Cereal Research Communications

, Volume 35, Issue 4, pp 1661–1673 | Cite as

Ammi Analysis for Stability and Locations Effect on Grain Protein Content of Durum Wheat Genotypes

  • J. K. Haile
  • A. K. SarialEmail author
  • S. Assefa


Durum wheat is a good source of protein. A grain protein content of 13% for durum is a standard in quality throughout the grain industry (Riley et al. 1998). Protein content like other traits in wheat is known to be affected by genetic and environmental factors mainly location (Bement et al. 2003). In this study we evaluated a set of 25 genotypes comprising introduction from CIMMYT and advanced lines developed through hybridization by the Ethiopian National Durum Wheat Research Project (NDWP) for protein content over six testing locations, representing the wheat agro-ecologies in the country. The experiments were conducted in a randomised complete block design (RBD) with three replications each. Plot size was kept at 2 m2. Grain protein content was analyzed following Kjeldahl method (A.A.C.C. 1983). Stability analysis was done according to Eberhart and Russel (1966) model and effect of locations and its interaction with genotypes were estimated following additive main effects and multiplicative interaction (AMMI) model. The mean grain protein content varied from 11.61 to 13.52% among the genotypes. Only three genotypes, namely CD98206, DZ3117 and DZ-04-118 attained higher grain protein content than standard 13.00%. Stability analysis revealed that all but three genotypes were observed to be predictable. DZ 2212-1BS was found suitable for favorable environments. Genotype CD97383 was found sensitive to change in environment. Eight genotypes were identified as stable. Genotypes DZ3117 was found to be the best having maximum protein content recorded at AlemTena location and higher yield with stable performance across locations. AMMI analysis revealed that the first two significant IPCA scores together explained 73.55% of the total interaction variance. Biplot graphical analysis showed Alem Tena as the best location followed by Debre Zeit and Minjar in terms of average protein content of genotypes. Genotype DZ1669-1AK scored zero and could be considered as stable and wide adaptable having protein content higher than the general mean. The graphical analysis of IPCA 1 and IPCA 2 further revealed that this genotype was relatively close to origin zero. Genotype DZ-04-118 was adapted to Debre Zeit and Minjar while a large numbers of genotypes with negative IPCA score were adapted to Akaki and Chefe Donsa locations. Genotype DZ3117 had specific adaptability to Alem Tena location. High protein but low grain yield at Alem Tena may be due to the drought occurrence during grain filling period.


durum wheat Triticum turgidum AMMI analysis stability G × E interaction protein content 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. A.A.C.C. (American Association of Cereal Chemists) 1983. ’Approved methods’ A.A.C.C., St. Paul, MN.Google Scholar
  2. Adugna, W., Labuschagne, M.T. 2002. G × E interactions and phenotypic stability analyses of linseed in Ethiopia. Plant Breeding 121:66–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Agrobase 20. 1999. Agronomix software, Inc. Canada.Google Scholar
  4. Banziger, M., Feil, B., Schmid, J.E., Stamp, P. 1992. Genotypic variation in grain nitrogen content of wheat as affected by mineral nitrogen supply in the soil. Eur. J. Agron. 1:155–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Belay, S., Struik, P.C., Nachit, M.M., Peacock, J.M. 1993. Ontogenetic analysis of yield components and yield stability of durum wheat in water limited environments. Euphytica 71:211–219.Google Scholar
  6. Bement, G., Ameha, Y., Alemayehu, Z., Jemanesh, K., Tekalign, T., Bekele, M. 2003. Fertilizer N effects on yield and grain quality of durum wheat. Trop Agric. (Trinidad) 80:146–151.Google Scholar
  7. Budak, N. 2000. Heritability, Correlation and G × E Interactions of grain yield, test weight and protein content in durum wheat. Turkish Journal of Field Crops 5 (2):1–6.Google Scholar
  8. Craffi, M., Tozzi, L., Borghi, B., Corbellini, M., Lafiandra, D. 1996. Effect of heat shock during grain filling on the gluten composition of bread wheat. J. Cereal Sci. 24:91–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. CSA (Central Statistical Authority) 2001. Time series data on area, production and yield of major crops. Statistical Bulletin. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. CSA. pp. 76.Google Scholar
  10. Eberhart, S.A., Russel, W.A. 1966. Stability parameters for comparing varieties. Crop Sci. 6:36–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Efrem, B., Pena, R.J., Demissie, M. 2000. Quality of Ethiopian Durum Wheat Cultivars. The Eleventh Regional Wheat Workshop for Eastern, Central and Southern Africa. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 18–22 September, International Maize and Wheat Improvement Centre, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, pp. 18–22.Google Scholar
  12. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nation, Rome), 2002. FAO Year Book. Statistics Series No. 135.Google Scholar
  13. Fares, C., Alessandro, M., Gallo, A. 1993. Grain quality of durum wheat as affected by environment and cropping practices. Agron. J. 27:117–124.Google Scholar
  14. Gauch, H.G. 1988. Model selection and validation for yield trials with interaction. Biometrics 44:705–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Metho, L.A. Hammes, P.S., De Beer, J.M., Groeneveld, H.T. 1997. Interaction between cultivar and soil fertility on grain yield, yield components and grain nitrogen content of wheat. S. Afr. J. Plant Soil 14:158–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Riley, E.A., Thompson, T.L., White, S.A., Ottman, M.J. 1998. Late season tissue tests for critical grain protein content in durum, Maricopa. In: Ottman, M. (ed.), Forage and Grain, A college of Agriculture Report Series, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, pp. 43–50.Google Scholar
  17. Sertsu, S., Bekele, T. 2000. Procedures for Soil and Plant Analysis. National Soil Research Center, EARO, Addis Ababa, pp. 73–76.Google Scholar
  18. Simmonds, D.H. 1989. Inherent Quality Factors in Wheat. Wheat and Wheat Quality in Australia, CSIRO, Australia, pp. 31–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Tesfaye T., Getachew, B. 1991. Aspects of Ethiopian tetraploid wheats with emphasis on durum wheat genetic and breeding research. In: Gebre-Mariam, H., Tanner, D.G., Hulluka, M. (eds): Wheat Research in Ethiopia: A historical perspective. IAR/CIMMYT, Addis Ababa, pp. 47–71.Google Scholar
  20. Tesfaye T., Seifu, T., Getachew, B., Eferem, B., Demissie, M. 1998. Stability of performance of tetraploid wheat landraces in Ethiopian highland. Euphytica 102:301–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of BiologyAddis Ababa UniversityAddis AbabaEthiopia
  2. 2.Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural ResearchDebre-ZeitEthiopia
  3. 3.COAHaryana Agricultural University CampusKaulIndia

Personalised recommendations