Impact of different environments in Europe on yield and quality of sugar beet genotypes

European Journal of Agronomy

Volumn 30, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 17-26

  Hoffmann, Christa M ^a   Huijbregts, Toon ^b   van Swaaij, Noud ^b   Jansen, Rudolf ^c  

^a Institute of Sugar Beet Research   (Germany)

^b Institute of Sugar Beet Research IRS   (Netherlands)

^c KWS SAAT SE   (Germany)

Author keywords

Environment; Genotype; Interaction; Invert sugar; Quality; Sugar beet; Sugar content; Yield

Indexed keywords

ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; ENVIRONMENTAL STRESS; FOOD QUALITY; GENOTYPE-ENVIRONMENT INTERACTION; SUGAR; SUGAR BEET; YIELD RESPONSE;

EURASIA; EUROPE;

BETA VULGARIS; BETA VULGARIS SUBSP. VULGARIS;

EID: 55249108458     PISSN: 11610301     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.eja.2008.06.004     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Annicchiarico, P. 2002. Genotype × environment interactions-Challenges and opportunities for plant breeding and cultivar recommendations. FAO Plant Production and Protection Paper-174, Rome, 115 pp.
2. Annicchiarico P. Wide- versus specific-adaptation strategy for lucerne breeding in northern Italy. Theor. Appl. Genet. 114 (2007) 647-657
3. Allard R.W., and Bradshaw A.D. Implications of genotype-environmental interactions in applied plant breeding. Crop Sci. 4 (1964) 829-844
4. Baker R.J. Tests for crossover genotype-environmental interactions. Can. J. Plant Sci. 68 (1988) 405-410
5. Becker H.C., and Léon J. Stability analysis in plant breeding. Plant Breed. 101 (1988) 1-23
6. Bloch D., Hoffmann C.M., and Märländer B. Solute accumulation as cause for quality losses in sugar beet submitted to continuous and temporary drought stress. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 192 (2006) 17-24
7. Brancourt-Hulmel M., and Lecomte C. Effect of environmental variates on genotype × environment interaction of winter wheat: a comparison of biadditive factorial regression to AMMI. Crop Sci. 43 (2003) 608-617
8. Burba, M., Georgi, B. 1975, 1976. Die fluorometrische Bestimmung der Aminosäuren in Zuckerrüben und Zuckerfabriksprodukten mit Fluoreszamin und o-Phthalaldehyd. Zuckerind. 25, 667-673; 26, 322-329.
9. Cattell R.B. The scree test for the number of factors. Multivar. Behav. Res. 1 (1966) 245-276
10. Ceccarelli S. Wide adaptation: how wide?. Euphytica 40 (1989) 197-205
11. Ceccarelli S. Specific adaptation and breeding for marginal conditions. Euphytica 77 (1994) 205-219
12. Crossa J. Statistical analysis of multilocation trials. Adv. Agron. 44 (1990) 55-85
13. Dreccer M.F., Borgognone M.G., Ogbonnaya F.C., Trethowan R.M., and Winter B. CIMMYT-selected derived synthetic bread wheats for rainfed environments: yield evaluation in Mexico and Australia. Field Crops Res. 100 (2007) 218-228
14. Eberhart S.A., and Russel W.A. Stability parameters for comparing varieties. Crop. Sci. 1 (1966) 36-40
15. Epinat-Le Signor C., Dousse S., Lorgeo J., Denis J.-B., Bonhomme R., Carolo P., and Charcosset A. Interpretation of genotype × environment interaction for early maize hybrids over 12 years. Crop Sci. 41 (2001) 663-669
16. Finlay K.W., and Wilkinson G.N. The analysis of adaption in a plant breeding programme. Austr. J. Agric. Res. 14 (1963) 742-754
17. Gauch Jr. H.G. Statistical analysis of yield trials by AMMI and GGE. Crop Sci. 46 (2006) 1488-1500
18. Hoffmann C., and Märländer B. Composition of harmful nitrogen in sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) - amino N, betaine, nitrate - as affected by genotype and environment. Eur. J. Agron. 22 (2005) 255-265
19. ICUMSA. The determination of the polarisation of sugar beet by the macerator or cold aqueous digestion method using aluminium sulphate as clarifying agent-official. In: International Commission for Uniform Methods of Sugar Analysis (Ed). Methods Book, Method GS 6-3 (2007), Verlag Dr. Albert Bartens, Berlin, Germany
20. ICUMSA. The determination of sucrose, glucose and fructose by HPLC - in cane molasses - official - and in sucrose in beet molasses - official. In: International Commission for Uniform Methods of Sugar Analysis (Ed). Methods Book, Method GS 7/4/8-23 (2007), Verlag Dr. Albert Bartens, Berlin, Germany
21. Kaiser H.F. The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educ. Psychol. Measu. 20 (1960) 141-151
22. Kenter, C., Hoffmann, C. Changes in the quality of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) during long-term storage under controlled conditions. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol., doi:10.1111/j.1365-2621.2007.01641.x, in press.
23. Ma B.L., Yan W., Dwyer L.M., Frégeau-Reid J., Voldeng H.D., Dion A., and Nass H. Graphic analysis of genotype, environment, nitrogen fertilizer, and their interactions on spring wheat yield. Agron. J. 96 (2004) 169-180
24. Mäck G., and Hoffmann C.M. Organ-specific adaptation to low precipitation in solute concentration of sugar beet. Eur. J. Agron. 25 (2006) 270-279
25. Ouk M., Basnayake J., Tsubo M., Fukai S., Fischer K.S., Kang S., Men S., Thun V., and Cooper M. Genotype-by-environment interactions for grain yield associated with water availability at flowering in rainfed lowland rice. Field Crops Res. 101 (2007) 145-154
26. Piepho H.-P. Stability analysis using the SAS system. Agron. J. 91 (1999) 154-160
27. Piepho, H.-P., 2005. Erfassung der phänotypischen Stabilität in züchterischen Versuchen. Bericht über die 56. Tagung 2005 der Vereinigung der Pflanzenzüchter und Saatgutkaufleute Österreichs 2005, 1-6.
28. Reynolds M.P., Trethowan R., Crossa J., Vargas M., and Sayre K.D. Physiological factors associated with genotype by environment interaction in wheat. Field Crops Res. 75 (2002) 139-160 (Erratum: 85, 253-274)
29. SAS, 2007. Principle component analysis. http://support.sas.com/publishing/pubcat/chaps/55129.pdf (last visit: 20.06.07).
30. Schubert S., Abd-El-Motagally F., and Steffens D. Heat stress can be compensated by irrigation in sugar beet. Proceedings VIII ESA Congress (2004) 173-174
31. Shlens, J., 2005. A tutorial on principal component analysis. www.cs.cmu.edu/∼elaw/papers/pca.pdf (last visit 20.06.07).
32. van der Poel P.W., Schiweck H., and Schwartz T. Sugar Technology Beet and Cane Sugar Manufacture (1998), Dr. Albert Bartens, Berlin
33. Vargas M., Crossa J., van Eeuwijk F.A., Ramirez M.E., and Sayre K. Using partial least squares regression, factorial regression, and AMMI models for interpreting genotype × environment interaction. Crop Sci. 39 (1999) 955-967
34. Vargas M., Crossa J., Reynolds M.P., Dhungana P., and Eskridge K.M. Structural equation modelling for studying genotype × environment interactions of physiological traits affecting yield in wheat. J. Agric. Sci. 145 (2007) 151-161
35. Wolf, I., 1995. Sorte und Sortenwahl bei Zuckerrüben und deren Wechselwirkung zu Umwelt und Qualitätsbezahlung. Dissertation Göttingen, Cuvillier Verlag Göttingen.
36. Yan W., and Hunt L.A. Interpretation of genotype × environment interaction for winter wheat in Ontario. Crop Sci. 41 (2001) 19-25
37. Yan W., and Tinker N.A. Biplot analysis of multi-environment trial data: principles and applications. Can. J. Plant Sci. 86 (2006) 623-645