Paper · 2025 · European Journal of Agronomy

A multidimensional analytical framework for the selection of soft wheat varieties for dryland environments based on agronomic productivity, stability, nitrogen use efficiency and economic parameters

Qudratullah Soofizada; Antonio Pescatore; Simone Orlandini; et al.

14
claims
28
verbatim quotes
4
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Wheat production in arid and semi-arid regions is constrained by environmental variability and limited input availability, especially nitrogen. The use of a novel multidimensional analytical framework is proposed to permit the selection of the most suitable bread wheat varieties for Afghanistan, optimizing the aforementioned constraints. The objective was to (i) evaluate 33 varieties across 6 environments, and (ii) to develop a novel robust analytical framework integrating agronomic performance, nitrogen use efficiency (NUE), stability metrics, and economic return for the identification of the most stable, high-performing varieties. Environmental factors explained over 80 % of the variance in grain yield (GY) and straw yield (SY). Significant genotype × environment interactions enabled the identification of broadly adapted genotypes. Varieties 28 and 32 exceeded 4.0 t ha⁻¹ GY with high stability across environments. Nitrogen uptake efficiency (Nt/Ns) ranged from 0.41 to 0.72, with varieties 11, 19 and 20 combining high NUE traits with consistent performance. Protein content was mostly environment-driven, with variety 15 showing exceptional stability and quality. The Net Nitrogen-adjusted Margin (NNaM), an economic index combining yield, NUE, and grain protein, was significantly associated with Nt/Ns and SY. A linear regression model explained 96.5 % of NNaM variability, highlighting the value of integrating physiological and economic traits. The derived composite index allowed for multi-trait ranking. From this, only varieties 28, 32 and 15 emerged as optimal candidates. This integrative framework facilitates the selection of productive, resource-efficient wheat varieties for Afghanistan farming and offers a scalable approach for breeding programs in arid and semi-arid agro-ecosystems.

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 14

Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Environment explained over 80% of grain yield variance.

Outcome
variance in grain yielde0
Value
over 80 %e0
Setting
Environmental factorse0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Environmental factors explained over 80 % of the variance in grain yield (GY) and straw yield (SY).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 641–740 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 66–71 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Environment explained over 80% of straw yield variance.

Outcome
straw yielde0
Value
over 80 %e0
Setting
Environmental factorse0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Environmental factors explained over 80 % of the variance in grain yield (GY) and straw yield (SY).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 641–740 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 66–71 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Genotype by environment interactions were significant.

Outcome
genotype × environment interactionse0
Setting
environmente0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Significant genotype × environment interactions enabled the identification of broadly adapted genotypes.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 741–845 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 66–71 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Variety 28 exceeded 4.0 t ha⁻¹ grain yield with high stability.

Material
28e0
Outcome
GYe0
Direction
exceedede0
Value
4.0 t ha⁻¹e0
Qualifier
high stability across environmentse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Varieties 28 and 32 exceeded 4.0 t ha⁻¹ GY with high stability across environments.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 846–929 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 66–71 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Variety 32 exceeded 4.0 t ha⁻¹ grain yield with high stability.

Material
32e0
Outcome
GYe0
Direction
exceedede0
Value
4.0 t ha⁻¹e0
Qualifier
high stability across environmentse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Varieties 28 and 32 exceeded 4.0 t ha⁻¹ GY with high stability across environments.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 846–929 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 66–71 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nitrogen uptake efficiency ranged from 0.41 to 0.72.

Outcome
Nitrogen uptake efficiencye0
Value
0.41 to 0.72e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Nitrogen uptake efficiency (Nt/Ns) ranged from 0.41 to 0.72”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 930–989 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 66–71 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Varieties 11, 19 and 20 combined high nitrogen efficiency with consistent performance.

Material
varieties 11, 19 and 20e0
Outcome
high NUE traits with consistent performancee0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“varieties 11, 19 and 20 combining high NUE traits with consistent performance”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 996–1073 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 66–71 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Protein content was mostly determined by environment.

Outcome
Protein contente0
Setting
environmente0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Protein content was mostly environment-driven”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1075–1120 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 66–71 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Variety 15 had exceptional protein stability and quality.

Material
variety 15e0
Outcome
exceptional stability and qualitye0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“variety 15 showing exceptional stability and quality”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1127–1179 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 66–71 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Nitrogen-adjusted margin was significantly associated with nitrogen uptake efficiency.

Outcome
Net Nitrogen-adjusted Margine0
Qualifier
Nt/Nse0

Not reportedCompoundDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The Net Nitrogen-adjusted Margin (NNaM), an economic index combining yield, NUE, and grain protein, was significantly associated with Nt/Ns and SY.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1181–1328 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 66–71 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Nitrogen-adjusted margin was significantly associated with straw yield.

Outcome
Net Nitrogen-adjusted Margine0
Qualifier
SYe0
Setting
SYe0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The Net Nitrogen-adjusted Margin (NNaM), an economic index combining yield, NUE, and grain protein, was significantly associated with Nt/Ns and SY.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1181–1328 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 66–71 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Regression explained 96.5% of nitrogen-adjusted margin variability.

Outcome
NNaM variabilitye0
Value
96.5 %e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“A linear regression model explained 96.5 % of NNaM variability”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1329–1391 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 66–71 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The composite index allowed multi-trait ranking.

Outcome
multi-trait rankinge0

Not reportedComparatorValue

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The derived composite index allowed for multi-trait ranking.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1466–1526 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 66–71 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Varieties 28, 32 and 15 were selected as optimal candidates.

Material
varieties 28, 32 and 15e0
Outcome
optimal candidatese0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“only varieties 28, 32 and 15 emerged as optimal candidates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1538–1596 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 66–71 · show in text ↑