Abstract
Reports of estimates of components of genetic variance in open pollinated populations of maize ( Zea mays L.) have been mostly on U.S. Corn Belt germplasm, whereas few studies have been conducted using European germplasm. This study was undertaken to obtain estimates of genetic parameters for important agronomic traits in two populations (Ribadumia and Tuy) from northwestern Spain. Full‐sib within halfosib groups were developed by the Design I mating system and evaluated at two locations in Spain in 1987 and 1988. The populations showed a similar genetic structure with very small differences. Moreover, the pattern of genetic variability was similar to other germplasm because the greatest proportion of total genetic variance was attributed to additive effects for most traits. In contrast, estimates of dominance variance were large for yield, ear, and plant height and ear length. In general, additive × environment interaction variances were significant while dominance × environment interaction variances were not significant for either population. The large range of variation and the high values of heritability for lodging and ear and kernels traits, as well as values of expected gain from selection for these traits, suggested good potential for improvement through an intrapopulation selection program. However, the large dominance effects and the small additive effects for grain yield indicated that an interpopulation selection program would be effective if the large intrapopulation dominance variance is expressed in population crosses. Yield did not show significant additive variance so estimates of additive correlation with any trait were not calculated. Correlated response between yield and any trait is not expected and improved grain yield based on indirect selection of yield components is not recommended.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 11
Claim · model-written summary
The two maize populations showed similar genetic structure.
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The populations showed a similar genetic structure with very small differences.”
t0“Maize”
t1“Ribadumia and Tuy”
Claim · model-written summary
Additive effects accounted for most genetic variance for most traits.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the greatest proportion of total genetic variance was attributed to additive effects for most traits”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Dominance variance was large for yield, ear and plant height, and ear length.
- Outcome
- estimates of dominance variancee0
- Direction
- largee0
- Qualifier
- yield, ear, and plant height and ear lengthe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“estimates of dominance variance were large for yield, ear, and plant height and ear length”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Additive by environment interaction variance was significant.
- Outcome
- additive × environment interaction variancese0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“additive × environment interaction variances were significant”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Dominance by environment interaction variance was not significant in either population.
- Outcome
- dominance × environment interaction variancese0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“dominance × environment interaction variances were not significant for either population”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Lodging, ear and kernel traits had broad variation and high heritability and expected selection gains.
- Outcome
- heritability for lodging and ear and kernels traitse0
- Direction
- highe0
- Qualifier
- large range of variatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The large range of variation and the high values of heritability for lodging and ear and kernels traits, as well as values of expected gain from selection for these traits”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Intrapopulation selection has good improvement potential for lodging, ear and kernel traits.
- Outcome
- improvement through an intrapopulation selection programe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“suggested good potential for improvement through an intrapopulation selection program”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
An interpopulation selection program could improve grain yield if dominance variance is expressed in crosses.
- Outcome
- an interpopulation selection programe0
- Qualifier
- if the large intrapopulation dominance variance is expressed in population crossese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“an interpopulation selection program would be effective if the large intrapopulation dominance variance is expressed in population crosses”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Yield lacked significant additive variance.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Yield did not show significant additive variance”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
No correlated response between yield and any other trait is expected.
- Outcome
- Correlated response between yield and any traite0
- Direction
- not expectede0
- Comparator
- any traite0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Correlated response between yield and any trait is not expected”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors do not recommend indirect grain-yield selection using yield components.
- Outcome
- indirect selection of yield componentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“improved grain yield based on indirect selection of yield components is not recommended”
t0“Maize”