Skip to content
Research Article Open access CC BY 4.0

Genotype-by-Environment Interaction and Stability Analysis in Grain Yield of Improved Tef (Eragrostis tef) Varieties Evaluated in Ethiopia

Habte Jifar, Kebebew Assefa, Kassahun Tesfaye, Kifle Dagne, Zerihun Tadele

Journal of Experimental Agriculture International · pp. 1–13 · Published 7 May 2019

10.9734/jeai/2019/v35i530214

Abstract

Aims: To assess the magnitude of genotype by environment interaction; possible existence of different mega-environments; and discriminating ability and representativeness of the testing environments. Study Design: Randomized complete Block Design with three replications. Place and Duration of Study: The study was conducted at Debre Zeit, Holetta and Alem Tena for two years (2015 and 2016) and at Adet, Axum and Bako for one year (2015). Methodology: Thirty-five improved tef varieties were evaluated at nine environments. The G × E interaction were quantified using additive main effects and multiplicative interaction (AMMI) and the genotype and genotype by environment (GGE) biplot models. Results: Combined analysis of variance revealed highly significant (P = 0.01) variations due to genotype, environment and genotype by environment interaction effects. AMMI analysis revealed 4.3%, 79.7% and 16% variation in grain yield due to genotypes, environments and G x E effects, respectively. G6 gave the highest mean grain yield (3.33 t/ha) over environments whereas G29 gave the lowest mean yield (2.49 t/ha). The GGE biplot grouped the nine testing environments and the 35 genotypes into four mega environments and seven genotypic groups. The four mega environments include: G-I (E1, E4 and E6); G-II (E2, E3, E7 and E8); G-III (E9), and G-IV (E5). E5, E6, E7 and E8 which had the longest vector were the most discriminating of all environments while, E1 and E4 which had the smallest angle with the average environmental axis were the most representative of all environments. Regarding genotypes, G6, G25, G34 and G16 were identified as the best yielding and relatively stable genotypes to increase tef productivity. Conclusion: AMMI and GGE were found to be efficient in grouping the tef growing environments and genotypes.

AMMI biplot GGE stability Tef

Cited by 10

Stability analyses of tef (Eragrostis tef [Zucc.] Trotter) grain yield in dryland areas of Northeast Ethiopia

Fisseha Worede, Towfik Mehadi, Senayit Wondimu · Cogent Food & Agriculture · 2020

Participatory selection and performance of improved teff [ Eragrostis tef (Zuccagni) Trotter] varieties in East Gojjam, Ethiopia

Kelemu Nakachew, Alemnesh Eskezia, Ahadu Menzir · Agrosystems, Geosciences & Environment · 2026

Haulm Forage Value of Lentil Varieties in Central Ethiopia

Asemahegn Mersha Hailegiorgis, Debissa Lemessa · International Annals of Science · 2019

Performance, Stability Analysis, and Selection for New Yellow‐Fleshed Sweet Potato (Ipomoea batatas [L.] Lam.) in West Java, Indonesia

Yohanis Amos Mustamu, Debby Ustari, Arif Affan Wicaksono · International Journal of Agronomy · 2024

Showing 9 of 10 known citations — external sources report more than can currently be individually listed.

Article metrics

Real usage data collected on this platform.

0

Page views

0

PDF downloads

0

Outbound clicks

10

Citations

Views by country

Approximate, from request IP at view time — not citizenship or institution. Countries with fewer than 5 views are grouped as "Other".

No views recorded yet.

Traffic sources

Referring site, by host.

No traffic recorded yet.

Views and downloads exclude known bots/crawlers. Citations combines this platform's own DOI-resolved index with each external source's own reported total — see Cited by above for individually listed citing works. Last refreshed 0 seconds ago.