Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Specific adaptation of barley varieties in different locations in Ethiopia

  • Published:
Euphytica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Barley is one of the most important cereal crops grown for the livelihoods of the poor farmers of Tigray region in northern Ethiopia. As many low input and marginal environments it has benefited less from the yield increases achieved by modern breeding. This has been largely attributed due to genotype × environment intraction (GEI). To investigate the causes of GEI, ten barley varieties including local checks (two farmers developed varieties, four modern varieties and three rare local varieties) were tested over 21 environments. Participatory methods were applied to sample an adequate number of environments spanning the regional diversity. The yielding ability and stability of the varieties was graphically depicted by GGE and PLSR biplot. There were two major groups of environments, the central and northern highlands, the latter with less rainfall and poorer soils. Rainfall per month and total nitrogen level were the environmental variables that differentiated these two groups. In Tigray, rainfall in June and July were negatively correlated with yield, reflecting waterlogging problems. The different varieties were either specifically or widely adapted across the two environments. The variety ‘Himblil’, originating in Tigray, was the highest yielding and also most stable in the region of origin. However, it was inferior to improved varieties (Shege and Dimtu) at high yield levels. The association of earliness with grain yield indicates that the trait can be effectively manipulated within the existing materials. We recommend breeding for drought/water logging resistance based on selection in the target environment as the best strategy to provide stable and high yielding varieties for Tigray.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aastveit AH, Martens H (1986) ANOVA interactions interpreted by partial least squaresregression. Biometrics 42:829–844. doi:10.2307/2530697

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abay F, Cahalan C (1995) Evaluation of response of some barley landraces in drought prone sites of Tigray (northern Ethiopia). Crop Improv 22:125–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Abay F, Waters-Bayer A, Bjørnstad A (2008) Farmers’ seed management and Innovation in varietal selection: implications for barley breeding in Tigray, northern Ethiopia. Ambio 37(4):312–320. doi:10.1579/0044-7447(2008)37[312:FSMAII]2.0.CO;2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ahokas H, Manninen M-L (2001) Polymorphisms of phosphate acquisition parameters in barley (Hordeum vulgare) landraces: selected acid phosphatase and milieu acidification of roots after germination in vitro. Biol Agric Hortic 18:385–399

    Google Scholar 

  • Annicchiarico P (2002) Genotype × environment interactions: challenges and opportunities for plant breeding and cultivar recommendations. FAO Plant Production and Protection Paper No. 174. FAO, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • Annicchiarico P, Bellah A, Chiari T (2005) Defining sub regions and estimating benefits for a specific-adaptation strategy by breeding programs: a case study. Crop Sci 45:1741–1749. doi:10.2135/cropsci2004.0524

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atlin GN, Frey KJ (1989) Predicting the relative effectiveness of direct versus indirect selection for oat yield in three types of stress environments. Euphytica 44:137–142. doi:10.1007/BF00022608

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atlin GN, Cooper M, Bjørnstad Å (2001) A comparison of formal and participatory breeding approaches using selection theory. Euphytica 122:463–475. doi:10.1023/A:1017557307800

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birhanu B, Fekadu A, Berhane L (2005) Food barley in Ethiopia, pp 53–81. In: Grando S, Helena GM (eds) Food barley importance, uses and local knowledge. Proceedings of the international workshop on food barley improvement, Hammamet, Tunisia, ICARDA, Aleppo, Syria

  • Ceccarelli S (1989) Wide adaptation. How wide? Euphytica 40:197–205

    Google Scholar 

  • Ceccarelli S (1994) Specific adaptation and breeding for marginal conditions. Euphytica 77:205–219. doi:10.1007/BF02262633

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ceccarelli S (1996) Positive interpretation of genotype by environment interactions in relation to sustainability and biodiversity. In: Cooper M, Hammer GL (eds) Plant adaptation and crop improvement. CAB International, Wallingford, pp 467–486

    Google Scholar 

  • Ceccarelli S, Grando S (2007) Decentralized-participatory plant breeding: an example of demand driven research. Euphytica 155:349–360. doi:10.1007/s10681-006-9336-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ceccarelli S, Grando S, Hamblin J (1992) Relationships between barley grain yield measured in low and high yielding environments. Euphytica 64:49–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Ceccarelli S, Grando S, Impiglia A (1998) Choice of selection strategy in breeding barely for stress environments. Euphytica 103:307–318. doi:10.1023/A:1018647001429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ceccarelli S, Grando S, Baum M (2007) Participatory plant breeding in water-limited environment. Exp Agric 43:411–435. doi:10.1017/S0014479707005327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christinck A, Weltzien E, Hoffmann V (eds) (2005) Setting breeding objectives and developing seed systems with farmers. A handbook for practical use in participatory plant breeding projects. Margraf Publishers, Weikersheim

    Google Scholar 

  • Eberhart SA, Russell WA (1966) Stability parameters for comparing varieties. Crop Sci 6:36–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Fekadu W, Skjelvag AS (2002) Sowing date effects on growth rate and straw yield of local cultivars. NLH PhD thesis 36: 1–20

  • Finlay KW, Wilkinson GN (1963) The analysis of adaptation in a plant-breeding program. Aust J Agric Res 14:742–754. doi:10.1071/AR9630742

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gauch HG, Zobel RW (1997) Identifying mega-environments and targeting genotypes. Crop Sci 37:311–326

    Google Scholar 

  • Górny AG (2001) Variation in utilisation efficiency and tolerance to reduced water and nitrogen supply among wild and cultivated barleys. Euphytica 117:59–66. doi:10.1023/A:1004061709964

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hadjichristodoulou A (1987) Stability of 1,000 grain weight and its relation with other traits of barley in dry land areas. Euphytica 51:11–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holland JB, Bjørnstad Å, Frey KJ, Gullord M, Wesenberg DM (2001) Reccurent selection for broad adaptation affects stability of oat. Euphytica 126:265–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hussein MA, Bjørnstad Å, Aastveit AH (2000) SASG × ESTAB: a SAS program for computing genotype × environment stability statistics. Agron J 92:454–459

    Google Scholar 

  • IRRI (2002) International Rice Research Institute. IRRISTAT 4.3 for Windows. www.irri.org

  • Martens H, Naes T (1989) Multivariate calibration. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitiku H, Berhanu G, Amare B (2003) The status of soil fertility in Tigray. In: Gebremedhin B, Pender J, Endu SK (eds) Policies for sustainable land management in the highlands of Tigray, northern Ethiopia. Socio-economics and policy research working paper 54. ILRI, Nairobi

    Google Scholar 

  • Muruli BJ, Paulsen GM (1981) Improvement of nitrogen use efficiency and its relationship to other traits in maize. Maydica 26:63–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkins JM, Jinks JL (1968) Environmental and genotype-environmental components of variability IV. Non-linear interactions for multiple inbred lines. Heredity 23:525–535. doi:10.1038/hdy.1968.71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SAS (2001) SAS user’s guide, released 9th edn. SAS Institute Inc., Cary

  • Simmonds NW (1991) Selection for local adaptation in plant breeding program. Theor Appl Genet 82:363–367. doi:10.1007/BF02190624

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinebo W (2002) Yield relationships of barleys grown in a tropical Highland environment. Crop Sci 42:428–437

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinebo W, Gretzmacher R, Edelbauer A (2002) Environment of selection for grain yield in low fertilizer input barley. Field Crops Res 74:151–162. doi:10.1016/S0378-4290(01)00207-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snapp S (1999) Mother and baby trials: a novel trial design being tried out in Malawi. Target Newsl South Afr Soil Fertil Netw 17:8–10

    Google Scholar 

  • van Oosterom EJ, Ceccarelli S (1993) Indirect selection for grain yield of barley in harsh Mediterranean environments. Crop Sci 33:1127–1131

    Google Scholar 

  • van Oosterom EJ, Ceccarelli S, Peacock JM (1993) Yield response of barley to rainfall and temperature in Mediterranean environments. J Agric Sci Camb 121:307–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vargas M, Crossa J, Sayre K, Reynolds M, Ramirez ME, Talbot M (1998) Interpreting genotype × enviornment interaction in wheat using partial least squares regression. Crop Sci 38:679–689

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaughan DA, Chang TT (1992) In situ conservation of rice genetic resources. Econ Bot 46:368–383

    Google Scholar 

  • Yan W (2001) GGEbiplot a windows application for graphical analysis of multi-environment trial data and other types of two-way data. Agronomy 93:1111–1118

    Google Scholar 

  • Yan W, Rajcan I (2002) Biplot analysis of test sites and Trait relations of soyabean in Ontario. Crop Sci 42:11–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yan W, Tinker NA (2006) Biplot analysis of multi-environment trial data: principles and applications. Can J Plant Sci 86:623–645

    Google Scholar 

  • Yan W, Hunt LA, Sheng Q, Szlavnics Z (2000) Cultivar evaluation and mega-environment investigation based on the GGE biplot. Crop Sci 40:597–605

    Google Scholar 

  • Yan W, Kang MS, Ma B, Woods S, Cornelius PL (2007) GGE Biplot vs. AMMI analysis of genotype-by-environment data. Crop Sci 47:641–653

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou MX, Li HB, Mendham NJ (2007) Combining ability of waterlogging tolerance in barley. Crop Sci 47:278–284. doi:10.2135/cropsci2006.02.0065

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zobel RW, Wright MJ, Gauch G (1988) Statistical analysis of a yield trial. Agron J 80:388–393

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fetien Abay.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Abay, F., Bjørnstad, A. Specific adaptation of barley varieties in different locations in Ethiopia. Euphytica 167, 181–195 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-008-9858-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-008-9858-3

Keywords

Navigation