Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T02:47:55.300Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An investigation of two-dimensional yield variability in breeders' small plot barley trials

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

Dorothy L. Robinson ,
C. D. Kershaw  and
R. P. Ellis
Dorothy L. Robinson
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural Statistics Service, University of Edinburgh
C. D. Kershaw
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural Statistics Service, University of Edinburgh
R. P. Ellis
Affiliation:
Scottish Crop Research Institute, Invergowrie, Dundee
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

This paper describes an investigation into yield variability and spatial correlations in 129 spring barley trials using small plots between 2·4 and 6·0 m2 in area. We report on the efficiencies of the generalized lattice designs used, and discuss the effects of plot size and year-to-year variations. Results indicate that the recommendations of Patterson & Hunter (1983) on choice of block size apply equally well to small-plot trials. The observed variability and correlations are then discussed and so is the potential for improvement by using alternative designs. Patterns of variability were not at all consistent from year to year, or even between trials in the same year, but it appears important to take account of column effects as well as row effects.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 111 , Issue 3 , December 1988 , pp. 419 - 426
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ainsley, A. E., Paterson, L. J., & Patterson, H. D. (1985). A method for predicting the efficiency of incomplete block trials. Biometrics 43, 55–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
John, J. J. & Eccleston, J. A. (1986). Row–column alpha designs. Biometrika 73, 301–306.Google Scholar
John, J. J. (1987). Cyclic Designs. London: Chapman & Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kempton, R. A. (1985). Comparison of nearest neighbour and classical methods of analysis. In Spatial Methods in Field Experiments. Papers presented at a Biometric Society workshop, University of Durham, 13 12 1984.Google Scholar
Kempton, R. A., Gregory, R. S., Hughes, W. G. & Stoehr, P. J. (1986). The effect of interplot competition on yield assessment in triticale trials. Euphytica 35, 257–265.Google Scholar
Kempton, R. A. & Howes, C. W. (1981). The use of neighbouring plot values in the analysis of variety trials. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society C 30, 59–70.Google Scholar
Patterson, H. D. & Hunter, E. A. (1983). The efficiency of incomplete block designs in National List and Recommended List cereal variety trials. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 101, 427–433.Google Scholar
Patterson, H. D. & Thompson, R. (1975). Maximum likelihood estimation of components of variance. Proceedings of the 8th International Biometric Conference, pp. 197–207.Google Scholar
Patterson, H. D., Williams, E. R., & Hunter, E. A. (1978). Block designs for variety trials. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 60, 275–278.Google Scholar
Robinson, D. L. (1987). Estimation and use of variance components. The Statistician 36, 3–14.Google Scholar
Swanston, J. B., Ellis, R., Thomas, W. T. B. & Brown, J. (1981). An opportunistic breeding scheme. In Barley Genetics IV, Proceedings of the 4th Barley Genetics Symposium (ed. Asher, M. J. C., Ellis, R. P., Hayter, A. M. and Whitehouse, R. N. H.), pp. 172–175. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Talbot, M. & England, F. J. W. (1984). A comparison of cereal variety performance in National List and plant breeders' trials. Journal of the National Institute of Agricultural Botany 16, 499–505.Google Scholar