Skip to main content
Log in

Environmental classification of maize-testing sites in the SADC region and its implication for collaborative maize breeding strategies in the subcontinent

  • Published:
Euphytica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

When evaluating genotypes, it is efficient and resourceful to identify similar testing sites and group them according to similarity. Grouping sites ensures that breeders choose as many variable sites as possible to capture the effects of genotype-by-environment (GE) interactions. In order to exploit these interactions and increase testing efficiency and variety selection, it is necessary to group similar environments or mega-environments. The present mega-environments in the Southern African Development Community (SADC) countries are confounded within each country, which limits the exchange of germplasm among them. The objective of this study was to revise and group similar maize-testing sites across the SADC countries that are not confounded within each country. The study was based on 3 years (1999–2001) of regional maize yield trial data and geographical information systems (GIS) parameters from 94 sites. Sequential retrospective (Seqret) pattern analysis methodology was used to stratify testing sites and group them according to their similarity and dissimilarity based on mean grain yield. The methodology used historical data, taking into account imbalances of data caused by changes over locations and years, such as additions and omission of genotypes and locations. Cluster analysis grouped regional trial sites into seven mega-environments, mainly distinguished by GIS parameters related to rainfall, temperature, soil pH, and soil nitrogen with an overall R2 = 0.70. This analysis provides a challenge and an opportunity to develop and deploy maize germplasm in the SADC region faster and more effectively.

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

References

  • Cooper, M. & I.H. Delacy, 1994. Relationships among analytical methods used study genotypic variation and genotype-by-environment interaction in plant breeding multi-environment experiments. Theor Appl Genetics 88: 561–572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, M., I.H. Delacy & R.L. Eisemann, 1993. Recent advances in the study of genotype × environment interactions and their applications in breeding. In: B.C. Imrie & J.B. Hacker (Eds.), Focused Plant Improvement : Towards Responsible and Sustainable Agriculture. Proceedings of 10th Australian Plant Breeding Conference, Vol. I, pp. 116–131. Organizing Committee Australian Convention and Travel Service, Canberra.

  • Delacy, I.H., M. Cooper & P.K. Lawrence, 1990. Pattern analysis over years of regional variety trials: Relationship among sites. In: M.S. Kang (Ed.), Genotype-by-Environment Interaction and Plant Breeding, pp. 189–213. Louisiana State University, Baton Rogue, Louisiana (12–13 February).

  • DeLacy, I.H., P.N. Fox, J.D. Corbett, J. Crossa, S. Rajaram, R.A. Fischer & M. Vam Ginkel, 1994. Long-term association of locations for, testing spring wheat. Euphytica 72: 95–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeLacy, I.H., K. Basford, M. Cooper & P. Fox, 1996. Retrospective analysis of historical data sets from multi-environment trials – Theoretical development. In: M. Cooper & G.L. Hammer (Eds.), Plant Adaptation and Crop Improvement, pp. 243–267. CAB International.

  • DeLacy, I.H., K. Basford, M. Cooper & P.N. Fox, 1998. The SEQRET Package: Computer Programs for Retrospective Pattern Analysis, Version 1.1. The University of Queensland, Brisbane 4072, Australia.

  • FAOSTAST: 2003. Statistical Database of Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. http://www.fao.org/waicent/portal/statistics_en.asp.

  • Hamblin, J., H.M. Fischer & H.I. Ridings, 1980. The choice of locality for plant breeding when selecting for high yield and general adaptation. Euphytica 29: 161–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, D.P., E. Martinez-Romero, J.W. White, J.D. Corbett & M. Banziger, 2002. African Maize Research Atlas, Vol. 30. CIMMYT, C.D., Mexico D.F.

  • Mirzawan, P.D.N., M. Cooper, I.H. DeLacy & D.M. Hogarth, 1994. Retrospective analysis of relationships among the test environments of the Southern Queensland Sugar Cane breeding program. Theor Appl Genetics 88: 707–716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, C.J., 1992. Similarities among test sites based on cultivar performance in the hard red winter region. Crop Sci 32: 907– 912.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, C.J. & W.H. Pfeiffer, 1989. International winter wheat evaluation: Relationships among test sites based on cultivar performance. Crop Sci 29: 276–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, J.H., 1963. Hierarchical grouping to optimise an objective function. J Am Stat Assoc 58: 236–244.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. Setimela.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Setimela, P., Chitalu, Z., Jonazi, J. et al. Environmental classification of maize-testing sites in the SADC region and its implication for collaborative maize breeding strategies in the subcontinent. Euphytica 145, 123–132 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-005-0625-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-005-0625-4

Keywords

Navigation