Ajay Verma G. P. Singh


Reports on biased interpretation for the stability of the genotypes under AMMI analysis, considering only the first two interaction principal components, has been observed in recent past. Simultaneous use of yield and stability of genotypes in a single measure had been advocated for identification of highly productive and broadly adapted genotypes.  The performance of superiority index, allowed variable weighting mechanism for yield and stability, has been compared with AMMI based measures. For the first year (2018-19) Superiority index, weighting 0.65 and 0.35 for yield and stability, found UAS3002, MP3336 and HI1633 as of stable performance with high yield. Recent analytic measures the relative proportion of genotypic value (PRVG) and Harmonic mean of the relative proportion of genotypic value (MHPRVG) selected CG1029, HI1634 and HD2932 wheat genotypes.  Indirect relations were expressed by Superiority Index (SI) with other stability measures.  Superiority index saw stable performance along with high yield of HD2864  and HI1634 for the second year 2019-20. PRVG as well as MHPRVG measures observed suitability of  CG1029 and  HD2864 while MP3336  as unstable wheat genotypes. Values of SI measure had expressed only indirect relations of high degree with stability measures except with yield, PRVG and MHPRVG values.  Stability measures by the simultaneous use of AMMI and yield would be more meaning full and useful as compared to measures consider either the AMMI or yield of genotypes only.


Download data is not yet available.


Metrics Loading ...




AMMI analysis, ASV, Biplot graphs, EV, SI, SSI, SIPC, Za

Adjebeng-Danquah, J., Manu-Aduening, J., Gracen V.E., Asante I.K., and Offei, S.K. (2017). AMMI stability analysis and estimation of genetic parameters for growth and yield components in cassava in the forest and guinea savannah ecologies of Ghana. Int. J. Agron. 2017:1–10.
Ajay, B. C., Aravind J., Fiyaz R. Abdul, Kumar Narendra, Lal Chuni, Gangadhar K., Kona Praveen, Dagla M. C. and Bera S. K. (2019) Rectification of modified AMMI stability value (MASV). Indian J. Genet., 79(4) 726-731
Balestre, M., Von Pinho R.G., Souza J.C., and Oliveira R.L.( 2009). Genotypic stability and adaptability in tropical maize based on AMMI and GGE biplot analysis. Genet. Mol. Res. 8:1311–1322.
Bocianowski, J., Niemann J., and Nowosad K. (2019). Genotype-by environment interaction for seed quality traits in interspecific cross-derived Brassica lines using additive main effects and multiplicative interaction model. Euphytica 215(7):1–13.
Bornhofen, E., Benin G., Storck L., Woyann L.G., Duarte T., Stoco M.G., and Marchioro S.V.. (2017). Statistical methods to study adaptability and stability of wheat genotypes. Bragantia 76:1–10.
Farshadfar, E. 2008. Incorporation of AMMI stability value and grain yield in a single nonparametric index (GSI) in bread wheat. Pak. J. Biol. Sci. 11:1791–1796.
Farshadfar, E., Mahmodi N., and Yaghotipoor A.. 2011. AMMI stability value and simultaneous estimation of yield and yield stability in bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Aust. J. Crop Sci. 5:1837–1844.
Gauch, H.G. (2013). A simple protocol for AMMI analysis of yield trials. Crop Sci. 53:1860–1869.
Kang, M.S. (1993). Simultaneous selection for yield and stability in crop performance trials: Consequences for growers. Agronomy Journal 85:754-757.
Olivoto, T. (2018). WAASB data, Mendeley Data, v2. doi. org/10.17632/2sjz32k3s3.2
Olivoto, T. (2019). Metan: multi environment trials analysis. R package version 1.1.0. https://github.com/TiagoOlivoto/metan.
Olivoto, T., Lucio A. Dal’Col, Gonzalez, Silva J.A. da, and Marchioro V.S. (2019). Mean performance and stability in multi-environment trials I: Combining features of AMMI and BLUP techniques. Agronomy Journal . 111:1–12.
Oyekunle, M., Menkir A., Mani H., Olaoye G., Usman I.S., Ado S.G. (2017). Stability analysis of maize cultivars adapted to tropical environments using AMMI analysis. Cereal Res. Commun. 45:336–345.
Purchase, J.L., Hatting H., and Deventer C.S. van. (2000). Genotype × environment interaction of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in South Africa: II. Stability analysis of yield performance. S. Afr. J. Plant Soil 17:101–107.
Ramburan, S., Zhou M., and Labuschagne M. (2011). Interpretation of genotype × environment interactions of sugarcane: Identifying significant environmental factors. Field Crops Res. 124:392–399.
Rao, A.R., and Prabhakaran V.T. (2005). Use of AMMI in simultaneous selection of genotypes for yield and stability. Journal of the Indian Society of Agricultural Statistics 59:76-82.
Resende, M.D.V. and Duarte, J.B. (2007). Precision and Quality Control in Variety Trials. Pesquisa Agropecuaria Tropical , 37: 182-194.
Sneller, C.H., Norquest L. Kilgore-, and Dombek D. (1997). Repeatability of yield stability statistics in soybean. Crop Sci. 37:383–390.
Veenstra, L.D., Santantonio N., Jannink J.-L., and Sorrells M.E. (2019). Influence of genotype and environment on wheat grain fructan content. Crop Sci. 59:190–198.
Zali, H., Farshadfar E., Sabaghpour S.H., and Karimizadeh R. (2012). Evaluation of genotype × environment interaction in chickpea using measures of stability from AMMI model. Ann. Biol. Res. 3:3126–3136.
Zhang, Z., Lu C., and Xiang Z.H. (1998). Analysis of variety stability based on AMMI model. Acta Agronomica Sinica 24:304-309.
Zobel, R.W., Wright M.J., and Gauch H.G. Jr. (1988). Statistical analysis of yield trial. Agronomy Journal 80:388-393.
Citation Format
How to Cite
Verma, A., & Singh, G. P. (2020). Simultaneous application of AMMI measures and yield for stability analysis of wheat genotypes evaluated under irrigated late sown conditions of Central Zone of India. Journal of Applied and Natural Science, 12(4), 541–549. https://doi.org/10.31018/jans.v12i4.2391
More Citation Formats:
Research Articles

Most read articles by the same author(s)