Abstract
A field experiment was conducted at the field of Field Crop .Dept., College of Agric\Univ.of Baghdad. spring and fall seasons of 2009, 2010 , spring of 2011 and fall of 2013 in order to know the relative magnitude of the genetic variation component and interactions forms of epistasis using Generation Means Analysis of maize (Zea mays L.) . Six generations P1 , P2 , F1 , F2, BC1 and BC2 for four crosses (FI01301 Rustico), (AntignaoHi39× Nostred ) , (Lo1391 ×Rustico) and ( Rusticocangini× Rustico) were evaluated by using randomized complete block design( RCBD) with four replications for grain yield and its components. The results showed significant differences between the generations of the four crosses. The first generation superiority and gave the highest mean for each of the traits of four crosses. The highest hybrid vigor and heterosis percent to for unit area grain yield (ton\ha) 121.8% and 126.92% for cross( FI01301 ×Rustico ). Most of the genetic effects (d additive , dominance h , additive × additive i , additive × dominance j and dominance × dominance l) were significant for all crosses . This revealed the importance of the dominance, additive and epistasis effects as genetic actions controlled in yield inheritance and its components in maize. But the dominance variation was more important than the additive variation in the ear length ,grain weighte and yield unit area, disagreement signal indicate the existence of an act of the dominance h and dominance× dominance l of most studied traits duplicate epistasis. Supplementary superiority also appeared to Epistasis complementary of crosses (FI01301×Rustico) and (AntignaoHi39×Nostred) and grain weight in cross (Lo1391 ×Rustico ). It can be conclude that the additive and non-additive gene action control the in heritable yield and its component . It is recommend using the method of reciprocal recurrent selection(RRS) to improve yield and its components .
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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
Generations differed significantly across four crosses.
- Outcome
- differences between the generationse0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“significant differences between the generations of the four crosses”
t0“MAIZE”
Claim · model-written summary
First generations had the highest trait means in four crosses.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The first generation superiority and gave the highest mean for each of the traits of four crosses”
t0“MAIZE”
Claim · model-written summary
FI01301 × Rustico showed 121.8% hybrid vigor for grain yield.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“hybrid vigor and heterosis percent to for unit area grain yield (ton\ha) 121.8% and 126.92% for cross( FI01301 ×Rustico )”
t0“MAIZE”
Claim · model-written summary
FI01301 × Rustico showed 126.92% heterosis for grain yield.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“hybrid vigor and heterosis percent to for unit area grain yield (ton\ha) 121.8% and 126.92% for cross( FI01301 ×Rustico )”
t0“MAIZE”
Claim · model-written summary
Additive, dominance and epistatic effects were significant in all crosses.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Most of the genetic effects (d additive , dominance h , additive × additive i , additive × dominance j and dominance × dominance l) were significant for all crosses”
t0“MAIZE”
Claim · model-written summary
Dominance variance exceeded additive variance for ear length, grain weight and yield.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“dominance variation was more important than the additive variation in the ear length ,grain weighte and yield unit area”
t0“MAIZE”
Claim · model-written summary
Opposing dominance and dominance-by-dominance signs indicated duplicate epistasis.
- Outcome
- duplicate epistasise0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“disagreement signal indicate the existence of an act of the dominance h and dominance× dominance l of most studied traits duplicate epistasis”
t0“MAIZE”
Claim · model-written summary
Complementary epistasis was reported for FI01301×Rustico.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Epistasis complementary of crosses (FI01301×Rustico) and (AntignaoHi39×Nostred) and grain weight in cross (Lo1391 ×Rustico )”
t0“MAIZE”
Claim · model-written summary
Complementary epistasis was reported for AntignaoHi39×Nostred.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Epistasis complementary of crosses (FI01301×Rustico) and (AntignaoHi39×Nostred) and grain weight in cross (Lo1391 ×Rustico )”
t0“MAIZE”
Claim · model-written summary
Complementary epistasis in grain weight was reported for Lo1391 ×Rustico.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Epistasis complementary of crosses (FI01301×Rustico) and (AntignaoHi39×Nostred) and grain weight in cross (Lo1391 ×Rustico )”
t0“MAIZE”
Claim · model-written summary
Authors recommended reciprocal recurrent selection to improve yield and components.
- Outcome
- reciprocal recurrent selection(RRS)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“It is recommend using the method of reciprocal recurrent selection(RRS) to improve yield and its components”
t0“MAIZE”