About Us | Help Videos | Contact Us | Subscriptions
 

Abstract

 

This article in CS

  1. Vol. 26 No. 5, p. 894-900
     
    Received: Nov 14, 1985
    Published: Sept, 1986


 View
 Download
 Alerts
 Permissions
 Share

doi:10.2135/cropsci1986.0011183X002600050012x

Stability Analysis: Where Do We Stand?1

  1. C. S. Lin,
  2. M. R. Binns and
  3. L. P. Lefkovitch2

Abstract

Abstract

To clarify the apparent confusion arising from the diversity of published stability statistics, and the relationship of these with the clustering of genotypes for similarity of response to environments, the interrelationship of nine stability statistics and nine similarity measures are investigated. The stability statistics fall into four groups depending on whether they are based on the deviations from the average genotype effect or on the genotype ✕ environment (GE) term, and whether or not they incorporate a regression model on an environmental index. These groups of stability statistics are shown to be related to three concepts: A genotype may be considered to be stable (i) if its among-environment variance is small, (ii) if its response to environments is parallel to the mean response of all genotypes in the trial, or (iii) if the residual mean square from a regression model on the environmental index is small. Unfortunately, these three concepts represent different aspects of stability and do not always provide a complete picture of the response. In the alternative approach of cluster analysis, the similarity measures define complete similarity in three different ways: i) equality of genotype's response across locations, ii) equality of all within location differences, and iii) equality of all within location ratios. The advantage of the nonparametric approach is that a cultivar's response characteristics can be assessed qualitatively, without the need for a mathematical characterization.

  Please view the pdf by using the Full Text (PDF) link under 'View' to the left.

Copyright © .