Skip to main content
Log in

Environmental response patterns in commercial classes of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)

  • Published:
Theoretical and Applied Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

The yield data of 39 cultivars of diverse commercial classes of beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) planted in seven locations in Michigan were subjected to cluster and canonical variate analyses. The essential findings and conclusions can be summarized as follows: (1) Cluster analysis classified the cultivars into sub-sets or clusters almost identically coinciding with their commercial class designation. Canonical variate analysis completely confirmed the sub-groupings. Within class similarities were attributed to a narrow genetic base resulting from a common genetic relationship, or at least sharing of a common gene pool. (2) It was found that two clusters could possess almost identical mean (cluster mean) yields, and deviate in opposite directions over the same range of environments. (3) When total genotype × environmental interaction variance was partitioned into between and within clusters, the cluster × environment portion constituted 80% of the total. (4) These results imply that if the behavior of a given cultivar across a series of environments is known, the behavior of all other members of the class across a similar range of environments would be predictable.

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.

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature

  • Abou-El-Fittouh, H.A.; Rawlings, J.O.; Miller, P.A. (1969): Classification of environments to control genotype by environment interactions with an application to cotton. Crop Sci. 9, 135–140

    Google Scholar 

  • Adams, M.W. (1977): An estimation of homogeneity in crop plants, with special reference to genetic vulnerability in the dry bean, Phaseolus vulgaris L. Euphytica 26, 665–679

    Google Scholar 

  • Avley, N.G.; Banfield, C.F.; Baxter, R.I.; Gower, J.C.; Krzanowski, W.J.; Lane, P.W.; Leech, P.K.; Nelder, J.A.; Payne, R.W.; Phelps, K.M.; Rogers, C.E.; Ross, G.V.S.; Simpson, H.R.; Todd, A.D.; Wedderburn, R.M.W.; Wilkinson, G.N. (1977): GENSTAT: A General Statistical Program. Rothamsted, England: Rothamsted Exper. Stn., Stat. Dep.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackith, R.E.; Reyment, R.A. (1971): Multivariate Morphometrics. New York: Acad. Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Byth, D.E.; Eisemann, R.L.; DeLacy, I.H. (1976): Two-way pattern analysis of a large data set to evaluate genotypic adaptation. Heredity 37, 215–230

    Google Scholar 

  • Eberhart, S.A.; Russell, W.A. (1966): Stability parameters for comparing varieties. Crop Sci. 6, 36–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Finlay, K.W.; Wilkinson, G.N. (1963): The analysis of adaptation in a plant breeding programme. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 14, 742–754

    Google Scholar 

  • Freemann, G.H. (1973): Statistical methods for the analysis of genotype — environment interactions. Heredity 31, 339–354

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghaderi, A.; Everson, E.H.; Cress, C.E. (1980): Classification of environments and genotypes in wheat. Crop Sci. 20, 707–710

    Google Scholar 

  • Gollob, H.F. (1968): A statistical model which combines features of factor analytic and analysis of variance techniques. Psychometrica 33, 73–116

    Google Scholar 

  • Klecka, W.R. (1975): Discriminant analysis. In: SPSS, Statistical Package for Social Sciences (eds. Nie, N.H.; Hull, C.H.; Jenkins, J.; Steinbrenner, K.; Bent, D.H.), pp. 434–467. New York: McGraw Hill

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, Chuang Sheng; Thompson, B. (1975): An empirical method of grouping genotypes based on linear function of the genotype — environment interaction. Heredity 34, 255–263

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandel, J. (1961): Non-additivity in two-way analysis of variance. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 56, 878–888

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandel, J. (1972): Principal components, analysis of variance and data structure. Stat. Neerl. 26, 119–129

    Google Scholar 

  • Muntgomery, V.E.; Shorter, R.; Byth, D.E. (1974): Genotype × environment interactions and environmental adaptation. I. Pattern analysis-application to soybean populations. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 25, 59–72

    Google Scholar 

  • Shorter, R.; Byth, D.E.; Muntgomery, V.E. (1977): Genotype × environment interactions and environmental adaptation. II. Assessment of environmental contributions. Austr. J. Agric. Res. 28, 233–235

    Google Scholar 

  • Verma, M.M.; Chahal, G.S. (1978): Limitations of conventional regression analysis, a proposed modification. Theor. Appl. Genet. 53, 89–91

    Google Scholar 

  • Wishart, D. (1978): Clustan User Manual. Inter-University/ Research Council Series, Report No. 47. Edinburgh University

  • Yates, F.; Cochran, W.G. (1938): The analysis of groups of experiments. J. Agric. Sci. 28, 556–580

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Communicated by R. W. Allard

Journal Article No. 10329 of the Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ghaderi, A., Adams, M.W. & Saettler, A.W. Environmental response patterns in commercial classes of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Theoret. Appl. Genetics 63, 17–22 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00303484

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00303484

Key words

Navigation