Analysis of line x environment interactions for yield in navy beans. 2. Pattern analysis of lines and environment within years

Australian Journal of Agricultural Research

Volumn 51, Issue 5, 2000, Pages 607-617

  Redden, R J ^a   DeLacy, I H ^b   Butler, D G ^c   Usher, T ^a  

^a Hermitage Research Station   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

^c DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES   (Australia)

Author keywords

Cluster analysis; Environments; Ordination analysis; Phaseolus vulgaris; Yield

Indexed keywords

PHASEOLUS VULGARIS;

EID: 0033937709     PISSN: 00049409     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1071/AR97136     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Basford KE, Kroonenberg PM, DeLacy IH (1991) Three-way methods for multiattribute genotype × environment data: an illustrated partial survey. Field Crops Research 27, 131-157.
2. Bradu D, Gabriel KR (1978) The bi-plot as a diagnostic tool for models of two-way tables. Technometrics 20, 47-68.
3. Burr EJ (1968) Cluster sorting with mixed character types. I. Standardization of character values. Australian Computer Journal 1, 97-99.
4. Burr EJ (1970) Cluster sorting with mixed character types. II. Fusion strategies. Australian Computer Journal 2, 98-103.
5. Butler DG, Redden RJ, DeLacy IH, Usher T (2000). Analysis of line × environment interactions for yield in navy beans. 1. Components of variation. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 51, 597-605.
6. Byth DE, Eisemann RL, DeLacy IH (1976) Two-way pattern analysis of a large data set to evaluate genotypic adaptation. Heredity 37, 215-230.
7. Cooper M, DeLacy IH (1994) Relationships among analytical methods used to study genotypic variation and genotype-by-environment interaction in plant breeding multi-environment experiments. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 88, 561-572.
8. Cooper M, DeLacy IH, Basford KE (1996) Relationships among analytical methods used to analyse genotypic adaptation in multi-environment trials. In 'Plant adaptation and crop improvement'. (Eds M Cooper, GL Hammer) pp. 193-224. (CAB International/IRRI/ ICRISAT: Wallingford)
9. DeLacy IH, Basford KE, Cooper M, Bull JK, McLaren CG (1996a) Analysis of multi-environment trials - an historical perspective. In 'Plant adaptation and crop improvement'. (Eds M Cooper, GL Hammer) pp. 39-124. (CAB International/IRRI/ICRISAT: Wallingford)
10. DeLacy IH, M Cooper, KE Basford (1996b) Relationships among analytical methods used to study genotype-by-environment interactions and evaluation of their impact on performance to selection. In 'Genotype-by-environment interaction'. (Eds MS Kang, HG Gauch) pp. 51-84. (CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL)
11. DeLacy IH, Eisemann RE, Cooper M (1990) The importance of genotype by environment interaction in regional variety trials. In 'Genotype-by-environment interaction and plant breeding'. (Ed MS Kang) pp. 287-300. (Louisiana State University: Baton Rouge, LA)
12. DeLacy IH, Redden RJ, Butler DG, Usher T (2000) Analysis of linexenvironment interactions for yield in navy beans. 3. Pattern analysis of environments over years. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 51, 619-628.
13. Eckart C, Young G (1936) The approximation of one matrix by another of lower rank. Psychometrika 1, 211-218.
14. Finlay KW, Wilkinson GN (1963) The analysis of adaptation in a plant breeding programme. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 14, 742-754.
15. Fox PN, AA Rosielle (1982) Reducing the influence of environmental main-effects on pattern analysis of plant breeding environments. Euphytica 31, 645-656.
16. Gabriel KR (1971) The bi-plot-graphical display of matrices with application to principal component analysis. Biometrika 58, 453-467.
17. Gabriel KR (1981) Bi-plot display of multivariate matrices for inspection of data and diagnosis. In 'Interpreting multivariate data'. (Ed V Barnett) pp. 147-173. (John Wiley: Chicester, UK)
18. Gauch HG (1988) Model selection and validation for yield trials with interaction. Biometrics 44, 705-715.
19. Gauch HG, Zobel RW (1996) AMMI analysis of yield trials. In 'Genotype-by-environment interaction'. (Eds MS Kang, HG Gauch) pp. 85-122. (CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL)
20. Kempton RA (1984) The use of bi-plots in interpreting variety by environment interactions. Journal of Agricultural Science 103, 123-135.
21. Mirzawan PDN, Cooper M, DeLacy IH, Hogarth DM (1994) Retrospective analysis of the relationships among the test environments of the Southern Queensland sugarcane breeding program. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 88, 707-716.
22. Mungomery VE, Shorter R, Byth DE (1974) Genotype × environment interactions and environmental adaptation. I Pattern analysis - application to soya bean populations. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 25, 59-72.
23. Redden RJ, Rose JL, Gallagher EC (1985) The breeding of navy and culinary beans in Queensland. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 25, 470-479.
24. Redden RJ, Usher T (1993) Genetic diversity and multi-trait selection in a navy bean breeding program. In 'Focussed plant improvement towards responsible and sustainable agriculture. Proceedings: Tenth Australian Plant Breeding Conference'. Vol. 2. pp. 49-50. (Eds BC Imrie, JB Hacker) (University of Queensland Printers.)
25. Ward JH (1963) Hierarchical grouping to optimise an objective function. Journal of the American Statistical Association 58, 236-244.
26. Williams WT (1976) 'Pattern analysis in agricultural science.' (Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company: Amsterdam)
27. Wishart D (1969) An algorithm for hierarchical classification. Biometrics 25, 165-170.