, Volume 79, Issue 1–2, pp 149–161 | Cite as

Relationships among American and Spanish populations of maize

  • A. Ordás
  • R. A. Malvar
  • A. M. de Ron


Two experiments were carried out with two objectives. First, to establish the phenetic relationships among the maize (Zea mays L.) landraces from Galicia (Northwestern Spain) maintained at the Misión Biológica de Galicia. Second, to assess the resemblance between a collection of Spanish populations (including the landraces from Galicia) and a set of US Corn Belt varieties. For the first objective 73 varieties from Galicia, along with 9 hybrid checks, were grown in 9×9 simple lattices at two locations for two years. For the second objective 131 populations from the US Corn Belt and Spain, along with 9 hybrid checks, were grown for three years in unreplicated experiments. Cluster analyses were carried out with the first principal components that accounted for a significant amount of the total variation. Four groups were found among the landraces from Galicia. The populations from Spain and America were classified as belonging to nine main groups. The replicated experiment was more accurate than the unreplicated one. However, it is concluded that an unreplicated test grown in several environments is accurate enough to detect the main groups, although some inaccuracies should be expected.

Key words

maize germplasm cluster analysis landraces Zea mays 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Brown A.H.D., 1989. The case for core collections. In: A.H.D.Brown, O.H.Frankel, D.R.Marshall & J.T.Williams (Eds), The Use of Plant Genetic Resources, pp. 136–156. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  2. Cochran W.G. & G.M.Cox, 1957. Experimental Designs, 2nd ed. John Wiley & Sons, New York, USA.Google Scholar
  3. Darrah L.L. & M.S.Zuber, 1986. 1985 United States farm maize germplasm base and commercial breeding strategies. Crop Sci. 26: 1109–1113.Google Scholar
  4. Dunn G. & B.S.Everitt, 1982. An Introduction to Mathematical Taxonomy, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  5. Eberhart S.A., A.R.Hallauer & W.A.Russell, 1972. Registration of four maize synthetics. Crop Sci. 12: 132.Google Scholar
  6. Edwards R.J. & E.R.Leng, 1965. Classification of some indigenous maize collections from Southern and Southeastern Europe. Euphytica 14: 161–169.Google Scholar
  7. Frankel O.H., 1989. Principles and strategies of evaluation. In: A.H.D.Brown, O.H.Frankel, D.R.Marshall & J.T.Williams (Eds), The Use of Plant Genetic Resources, pp. 245–260, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  8. Goodman M.M. & R. McK.Bird, 1977. The races of maize IV: Tentative grouping of 219 Latin America races. Econ. Bot. 31: 204–221.Google Scholar
  9. Jeffers J.N.R., 1967. Two case studies in the application of principal component analysis. Appl. Stat. 16: 225–236.Google Scholar
  10. Llauradó M. & J.Moreno-González, 1993. Classification of northern Spanish populations of maize by methods of numerical taxonomy. I. Morphological traits. Maydica 38: 15–21.Google Scholar
  11. Marshall D.R., 1989. Limitations to the use of germplasm collections. In: A.H.D.Brown, O.H.Frankel, D.R.Marshall & J.T.Williams (Eds), The Use of Plant Genetic Resources, pp. 105–120. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  12. Melchiorre P., 1992. Phenetic relationships among different races of maize (Zea mays L.) from Salta (Argentina). Maydica 37: 329–338.Google Scholar
  13. Moreno-González J., 1988. Diallel crossing system in sets of flint and dent inbred lines of maize (Zea mays L.). May dica 33: 37–49.Google Scholar
  14. Ordás A., 1991. Heterosis in crosses between American and Spanish populations of maize. Crop Sci. 31: 931–935.Google Scholar
  15. Ordás A. & A.M.deRon, 1988. A method to measure conicalness in maize. Maydica 33: 261–267.Google Scholar
  16. Ordás A. & R.E.Stucker, 1977. Effect of planting density on correlations among yield and its components in two corn populations. Crop Sci. 17: 926–929.Google Scholar
  17. Peeters J.P. & J.A.Martinelli, 1989. Hierarchical cluster analysis as a tool to manage variation in germplasm collections. Theor. Appl. Genet. 78: 42–48.Google Scholar
  18. Peterson R.H., J.L.Geadelmann, E.H.Rinke & J.C.Sentz, 1976. Registration of six maize germplasm populations. Crop Sci. 16: 605–606.Google Scholar
  19. Ron & A.Ordás, 1987. Genetic study of non-ear characters in maize. Plant Breed. 98: 268–271.Google Scholar
  20. Russell W.A., 1979. Registration of maize gernplasm. Crop. Sci. 19: 565.Google Scholar
  21. Russell W.A., L.H.Penny, A.R.Hallauer, S.A.Eberhart, G.E.Scott, W.D.Guthrie & F.F.Dicke, 1971. Registration of maize germplasm synthetics. Crop Sci. 11: 140–141.Google Scholar
  22. Sánchez J.J. & M.M.Goodman, 1992. Relationships among Mexican and some North American and South American races of maize. Maydica 37: 41–51.Google Scholar
  23. Sánchez-Monge E., 1962. Razas de Maíz en España. Ministry of Agriculture, Madrid, Spain.Google Scholar
  24. SAS Institute Inc., 1989 SAS/STAT user's guide, Version 6, 4th ed. Vols. 1 and 2. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, North Carolina, USA.Google Scholar
  25. Smith J.S.C., 1988. Diversity of United States hybrid maize germplasm; isozymic and chromatographic evidence. Crop Sci. 28: 63–69.Google Scholar
  26. Wessel-Beaver L., R.H.Beck & R.J.Lambert, 1984. Rapid method for measuring kernel density. Agron. J. 76: 307–309.Google Scholar
  27. Zuber M.S. & L.L.Darrah, 1980. 1979 U.S. corn germplasm base. Proc. Annu. Corn Sorghum Res. Conf. 35: 234–249.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Ordás
    • 1
  • R. A. Malvar
    • 1
  • A. M. de Ron
    • 1
  1. 1.Misión Biológica de GaliciaCSICPontevedraSpain

Personalised recommendations