Response of winter wheat cultivars to crop management and environment in post-registration trialsądry W., Derejko A., Studnicki M., Paderewski J., Gacek E. (2017): Response of winter wheat cultivars to crop management and environment in post-registration trials. Czech J. Genet. Plant Breed., 53: 76-82.
download PDF
In order to deliver essential information related to flexible cultivar recommendations, the cultivars which have been released have to be evaluated under different crop management treatments across agro-ecosystems using two-factorial post-registration multi-environment trials. The objective of this study was to evaluate the yield adaptive patterns of 24 winter wheat cultivars tested across 20 trial locations and three consecutive cropping seasons. The evaluated winter wheat cultivars from many Western European countries and Poland showed different adaptive responses to the Polish agro-ecosystems under each of the crop management intensities. Under the high-input management, the cultivars Rapsodia, (UK) Bogatka and Nadobna (Poland) showed a wide adaptation. The cultivars Alcazar (France), Anthus (Germany), Batuta (Poland) and Boomer (UK) were the best adapted to lower-productive environments and poorly adapted to highly productive conditions under both management treatments.  
Anderson W. K., van Burgel A. J., Sharma D. L., Shackley B. J., Zaicou-Kunesch C. M., Miyan M. S., Amjad M. (2011): Assessing specific agronomic responses of wheat cultivars in a winter rainfall environment. Crop and Pasture Science, 62, 115-
Annicchiarico P. (2002): Genotype-environment Interactions: Challenges and Opportunities for Plant Breeding and Cultivar Recommendations. FAO Paper No. 174, Rome, FAO.
Annicchiarico Paolo, Chiapparino Elena, Perenzin Maurizio (2010): Response of common wheat varieties to organic and conventional production systems across Italian locations, and implications for selection. Field Crops Research, 116, 230-238
Ebdon J. S., Gauch H. G. (2002): Additive Main Effect and Multiplicative Interaction Analysis of National Turfgrass Performance Trials. Crop Science, 42, 489-
Gan Y., Malhi S. S., Brandt S., Katepa-Mupondwa F., Kutcher H. R. (2007): Canola in the Northern Great Plains. Agronomy Journal, 99, 1208-
Gauch Hugh G. (2013): A Simple Protocol for AMMI Analysis of Yield Trials. Crop Science, 53, 1860-
Gauch Hugh. G., Zobel Richard W. (1997): Identifying Mega-Environments and Targeting Genotypes. Crop Science, 37, 311-
Gomez K.A., Gomez A.A. (1984): Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. 2nd Ed. New York, Wiley & Sons.
Loyce C., Meynard J.M., Bouchard C., Rolland B., Lonnet P., Bataillon P., Bernicot M.H., Bonnefoy M., Charrier X., Debote B., Demarquet T., Duperrier B., Félix I., Heddadj D., Leblanc O., Leleu M., Mangin P., Méausoone M., Doussinault G. (2008): Interaction between cultivar and crop management effects on winter wheat diseases, lodging, and yield. Crop Protection, 27, 1131-1142
Möhring J., Piepho H.-P. (2009): Comparison of Weighting in Two-Stage Analysis of Plant Breeding Trials. Crop Science, 49, 1977-
Przystalski M., Osman A., Thiemt E. M., Rolland B., Ericson L., Østergård H., Levy L., Wolfe M., Büchse A., Piepho H.-P., Krajewski P. (2008): Comparing the performance of cereal varieties in organic and non-organic cropping systems in different European countries. Euphytica, 163, 417-433
download PDF

© 2022 Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences | Prohlášení o přístupnosti