 160 179 162 150 158 158 149 149 158
G16 161 181 161 148 157 157 153 154 159 G46 161 184 157 144 160 159 152 151 159
G17 164 181 159 147 153 161 152 154 159 G47 161 176 160 147 155 159 153 150 158
G18 163 181 157 147 154 159 151 152 158 G48 157 177 156 148 156 161 152 151 157
G19 162 181 158 149 155 161 151 153 159 G49 157 179 162 150 158 159 152 148 158
G20 163 182 162 150 159 159 150 154 160 G50 159 177 160 144 159 160 152 148 157
G21 159 183 157 148 159 161 149 153 159 G51 160 182 158 143 159 161 152 153 159
G22 161 181 159 149 161 160 151 155 160 G52 161 180 160 147 155 159 151 151 158
G23 160 177 161 147 160 159 150 151 158 G53 156 178 160 148 156 159 150 150 157
G24 159 177 159 148 155 159 149 154 158 G54 162 177 162 146 157 159 150 151 158
G25 157 175 158 149 156 159 149 153 157 G55 160 175 160 146 159 161 151 151 158
G26 158 180 158 148 154 158 152 153 158 G56 161 180 160 150 157 161 155 151 159
G27 158 182 160 148 158 158 149 154 158 G57 160 179 159 147 157 159 154 155 159
G28 156 176 163 149 158 161 154 154 159 G58 162 180 160 150 157 159 153 152 159
G29 161 177 161 149 162 161 152 156 160 G59 165 179 160 146 158 157 154 153 159
G30 164 175 162 148 158 159 152 154 159 G60 157 180 158 147 157 158 154 152 158
Mean - - - - - - - - - - 161 179 160 147 157 159 151 152 158
Max - - - - - - - - - - 172 184 166 150 162 161 156 156 162
Min - - - - - - - - - - 156 175 156 143 153 156 144 146 157

Desi-rable

RIL

- - - - - - - - - - 28 25 48 51 17 13 03 02 53

E1=Peshawar 2014/15, E2=Kohat 2014/15, E3=Sarai Naurang 2014/15, E4=D.I. Khan 2014/15, E5=Peshawar 2015/16, E6=Kohat 2015/16, E7=Sarai Naurang 2015/16, E8=D.I Khan 2015/16.

Grain filling duration

Pooled analysis of variance for grain filling duration revealed significant (p<0.05) differences among genotypes, environments and GE interaction. The environment contributed 78.3% of the total variation, while the genotype and GE interaction explained 4.1 and 8.5% of the total variation, respectively (Table 1). Significant GE interaction justified individual analysis for each environment. Data for grain filling duration ranged between 46 and 53 days with an average of 50 days across tested environments. Furthermore, grain filling duration ranged from 29 to 45 days in E1; 56 to 73 days in E2; 32 to 57 days in E3; 37 to 49 days in E4; 42 to 64 days in E5; 44 to 54 days in E6; 40 to 52 days in E7 and 42 to 55 days in E8. Maximum grain filling duration was observed for RIL51 in E1; RIL35 in E2; RIL33 in E3; RIL22 in E4; RIL45 in E5; RIL21 in E6; RIL24 in E7 and RIL29 in E8. However, maximum grain filling duration (53 days) was noted for RIL51across environments.

Table 4: Mean data for grain filling duration of 60 wheat genotypes across eight environments during 2014/15 and 2015/16.

Genotypes E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 Mean Genotypes E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 Mean
G1 35 65 49 43 57 48 47 45 49 G31 37 62 51 44 59 49 49 53 51
G2 43 65 47 43 56 50 47 42 49 G32 40 66 49 46 60 51 49 48 51
G3 37 64 51 38 55 51 40 48 48 G33 45 63 57 45 60 51 47 51 52
G4 40 62 46 39 56 49 46 45 48 G34 43 67 56 45 62 52 47 48 53
G5 37 60 42 39 53 45 44 44 46 G35 45 72 56 44 58 52 51 47 53
G6 40 61 48 37 55 49 46 46 48 G36 33 66 45 42 58 51 46 47 49
G7 41 64 51 46 56 48 48 47 50 G37 33 63 43 43 57 47 42 51 47
G8 36 56 51 45 56 47 46 47 48 G38 35 72 46 47 56 50 45 47 50
G9 33 64 49 41 58 48 46 46 48 G39 35 67 45 43 62 50 46 48 50
G10 35 68 47 48 60 50 46 50 51 G40 32 66 45 41 55 51 44 50 48
G11 40 63 48 45 62 51 44 49 50 G41 33 66 46 43 58 50 45 47 49
G12 37 63 48 41 60 47 47 49 49 G42 29 66 45 42 54 48 42 49 47
G13 34 69 46 42 58 46 46 51 49 G43 35 64 40 39 59 49 46 49 48
G14 33 69 46 42 62 48 46 49 49 G44 39 73 50 41 57 49 46 44 50
G15 34 68 48 42 61 48 46 51 50 G45 35 68 50 45 64 50 46 47 51
G16 34 63 48 41 54 44 46 50 48 G46 35 72 48 41 62 52 51 49 51
G17 42 65 32 43 54 51 48 52 48 G47 38 60 52 39 52 51 49 49 49
G18 35 64 45 44 59 49 47 49 49 G48 38 63 50 41 59 49 46 49 49
G19 36 70 51 43 57 49 44 50 50 G49 39 71 51 40 58 51 49 46 51
G20 37 68 55 46 59 50 47 52 52 G50 43 68 56 40 61 52 50 44 52
G21 37 71 48 48 61 54 48 51 52 G51 45 72 55 43 58 51 50 50 53
G22 37 67 50 49 62 50 49 51 52 G52 45 72 55 45 61 50 49 48 53
G23 39 66 52 47 63 53 52 46 52 G53 38 67 55 46 59 51 49 47 52
G24 34 67 45 48 60 51 47 49 50 G54 45 67 57 44 56 51 49 46 52
G25 32 59 45 39 60 48 45 47 47 G55 44 64 55 42 57 53 51 49 52
G26 32 67 46 48 52 47 47 48 48 G56 34 64 43 46 60 50 49 48 49
G27 33 70 46 44 58 48 43 50 49 G57 30 58 42 37 55 49 52 48 46
G28 30 67 49 44 56 50 48 49 49 G58 31 63 47 39 63 47 45 46 48
G29 33 68 45 40 59 49 46 55 49 G59 44 61 54 43 57 48 48 48 50
G30 40 66 51 45 60 49 48 52 51 G60 31 65 46 41 42 47 46 49 46
Mean - - - - - - - - - - 37 66 49 43 58 49 47 48 50
Max - - - - - - - - - - 45 73 57 49 64 54 52 55 53
Min - - - - - - - - - - 29 56 32 37 42 44 40 42 46
Desirable RIL - - - - - - - - - - 51 35 33 22 45 21 24 29 51

E1=Peshawar 2014/15, E2=Kohat 2014/15, E3=Sarai Naurang 2014/15, E4=D.I. Khan 2014/15, E5=Peshawar 2015/16, E6=Kohat 2015/16, E7=Sarai Naurang 2015/16, E8=D.I Khan 2015/16.

Based on these results, E2, E3 and E5 were identified as productive environments where the tested wheat RILs took maximum days for grain filling (Table 4).

Drought stress usually shrinks the grain filling period, resulting significant reduction in number of days to maturity. This could force genotypes to exhibit their differences (Kilic and Yagbasanlar, 2010). Shortening of grain filling period may result in underdeveloped, small and shrivelled kernels as a result seed weight is radically reduced with a subsequent yield penalty. Ali (2011) reported that wheat grain growth is reduced due to various factors including degree of water deficiency and stress development rate, therefore limit final grain yield. Grain yield is considerably reduced by drought stress during grain filling period (Talebi et al., 2009). All the tested environments were different for rainfall distribution during wheat growing season. Variation in metrological conditions might have caused differences in grain filling duration for the tested genotypes. Among environments, E2, E3 and E5 were declared as productive environments, in which the tested wheat RILs took maximum days for filling the grain. These environments were reported with almost high rate of precipitation, facilitating wheat plants to increase number of days to mature. Elhani et al. (2007) also reported significant GE interaction for grain filling duration in bread wheat.

Grain growth rate

Mean squares for grain growth day-1 exhibited significant (p<0.05) variations among genotypes, environments and GE interaction. Genotypes, environments and GE interaction explained 7.8%, 40.7% and 26.3% of the total variation, respectively (Table 1). Averaged over eight environments, grain growth rate ranged from 31 to 50 g with an average of 40 g growth day-1 (Table 5). At each environment, grain growth rate ranged from 33 to 75 g in E1; 18 to 42 g in E2; 24 to 75 g in E3; 22 to 73 g in E4; 16 to 42 g in E5; 19 to 61 g in E6; 20 to 66 g in E7 and 15 to 45 g in E8. Maximum grain growth rate day-1 was recorded for wheat RIL24 in E1; RIL36 in E2; RIL17 in E3; RIL53 in E4; RIL19 in E5; RIL7 in E6; RIL25 in E7 and RIL53 in E8 (Table 5). Overall, RIL53 was noticed with maximum (50 g) grain growth rate across environments. Similarly, RIL53 developed grains with maximum rate in E4 (73 g) and E8 (45 g). Environments E1, E3, E4 and E7 had maximum grain growth rate day-1.

Akram (2011) reported in his study that perhaps less effect of water deficiency may occur during early processes of grain growth. Therefore, a reduction in grain weight and grain yield under post-anthesis water deficiency might reflect the lack of supply of photo-assimilates for grain filling (Ahmadi et al., 2009; Abdoli and Saeidi, 2012). In the present study, significant variation among genotypes and GE interaction for grain growth rate suggested that ranking of genotypes for grain growth was inconsistent across environments. Biologically, this may occur when the contribution (or level of expression) of the genes regulating a specific trait differs among environments (Basford and Cooper, 1998). Rainfall data across environments varied significantly, which might have differentiated genotypes for grain growth rate across environments. Hence, the data may be analysed further through AMMI or GGE biplot analysis to visualize stable genotypes and to understand the contribution of genotypes and GE interaction to the total variation for the trait. Among environments, E2, E3, E4 and E7 were noted with maximum grain growth rate day-1. These environments were recorded with adequate rain showers which thus provided suitable growth conditions to the tested genotypes. Mehari et al. (2015) also found different response of genotypes for grain growth rate day-1 across environments in wheat which support the findings of the current study.

Grains spike-1

Mean squares were significantly (p<0.05) different for genotypes and environments, however, the GE interaction was non-significant. Overall, genotypes, environments and GE interaction contributed 9.0%, 10.3% and 33.4% to the total sum of squares, respectively (Table 1). Grains spike-1 ranged from 43 to 53 grains with an average of 49 grains spike-1 across environments. Among environments, grains spike-1 ranged from 34 to 66 grains in E1; 39 to 56 grains in E2; 40 to 66 grains in E3; 36 to 66 grains in E4; 42 to 63 grains in E5; 38 to 62 grains in E6; 38 to 63 grains in E7 and 32 to 46 grains in E8. Maximum grains spike-1 were produced by RIL43 in E1; RIL25 at E2; RIL30 at E3; RIL26 in E4; RIL24 in E5; RIL33 in E6; RIL25 in E7 and RIL30 in E8. The RIL25 consistently produced maximum grains spike-1 across environments (Table 6).

Grains spike-1 is another important grain yield component. It has generally been observed that high yield in bread wheat varieties is associated with the increasing number of grains spike-1. Reduced number of grains per spike in water stress conditions affected grain growth stages including embryogenesis and development of kernels (Riaz and Chowdhry, 2003). Many researchers cited that water stress during anthesis stage reduced pollination. Consequently, fewer grains were formed spike-1 which resulted in significant loss of grain yield (Akram, 2011). Low yield in water stress condition is also attributable to decrease in fertile spikes and number of grains per spike (Sterling and Nass, 1981). The tested wheat genotypes were significantly different for grains spike-1 with non-significant GE interaction, indicating variation among genotypes with no effect of drought. Maximum grains spike-1 were produced by RIL43 in

Table 5: Mean data for grain growth rate (g day-1) of 60 wheat genotypes across eight environments during 2014/15 and 2015/16.

Genotypes E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 Mean Genotypes E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 Mean
G1 55 29 43 52 40 48 26 28 40 G31 50 32 49 40 29 49 58 19 41
G2 44 35 53 47 34 50 38 23 41 G32 45 32 46 54 25 51 51 25 41
G3 36 20 31 35 24 51 54 16 33 G33 35 32 34 50 23 51 32 22 35
G4 48 31 45 51 35 49 43 23 41 G34 40 32 31 40 28 52 26 20 34
G5 42 28 56 49 33 45 52 20 41 G35 45 31 35 56 31 52 35 36 40
G6 44 23 43 43 25 49 35 18 35 G36 48 42 56 68 27 51 39 36 46
G7 40 20 32 62 16 48 32 22 34 G37 65 34 62 49 33 47 48 22 45
G8 48 37 35 69 27 47 46 26 42 G38 57 31 51 50 30 50 50 28 43
G9 53 29 28 72 31 48 27 28 40 G39 73 28 47 36 30 50 43 28 42
G10 52 22 33 40 31 50 35 23 36 G40 69 33 55 49 35 51 46 26 46
G11 39 21 28 45 25 51 35 16 33 G41 61 33 59 31 36 50 36 24 41
G12 37 29 51 70 27 47 40 25 41 G42 74 30 52 31 36 48 44 22 42
G13 55 24 48 50 34 46 49 20 41 G43 62 34 66 45 34 49 65 24 47
G14 58 18 27 47 26 48 33 22 35 G44 54 32 41 49 39 49 52 36 44
G15 53 24 31 49 29 48 41 16 36 G45 52 29 45 50 24 50 49 29 41
G16 46 21 34 33 32 44 30 22 33 G46 41 31 57 49 24 52 51 19 41
G17 62 27 75 44 37 51 41 22 45 G47 45 35 42 53 29 51 38 28 40
G18 60 27 40 45 36 49 37 18 39 G48 46 35 52 51 30 49 44 26 42
G19 53 28 53 35 42 49 45 16 40 G49 57 29 54 39 34 51 56 26 43
G20 55 18 42 23 32 50 43 18 35 G50 43 29 36 39 29 52 54 26 39
G21 50 27 35 28 38 54 43 17 37 G51 44 32 45 68 30 51 52 28 44
G22 54 31 44 54 29 50 39 25 41 G52 47 32 33 65 31 50 38 35 41
G23 63 29 35 45 36 53 20 33 39 G53 64 40 47 73 35 51 41 45 50
G24 75 28 45 44 42 51 34 24 43 G54 33 22 24 36 20 51 42 19 31
G25 75 39 53 42 42 48 66 15 48 G55 48 27 28 39 30 53 26 23 34
G26 67 23 51 22 34 47 34 17 37 G56 63 31 48 48 21 50 35 24 40
G27 64 19 56 60 34 48 43 22 43 G57 63 30 50 42 30 49 46 20 41
G28 59 19 40 31 27 50 44 16 36 G58 58 33 50 37 26 47 65 25 43
G29 51 20 47 33 27 49 46 19 37 G59 33 27 37 32 23 48 56 20 35
G30 54 24 41 41 31 49 55 21 40 G60 49 34 56 52 37 47 53 26 44
Mean - - - - - - - - - - 53 29 44 46 31 49 43 24 40
Max - - - - - - - - - - 75 42 75 73 42 54 66 45 50
Min - - - - - - - - - - 33 18 24 22 16 44 20 15 31
Desirable RIL - - - - - - - - - - 24 36 17 53 19 07 25 53 53

E1=Peshawar 2014/15, E2=Kohat 2014/15, E3=Sarai Naurang 2014/15, E4=D.I. Khan 2014/15, E5=Peshawar 2015/16, E6=Kohat 2015/16, E7=Sarai Naurang 2015/16, E8=D.I Khan 2015/16.

E1; RIL37 in E2; RIL43 in E3; RIL26 in E4; RIL24 in E5; RIL33 in E6; RIL25 in E7 and RIL30 in E8. These inbred lines might have drought resistant genes which enabled them to perform better. Among the tested wheat material, the RIL25 was noted with maximum grains spike-1 across environments.

1000-grain weight

Combined analysis of variance revealed non-significant (p>0.05) differences among genotypes and GE interactions (Table 1). Based on average, 1000-grain weight ranged from 24 to 40 g in E1; 20 to 32 g in E2; 23 to 46 g in E3; 18 to 36 g in E4; 36 to 61 g in E5; 27 to 42 g in E6; 25 to 41 g in E7 and 30 to 40 g in E8. Among genotypes, RIL32 in E1; RIL36 in E2; RIL13 in E3; RIL13 in E4; RIL31 in E5; RIL2 in E6; RIL37 in E7 and RIL37 in E8 were recorded with maximum 1000-grain weight. Wheat RIL13 produced heaviest

Table 6: Mean data for grains spike-1 of 60 wheat genotypes across eight environments during 2014/15 and 2015/16.

Genotypes E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 Mean Genotypes E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 Mean
G1 42 48 46 45 43 52 51 37 46 G31 42 48 46 45 43 52 51 37 46
G2 46 48 48 39 42 45 45 38 44 G32 46 48 48 39 42 45 45 38 44
G3 41 52 51 45 42 42 53 37 45 G33 41 52 51 45 42 42 53 37 45
G4 39 45 40 36 54 38 53 42 43 G34 39 45 40 36 54 38 53 42 43
G5 47 48 58 58 58 47 51 40 51 G35 47 48 58 58 58 47 51 40 51
G6 47 40 51 51 45 46 51 41 47 G36 47 40 51 51 45 46 51 41 47
G7 50 52 50 52 48 49 58 40 50 G37 50 52 50 52 48 49 58 40 50
G8 50 52 54 55 46 48 62 33 50 G38 50 52 54 55 46 48 62 33 50
G9 52 44 49 55 45 47 51 36 47 G39 52 44 49 55 45 47 51 36 47
G10 50 42 50 55 48 58 46 34 48 G40 50 42 50 55 48 58 46 34 48
G11 41 39 42 42 49 48 45 34 43 G41 41 39 42 42 49 48 45 34 43
G12 36 39 51 43 55 57 49 35 46 G42 36 39 51 43 55 57 49 35 46
G13 34 44 51 41 51 60 48 41 46 G43 34 44 51 41 51 60 48 41 46
G14 53 44 56 49 60 58 59 40 52 G44 53 44 56 49 60 58 59 40 52
G15 45 44 63 39 44 52 48 40 47 G45 45 44 63 39 44 52 48 40 47
G16 56 46 50 62 61 53 56 39 53 G46 56 46 50 62 61 53 56 39 53
G17 48 42 58 49 55 52 47 37 49 G47 48 42 58 49 55 52 47 37 49
G18 52 43 48 54 58 56 44 35 49 G48 52 43 48 54 58 56 44 35 49
G19 48 52 47 55 55 52 52 37 50 G49 48 52 47 55 55 52 52 37 50
G20 45 46 48 49 59 52 38 35 47 G50 45 46 48 49 59 52 38 35 47
G21 47 44 49 45 56 49 41 39 46 G51 47 44 49 45 56 49 41 39 46
G22 49 40 53 51 49 53 46 34 47 G52 49 40 53 51 49 53 46 34 47
G23 44 48 48 46 52 49 58 40 48 G53 44 48 48 46 52 49 58 40 48
G24 46 48 47 50 63 49 52 32 48 G54 46 48 47 50 63 49 52 32 48
G25 52 54 50 57 54 55 63 36 53 G55 52 54 50 57 54 55 63 36 53
G26 56 50 51 66 54 45 49 32 50 G56 56 50 51 66 54 45 49 32 50
G27 60 46 54 59 52 54 44 38 51 G57 60 46 54 59 52 54 44 38 51
G28 54 43 47 57 56 53 38 45 49 G58 54 43 47 57 56 53 38 45 49
G29 52 47 63 54 54 50 40 45 51 G59 52 47 63 54 54 50 40 45 51
G30 53 48 64 59 50 51 43 46 52 G60 53 48 64 59 50 51 43 46 52
Mean - - - - - - - - - - 48 47 52 51 52 51 49 38 49
Max - - - - - - - - - - 66 56 66 66 63 62 63 46 53
Min - - - - - - - - - - 34 39 40 36 42 38 38 32 43
Desirable RIL - - - - - - - - - - 43 25 30 26 24 33 25 30 25

E1=Peshawar 2014/15, E2=Kohat 2014/15, E3=Sarai Naurang 2014/15, E4=D.I. Khan 2014/15, E5=Peshawar 2015/16, E6=Kohat 2015/16, E7=Sarai Naurang 2015/16, E8=D.I Khan 2015/16.

grains (40 g) across environments. Similarly, RIL13 was also noted with maximum 1000-grain weight in E3 and E4. Moreover, E3, E5 and E7 were productive environments for 1000-grain weight (Table 7).

Thousand-grain weight is useful index for milling yield (Safdar et al., 2009). Maximum grain weight is the cardinal source of high yield in cereal crops. Large and bold grain produce more weight thus increase over all yield. The non-significant GE interaction results for 1000-grain weight, suggested the consistency in performance of genotypes across tested environments. The stability of the tested bread wheat recombinant inbred lines across environments for this trait may be due to their genetic similarity or due to the similarity in response of genes to varying environments. On average, E3, E5 and E7

Table 7: Mean data for 1000-grain weight (g) of 60 wheat genotypes across eight environments during 2014/15 and 2015/16.

Genotypes E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 Mean Genotypes E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 Mean
G1 32 28 36 31 43 38 51 30 36 G31 32 23 41 24 61 30 46 32 36
G2 33 25 33 22 47 42 45 36 35 G32 39 23 42 26 53 38 49 33 38
G3 39 23 30 20 41 37 53 35 35 G33 33 24 36 30 49 37 51 34 37
G4 40 23 39 29 42 34 53 34 37 G34 25 32 32 28 58 34 48 32 36
G5 32 20 32 35 46 33 51 35 36 G35 24 25 36 27 49 41 48 35 36
G6 31 22 37 23 43 33 51 33 34 G36 32 32 30 25 50 38 42 33 35
G7 29 21 29 25 41 37 58 33 34 G37 32 26 36 30 54 38 56 40 39
G8 30 21 34 29 47 32 62 33 36 G38 29 23 28 25 50 36 50 34 34
G9 35 29 44 32 54 31 51 35 39 G39 31 24 40 26 55 40 39 35 36
G10 33 24 33 28 48 36 46 34 35 G40 30 20 39 25 36 38 39 32 32
G11 36 25 42 22 56 34 45 32 37 G41 33 26 38 22 51 34 41 33 35
G12 31 27 36 22 59 35 49 33 37 G42 31 22 37 26 50 35 56 32 36
G13 38 21 46 36 57 38 48 33 40 G43 33 24 40 28 41 34 51 35 36
G14 28 25 25 25 52 37 59 35 36 G44 32 29 25 31 40 33 44 33 33
G15 30 23 30 25 42 41 48 38 35 G45 26 25 32 24 57 32 46 34 35
G16 30 22 27 26 48 34 56 38 35 G46 32 26 30 23 59 39 47 34 36
G17 31 21 36 19 42 34 47 36 33 G47 28 25 34 25 49 34 47 34 35
G18 30 24 33 23 41 36 44 31 33 G48 29 24 29 26 47 33 46 37 34
G19 32 28 41 24 40 38 52 33 36 G49 29 22 26 26 43 35 44 36 33
G20 29 30 44 18 49 41 38 32 35 G50 33 26 41 24 51 33 59 36 38
G21 34 25 32 29 48 35 41 33 35 G51 26 25 37 28 51 36 52 36 36
G22 31 30 32 27 50 33 46 34 35 G52 27 28 33 30 50 34 48 34 36
G23 31 29 33 28 47 34 58 35 37 G53 33 28 33 28 54 32 50 35 37
G24 33 27 32 25 45 31 52 35 35 G54 30 26 31 25 49 34 57 34 36
G25 29 28 37 24 47 34 63 34 37 G55 35 20 33 27 41 30 52 31 34
G26 31 24 38 23 50 35 49 33 35 G56 40 22 30 26 41 33 51 36 35
G27 28 22 28 20 43 34 44 36 32 G57 36 24 30 25 46 32 48 37 35
G28 33 22 39 24 55 35 38 35 35 G58 32 21 30 29 44 27 48 32 33
G29 31 26 25 25 56 33 40 34 34 G59 31 26 33 24 41 35 56 36 35
G30 32 31 23 25 51 31 43 32 34 G60 30 28 38 23 43 39 54 31 36
Mean - - - - - - - - - - 32 25 34 26 48 35 49 34 35
Max - - - - - - - - - - 40 32 46 36 61 42 63 40 40
Min - - - - - - - - - - 24 20 23 18 36 27 38 30 32
Desirable RIL - - - - - - - - - - 32 36 13 13 31 02 37 37 13

E1=Peshawar 2014/15, E2=Kohat 2014/15, E3=Sarai Naurang 2014/15, E4=D.I. Khan 2014/15, E5=Peshawar 2015/16, E6=Kohat 2015/16, E7=Sarai Naurang 2015/16, E8=D.I Khan 2015/16.

had maximum1000-grain weight, hence, were favourable environments for 1000-grain weight. Among these environments, E3 and E5 were recorded with relatively maximum precipitation, while E7 was noted with relatively minimum precipitation and hence were declared as low and high stressed environments, respectively.

Grain yield

Analysis of variance for grain yield revealed significant (p<0.05) differences among genotypes, environments and genotype by environment interaction. The GE interaction explained maximum (32.4%) variation for grain yield, whereas genotypes and environments contributed 8.3% and 28.4% to the total variation, respectively (Table 1). Grain yield data across environments ranged from 1613 kg ha-1 to 2471 kg ha-1 with an average of 2009 kg ha-1 (Table 8). Data for grain yield ranged from 967 to 2800 kg ha-1 in E1; 1417 to 3123 kg ha-1 in E3; 1541

Table 8: Mean grain yield (kg ha-1) of 60 wheat genotypes across eight environments during 2014/15 and 2015/16.

Geno-types

E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 Mean Geno-types E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 Mean
G1 2511 2998 2641 2884 1648 2956 1333 1561 2317 G31 1822 2119 2742 2056 1161 2074 3117 1106 2025
G2 2117 2760 3185 2111 1197 1771 1944 1233 2040 G32 1656 2165 2173 2023 1413 1683 2778 1322 1902
G3 1517 1718 2225 1500 1307 2078 2233 961 1692 G33 1550 2075 2120 1744 1515 1906 1611 1244 1721
G4 2122 2420 2745 2878 1516 1498 2189 1278 2081 G34 1900 2205 1932 1889 1591 1891 1389 1017 1727
G5 1911 2219 3005 1656 1323 2798 2494 1056 2058 G35 2011 2404 2132 2228 1449 2061 1956 1872 2014
G6 1511 2028 2818 2000 1411 2349 1739 1072 1866 G36 1722 2993 2819 1834 1398 2300 1972 1833 2109
G7 967 1877 2143 1556 1412 3200 1717 1289 1770 G37 2106 2358 2945 2378 1473 2072 2217 1228 2097
G8 1650 2597 2866 1922 1192 2778 2311 1483 2100 G38 1878 2375 2594 2023 1532 2189 2494 1439 2066
G9 1967 2497 2327 2222 1210 2411 1383 1694 1964 G39 2044 1899 2300 2695 1410 2597 2206 1528 2085
G10 2039 2106 2160 2222 1339 1720 1811 1361 1845 G40 2117 1828 2742 2428 1502 2952 2217 1433 2152
G11 1711 1918 2075 1889 1344 1233 1722 1011 1613 G41 2311 2494 2965 2007 1680 2067 1767 1239 2066
G12 1778 2438 3235 1667 1803 2467 2083 1383 2107 G42 2117 2561 2548 2414 1406 1944 1983 1178 2019
G13 2167 2350 2577 2778 1552 2667 2461 1233 2223 G43 2228 2261 2895 2345 1369 2368 3261 1300 2253
G14 1783 1792 1628 2434 1552 2739 1639 1294 1858 G44 2428 2610 2264 2405 1614 2040 2633 1728 2215
G15 1967 2162 2067 2000 1827 2624 2056 1017 1965 G45 1678 2191 2453 2056 1770 1841 2478 1494 1995
G16 1922 1892 2157 1722 1750 1111 1528 1350 1679 G46 1617 2295 3054 2078 1646 2287 2806 1011 2099
G17 2161 2379 2735 2555 1649 2316 2178 1356 2166 G47 1656 2277 2372 2206 1586 2121 2094 1539 1981
G18 2344 2357 2313 2439 2209 1741 1878 1078 2045 G48 1950 2299 2855 2172 1280 2110 2233 1422 2040
G19 2594 2635 3229 2833 1670 1020 2200 928 2139 G49 2172 2081 3082 2460 1665 1874 3039 1289 2208
G20 1967 1841 2507 2333 1579 2663 2283 1133 2038 G50 1950 2141 2255 2219 1466 1889 2983 1278 2023
G21 2450 2419 2845 2556 1518 1353 2300 1017 2057 G51 1894 1950 2747 2301 1457 2676 2872 1539 2180
G22 1983 2781 2769 2734 1304 2113 2111 1494 2161 G52 2061 2249 2037 2722 1318 2191 2028 1878 2061
G23 2522 2805 2198 2655 1759 1630 1183 1878 2079 G53 2300 2891 2818 2072 1162 1820 2250 2339 2207
G24 2800 2517 3252 2833 1593 1338 1817 1472 2203 G54 1267 1417 1541 2017 1662 1938 2261 956 1632
G25 2744 3123 3665 2389 1800 1939 3256 850 2471 G55 1894 1828 1702 2072 1359 1877 1472 1244 1681
G26 1972 2089 3127 2389 1762 1660 1722 983 1963 G56 1411 2037 2144 2306 1672 2017 1928 1306 1853
G27 2156 2452 2922 2000 1570 2643 2000 1322 2133 G57 1800 2045 2257 2133 1757 1608 2594 1072 1908
G28 1694 1947 2703 2000 1224 2063 2333 961 1866 G58 1811 2006 2634 1754 2370 1763 3261 1239 2105
G29 1789 1996 2643 2089 1252 1202 2333 1300 1826 G59 1461 1950 2239 1822 1222 1901 2928 1072 1824
G30 2072 2290 2687 2389 1179 1401 2889 1339 2031 G60 1461 2118 2877 1556 1467 1899 2706 1394 1935
Mean - - - - - - - - - - 1953 2259 2561 2201 1514 2057 2211 1315 2009
Max - - - - - - - - - - 2800 3123 3665 2884 2370 3200 3261 2339 2471
Min - - - - - - - - - - 967 1417 1541 1500 1161 1020 1183 850 1613

Desi-

rable

RIL

- - - - - - - - - - 25 25 25 04 58 07 43 53 25

E1=Peshawar 2014/15, E2=Kohat 2014/15, E3=Sarai Naurang 2014/15, E4=D.I. Khan 2014/15, E5=Peshawar 2015/16, E6=Kohat 2015/16, E7=Sarai Naurang 2015/16, E8=D.I Khan 2015/16.

to 3665 kg ha-1 in E3; 1500 to 2884 kg ha-1 in E4; 1161 to 2370 kg ha-1 in E5; 1020 to 3200 kg ha-1 in E6; 1183 to 3261 kg ha-1 in E7 and 850 to 2339 kg ha-1 in E8. Wheat RILs 24, 25, 25, 1, 7, 58, 43, and 53 produced maximum grain yield in E1 (2800 kg ha-1), E2 (3123 kg ha-1), E3 (3665 kg ha-1), E4 (2884 kg ha-1), E5 (2370 kg ha-1), E6 (3200 kg ha-1), E7 (3261 kg ha-1) and E8 (2339 kg ha-1), respectively (Table 8). Among genotypes, RIL25 was the most productive line for grain yield across environments. Similarly, RIL25 out-yielded its counter mates at E1, E2 and E3. Furthermore, E2, E3, E6 and E7 were the highly productive environments, while E1 and E8 were least productive for grain yield.

Grain yield is one of the key economic factors behind a positive wheat cropping enterprise and is therefore a major target for wheat breeding programs (Wu et al., 2012). In this study, data for grain yield revealed significant differences among genotypes which indicated genetic differences among genotypes for this trait. The significant GE interaction further suggested that the tested environments were not similar. Thus, there is no guarantee that a genotype selected in an environment with high rainfall will produce high yields in environments with low rainfall and vice versa. Therefore, indirect selection in drought environment based on the results of optimum conditions will not be efficient (Sio-Se al., 2006). Differences among environments were due to variation in rainfall distribution across environments during wheat growing season. Based on metrological data, environments E2, E3, E6 and E7 were good for grain yield despite drought stress. This indicated the presence of drought tolerant genes, which might have expressed and resulted in higher grain yield. The results in the study for grain yield are in line with the results of Islam et al. (2015) who also reported significant GE interaction for grain yield in spring wheat.

Table 9: Phenotypic correlation among yield and yield contributing traits of 60 bread wheat genotypes across eight environments.

  DM GFD GGR GPS TGW GY
DH -0.26 -0.36 0.39 -0.005 -0.31 0.27**
DM   0.80 -0.43 0.0003 -0.04 -0.07**
GFD     -0.52 -0.05 0.10 -0.18**
GGR       0.12 -0.13 0.72**
GPS         -0.007 0.09**
TGW           -0.25**

DM=days to maturity, GFD=grain filling duration, GGR=grain growth rate, GPS=grains spike-1, TGW=1000-grain weight, GY=grain yield, ** = Significant at 5% probability.

Correlation coefficients among yield and yield contributing traits of 60 bread wheat genotypes were also computed over eight environments. Correlation analysis revealed that grain yield was significantly correlated with days to heading (rg = 0.27**), grain growth rate (rg = 0.72**) and grains spike-1 (rg = 0.09**). Grain yield was negatively associated with days to maturity, grain filling duration and 1000-grain weight. The association of the mentioned traits with grain yield indicated the importance of these traits in higher grain yield (Table 9). Khan et al. (2018) and Mohsen et al. (2012) also reported significant association of grain yield with grains spike-1.

Table 10: Mean data of environments across genotypes during 2014/15 and 2015/16.

Environment DH DM GFD GGR GPS TGW GY
E1 124 161 37 53 48 32 1953
E2 114 179 66 29 47 25 2259
E3 111 160 49 44 52 34 2201
E4 105 147 43 46 51 26 1514
E5 100 157 58 31 52 48 2057
E6 110 159 49 49 51 35 2211
E7 105 151 47 43 49 49 1315
E8 101 152 48 24 38 34 2009

DM=days to maturity, GFD=grain filling duration, GGR=grain growth rate, GPS=grains spike-1, TGW=1000-grain weight, GY=grain yield, E1=Peshawar 2014/15, E2=Kohat 2014/15, E3=Sarai Naurang 2014/15, E4=D.I. Khan 2014/15, E5=Peshawar 2015/16, E6=Kohat 2015/16, E7=Sarai Naurang 2015/16, E8=D.I Khan 2015/16.

Conclusions and Recommendations

Significant genotype by environment interaction suggested the uncertainty in performance of wheat RILs due to diverse environments. Although, Sarai Naurang (E3) was noted with relatively minimum rainfall distribution followed by Kohat (E2) however, Sarai Naurang (E3, E7) produced relatively maximum grain yield. Among the tested wheat genotypes, the RIL34 had early heading; RILs 51 and 53 were early maturing; RIL34 recorded maximum grain filling duration; the RIL25 produced maximum grains spike-1; RIL53 recorded maximum grain growth rate; RIL13 produced heaviest grains and RIL25 had highest grain yield across environments. The mentioned RILs could serve as useful breeding material to improve various plant attributes. Grain yield had significant association with days to heading, grain growth rate and grains spike-1, while the relationship was significantly negative with days to maturity, grain filling duration and 1000-grain weight. Based on results of this study, wheat RIL25 (derived from Tatara × Ghaznavi) was identified as potential line for its superior grain yield across environments, followed by RIL51 and RIL53 (derived from Wafaq × Ghaznavi). However, the use of advance statistical tools for interpreting GE interaction to establish stability of mentioned lines is recommended to reach more credible conclusions.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the technical and field staff of all the research stations where the current experiments were performed. The authors also acknowledge Dr. Malak Atiq for his valuable comments during data compilation and manuscript writeup. The authors are grateful to Dr. Sheraz Ahmed for his good support in data analysis, constructive comments and suggestions which substantially improved the presentation of an earlier version of the manuscript.

Author’s Contributions

This research article is an integral part of doctoral study of the first author Muhammad Ilyas (MI). MI and Fida Mohammad (FM) formulated the research. MI performed the experiments and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. FM made critical corrections in the first draft. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Novelty Statement

This research was designed to interpret Genotype by environment (GE) interaction using 55 F5:8 bread wheat recombinant inbred lines (RILs) with five checks. Newly developed germplasm or genotypes were evaluated in multi-environment trials (METs) in order to identify high yielding lines with specific and wide adaptability.

References

Abdoli, M. and M. Saeidi. 2012. Using different indices for selection of resistant wheat cultivars to post anthesis water deficit in the west of Iran. Annals Bio. Res. 3:1322-1333

Ahmad, F. and F. Mohammad. 2005. Genetic analysis of some important production traits in bread wheat. PhD dissertation, University of Agriculture, Peshawar-Pakistan

Ahmadi, A., M. Joudi, and M. J. Mohammdi. 2009. Late defoliation and wheat yield. Little evidence of post anthesis source limitation. Field Crops Res. 113:90-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2009.04.010

Akram, M. 2011. Growth and yield components of wheat under water stress of different growth stages. Bangladesh J. Agric. Res. 36:455-468. https://doi.org/10.3329/bjar.v36i3.9264

Alwala, S., T. Kwolek, M. McPherson, J. Pellow, and D. Meyer. 2010. A comprehensive comparison between Eberhart and Russell joint regression and GGE biplot analyses to identify stable and high yielding maize hybrids. Field Crops Res. 119:225-230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2010.07.010

Ali, M.A. 2011. Pedigree selection for grain yield in spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) under drought stress conditions. Asian J. Crop Sci. 3:158-168. https://doi.org/10.3923/ajcs.2011.158.168

Basford, K.E. and M. Cooper. 1998. Genotype× environment interactions and some considerations of their implications for wheat breeding in Australia. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 49(2):153-174. https://doi.org/10.1071/A97035

Chaves, M.M., J.S. Pereira, J. Maroco, M.L. Rodrigues, C.P. Ricardo, M.L. Osorio, I. Carvalho, T. Faria and C. Pinheiro. 2002. How plants cope with water stress in the field. Photosynthesis and growth. Annals Bot. 89:907-916. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcf105

Cooper, M. and D.E Byth. 1996. Understanding plant adaptation to achieve systematic applied crop improvement: A fundamental challenge. In: Cooper, M and Hammer, GL (eds.) Plant adaptation and crop Wallingford: CABI Publishing.

Dhanda, S.S., G.S. Sethi, and R.K. Behl. 2004. Indices of drought tolerance in wheat genotypes at early stages of plant growth. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 190:6-12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-037X.2004.00592.x

Elhani, S., V. Martos, Y. Rharabatti, C. Royo, and L.F. Garcia del Moral. 2007. Contribution of main stem and tillers to durum wheat (Triticum turgidum L var durum) grain yield and its components in Mediterranean environments. Field Crops Res. 103:25-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2007.05.008

Hanft, J.M. and R.D Wych. 1982. Visual indicators of physiological maturity of hard red spring wheat. J. Crop Sci. 22:584-587. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1982.0011183X002200030036x

Ijaz, F., I. Khaliq, M.T. Shahzad, and B. Salam. 2013. Computation of heritability of yield and some morphological traits in F2 population of spring wheat. Intl. J. Modern Agric. 2(3):102-107.

Ikramullah, I.H. Khalil, H. Rahman, F. Mohammad, Hidayatullah, and S.K. Khalil. 2011. Magnitude of heritability and selection response for yield traits in wheat under two different environments. Pak. J. Bot. 43(5):2359-2363.

Islam, M.S., T. Halder, J. Hossain, F. Mahmud, and J. Rahman.2015. Genotype by environment interaction in spring wheat of Bangladesh. Bangl. J. Plant Breed. Genet. 28(2):17-24. https://doi.org/10.3329/bjpbg.v28i2.29957

Kashiwagi, J., L. Krishnamurthy, H.D. Upadhyaya, H. Krishna, S. Chandra, V. Vadez, and R. Serraj. 2004. Genetic variability of drought avoidance root traits in the mini-core germplasm collection of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Euphytica 146:213-222. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-005-9007-1

Khan, M.A.U. and F. Mohammad. 2018. Effect of genotype × environment interaction on grain yield determinants in bread wheat. Sarhad J. Agric. 34(1):54-62. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.sja/2018/34.1.54.62

Kilic, H. and T. Yagbasanlar. 2010. The effect of drought stress on grain yield, yield components and some quality traits of durum wheat cultivars. Not. Bot. Hort. Agrobot. 38:164-170.

Levitt, J. 1980. Responses of plants to environmental stresses. In: Physiological Ecology (T.T. Kozlowski (Ed) New York: Academic Press, pp:347-448.

Mehari, M., M. Tesfay, H. Yirga, A. Mesele, T. Abebe, A. Workineh, and B. Amare. 2015. GGE biplot analysis of genotype-by-environment interaction and grain yield stability of bread wheat genotypes in South Tigray, Ethiopia. Commun. Biomet. Cr. Sci. 10(1):17-26. https://doi.org/10.3923/ijpbg.2015.22.27

Mohsen, A., A.S.R. Hegazy, and M.H. Taha. 2012. Genotypic and phenotypic interrelationships among yield and yield components in Egyptian bread wheat genotypes. J. Pl Br. Crop. Sci. 4(1):9-16.

Nasarullah, R. Uddin, F. Uddin, and M. Jamal. 2017. Interpreting GE interaction of wheat genotypes for grain yield under different regimes of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Pakistan J. Agric. Res. 30:107-121.

PBS (Pakistan Bureau of Statistics). 2018. Pakistan economic survey government of Pakistan, finance division, economic advisory wing, Islamabad.

Riaz, R. and M. Chowdhry. 2003. Estimation of variation and heritability of some physiomorphic traits of wheat under drought conditions. Asian J. Plant Sci. 2(10):748-755. https://doi.org/10.3923/ajps.2003.748.755

Sayre, K.D., S. Rajaram, and R. A. Fischer. 1997. Yield potential progress in bread wheat in northwest Mexico. J. Crop Sci. 37:36-42. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1997.0011183X003700010006x

Safdar, M.N., K. Naseem, N. Siddiqui, M. Amjad, T. Hameed, and S. Khalil. 2009. Quality evaluation of different wheat varieties for the production of unleavened flat bread (Chapatti). Pak. J. Nutrition 8(11):1773-1778. https://doi.org/10.3923/pjn.2009.1773.1778

SAS (statistical analysis system), SAS Institute Inc. 2009. SAS/STAT ® 9.2 User’s Guide, Second Edition. Copyright © 2009, SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC, USA. https:// support. sas.com/ documentation/ cdl/en/statug/ 63033/HTML/default/viewer.htm)

Sio-Se, A. Mardehet, A. Ahmadi, K. Poustini, and V. Mohammadi. 2006. Evaluation of drought resistance indices under various environmental conditions. Field Crops Res. 98:222-229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2006.02.001

Sterling, J.D.E. and H.G. Nass. 1981. Comparison of tests characterizing varieties of barley and wheat for moisture resistance. Canad. J. Plant Sci. 61:283-292. https://doi.org/10.4141/cjps81-041

Takele, A. 2000. Seedling emergence and growth of sorghum genotypes under variable soil moisture deficit. Acta Agronomica Hungaria 48:95-102. https://doi.org/10.1556/AAgr.48.2000.1.10

Talebi, R., F. Fayaz, and A.M. Naji. 2009. Effective selection criteria for assessing drought stress tolerance in durum wheat. General Appl. Plant Phys. 35:64-74.

Wu, X., X. Chang, and R. Jing. 2012. Genetic insight into yield-associated traits of wheat grown in multiple rain-fed environments. Plos one 7(2):e31249. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0031249

Worland, A.J. and E. J. Sayers. 2004. The distribution in European winter wheats of genes that influence ecoclimatic adaptability whilst determining photoperiodic insensitivity and plant height. Euphytica 80(3):219-228. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00039653

Zeeshan, K., M. Ibrahim, G. Ahmad, M. Jan, M. Ishaq, and K. Afridi. 2015. Evaluation of promising wheat advanced lines for maturity and yield attributes under rainfed environment. Am-Euras. J. Agric. Environ. Sci. 15 (8):1625-1629.

Sarhad Journal of Agriculture

March

Sarhad Journal of Agriculture, Vol.40, Iss. 1, Pages 01-262

Featuring

Click here for more

Subscribe Today

Receive free updates on new articles, opportunities and benefits


Subscribe Unsubscribe