[go: up one dir, main page]
Next Article in Journal
Insects, Microbes, Natural Compounds, Fish and Plant Species Biodiversity: The Innovative Ammo in the Battle against Plant Pests and Pathogens
Previous Article in Journal
Novel Model for Pork Supply Prediction in China Based on Modified Self-Organizing Migrating Algorithm
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Agriculture
Volume 14
Issue 9
10.3390/agriculture14091591
agriculture-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Genotype by Environment Interaction (GEI) Effect for Potato Tuber Yield and Their Quality Traits in Organic Multi-Environment Domains in Poland

by
Beata Ewa Tatarowska
1,*,
Jarosław Plich
1,
Dorota Milczarek
1,
Dominika Boguszewska-Mańkowska
2 and
Krystyna Zarzyńska
2
1
Plant Breeding and Acclimatization Institute—National Research Institute in Radzików, Młochów Division, Department of Potato Genetics and Parental Lines, Platanowa Str. 19, 05-831 Młochów, Poland
2
Plant Breeding and Acclimatization Institute—National Research Institute in Radzików, Jadwisin Division, Department of Potato Agronomy, Szaniawskiego Str. 15, 05-140 Serock, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agriculture 2024, 14(9), 1591; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14091591
Submission received: 19 June 2024 / Revised: 9 September 2024 / Accepted: 10 September 2024 / Published: 12 September 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Crop Genetics, Genomics and Breeding)
Browse Figures
Figure 1
<p>Map of Poland with location of organic farms.</p> "> Figure 2
<p>Biplot analysis of GGE for first two IPC scores (IPC1 vs. IPC2) for tuber yield (2020–2022).</p> "> Figure 3
<p>Biplot analysis of GGE for the IPC1 scores and tuber yield of 9 potato cultivars across 12 environments (2020–2022).</p> "> Figure 4
<p>Taste of potato cultivars (2020–2021).</p> ">
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Potatoes (Solanum tuberosum L.) are an important plant crop, whose yield may vary significantly depending on pedo-climatic conditions and genotype. Therefore, the analysis of the genotype × environment interaction (GEI) is mandatory for the setup of high-yielding and stable potato genotypes. This research evaluated the tuber yield (t ha−1) and yield characteristic of nine potato cultivars over 3 years and 4 organic farms in Poland by additive main effects and multiplicative interactions (AMMIs) and genotype plus genotype environment interaction (GGE) biplot analyses. The results of these analyses indicated significant differentiation of tuber yield among genotypes in individual environments. It was found that the environment (E, where E = L (localization) × Y (year)), genotype (G) and GEI, but not replication, significantly affected tuber yield. The AMMI analysis showed that the environment factor explained the most considerable part of tuber yield variations (52.3%), while the GEI and G factors explained a much lower part of the variations. The AMMI and GGE analyses identified five cvs.: Twister (46.4 t ha−1), Alouette (35.8 t ha−1), Kokra (34.8 t ha−1), Levante (33.1 t ha−1), and Gardena (30.4 t ha−1), as leading cultivars in the studied organic farms due to their high productivity coupled with yield stability. The statistical measure Kang (YSi) showed that these cvs. can be considered as adaptable to a wide range of organic environments. In the case of morphological traits of tubers (tuber shape and depth of tuber eyes), the most important factor influencing both these traits was genotype (G). Influence of other factors, like localization (L), year (Y), and all interactions (double and triple), were much less significant or insignificant. In case of taste and non-darkening of tuber flesh, the main effects which significantly affected the values of these traits were genotype (G) and localization (L). We observed that cooking type can vary depending on the year (Y) and the localization (L).

1. Introduction

The pandemic has caused rapid changes in life priorities for most citizens of developed countries. Taking care of your life and that of your loved ones has become the most important priority. In the last decade, the production and consumption of organic food has increased systematically worldwide. In recent years, several countries, including Germany, France, Estonia, Finland, Sweden, and Slovenia, have set goals of achieving 20% of their area under organic farming. In Austria, in 2019, already 26% of their area was already under organic farming, and over 20% in Estonia and Sweden. The report prepared by the Agricultural and Food Quality Inspection shows that in 2022, the total area of agricultural land on which organic production methods were used increased by 3.5% (22,882 ha). It can be safely emphasized that organic farming is a global trend—this was clearly stated by the European Commission. The most important goals of the EU strategy include reducing the use of pesticides, antibiotics, and fertilizers, and achieving a higher share of organic farming area by 2030, which on average for the entire European Union should amount to 25%. According to experts, a realistic goal for Poland is to achieve 7% of such uses. Potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) is an important staple food in Poland and is deeply rooted in Polish cultural traditions since it can be produced in most parts of the country. Organic production can be unpredictable due to environmental factors (e.g., climate and disease pressure), which can cause large fluctuations in quantity and quality. Producers of organic potato tubers are looking for productive cultivars, suited to their local climatic and soil conditions, that are not susceptible to diseases and pest attack. Organic agriculture standards recommend the cultivation of site-adapted crop cultivars [1]. Before commercial potato seeds are produced for organic farmers, the most suitable cultivars must be chosen [2,3]. The organic-farming growing conditions require adaptability and stability of potato cultivars [1]. The most important quality traits for suitable cultivars in organic farming are (a) early canopy closure under low N for good weed suppression; (b) early tuber setting and tuber bulking to be less exposed to late blight season; (c) well established root system for efficient nutrient uptake; (d) resilience to irregular water availability; (e) stability of yielding; (f) good morphological traits, good and stable taste; (g) durable resistance to main diseases [4,5]. The quality traits of potato tubers are well known to be closely affected by genotype (G) and environment (E) (i.e., soil properties, rainfall, temperature, and agricultural management) [6,7,8,9]. The environment is usually highly variable over seasons and specific locations, thus representing the main factor affecting phenotypic behaviour. Knowledge of the GEI index can be useful in developing widely adaptable and stable genotypes in different environments. It also allows for improving the quality characteristics of existing cultivars or breeding lines, thus meeting the quality standards required on the domestic and international market. In such studies, multi-environment trials (METs) are often conducted to better understand the performance of genotypes in different environments by examining their stability [10,11]. The AMMI analysis combines the ANOVA with the PCA [12], while the GGE analysis removes the E and integrates the G with the GEI effect [13]. The AMMI and the GGE biplot analysis can be effectively integrated to visualize the GEI, identify representative environments, and delineate mega-environments, detecting the ability of test environments to discriminate and identify stable genotypes in METs [14].
In the present study, nine potato cultivars were evaluated (eight table and one starch).The experiments were conducted in four organic farms during three growing seasons to (1) estimate the GEI of potato tuber yield by using the AMMI and the GGE biplot analysis, (2) find out stable cultivars suitable for organic production with low levels of GEI, and (3) recognize cultivars with good morphological traits and high cooking quality in all tested environments.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Plant Material

In each location, nine potato cultivars (Alouette, Carolus, Otolia, Twister, Twinner, Levante, Kokra, Bzura, Gardena) were planted in three replications (Table 1). In each of the three blocks (=replications), the cultivars were planted in 10-hill plots. The spacing of plants in individual locations was as follows: in Tuligłowy 65 cm × 35 cm; in Połomia 67.5 cm × 35 cm; in Grabów 70 cm × 40 cm; in Jadwisin 75 cm × 33 cm. The tuber yield (t ha−1) and the morphological traits, depth of eyes and regularity of tuber shape, were evaluated after harvest. Cooking quality (taste, texture, and discoloration of tuber flesh) was carried out over two years of experiments. The cultivars evaluated in the study were selected from a group of 65 European potato cultivars intended for organic farming, characterized within the Ecobreed project (https://ecobreed.eu (accessed on 11 September 2024)). The chosen cvs. were evaluated within the farmer-participatory breeding framework in contrasting pedoclimatic zones. These cvs. stood out from the rest with a good set of morphological features and a high level of resistance to P. infestans.

2.2. Cultivation Practices

Field experiments were carried out over three growing seasons: 2020, 2021, and 2022 across four organic locations. Two of these locations were on fields belonging to individual farmers from Podkarpackie Voivodeship: Połomia and Tuligłowy. Another two were located in the Mazowieckie Voivodeship: Jadwisin and Grabów (Figure 1). The geographic, soil, fertilization, and fore crops data for field experiments are presented in Supplementary Table S1. The tubers were planted at the end of April and harvested approximately after 130 days (Supplementary Table S2). Meteorological conditions ((rainfall (mm) and air temperature (°C)) for each growing season and for each localization are presented in the Supplementary Figures (Figures S1–S4).

2.3. Assessment of Morphological Characteristics of Potato Tubers

The most important characteristic for assessing the morphological features of tubers are regularity of tuber shape and depth of eyes. The evaluated samples of potato tubers were previously cleaned from the rest of the soil and washed. Regularity of tuber shape depends on the depth of indentations at the rose and heel ends and on all other deviations from ideal shape. The regularity of the tuber shape was evaluated on a 9-grade scale, where 1 = the highly malformed tuber shape and 9 = the perfect tuber shape (almost all tubers of one type of shape). The depth of eyes is a trait especially important for cultivars for table and processing use. The depth of eyes was evaluated on a 9-grade scale, where 1 = very deep eyes, tubers not suitable for table use; 9 = eyes impalpable under finger [15].

2.4. Cooking Quality Traits

The cooking quality of the potato tubers was assessed in two growing seasons: 2020 and 2021. In potato breeding, cooking quality is evaluated mainly by using tubers boiled in water. The objective is to evaluate the suitability of fresh tubers for the preparation of dishes. Ten main characteristics of potato after cooking quality may be distinguished: surface colour of flesh, uniformity of colour of cut surface, disintegration, consistency, mealiness, moisture, structure, taste, stickiness, and cooking type. In Europe, the assessment of cooking quality has been standardized by the European Association for Potato Research (EAPR) and designed as the so-called European method [16]. According to this method, potatoes are classified into four cooking types: (1) Type A—salad, tubers remain whole after boiling, firm, easy to cut out with fine structure, suitable for salad; (2) Type B—multi–purpose for salad, mashing, French fries, flesh slightly mealy, slightly moist with fairly fine structure; (3) Type C—mealy, for mashing and baking; and (4) Type D—very mealy, has limited consumption use, for dry and coarse purée, and for baking. The classification is based on the textural characteristics of the tuber flesh. These features have been expressed into five main characteristics, which are scored on a 4-grade scale: disintegration (of tuber cortex), consistency, mealiness, moistness, and structure. There was also a separate characteristic for flavour. Besides the characteristics, the potatoes are evaluated for (1) flesh colour; (2) discoloration of cooked tubers, which is rated twice (10 min and 24 h after cooking) on scale ranging from 1 to 9 (the colour range is controlled by colour chart); (3) discoloration of potato flesh in raw state, which is evaluated on a lengthwise cut of tubers 4 h after cutting, rating system as above.

2.5. Statistical Analyses

The additive main effects and multiplicative interaction (AMMI) model was used to assess the stability and yielding level of nine potato cultivars in four organic localizations over three years. The environment in the AMMI analyses was a combination of year and localization. The AMMI model is based on the number axes of the main components, and it is displayed graphically in the form of GGE biplots. The ANOVA test was used for comparison data from the morphological and cooking quality traits. All statistical analyses were performed with the use of Statistica 13 software (version 13, StatSoft Inc., Tulsa, OK, USA).

3. Results

3.1. Tuber Yield

Statistical analyses were performed by using the AMMI model. The analysis of genotype by environment interaction (GEI) was performed for 9 cultivars evaluated in 12 environments. In this research, we treated each location in each year as individual environment.
The GGE biplots analysis based on the AMMI model for the performance of 9 potato cultivars was constructed based on the values of the first two interactions’ principal component scores (IPC1 and IPC2), which explained 68.7% of the potato yield variation due to G and GEI (Table 2, Figure 2). Figure 2 shows the association or relationship between the different environments and cultivars. Environments which are located at larger distances from the centre of the biplot contributed the most to GEI. Environments with small vector angles tend to have closer similarity, and those with wide vector angles show minimum association. The greatest contribution in this interaction was observed for environments: Grabów 2021, Tuligłowy 2020 and 2021, while the smallest one for: Jadwisin 2021 and 2022, Grabów 2022, Połomia 2020, and 2021 (Figure 2). Cultivars and environments on the right side of the figure have higher tuber yields than average, while cultivars and environments on the left side have tuber yields below average (Figure 2). Cultivars yielding better than environmental average were Twister, Otolia, Alouette, Kokra, and Levante, while weaker than environmental average: Bzura, Twinner, Carolus, and Gardena (Figure 2, Table 3, and Supplementary Tables S3 and S4). Cultivars and environments relative to first IPC1 are presented in Figure 3. The distance from the IPC1 controls the extent of GEI. Cultivars and environments which are located near axis IPC1 (with small effects of GEI) characterized small participation in interactive variability. These cultivars and environments can be classified as stable (Figure 3). The GGE biplot analysis shown that Twister, Alouette, Kokra, Levante, and Gardena were the most stable cultivars in tuber yield in all 12 environments and can be considered as adaptable to all the environments in Poland (Figure 3). Cultivars Otolia, Twinner, Carolus, and Bzura were far from axis IPC1, hence they are more sensitive to the GEI and therefore specifically adapted to environments (Figure 3).
The statistical results (Table 2) indicate significant differentiation of tuber yield among genotypes in individual environments. It was found that the environment (E, where E = L × Y), genotype (G), and GEI were the main effects, which significantly affected the tuber yield. The contribution of factor genotype (G) to explaining the observed variability was 14.3%, environment (E)—52.3% and GEI—23.6%. This shows that the environment had the greatest influence on the variability of tuber yield, the interaction GEI had a smaller influence and the genotype had the least variability (Table 4). In the AMMI analysis, the sum of squares deviations for GEI has been divided on the sum of squares deviations for interaction principal components (IPCs). The first five IPCs were statistically significant. IPC1 was responsible for 46.1% and IPC2 for 22.6% sum of squares for GEI. IPC1 and IPC2 were used for further statistical analyses (Table 2).
In next step, cultivars with broad adaptation to various environments were distinguished. In Table 3, the following statistics are presented: mean values of tuber yield (t ha−1), standard deviation (SD), index for ranks for mean, measure of yield of advantage of the i-th cultivar (Ri), and measure Kang (YSi). The highest tuber yield was noted for cvs. Twister (46.4 t ha−1), Otolia (37.2 t ha−1), Alouette (35.8 t ha−1), and Kokra (34.8 t ha−1). The analysis of cultivars in terms of measures of broad adaptation showed that cvs. Twister, Alouette, Kokra, and Otolia have a higher degree of adaptation in a broad sense, while cvs. Bzura, Twinner, Carolus, Gardena, and Levante have a lower degree of adaptation in a broad sense. Cultivars with Ri closer to 1 always yield means above environmental (Table 3). Measure Kang (YSi) showed that cultivars Twister, Alouette, Kokra, and Levante were characterized by a relatively higher (compared to other cultivars) degree of wide adaptation. A different response of potato cultivars to environmental factors suggests that there is a need to select potato cultivars in various locations and years.

3.2. Morphological Assessment of Tubers: Regularity of Tuber Shape and Depth of Eyes

Potato tubers followed by three years of experiments had good regularity of tuber shape and shallow depth of eyes (Table 4 and Table 5, and Supplementary Tables S3 and S4). In Table 5, the following data are presented: mean values for depth of eyes and regularity of tuber shape, standard deviation (SD), and rank for mean values. Analysis of variance for regularity of tuber shape and depth of eyes are presented in Table 6. It was found that genotype (G), localization (L), year (Y), and all interactions (double and triple) were significantly affected by regularity of tuber shape. Analysis of variance for depth of eyes showed highly statistically significant differences for genotype (G) and interactions (G × L), (G × Y), and (G × L × Y) (Table 6).

3.3. Cooking Quality Traits

Potato tubers from four organic farms were characterized by a two-year experiment (2021 and 2022) in terms of cooking quality and cooking types. The statistical analysis showed that genotype (G) and year (Y) were the main effects, which significantly affected the values obtained for cooking type (Table 7 and Table 9).
All tested cultivars were characterized in individual year and localization by good taste and non-darkening of tuber flesh, both raw and cooked. Mean values, standard deviation, and rank for taste and non-darkening of tuber flesh are presented in Table 8. Statistical analysis showed that genotype (G) and localization (L) were the main effects that significantly affected the values obtained for the taste and non-darkening of flesh tubers, both raw and cooked (Table 9). By two-year experiments, the potato tubers harvested from four organic localization were characterized as having a very good and stable taste (Figure 4).

4. Discussion

Under organic production, potatoes are subjected to different pests, diseases, and limited available nutrients, consequently producing lower tuber yield compared to the conventionally grown potatoes. The evidence suggests that organic arable cropping systems generally produce lower, more variable yields than systems employing synthetic fertilizers and chemical crop protection measures [17]. Reviews by De Ponti et al. [18] and Seufuret et al. [19] concluded that organic arable yields average 80% and 75% of conventional production, respectively. Djaman et al. [20] and Zarzyńska et al. [21] also report large differences in yield depending on the production system.
Cultivation in organic conditions requires adaptability and greater stability of varieties [1]. The requirement for stable genotypes that perform well in a wide range of environments is becoming increasingly important, as farmers need reliable cultivars [14]. The performance of a genotype is determined by three factors: genotypic main effect (G), environmental main effect (E), and their interaction (GEI) [10]. Therefore, the aim of our research was to estimate the GEI of organic potato tuber yield by using the AMMI and the GGE biplot analysis and to find stable cultivars suitable for organic production with a low level of GEI and with good morphological traits and high cooking quality in all tested environments.
The results of performed statistical analyses indicated a significant differentiation of tuber yield among tested cultivars in 12 environments. A significant (p < 0.01**) influence of environment (E), genotype (G), and GEI on potato yield was found. The highest influence on determining the variability of tuber yields had environment, a smaller interaction GEI, while the genotype had the least effect. It should be emphasized that all the varieties we tested in organic cultivation showed a high level of yield. The highest tuber yield was noted for cvs. Twister (mean2020–2022 = 46.4 t ha−1), Otolia (mean2020–2022 = 37.2 t ha−1), Alouette (mean2020–2022 = 35.8 t ha−1), and Levante (mean2020–2022 = 33.1 t ha−1). Cultivars Twister, Alouette, Kokra, Levante, and Gardena are characterized by a relatively higher (compared to other cultivars) degree of wide adaptation. The main effects influencing on potato yield variability were the environmental factors (E) and GEI. The environment was responsible for 52.3% of the effects of variability in total yield, while the GEI had less impact and was responsible for 23.6% of variability. The obtained results showed that GEI is a very important measure that helps the breeder to select the desirable cultivars in the process of evaluation and increases the efficiency of selection. Kim et al. [22], who investigated the genotype and environment interaction (GEI) using the AMMI and the GGE, also concluded that potato yield is highly related to environment and GEI factors. Moreover, GEI was the main environmental factor that affected the qualitative characteristics of other assessed cultivated species. Overall, the results obtained in the GGE biplots are in line with the Kang’s measures (YSi), highlighting cvs. Twister, Alouette, Kokra, Levante, and Gardena as the superior genotypes for potato production throughout the studied environments. These cvs. can be considered suitable for adaptation to all organic farms in Poland. An ideal genotype has high performance coupled with high stability across environments [13,23]. In our research, the most suitable cultivar to organic farming was Twister, which showed the highest and most stable tuber yield in all environments. AMMI analysis is increasingly used for the evaluation of genotypes in multi-environmental trials, often reporting specific adaptations, as in the present study [24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33].
By three years of experiments, the potato tubers were characterized by a good regularity of tuber shape and shallow depth of eyes. It was found that genotype (G), localization (L), year (Y), and all interactions (double and triple) were significantly affected by the regularity of tuber shape. Depth of eyes showed highly statistically significant differences for genotype (G) and interactions (G × L), (G × Y), and (G × L × Y). By two years of experiments, the potato tubers characterized a very good taste and non-darkening of flesh tubers both raw and cooked. The observed variability between cultivars in these traits was influenced by genotype (G) and localization (L). The best taste was observed for the cvs. Otolia, Alouette, and Levante. A large variability was observed in the cooking type of tubers from individual organic farms. Variability was observed for both years and locations. Only cv Gardena did not change cooking type. The classification of cooking type is based on the textural characteristics of the tuber flesh. In our previous research, tuber texture was also influenced by the effects of genotype, location, and their interaction, which resulted in the cooking type changing depending on the environment [34] and for some cultivars, the cooking type was different than in the catalogue description. Similar observation can be found in research by Thybo et al. [35], which investigated the effects of six different organic treatments on the chemical, rheological, and sensory quality of cooked potatoes. Organic environments had a significant effect on most of the characteristics creating a cooking type.
It should be noted that all tested cultivars were characterized in individual years and localizations by good taste and non-darkening of tuber flesh, both raw and cooked. This is due to the fact that potatoes from organic production are generally characterized by better taste and less darkening of the flesh due to the lower amount of nitrogen [20].
Tuber yields analysis using the AMMI and the GGE allowed us to find the best cultivars across different locations. Cultivars Twister, Alouette, Kokra, Levante, and Gardena can be selected for organic farming due to their higher tuber yield at final harvest. For successful organic farming, it is essential to know the potato genotypes response to different environment over the years. An important aspect for selecting cultivars for organic farming is also the characterization of traits related to tuber morphology and cooking quality.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/agriculture14091591/s1, Figure S1: Rainfall (monthly total in mm) and temperature (average in monthly °C) during the potato growing seasons 2020–2022 in Jadwisin; Figure S2: Rainfall (monthly total in mm) and temperature (average in monthly °C) during the potato growing seasons 2020–2022 in Grabów; Figure S3: Rainfall (monthly total in mm) and temperature (average in monthly °C) during the potato growing seasons 2020–2022 in Tuligłowy; Figure S4: Rainfall (monthly total in mm) and temperature (average in monthly °C) during the potato growing seasons 2020–2022 in Połomia; Table S1:Geographic, soil, fertilization and fore crops data for field experiments; Table S2: Data for planting and harvested potato cultivars in four organic farms; Table S3: Mean values of potato tubers yield (t ha−1) and morphological of tubers from 9 cultivars grown in field experiments in 2020, 2021 and 2022; Table S4: Mean values of potato tubers yield (t ha−1) and morphological of tubers from 9 cultivars grown in Tuligłowy, Połomia, Jadwisin and Grabów in 2020, 2021 and 2022.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, B.E.T. and J.P.; methodology, B.E.T. and J.P.; software, B.E.T.; validation, B.E.T.; formal analysis, B.E.T.; investigation, B.E.T.; resources, B.E.T.; data curation, B.E.T., J.P. and K.Z.; writing—original draft, B.E.T.; writing—review and editing, B.E.T., J.P., D.M., D.B.-M. and K.Z.; visualization, B.E.T.; supervision, B.E.T.; project administration, B.E.T.; funding acquisition, B.E.T. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was financed by the European Union Horizon 2020 project ECOBREED (771367).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Supplementary data (climatic conditions, results of tuber yield, morphological and cooking quality traits) are available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.12544760.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Haase, T.; Schuler, C.; Kolsch, E.; Heb, J. The influence of variety, stand density and tuber seed size on yield and grading of potatoes (Solanum tuberosum L.) in organic farming. In Potatoes Today and Tomorrow; Wenzel, G., Wulfert, I., Eds.; WPR Communication GmbH and co KG: Hamburg, Germany, 2002; p. 106. [Google Scholar]
  2. Bonnel, E. Organic potato seed: Questions to the future of it. In Challenges and Opportunities for Organic Agricul-ture and the Seed Industry; Lammerts van Bueren, E., Ranganathan, R., Sorensen, N., Eds.; Knotenpunkt: Hunsruck, Germany, 2004; pp. 103–105. [Google Scholar]
  3. Koppel, M. Selection of potato varieties for organic growing. In EAPR Patology Section Meeting; Abstracts of Conference Papers; Bonin, Poland, 2001; pp. 73–74. In EAPR Pathology Section Meeting; Abstracts of Conference Papers; EAPR: Bonin, Poland, 2001; pp. 73–74. [Google Scholar]
  4. Tiemens-Hulscher, M.; Lammerts van Bueren, E.T.; Hutten, R.C.B. Potato: Improving organic cultivars including a participatory approach. In Organic Crop Breeding; van Bueren, E.T.L., Myers, J.R., Eds.; Wiley-Blackwell: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2012; pp. 227–238. [Google Scholar]
  5. Keijzer, P.; Van Bueren, E.L.; Engelen, C.J.M.; Hutten, R.C.B. Breeding late blight resistant potatoes for organic farming—A collaborative model of participatory plant breeding. Bioimpuls Project. Potato Res. 2022, 65, 349–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Ierna, A.; Mauromicale, G. How moderate water stress can affect water use efficiency indices in potato. Agronomy 2020, 10, 1034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Ierna, A.; Mauromicale, G. How irrigation water saving strategy can affect tuber growth and nutritional composition of potato. Sci. Hortic. 2022, 299, 111034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Ierna, A.; Parisi, B.; Melilli, M.G. Overall quality of “early” potato tubers as affected by organic cultivation. Agronomy 2022, 12, 296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Scavo, A.; Mauromicale, G.; Ierna, A. Genotype × environment interactions of potato tuber quality characteristics by AMMI and GGE biplot analysis. Sci. Hortic. 2023, 310, 111750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Yan, W.; Kang, M.S.; Ma, B.; Woods, S.; Cornelius, P.L. GGE biplot vs. AMMI analysis of genotype-by-environment data. Crop Sci. 2007, 47, 643–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Tatarowska, B.; Flis, B.; Zimnoch-Guzowska, E. Biological stability of resistance to Phytophthora infestans (Mont.) de Bary in 22 Polish potato cultivars evaluation in field experiments. Am. J. Potato Res. 2012, 89, 73–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Zobel, R.W.; Wright, M.J.; Gauch, H.G., Jr. Statistical analysis of a yield trial. Agron. J. 1988, 80, 388–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Yan, W.; Hunt, L.A.; Sheng, Q.; Szlavnics, Z. Cultivar evaluation and mega-environment investigation based on the GGE biplot. Crop Sci. 2000, 40, 597–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Gauch, H.G., Jr.; Piepho, H.P.; Annicchiarico, P. Statistical analysis of yield trials by AMMI and GGE: Further considerations. Crop Sci. 2008, 48, 866–889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Domański, L. Assessment of Morphological Characters of Potatoes; Monografie i Rozprawy Naukowe; IHAR Radzików: Błonie, Poland, 2001; pp. 92–95. [Google Scholar]
  16. Domański, L. Assessment of Cooking Quality of Potatoes; Monografie i Rozprawy Naukowe; IHAR Radzików: Błonie, Poland, 2001; pp. 96–100. [Google Scholar]
  17. Smith, R.G.; Gross, K.L.; Robertson, G.P. Effects of crop diversity on agroecosystem function: Crop yield response. Ecosystems 2008, 11, 355–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. De Ponti, T.; Rijk, B.; van Ittersum, M.K. The crop yield gap between organic and conventional agriculture. Agric. Syst. 2012, 108, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Seufuret, V.; Ramankutty, N.; Foley, J. Comparing the yields of organic and conventional agriculture. Nature 2012, 485, 229–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Djaman, K.; Sanogo, S.; Koudahe, K.; Allen, S.; Saibou, A.; Essah, S. Characteristics of Organically Grown Com-pared to Con-ventionally Grown Potato and the Processed Products: A Review. Sustainability 2021, 13, 6289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Zarzyńska, K.; Trawczyński, C.; Pietraszko, M. Environmental and Agronomical Factors Limiting Differences in Potato Yielding between Organic and Conventional Production System. Agriculture 2023, 13, 901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Kim, S.J.; Sohn, W.B.; Park, M.W.; Chang, D.C.; Hong, S.Y.; Kwon, O.K.; Cheong, J.C.; Koo, B.C.; Kim, Y.H. Interpreta-tion of genotype × environment interaction in agronomic traits in 24 potato cultivars using AMMI and GGE biplot analysis. Korean Soc. Breed. Sci. 2018, 50, 90–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Yan, W.; Kang, M.S. GGE Biplot Analysis: A Graphical Tool for Breeders, Geneticists, and Agronomists; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  24. Adebola, P.O.; Shegro, A.; Laurie, S.M.; Zulu, L.N.; Pillay, M. Genotype x environment interaction and yield stabil-ity estimate of some sweet potato [Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam] breeding lines in South Africa. Environments 2013, 3, 14411-636. [Google Scholar]
  25. Mirosavljević, M.; Pržulj, N.; Boćanski, J.; Stanisavljević, D.; Mitrović, B. The application of AMMI model for barley cultivars evaluation in multi-year trials. Genet. Belgrade 2014, 46, 445–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Mustamu, Y.A.; Tjintokohadi, K.; Grüneberg, W.J.; Karuniawan, A.; Ruswandi, D. Selection of superior genotype of sweet-potato in Indonesia based on stability and adaptability. Chil. J. Agric. Res. 2018, 78, 461–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Koundinya, A.V.V.; Pandit, M.K.; Ramesh, D.; Mishra, P. Phenotypic stability of eggplant for yield and quality through AMMI, GGE and cluster analyses. Sci. Hortic. 2019, 247, 216–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Gurmu, F.; Shimelis, H.; Laing, M.; Mashilo, J. Genotype-by-environment interaction analysis of nutritional compo-sition in newly-developed sweetpotato clones. J. Food Compos. Anal. 2020, 88, 103426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Karuniawan, A.; Maulana, H.; Ustari, D.; Dewayani, S.; Solihin, E.; Solihin, M.A.; Amien, S.; Arifin, M. Yield stabil-ity analysis of orange-Fleshed sweet potato in Indonesia using AMMI and GGE biplot. Heliyon 2021, 7, e06881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Katsenios, N.; Sparangis, P.; Leonidakis, D.; Katsaros, G.; Kakabouki, I.; Vlachakis, D.; Efthimiadou, A. Effect of Genotype × Environment Interaction on Yield of Maize Hybrids in Greece Using AMMI Analysis. Agronomy 2021, 11, 479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Khan MM, H.; Rafii, M.Y.; Ramlee, S.I.; Jusoh, M.; Al Mamun, M. AMMI and GGE biplot analysis for yield perfor-mance and stability assessment of selected Bambara groundnut (Vigna subterranea L. Verdc.) genotypes under the mul-ti-environmental trials (METs). Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 22791. [Google Scholar]
  32. Xie, R.; Lu, Z.; Jin, X.; Lin, T.; Guo, B.; Guo, J.; Zhang, Z.; Han, Z.; Zhou, J. Analysis of potato varieties (lines) stabil-ity and adaptability in Midwestern Inner Mongolia base on AMMI model. J. North. Agric. 2022, 50, 18–24. [Google Scholar]
  33. Pradebon, L.C.; Carvalho, I.R.; Loro, M.V.; Port, E.D.; Bonfada, B.; Sfalcin, I.C.; Santos, I.J.; Bruinsma, G.M.W.; Silva, J.A.G.D.; Alban, A.A.; et al. Soybean adaptability and stability analyzes to the organic system through AMMI, GGE Biplot and mixed models methodologies. Ciência Rural 2023, 53, e20220262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Flis, B.; Tatarowska, B.; Milczarek, D.; Plich, J. Effect of location on starch content and tuber texture characteristics in potato breeding lines and cultivars. Acta Agric. Scand. Sect. B—Soil Plant Sci. 2017, 67, 453–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Thybo, A.K.; Mølgaard, J.P.; Kidmose, U. Effect of different organic growing conditions on quality of cooked pota-toes. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2002, 82, 12–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Agriculture 14 01591 g001
Figure 1. Map of Poland with location of organic farms.
Figure 1. Map of Poland with location of organic farms.
Agriculture 14 01591 g001
Agriculture 14 01591 g002
Figure 2. Biplot analysis of GGE for first two IPC scores (IPC1 vs. IPC2) for tuber yield (2020–2022).
Figure 2. Biplot analysis of GGE for first two IPC scores (IPC1 vs. IPC2) for tuber yield (2020–2022).
Agriculture 14 01591 g002
Agriculture 14 01591 g003
Figure 3. Biplot analysis of GGE for the IPC1 scores and tuber yield of 9 potato cultivars across 12 environments (2020–2022).
Figure 3. Biplot analysis of GGE for the IPC1 scores and tuber yield of 9 potato cultivars across 12 environments (2020–2022).
Agriculture 14 01591 g003
Agriculture 14 01591 g004
Figure 4. Taste of potato cultivars (2020–2021).
Figure 4. Taste of potato cultivars (2020–2021).
Agriculture 14 01591 g004
Table 1. List of potato cultivars used in this work.
Table 1. List of potato cultivars used in this work.
Cultivar (1)TypeMaturity GroupResistance to PVYResistance to Phytophtora infestans (Leaflets)Flesh ColourCooking Type (2)
Alouette (NL)tableearly89/9yellowAB
Carolus (NL)tableearly79/9yellowBC
Twinner (NL)tableearly78/9yellowAB
Levante (NL)tableearly68.5/7.5light yellowB
Gardena (PL)tablemid early78/8yellowB-BC
Twister (NL)tablemid early89/9light yellowAB
Otolia (DE)tablemid early77/4.5yellowB
Kokra (SL)tablemid early88creamAB
Bzura (PL)starchlate98/4light yellowC
(1) The cultivar description according to catalogue data; Country of origin: NL—Netherlands; PL—Poland; DE—Germany; SL—Slovenia; (2) Cooking types: Type A—salad, tubers remain whole after boiling, firm, easy to cut out with fine structure, suitable for salad; Type B—multi—purpose for salad, mashing, French fries, flesh slightly mealy, slightly moist with fairy fine structure; Type C—mealy for mashing and baking.
Table 2. AMMI analysis of the variance of tuber yield of potato cultivars evaluated in 12 environments (2020–2022).
Table 2. AMMI analysis of the variance of tuber yield of potato cultivars evaluated in 12 environments (2020–2022).
Source of VariationDF (1)Sum of SquareMean SquareVariability %GEI Explained %F Statistic
Total25159530.8237.2100.0
Environment (L × Y = E) (2)1131132.62830.252.3 45.987 **
Replication (R)16984.761.51.7 1.634
Genotype (G)88534.31066.814.3 28.325 **
Genotype × Environment (GEI)8814058.5159.823.6 4.242 **
IPC 1186484.7360.310.946.14.242 **
IPC 2163182.8198.95.322.62.873 **
IPC 3141482.5105.92.510.52.159 **
IPC 4121225.2102.12.18.71.931 **
IPC 510700.070.01.25.01.596 **
IPC 68556.869.60.94.01.451
IPC 76306.551.10.52.21.133
IPC 84120.030.00.20.90.797
Error1284820.737.78.1
(1) DF—degrees of freedom; (2) L × Y = E—Localization × Year = Environment; GEI—interaction G × E; IPC—interaction principal component; ** p < 0.01.
Table 3. Measures of wide adaptation for 9 potato cultivars for tuber yield (2020–2022).
Table 3. Measures of wide adaptation for 9 potato cultivars for tuber yield (2020–2022).
CultivarMean Tuber Yield t ha−1 (1)SD (2)Measure of Yield SuperiorityMeasure of Yield of Advantage of the i-th Cultivar (Ri)Measure Kang
(YSi)
Alouette35.8 (3)±14.386 (2)0.75 (2)8 (2)
Bzura33.4 (6)±9.5183 (6)0.58 (4)0 (7)
Carolus27.8 (8)±10.8249 (8)0.08 (7)0 (7)
Gardena30.4 (7)±10.4188 (7)0.33 (6)2 (5)
Kokra34.8 (4)±15.8101 (4)0.75 (2)7 (3)
Levante33.1 (5)±15.1160 (5)0.50 (5)3 (4)
Otolia37.2 (2)±21.294 (3)0.67 (3)1 (6)
Twinner24.7 (9)±11.6347 (9)0.08 (7)−1 (8)
Twister46.4 (1)±17.513 (1)0.92 (1)12 (1)
(1) mean value for tuber yield from 12 environments; (2) SD—standard deviation.
Table 4. Mean values and standard deviations for depth of eyes and regularity of tuber shape in individual years (2020–2022).
Table 4. Mean values and standard deviations for depth of eyes and regularity of tuber shape in individual years (2020–2022).
YearDepth of Eyes
(Scale 1–9)		Regularity of Tuber Shape
(Scale 1–9)
MeanSD (1)MeanSD (1)
20207.4±0.067.0±0.08
20217.3±0.116.8±0.13
20227.3±0.087.0±0.09
(1) SD—standard deviation.
Table 5. Result for mean values, standard deviation, index for ranks for mean values for depth of eyes and regularity of tuber shape (2020–2022).
Table 5. Result for mean values, standard deviation, index for ranks for mean values for depth of eyes and regularity of tuber shape (2020–2022).
CultivarDepth of Eyes
(Scale 1–9)		Regularity of Tuber Shape
(Scale 1–9)
MeanSD (1)RankMeanSD (1)Rank
Alouette7.8±0.3417.6±0.491
Bzura6.1±0.6165.8±0.948
Carolus7.6±0.4627.4±0.542
Gardena7.3±0.4446.6±0.666
Kokra6.6±0.4656.5±0.497
Levante7.8±0.3917.1±0.745
Otolia7.4±0.5737.1±0.695
Twinner7.6±0.5227.3±0.573
Twister7.6±0.4427.2±0.584
(1) SD—standard deviation.
Table 6. ANOVA results for the morphological traits (2020–2022).
Table 6. ANOVA results for the morphological traits (2020–2022).
Sources of VariationANOVA (Two–Way)
Sum of SquaresDF (1)Mean SquareF Statistic
ANOVA results for regularity of tuber shape
Genotype (G)60.9187.6165.13 ***
Localization (L)3.9731.3211.32 ***
Year (Y)1.3620.685.82 **
(G) × (L)10.78240.453.84 ***
(G) × (Y)8.25160.524.41 ***
(L) × (Y)2.4560.413.49 **
(G) × (L) × (Y)10.90480.231.94 ***
Error16.831440.12
ANOVA results for depth of eyes
Genotype (G)61.22587.65333.91 ***
Localization (L)1.47130.4902.17
Year (Y)1.28020.6402.84
(G) × (L)23.721240.9884.38 ***
(G) × (Y)14.728160.9204.08 ***
(L) × (Y)2.59060.4321.91
(G) × (L) × (Y)21.424480.4461.98 ***
Error32.5001440.226
(1) DF—degrees of freedom; *** significant at p < 0.001; ** significant at p < 0.01.
Table 7. Cooking type (2021–2022).
Table 7. Cooking type (2021–2022).
CultivarCooking Type (1)
Year 2021Year 2022
TuligłowyPołomiaGrabówJadwisinTuligłowyPołomiaGrabówJadwisin
AlouetteBCBCBCBCBABCC
CarolusBBCABABBAAAB
LevanteBCBCBCABBABBBC
TwinnerBCABBAB/CABABBCAB
TwisterBCBCCBBCABABAB
OtoliaBCBCBCABABABBCB
KokraBCBCBCBCBCBCBC
BzuraCDCDBCCDCABCDC
GardenaBCBCBCBCBCBCBCBC
(1) Cooking types: Type A—salad; Type B—multi-purpose; Type C—mealy for mashing and baking; Type D—very mealy for purée and baking.
Table 8. Result for mean values, standard deviation, index for ranks for mean values of taste and darkening of potato tubers 10 min. and 24 h after cooking and darkening of potato flesh 4 h after cutting raw state (2021–2022).
Table 8. Result for mean values, standard deviation, index for ranks for mean values of taste and darkening of potato tubers 10 min. and 24 h after cooking and darkening of potato flesh 4 h after cutting raw state (2021–2022).
CultivarTaste
(Scale 1–9)		Darkening
10 min. after Cooking
(Scale 1–9)		Darkening
24 h after Cooking
(Scale 1–9)		Darkening 4 h after Cutting Raw State
(Scale 1–9)
MeanSD (1)RankMeanSD1)RankMeanSD (1)RankMeanSD (1)Rank
Alouette7.5±0.4128.2±0.3727.8±0.3518.1±0.921
Bzura6.8±0.5257.3±0.2667.0±0.4957.0±0.466
Carolus7.4±0.6838.1±0.5037.8±0.6017.5±0.833
Gardena7.3±0.6647.8±0.4657.5±0.4947.7±0.782
Kokra6.8±0.3157.0±0.0076.4±0.3067.5±0.753
Levante7.5±0.6028.2±0.8027.7±0.8927.3±0.535
Otolia7.6±0.4518.3±0.5317.8±0.5317.5±0.713
Twinner7.3±0.6147.8±0.5357.6±0.6037.3±0.665
Twister7.4±0.3537.9±0.5047.5±0.7547.4±0.554
(1) SD—standard deviation.
Table 9. ANOVA results for darkening and taste of potato tubers (2021–2022).
Table 9. ANOVA results for darkening and taste of potato tubers (2021–2022).
Sources of VariationANOVA
Sum of SquaresDF (1)Mean SquareF Statistic
Darkening of potato tubers 10 min after cooking
Genotype (G)12.06981.5098.53 ***
Year (Y)0.50010.5002.83
Localization (L)3.81931.2737.20 ***
Darkening of potato tubers 24 h after cooking
Genotype (G)13.78081.7237.54 ***
Year (Y)0.07310.0730.32
Localization (L)7.85632.61911.46 ***
Darkening of potato flesh 4 h after cutting raw state
Genotype (G)5.53780.6922.26 *
Year (Y)0.00210.0020.01
Localization (L)13.12134.37414.30 ***
Taste
Genotype (G)5.71880.7153.32 *
Year (Y)0.45110.4512.09
Localization (L)4.29631.4326.64 ***
Cooking type
Genotype (G)24.61183.0762.39 ***
Year (Y)16.056116.05612.48 ***
Localization (L)0.05630.0190.01
(1) DF—degrees of freedom; * significant at p < 0.05; *** significant at p < 0.001.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Tatarowska, B.E.; Plich, J.; Milczarek, D.; Boguszewska-Mańkowska, D.; Zarzyńska, K. Genotype by Environment Interaction (GEI) Effect for Potato Tuber Yield and Their Quality Traits in Organic Multi-Environment Domains in Poland. Agriculture 2024, 14, 1591. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14091591

AMA Style

Tatarowska BE, Plich J, Milczarek D, Boguszewska-Mańkowska D, Zarzyńska K. Genotype by Environment Interaction (GEI) Effect for Potato Tuber Yield and Their Quality Traits in Organic Multi-Environment Domains in Poland. Agriculture. 2024; 14(9):1591. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14091591

Chicago/Turabian Style

Tatarowska, Beata Ewa, Jarosław Plich, Dorota Milczarek, Dominika Boguszewska-Mańkowska, and Krystyna Zarzyńska. 2024. "Genotype by Environment Interaction (GEI) Effect for Potato Tuber Yield and Their Quality Traits in Organic Multi-Environment Domains in Poland" Agriculture 14, no. 9: 1591. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14091591

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop