Skip to main content
Log in

Genotype × Environment Interacion in multi-environment Trials using shrinkage factors for ammi models

  • Published:
Euphytica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Shrinkage factors applied to the additive main effects and multiplicative interaction (AMMI) models improve prediction of cultivar responses in multi-environment trials (MET). Estimates of shrinkage factors based on the eigenvalue partition (EVP) method may get a further improvement in the predictions of cell means. Objectives of this work were: (1) to compare the EVP-based shrinkage method with unshrunken AMMI, best linear unbiased predictor (BLUP) and other shrunken method (herein named CCC), when they were applied to five maize MET and simulation data; (2) to assess by cross validation the equation which estimates the standard error of predicted means (SEPM) based on the EVP theory; (3) to estimate the genotype × environment interaction (GEI) variance components after applying the EVP shrinkage method to the five maize MET. Empirical data of five maize MET and simulation data were used for cross validation of the methods using the root mean square predictive difference (RMSPD) criterion. The RMSPD of the shrunken EVP predicted cell means was generally smaller than those of the other methods, suggesting that the EVP method was generally better predictor than the other methods. The truncated AMMI was the worst among the four methods studied. The EVP-based equation, which predicts the SEPM, was a good predictor as determined by the RMSPD cross validation criterion, with the advantage that it does not need one replication for validation. Estimates of mean squares, and GEI and error variances associated with the GEI effects were smaller for the shrunken EVP predicted effects than for the original data.

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

  • Cornelius, P.L., 1993. Statistical tests and retention of terms in the additive main effects and multiplicative interaction model for cultivar trials. Crop Sci 33:1186–1193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornelius, P.L., J. Crossa & M.S. Sayedsadr, 1993. Tests and estimators of multiplicative models for variety trials. In Proc of 5th Annual Kansas State University Conference on Applied Statistics in Agriculture, Manhattan, Kansas.

  • Cornelius, P.L. & J. Crossa, 1995. Shrinkage estimators of multiplicative models for crop cultivar trials. Technical Report No. 352, University of Kentucky, Dep. of Statistics, Lexington, KY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornelius P.L., J. Crossa & M.S. Seyedsadr, 1996. Statistical tests and estimators of multiplicative models for genotype-by-environment interaction. In: M.S. Kang & H.G. Gauch (Eds.). Genotype-By-Environment Interaction, pp.199–234. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornelius P.L. & J. Crossa, 1999. Prediction assessment of shrinkage estimators of multiplicative models for multi-environment trials. Crop Sci 39:998–1009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crossa, J., R.W. Zobel & H.G. Gauch, 1990. Additive and multiplicative interaction analysis of two international maize cultivar trials. Crop Sci 30:493–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crossa, J. & P.L. Cornelius. 1994. Recent developments in multiplicative models for trials In: Buxton, D.R. et al. (Eds.), International Crop Science I, Crop Science Society of America, Madison, WI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gabriel, K.R., 1978. Least squares approximation of matrices byadditive and multiplicative models. J Royal Stat Soc, Series B 40:186–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gauch, H.G., 1988. Model selection for yield trials with interaction. Biometrics 44:705–715.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gauch, H.G. & R.W. Zobel, 1988. Predictive and postdictive success of statistical analysis of yield trials. Theor Appl Genet 76:1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gauch, H.G. & R.W. Zobel, 1989. Accuracy and selection success in yield trials. Theor Appl Genet 77:473–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gollob, H.F., 1968. A statistical model which combines features of factor analytic analysis of variance techniques. Psychometricka 33:73–115.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Moreno-González, J. & J. Crossa, 1998. Combining genotype, envi-ronment and attribute variables in regression models for predicting cell means of multi-environment cultivar trials. Theor Appl Genet 96:803–811.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreno-González, J., J. Crossa & P.L. Cornelius, 2003a. Additive main effect and multiplicative interaction model I. Theory on variance components for predicting cell means. Crop Sci 43:1967–1975

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreno-González, J., J. Crossa & P.L. Cornelius, 2003b. Additive main effect and multiplicative interaction model II. Theory on shrinkage factors for predicting cell means. Crop Sci 43:1976–1982

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SAS Institute Inc. 1999. SAS/STAT/IML User's Guide, Version 8, 4th edn. Cary, NC.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Moreno-González, J., Crossa, J. & Cornelius, P. Genotype × Environment Interacion in multi-environment Trials using shrinkage factors for ammi models. Euphytica 137, 119–127 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EUPH.0000040509.61017.94

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EUPH.0000040509.61017.94

Navigation