[go: up one dir, main page]

 
 
Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Search Results (140)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = GEI

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
6 pages, 2098 KiB  
Correction
Correction: Hasanbeigi, A.; Zuberi, M.J.S. Electrified Process Heating in Textile Wet-Processing Industry: A Techno-Economic Analysis for China, Japan, and Taiwan. Energies 2022, 15, 8939
by Ali Hasanbeigi and M. Jibran S. Zuberi
Energies 2024, 17(22), 5698; https://doi.org/10.3390/en17225698 - 14 Nov 2024
Viewed by 217
Abstract
There was an error in the original publication [...] Full article
Show Figures

Figure 7

Figure 7
<p>Annual final energy demand in the textile wet-processing industry in China.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Annual final energy demand in the textile wet-processing industry in Japan.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Annual final energy demand in the textile wet-processing industry in Taiwan.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Annual CO<sub>2</sub> emissions from the textile wet-processing industry in China.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Annual CO<sub>2</sub> emissions from the textile wet-processing industry in Japan.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Annual CO<sub>2</sub> emissions from the textile wet-processing industry in Taiwan.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Energy costs per unit of production for the textile wet-processing industry in China.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Energy costs per unit of production for the textile wet-processing industry in Japan.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Energy costs per unit of production for the textile wet-processing industry in Taiwan.</p>
Full article ">
10 pages, 2254 KiB  
Correction
Correction: Hasanbeigi, A.; Zuberi, M.J.S. Electrification of Steam and Thermal Oil Boilers in the Textile Industry: Techno-Economic Analysis for China, Japan, and Taiwan. Energies 2022, 15, 9179
by Ali Hasanbeigi and M. Jibran S. Zuberi
Energies 2024, 17(22), 5691; https://doi.org/10.3390/en17225691 - 14 Nov 2024
Viewed by 212
Abstract
There was an error in the original publication [...] Full article
Show Figures

Figure 4

Figure 4
<p>Total annual final energy savings after electrification of steam boilers in the textile industry in China, Japan, and Taiwan up to 2050.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Potential change in steam boilers’ annual CO<sub>2</sub> emissions after electrification in the textile industry in China, Japan, and Taiwan.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Energy costs per unit of production for combustion and electric steam boilers in the textile wet-processing industry in China.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Energy costs per unit of production for combustion and electric steam boilers in the textile wet-processing industry in Japan.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Energy costs per unit of production for combustion and electric steam boilers in the textile wet-processing industry in Taiwan.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Total annual energy saving after electrification of thermal oil boilers in the textile industry in China, Japan, and Taiwan up to 2050.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Potential change in thermal oil boilers’ annual CO<sub>2</sub> emissions after electrification in the textile industry in China, Japan, and Taiwan.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Cost of conserved energy and CO<sub>2</sub> abatement for electric thermal oil boilers in the textile industry in China.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Cost of conserved energy and CO<sub>2</sub> abatement for electric thermal oil boilers in the textile industry in Japan.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>Cost of conserved energy and CO<sub>2</sub> abatement for electric thermal oil boilers in the textile industry in Taiwan.</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p>Energy costs per unit of production for combustion and electric thermal oil boilers in the textile industry in China.</p>
Full article ">Figure 18
<p>Energy costs per unit of production for combustion and electric thermal oil boilers in the textile industry in Japan.</p>
Full article ">Figure 19
<p>Energy costs per unit of production for combustion and electric thermal oil boilers in the textile industry in Taiwan.</p>
Full article ">Figure A4
<p>Cost of conserved energy and CO<sub>2</sub> abatement for electric thermal oil boilers under the CO<sub>2</sub> price scenario in the textile industry in China.</p>
Full article ">Figure A5
<p>Cost of conserved energy and CO<sub>2</sub> abatement for electric thermal oil boilers under the CO<sub>2</sub> price scenario in the textile industry in Japan.</p>
Full article ">Figure A6
<p>Cost of conserved energy and CO<sub>2</sub> abatement for electric thermal oil boilers under the CO<sub>2</sub> price scenario in the textile industry in Taiwan.</p>
Full article ">
16 pages, 3201 KiB  
Article
Integrating Environmental Covariates into Adaptability and Stability Analyses: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach for Cotton Breeding
by Matheus Massariol Suela, Moysés Nascimento, Ana Carolina Campana Nascimento, Camila Ferreira Azevedo, Paulo Eduardo Teodoro, Francisco José Correia Farias, Luiz Paulo de Carvalho and Diego Jarquin
Agriculture 2024, 14(11), 1914; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14111914 - 28 Oct 2024
Viewed by 790
Abstract
Breeding programs rely on genotype-by-environment interaction (GEI) to recommend cultivars for specific locations. GEI describes how different genotypes perform under varying environmental conditions. Several methods were proposed to assess adaptability and stability across environments. These methods utilize various statistical approaches like parametric and [...] Read more.
Breeding programs rely on genotype-by-environment interaction (GEI) to recommend cultivars for specific locations. GEI describes how different genotypes perform under varying environmental conditions. Several methods were proposed to assess adaptability and stability across environments. These methods utilize various statistical approaches like parametric and non-parametric regression, multivariate analysis techniques, and even Bayesian frameworks and artificial intelligence. The accessibility of environmental data through platforms like NASA POWER allows breeders to integrate this information into a breeding process. It has been done by using multi-omics integration models that combine data across various biological levels to create accurate predictive models. In the context of phenotypic adaptability and stability analysis, structural equation modeling (SEM) offers an interesting approach to integrating environmental covariates. This work aimed to propose a novel approach that integrates weather information into adaptability and stability analysis, combining SEM with the established Eberhart and Russell model. Additionally, a user-friendly applet, denoted ECERSEM-AdaptStab, was made available to perform the analysis. This approach utilized data from 12 cotton cultivar trials conducted across two growing seasons at 19 sites. This approach successfully integrated environmental covariates into a phenotypic adaptability and stability analysis of cotton cultivars. Specifically, the genotypes TMG 41 WS, IMA CV 690, DP 555 BGRR, BRS 286 and BRS 369 RF were recommended for favorable environments, while the genotypes TMG 43 WS, IMA 5675 B2RF, IMA 08 WS, NUOPAL, DELTA OPAL, BRS 335, and BRS 368 RF are more suitable for unfavorable environments. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Papers in Genotype Evaluation and Breeding)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Map of cotton cultivar yield test sites, Brazil.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Standard structural equation model (SEM) structure showing the causal relationship among Earth’s skin temperature (ST), temperature at 2 meters (T2M), relative humidity at 2 meters (RH), wind speed at 2 meters maximum (WS), corrected precipitation (PRECTOTCORR), and total clear sky surface photosynthetically active radiation (CLRSKY_SFC_PAR_TOT) to the environmental index (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="bold">I</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math>), and average fiber yield of each genotype (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="normal">y</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="normal">i</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>). The <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">γ</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> values represent the direct effects among environmental covariates to the index and each genotype. The <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">α</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msubsup> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">β</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="normal">I</mi> <mo>→</mo> <msub> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="normal">y</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="normal">i</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="normal">S</mi> <mi mathvariant="normal">E</mi> <mi mathvariant="normal">M</mi> </mrow> </msubsup> </mrow> </semantics></math> values represent the general mean of each genotype (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msubsup> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">β</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>0</mn> <mi mathvariant="normal">i</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="normal">S</mi> <mi mathvariant="normal">E</mi> <mi mathvariant="normal">M</mi> </mrow> </msubsup> </mrow> </semantics></math>), and the direct effect among environmental index to each genotype, respectively (general mean and adaptability parameter, as Eberhart and Russell, respectively). <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">ζ</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">ζ</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>2</mn> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> represents the random residuals associated with endogenous variables. <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">ψ</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>11</mn> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">ψ</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>22</mn> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> represents the residual variance of the endogenous variable.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Workflow for using the ECERSEM-AdaptStab app.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Example input for the phenotypic and local information files.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Heatmap that shows the direct effects between the environmental covariates and the genotypes via environmental index. Index: environmental index; TS: Earth skin temperature; T2M: temperature at 2 meters; RH2M: relative humidity at 2 meters; WS2M_MAX: wind speed at 2 meters maximum; PRECTOTCORR: precipitation corrected; CLRSKY_SFC_PAR_TOT: clear sky surface photosynthetically active radiation total. Gen1: TMG 41 WS; Gen2: TMG 43 WS; Gen3: IMA CV 690; Gen4: IMA 5675 B2RF; Gen5: IMA 08 WS; Gen6: NUOPAL; Gen7: DP 555 BGRR; Gen8: DELTA OPAL; Gen9: BRS 286; Gen10: BRS 335; Gen11: BRS 368 RF; Gen 12: BRS 369 RF.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Heatmap that shows the indirect effects between the environmental covariates and the genotypes via environmental index. TS: Earth skin temperature; T2M: temperature at 2 meters; RH2M: relative humidity at 2 meters; WS2M_MAX: wind speed at 2 meters maximum; PRECTOTCORR: precipitation corrected; CLRSKY_SFC_PAR_TOT: clear sky surface photosynthetically active radiation total. Gen1: TMG 41 WS; Gen2: TMG 43 WS; Gen3: IMA CV 690; Gen4: IMA 5675 B2RF; Gen5: IMA 08 WS; Gen6: NUOPAL; Gen7: DP 555 BGRR; Gen8: DELTA OPAL; Gen9: BRS 286; Gen10: BRS 335; Gen11: BRS 368 RF; Gen 12: BRS 369 RF.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Heatmap that shows the total effects of the environmental covariates on the genotypes. TS: Earth skin temperature; T2M: temperature at 2 meters; RH2M: relative humidity at 2 meters; WS2M_MAX: wind speed at 2 meters maximum; PRECTOTCORR: precipitation corrected; CLRSKY_SFC_PAR_TOT: clear sky surface photosynthetically active radiation total. Gen1: TMG 41 WS; Gen2: TMG 43 WS; Gen3: IMA CV 690; Gen4: IMA 5675 B2RF; Gen5: IMA 08 WS; Gen6: NUOPAL; Gen7: DP 555 BGRR; Gen8: DELTA OPAL; Gen9: BRS 286; Gen10: BRS 335; Gen11: BRS 368 RF; Gen 12: BRS 369 RF.</p>
Full article ">
14 pages, 1429 KiB  
Article
Agroecological Aptitude of the Northeast of Formosa (Argentinean Subtropical Region) for Banana Production Assessed by Multiple Factor Analysis
by Ana Paula Del Medico, Maria Susana Vitelleschi, Andrea Lina Lavalle, Gerardo Carlos Tenaglia and Guillermo Raúl Pratta
Agriculture 2024, 14(11), 1904; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14111904 - 27 Oct 2024
Viewed by 659
Abstract
Banana (Musa spp.) is an important crop in the economies of many developing countries. In the north of Argentina, a subtropical region, banana plants grow in a suboptimal environment that limits yield because only one harvest per year is achieved. The objective [...] Read more.
Banana (Musa spp.) is an important crop in the economies of many developing countries. In the north of Argentina, a subtropical region, banana plants grow in a suboptimal environment that limits yield because only one harvest per year is achieved. The objective of this work was to characterize the agroecological aptitude of Formosa, Argentina, for banana production through the behavior of three varieties of international use: Williams, Jaffa and Grand Naine, evaluated over five consecutive years. The three-way data analysis technique called Multiple Factor Analysis (MFA) was used for evaluating the varieties’ performances across cycles of production. The results allowed for inferring the existence of a genotype x environment interaction (GEI), corroborated by two-way factorial ANOVA. In order to determine how this suboptimal environment affected the development of each genotype of this perennial crop, Dual Multiple Factor Analysis (DMFA) was applied to jointly analyze the correlation structure between the traits that contributed to the performance of each variety in each year. The correlation structures between variables were different in each population and varied between years. All traits showed great variation between the years and genotypes, with the fruit peel thickness being the most discrepant throughout the years. However, Formosa appeared as a promising subtropical agroecological environment to produce banana because the varieties’ performances were acceptable for large-scale production systems. In addition to evaluating the adequate aptitude for cultivating banana in Formosa considering the significant effect of the GEIs, this research made a methodological contribution by proposing the use of three-way data analysis in Agronomy Science via MFA and DMFA. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Differences in traits number of hands and length and diameter of fingers between clones evaluated in Formosa. From left to right, two branches of cv. Williams, one branch of cv. Jaffa and two branches of cv. Grand Naine.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Representation of the variables in the 5 evaluation years in the first two global axes of the MFA.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Representation of the variables in the consensus structure in the first two global axes of the DMFA.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Representation of the groups of individuals in the first two global axes of the DMFA.</p>
Full article ">
16 pages, 4526 KiB  
Article
Opportunities to Improve the Recommendation of Plant Varieties under the Recommended List (RL) System
by Chin Jian Yang, Joanne Russell, Ian Mackay and Wayne Powell
Agronomy 2024, 14(10), 2267; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14102267 - 1 Oct 2024
Viewed by 499
Abstract
Recommended List (RL) is the UK plant variety recommendation system introduced in 1944 for supporting growers in making decisions on variety choices. The current RL system is heavily focused on single-trial analyses developed in the 1980s without making full use of information across [...] Read more.
Recommended List (RL) is the UK plant variety recommendation system introduced in 1944 for supporting growers in making decisions on variety choices. The current RL system is heavily focused on single-trial analyses developed in the 1980s without making full use of information across varieties and trial sites. Given the statistical advances that have been developed and adopted elsewhere, it is timely to review and update the methods for data analysis in RL. In addition, threats from climate change challenge the prediction of variety performance in future environments. Better variety recommendations, particularly for matching varieties to specific environments can be achieved through the improved modeling of effects from genetics, environments, and genetic-by-environment interactions. Here, we evaluate grain yield data from 153 spring barley varieties that were trialed for RL from 2002 to 2019. Our results show that the current RL system produces poor and inconsistent predictions on variety performance across environments. Improvement in RL can be achieved by using mixed models that account for genetic relationships among varieties, and additional improvement is possible if genetic-by-environment interaction can be modeled accurately. We highlight the relevance and importance of genomics in both variety registration and recommendation. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Crop Breeding and Genetics)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Trial distribution, climate variation, and yield prediction: (<b>A</b>) Geographical distribution of UK counties with spring barley trials. (<b>B</b>) Climate variation from north (1) to south (24) and separation of trial sites into three regions (North, West, East). (<b>C</b>) Predicted versus observed yield ranks from six methods in 2007 and 2016 at Coaltown of Balgonie, which is located in Fife, Scotland, and close to weather station 3.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Comparison of eight different methods for predicting variety performance. Each boxplot contains correlations between predicted and observed yield ranks from 29 unique trial sites and 13 years (2007 to 2019). The lower, middle, and upper hinges of the boxplots represent the first, second (median), and third quartiles of the data points. The whiskers extend from the boxes to the furthest data points within 1.5 times the interquartile range. The vertical red line serves as a reference based on the largest median correlation from method A5B.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Correlations between predicted and observed yield ranks in six trial sites: (<b>A</b>) Heatmap of correlations for eight methods and 13 years. These six trial sites are highlighted here because they have the greatest number of trials across the years. (<b>B</b>) Scatter plot of correlations for eight methods and 13 years. Significant difference in mean correlations between methods after applying Bonferroni correction is indicated by a black vertical line.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Correlations between predicted and observed yield ranks over 13 years: (<b>A</b>) Scatter plot of correlations for eight methods and trial sites within each year. Significant differences in mean correlations between methods after applying Bonferroni correction are indicated by black vertical lines. (<b>B</b>) Line plot of mean correlations for eight methods shown from 2007 to 2019.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Distribution of yield deficits across counties. Percent Deficits (PD) in yield due to incorrect predictions of best local variety are quantified for each trial site and year. The heat map shows the county-level PD as the means across all trial sites and years within each county.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Cumulative Percent Deficits (CPD) in yield over the years. PD is averaged across all trial sites within each year to obtain the annual mean PD, which is then summed over the years from 2007 to 2019 to highlight the CPD in yield for each method.</p>
Full article ">
13 pages, 1564 KiB  
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, Jarosław Plich, Dorota Milczarek, Dominika Boguszewska-Mańkowska and Krystyna Zarzyńska
Agriculture 2024, 14(9), 1591; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14091591 - 12 Sep 2024
Viewed by 618
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 [...] Read more.
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). Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Crop Genetics, Genomics and Breeding)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Map of Poland with location of organic farms.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Biplot analysis of GGE for first two IPC scores (IPC1 vs. IPC2) for tuber yield (2020–2022).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Biplot analysis of GGE for the IPC1 scores and tuber yield of 9 potato cultivars across 12 environments (2020–2022).</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Taste of potato cultivars (2020–2021).</p>
Full article ">
19 pages, 7611 KiB  
Article
Optimizing Seismic Performance of Tuned Mass Dampers at Various Levels in Reinforced Concrete Buildings
by Hosein Naderpour, Asghar SoltaniMatin, Ali Kheyroddin, Pouyan Fakharian and Nima Ezami
Buildings 2024, 14(8), 2443; https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14082443 - 8 Aug 2024
Viewed by 1521
Abstract
This study aimed to rigorously evaluate the impact of tuned mass dampers (TMDs) on structural response under seismic excitation. By strategically placing TMDs at various levels within the structures, the research sought to determine their effectiveness in mitigating structural movement. A single-degree-of-freedom (SDOF) [...] Read more.
This study aimed to rigorously evaluate the impact of tuned mass dampers (TMDs) on structural response under seismic excitation. By strategically placing TMDs at various levels within the structures, the research sought to determine their effectiveness in mitigating structural movement. A single-degree-of-freedom (SDOF) system incorporating TMDs was utilized to model structures of 10, 13, and 16 stories, each configured with TMDs at different heights. The structures were subjected to near-fault earthquakes to assess the efficacy of TMDs in reducing structural response. The findings revealed significant enhancements in structural performance when TMDs were optimally positioned. Specifically, a 50% reduction in both acceleration and displacement, alongside a 65% decrease in maximum drift, underscored the effectiveness of TMD deployment. Furthermore, the study demonstrated that distributing multiple TMDs along the height of the structure provided superior drift control. Notably, positioning TMDs within the upper one-third of the structure yielded the most pronounced improvements in acceleration, displacement, and maximum drift. Finally, the research indicates that the strategic incorporation of TMDs can significantly enhance the seismic resilience of structures. The results highlight the substantial benefits of TMDs in optimizing acceleration, displacement, and drift, thereby affirming their critical role in seismic design and retrofitting strategies. Full article
(This article belongs to the Collection Advanced Concrete Materials in Construction)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Diagram depicting a damped single-degree-of-freedom (SDOF) system.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Diagram of damped MDOF system.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Acceleration history of the 10-story structure under the Kobe earthquake.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The acceleration of different stories of the structure under the maximum acceleration of the total structure.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Displacement history of the 16-story structure under Kocaeli earthquake.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The maximum acceleration of the 10-story structure under 6 different earthquakes.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>The displacement of different stories of the structure under the maximum displacement of the total structure.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7 Cont.
<p>The displacement of different stories of the structure under the maximum displacement of the total structure.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Drift diagrams of the 10-story structure under 6 different earthquakes.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8 Cont.
<p>Drift diagrams of the 10-story structure under 6 different earthquakes.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Drift diagrams of the 16-story structure under 6 different earthquakes.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9 Cont.
<p>Drift diagrams of the 16-story structure under 6 different earthquakes.</p>
Full article ">
14 pages, 2636 KiB  
Article
Identification of High Erucic Acid Brassica carinata Genotypes through Multi-Trait Stability Index
by Misteru Tesfaye, Tileye Feyissa, Teklehaimanot Hailesilassie, Birhanu Mengistu, Selvaraju Kanagarajan and Li-Hua Zhu
Agriculture 2024, 14(7), 1100; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14071100 - 9 Jul 2024
Viewed by 944
Abstract
Brassica carinata is an important and native oilseed crop in Ethiopia. The seed oil from B.carinata attracts global attention for its various industrial applications, mainly due to its high erucic acid levels and its superior agronomic traits. Since the demand for high erucic [...] Read more.
Brassica carinata is an important and native oilseed crop in Ethiopia. The seed oil from B.carinata attracts global attention for its various industrial applications, mainly due to its high erucic acid levels and its superior agronomic traits. Since the demand for high erucic acid from oilseed brassica has been increasing in the world market due to its wider applications in bio-industries, the breeding target of B. carinata has recently been focused on enhancing its erucic acid. Several high erucic acid B. carinata genotypes have been screened from the pre-breeding activities. Such genotypes, however, need to be tested for their stable performance, for their erucic acid level, and other desirable traits under different environments. The aim of this study was to identify high erucic acid B. carinata genotypes with stable performance in multiple desirable traits. Thirty-two B. carinata genotypes were grown in a randomized complete block design with three replications at three locations for two years. The genotypes were evaluated for nine desirable traits related to seed oil quality (erucic acid and oil content), seed yield, and other agronomic traits. The results showed that the proportion of genotype by environment interaction (GEI) was clearly observed in erucic acid, which led to a stability and mean performance analysis for selecting the most stable and best-performing genotypes for the desired traits. For such an analysis, we used the multi-trait stability index (MTSI) along with the weighted average of absolute score BLUPs (WAASB). As revealed from the MTSI, five genotypes (G13, G18, G10, G22 and G5) were identified as the most stable in erucic acid, oil content, seed yield, and other agronomic traits. The selected genotypes showed on average 45.7% erucic acid, 3185 kg ha−1 seed yield and 45.1% oil content with 4.3%, 25.8% and 6.9% positive selection gain, respectively. The negative selection gain of phenological traits and the plant height of the selected genotypes revealed their early maturity and their lower probability of being affected by lodging. Our findings demonstrated MTSI can be used to select high erucic acid B. carinata with a set of desirable traits, which would facilitate breeding efforts in developing novel and high erucic acid B. carinata varieties. Our results also showed that MTSI is an effective tool for selecting genotypes across different environments due to its unique ability to select multiple traits simultaneously. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Crop Genetics, Genomics and Breeding)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The geographical position of field testing site of 32 carinata genotypes.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Proportion of phenotypic variance for nine traits of <span class="html-italic">B. carinata</span> genotypes grown in the six environments. DF, date of 50% flowering. DM, date of maturity. PH, plant height in cm. NPB, number of primary branches. NPP, number of pods per plant. TSW, thousand seed weight. SYD, seed yield in kg ha<sup>−1</sup>. OC, oil content in %. EA, erucic acid in %. GEN, genotypic variance. GEI, genotypic by environment interaction, Residual refers to the environmental variance.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Pearson’s correlation coefficient among the WAASBY index for nine traits of carinata tested at six environments. DF, date of flowering. DM, date of maturity. PH, plant height in cm. NPB, number of primary branch. NPP, number of pods per plant. TSW, thousand seed weight. SYD, seed yield in kg ha<sup>−1</sup>. OC, oil content in % and EC, erucic acid in %. *, *** represents significance at <span class="html-italic">p</span> = 0.05, and 0.001, respectively and “ns” refers to non-significance.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The multi-trait stability indexes of the 32 genotypes involved in the field trials. The selected stable genotypes located on the red circle or beyond, with red dots, considering 15% selection intensity.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>A view of the strengths and weakness of selected carinata genotypes. The graph depicted the proportion of each factor (FA) on the computed multi-trait stability index (MTSI). The smaller the proportion explained by a factor (closer to the external edge), the closer the traits within that factor are to the ideotype. The dashed line shows the theoretical value if all the factors had contributed equally.</p>
Full article ">
13 pages, 754 KiB  
Article
Stability Evaluation for Heat Tolerance in Lettuce: Implications and Recommendations
by Maryanne C. Pereira, Nara O. S. Souza, Warley M. Nascimento, Giovani O. da Silva, Caroline R. da Silva and Fabio A. Suinaga
Plants 2024, 13(11), 1546; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13111546 - 3 Jun 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 601
Abstract
Lettuce is an important cool-temperature crop, and its principal abiotic stress is low heat tolerance. Lettuce production has become more challenging in the context of global warming changes. Hence, the main objective of this research was to investigate the relationship between stability and [...] Read more.
Lettuce is an important cool-temperature crop, and its principal abiotic stress is low heat tolerance. Lettuce production has become more challenging in the context of global warming changes. Hence, the main objective of this research was to investigate the relationship between stability and lettuce heat tolerance. Field and greenhouse trials were run in 2015 (summer) and 2016 (fall and spring). The environments were composed of a combination of season and place (field, glass, and plastic greenhouse), and the assessed genotypes were BRS Leila and Mediterrânea, Elisa, Everglades, Simpson, and Vanda. Statistical analysis showed a significant effect (p < 0.05) of environments (E), genotypes (G), and the GEI. BRS Leila, Elisa, and BRS Mediterrânea showed the greatest means to the first anthesis in suitable environments (milder temperatures). Among these cultivars, BRS Mediterrânea was the most stable and adapted to hot environments. The environmental conditions studied in this research, mainly high temperatures, could become a reality in many lettuce-producing areas. Therefore, the results can help indicate and develop lettuce varieties with greater heat tolerance. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Crop Improvement under a Changing Climate)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Lettuce heat tolerance, estimated by the number of days to first anthesis, and stability analysis based on (<b>A</b>) the AMMI1 biplot and (<b>B</b>) the environmental stability GGE biplot. See <a href="#plants-13-01546-t001" class="html-table">Table 1</a> for environment codes.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Biplot of lettuce heat tolerance, estimated by the number of days to the first anthesis vs. weighted average of the absolute scores (WAASB Index).</p>
Full article ">
19 pages, 3666 KiB  
Article
Genetic Diversity and Population Structure of Maize (Zea mays L.) Inbred Lines in Association with Phenotypic and Grain Qualitative Traits Using SSR Genotyping
by Rumit Patel, Juned Memon, Sushil Kumar, Dipak A. Patel, Amar A. Sakure, Manish B. Patel, Arna Das, Chikkappa G. Karjagi, Swati Patel, Ujjaval Patel and Rajib Roychowdhury
Plants 2024, 13(6), 823; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13060823 - 13 Mar 2024
Cited by 7 | Viewed by 2688
Abstract
Maize (Zea mays L.) is an important cereal and is affected by climate change. Therefore, the production of climate-smart maize is urgently needed by preserving diverse genetic backgrounds through the exploration of their genetic diversity. To achieve this, 96 maize inbred lines [...] Read more.
Maize (Zea mays L.) is an important cereal and is affected by climate change. Therefore, the production of climate-smart maize is urgently needed by preserving diverse genetic backgrounds through the exploration of their genetic diversity. To achieve this, 96 maize inbred lines were used to screen for phenotypic yield-associated traits and grain quality parameters. These traits were studied across two different environments (Anand and Godhra) and polymorphic simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers were employed to investigate the genetic diversity, population structure, and trait-linked association. Genotype–environment interaction (GEI) reveals that most of the phenotypic traits were governed by the genotype itself across the environments, except for plant and ear height, which largely interact with the environment. The genotypic correlation was found to be positive and significant among protein, lysine and tryptophan content. Similarly, yield-attributing traits like ear girth, kernel rows ear−1, kernels row−1 and number of kernels ear−1 were strongly correlated to each other. Pair-wise genetic distance ranged from 0.0983 (1820194/T1 and 1820192/4-20) to 0.7377 (IGI-1101 and 1820168/T1). The SSRs can discriminate the maize population into three distinct groups and shortlisted two genotypes (IGI-1101 and 1820168/T1) as highly diverse lines. Out of the studied 136 SSRs, 61 were polymorphic to amplify a total of 131 alleles (2–3 per loci) with 0.46 average gene diversity. The Polymorphism Information Content (PIC) ranged from 0.24 (umc1578) to 0.58 (umc2252). Similarly, population structure analysis revealed three distinct groups with 19.79% admixture among the genotypes. Genome-wide scanning through a mixed linear model identifies the stable association of the markers umc2038, umc2050 and umc2296 with protein, umc2296 and umc2252 with tryptophan, and umc1535 and umc1303 with total soluble sugar. The obtained maize lines and SSRs can be utilized in future maize breeding programs in relation to other trait characterizations, developments, and subsequent molecular breeding performances for trait introgression into elite genotypes. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Genetics and Breeding of Grain Crops)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Box plots showing mean performance of the studied traits across two test sites during 2020. TA: days to 50% tasseling, SI: days to 50% silking, PH: plant height, EH: ear height, EPP: ears per plant, EL: ear length, EG: ear girth, KRP: kernel rows per ear, KPR: kernels per row, NKE: number of kernels per ear, Pro: protein content, TSS: total soluble sugar, Car: carotene content, Lys: lysine content, Trp: tryptophan content.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Dendrogram showing the relationship among 96 maize genotypes using molecular marker data (name of genotypes corresponds to the numbers are mentioned in <a href="#app1-plants-13-00823" class="html-app">Table S1</a>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Estimation of hypothetical sub-populations using ΔK-values.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Model-based population structure plot for each genotype with K = 3 in STRUCTURE software using 61 polymorphic SSRs. Color codes are as follows: sub-population I red, sub-population II green and sub-population III blue. The single vertical line represents an individual genotype and different segments of each vertical line show extent of admixture in an individual genotype.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>QQ plot for MLM of the studied traits in Anand environment.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>QQ plot for MLM of the studied traits in Godhra environment.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Manhattan plot for MLM of the studied traits under Anand environment. The horizontal red line indicates the threshold value. TA: days to 50% tasseling, SI: days to 50% silking, PH: plant height, EH: ear height, EPP: ears per plant, EL: ear length, EG: ear girth, KRP: kernel rows per ear, KPR: kernels per row, NKE: number of kernels per ear, Pro: protein content, TSS: total soluble sugar, Car: carotene content, Lys: lysine content, Trp: tryptophan content.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Manhattan plot for MLM of the studied traits under Godhra environment. The horizontal red line indicates the threshold value. TA: days to 50% tasseling, SI: days to 50% silking, PH: plant height, EH: ear height, EPP: ears per plant, EL: ear length, EG: ear girth, KRP: kernel rows per ear, KPR: kernels per row, NKE: number of kernels per ear, Pro: protein content, TSS: total soluble sugar, Car: carotene content, Lys: lysine content, Trp: tryptophan content.</p>
Full article ">
17 pages, 4667 KiB  
Article
Selection of Durum Wheat and SSR Markers for Organic Farming in Central Italy Using AMMI Analysis
by Ieva Urbanavičiūtė, Luca Bonfiglioli and Mario A. Pagnotta
Agronomy 2024, 14(3), 458; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14030458 - 26 Feb 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 2327
Abstract
Durum wheat is one of the main crops in the Mediterranean region, which is characterized as the hotspot of climate change, with large year-to-year weather fluctuations. Although chemical input reduction in agriculture is strongly demanded, as well as healthy food, there is still [...] Read more.
Durum wheat is one of the main crops in the Mediterranean region, which is characterized as the hotspot of climate change, with large year-to-year weather fluctuations. Although chemical input reduction in agriculture is strongly demanded, as well as healthy food, there is still a lack of stable and high-yielding crop varieties specifically adapted for organic conditions. This study evaluates the performance of fifteen durum wheat varieties in terms of suitability for organic farming in central Italy and assesses the impact of the genotype–environment interaction (GEI) on productive and quality traits. Variety performance was evaluated in field experiments over four successive seasons. In addition, a genotypic diversity analysis of 38 microsatellites associated with traits important for organic farming was performed. The AMMI (additive main effects and multiplicative interaction) stability analysis revealed that the best and most stable genotype regarding quality traits, such as thousand-kernel weight, protein content, and test weight was the ancient variety, Senatore Cappelli. The most stable and high yield was determined for the Fuego, Iride, and Mv-Pelsodur genotypes. Moreover, SSR markers that could be used for plant breeding, targeting organic farming systems based on molecular markers and GEI results, were identified. Full article
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>Four-year durum wheat selection under organic conditions at the experimental farm field at Tuscia University, located in Viterbo, central Italy (42°25′12.0″ N, 12°04′48.0″ E, 326 m ASL).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Evaluation of ground cover (<b>A</b>), growth habit (<b>B</b>), and days to heading (<b>C</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The days to heading for durum wheat. Values are a means of four growing seasons.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Ground cover (%), values are means of four growing seasons.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Growth habit (GH), (1–9) scale for plant growth habits, where (1) means predominantly straight and (9) curved leaves. Values are the means of four growing seasons.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Additive main effects and multiplicative interaction (AMMI 1) biplots show the GEI of the 15 durum wheat varieties under 4 environments for (<b>A</b>) thousand-kernel weight (TKW) and (<b>B</b>) test weight (HLW).</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Additive main effects and multiplicative interaction (AMMI 1) biplots showing GEI of the 15 durum wheat varieties under 4 environments for (<b>A</b>) grain yield (GY) and (<b>B</b>) protein content (PROT).</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Estimated values of the weighted average of stability (WAASB) and the mean performance (Y) (WAASBY) for the ground cover and growth habit of 15 durum wheat varieties across the 4 environments. Circle points with different colors represent the values of the index above and below the grand mean.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Estimated values of the weighted average of stability (WAASB) and the mean performance (Y) (WAASBY) for the thousand-kernel weight and test weight of 15 durum wheat varieties across the 4 environments. Circle points with different colors represent the values of the index above and below the grand mean.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Estimated values of the weighted average of stability (WAASB) and the mean performance (Y) (WAASBY) for grain yield and protein content of 15 durum wheat varieties across the 4 environments. Circle points with different colors represent the values of the index above and below the grand mean.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>UPGMA phenogram of Nei’s genetic distance among 15 durum wheat genotypes based on 38 SSR markers.</p>
Full article ">
23 pages, 2812 KiB  
Article
Interpreting the Interaction of Genotype with Environmental Factors in Barley Using Partial Least Squares Regression Model
by Kamenko Bratković, Kristina Luković, Vladimir Perišić, Jasna Savić, Jelena Maksimović, Slađan Adžić, Aleksandra Rakonjac and Mirela Matković Stojšin
Agronomy 2024, 14(1), 194; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14010194 - 16 Jan 2024
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1701
Abstract
Genotype by environment interaction (GEI) is a complex problem that complicates the barley selection and breeding process. The knowledge of the relationship between cereal phenology and climatic data is important for understanding GEI and the physiological pathways responsible for the interaction effect. The [...] Read more.
Genotype by environment interaction (GEI) is a complex problem that complicates the barley selection and breeding process. The knowledge of the relationship between cereal phenology and climatic data is important for understanding GEI and the physiological pathways responsible for the interaction effect. The grain yield of twenty winter barley genotypes in six environments was observed. Factors influencing the variability were analyzed using a linear mixed model. The partial least squares regression (PLSR) model was applied to determine the most relevant environmental variables in certain stages of development that explained GEI effects. Biplot with environmental variables explained 43.7% of the GEI. The barley was generally the most sensitive to the environmental conditions (relative humidity, maximum temperature and its variation, sun hours, and precipitation) during the anthesis and filling stage (May) which caused GEI. Temperature variables did not show significance only in the vegetative phase. Different genotypes responded differently to environmental factors. Genotypes NS-525, NS-589, and J-103 were highlighted as widely adaptable, and Zaječar was a suitable and reliable location for yield testing. The GEI information presented in this paper can be useful in traditional plant breeding and future breeding programs through molecular research of crop developmental genes and examination of physiological processes in two-row barley. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Crop Biology and Breeding under Environmental Stress)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Box plots for grain yield of two-row barley genotypes. Note: KG09, ZP09, and ZA09—Kragujevac, Zemun Polje, and Zaječar in 2008/2009, respectively; KG10, ZP10, and ZA10—Kragujevac, Zemun Polje, and Zaječar in 2009/2010, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>PLSR biplot for grain yield of two-row barley genotypes. Note: mn1, mx1, tv1, pr1, rh1, sh1—average minimum and maximum temperature, average temperature variation, sum of precipitation, average relative humidity, number of sun hours in period November–February; mn2, mx2, tv2, pr2, rh2, sh2—same parameters in March; mn3, mx3, tv3, pr3, rh3, sh3—same parameters in April; mn4, mx4, tv4, pr4, rh4, sh4—same parameters in May; mn5, mx5, tv5, pr5, rh5, sh5—same parameters in June, respectively; EI—environmental index, bci—bioclimatic index, htc—hydrothermal coefficient, ntd—number of tropical days, ncd—number of cold days; KG09, ZP09, and ZA09—Kragujevac, Zemun Polje, and Zaječar in 2008/2009, respectively, KG10, ZP10, and ZA10—Kragujevac, Zemun Polje, and Zaječar in 2009/2010, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Spearman’s coefficient correlation among environmental variables. Note: mn1, mx1, tv1, pr1, rh1, sh1—average minimum and maximum temperature, average temperature variation, sum of precipitation, average relative humidity, number of sun hours in period November–February; mn2, mx2, tv2, pr2, rh2, sh2—same parameters in March; mn3, mx3, tv3, pr3, rh3, sh3—same parameters in April; mn4, mx4, tv4, pr4, rh4, sh4—same parameters in May; mn5, mx5, tv5, pr5, rh5, sh5—same parameters in June, respectively; EI—environmental index, bci—bioclimatic index, htc—hydrothermal coefficient, ntd—number of tropical days, ncd—number of cold days. Circle sizes represent the significance of correlations between the variables, with larger circles in darker shades indicating stronger positive or negative associations, and smaller circles in lighter shades suggesting weaker associations.</p>
Full article ">
24 pages, 11926 KiB  
Article
Integrating Image Processing and Machine Learning for the Non-Destructive Assessment of RC Beams Damage
by Hosein Naderpour, Mohammad Abbasi, Denise-Penelope N. Kontoni, Masoomeh Mirrashid, Nima Ezami and Ambrosios-Antonios Savvides
Buildings 2024, 14(1), 214; https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14010214 - 13 Jan 2024
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 1702
Abstract
Non-destructive testing (NDT) is a crucial method for detecting damages in concrete structures. Structural damage can lead to functional changes, necessitating a range of damage detection techniques. Non-destructive methods enable the pinpointing of the location of the damage without causing harm to the [...] Read more.
Non-destructive testing (NDT) is a crucial method for detecting damages in concrete structures. Structural damage can lead to functional changes, necessitating a range of damage detection techniques. Non-destructive methods enable the pinpointing of the location of the damage without causing harm to the structure, thus saving both time and money. Damaged structures exhibit alterations in their static and dynamic properties, primarily stemming from a reduction in stiffness. Monitoring these changes allows for the determination of the failure location and severity, facilitating timely repairs and reinforcement before further deterioration occurs. A systematic approach to damage detection and assessment is pivotal for fortifying structures and preventing structural collapse, which can result in both financial and human losses. In this study, we employ image processing to categorize damaged beams based on their crack growth and propagation patterns. We also utilize support vector machine (SVM) and k-nearest neighbor (KNN) methods to detect the type, location, and extent of failures in reinforced concrete beams. To provide context and relevance for the laboratory specimens, we will compare our findings to the results from controlled experiments in a controlled laboratory setting. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Building Structures)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Recording of vertical changes in concrete beams.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Depicting cracks to be subjected to image processing following beam failure.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Image captured.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Beam cracks.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Processing of cracks in images with consideration of their growth and the loading conditions applied.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5 Cont.
<p>Processing of cracks in images with consideration of their growth and the loading conditions applied.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The reinforced concrete beam (CB).</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Image processing of cracks in CB beams.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Image processing of cracks in SCB beams.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Image processing for cracks in BDCM (10-3) beams.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Image processing for cracks in SBDCM (10-3) beams.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Image processing for cracks in SBDCM (15-1) beams.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Image processing for cracks in BDCM (15-1) beams.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Schematic representation of the BDCM (15-1) beam.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Image processing for cracks in BDCO (15-3) beams.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Image processing for cracks in SBDCO (15-3) beams.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>Schematic representation of the BDCO (15-3) beam.</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p>Image processing for cracks in BDCM (15-3) beams.</p>
Full article ">Figure 18
<p>Image processing for cracks in SBDCM (15-3) beams.</p>
Full article ">Figure 19
<p>Schematic representation of the BDCM (15-3) beam.</p>
Full article ">Figure 20
<p>Image processing for cracks in BDCM (10-0.5) (15-1) beams.</p>
Full article ">Figure 21
<p>Image processing for cracks in SBDCM (10-0.5) (15-1) beams.</p>
Full article ">Figure 22
<p>Schematic representation of the BDCM (10-0.5) (15-1) beam.</p>
Full article ">Figure 23
<p>Image processing for cracks in BDRA beams.</p>
Full article ">Figure 24
<p>Image processing for cracks in SBDRA beams.</p>
Full article ">Figure 25
<p>Schematic representation of the SBDRA beam with rebar failure.</p>
Full article ">Figure 26
<p>Image processing for cracks in SBDRS beams.</p>
Full article ">Figure 27
<p>Image processing for cracks in BDRS beams.</p>
Full article ">Figure 28
<p>Schematic representation of the SBDRS beam with rebar failure.</p>
Full article ">Figure 29
<p>The range of the failure threshold based on the failure index D.</p>
Full article ">Figure 30
<p>Diagram of the failure index of beams without FRP tested in terms of vertical displacement.</p>
Full article ">Figure 31
<p>Diagram of the failure index of beams with FRP tested in terms of vertical displacement.</p>
Full article ">
25 pages, 3716 KiB  
Article
Advancing Shear Capacity Estimation in Rectangular RC Beams: A Cutting-Edge Artificial Intelligence Approach for Assessing the Contribution of FRP
by Nima Ezami, Aybike Özyüksel Çiftçioğlu, Masoomeh Mirrashid and Hosein Naderpour
Sustainability 2023, 15(22), 16126; https://doi.org/10.3390/su152216126 - 20 Nov 2023
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1166
Abstract
Shear strength prediction in FRP-bonded reinforced concrete beams is crucial for ensuring structural integrity and safety. In this extensive investigation, advanced machine learning algorithms are harnessed to achieve precise shear strength predictions for rectangular RC beams reinforced with FRP sheets. The aim of [...] Read more.
Shear strength prediction in FRP-bonded reinforced concrete beams is crucial for ensuring structural integrity and safety. In this extensive investigation, advanced machine learning algorithms are harnessed to achieve precise shear strength predictions for rectangular RC beams reinforced with FRP sheets. The aim of this research is to enhance the accuracy and reliability of shear strength estimation, providing valuable insights for the design and assessment of FRP-strengthened structures. The primary contributions of this study lie in the meticulous comparison of various machine learning algorithms, including Xgboost, Gradient Boosting, Random Forest, AdaBoost, K-nearest neighbors, and ElasticNet. Through comprehensive evaluation based on predictive performance, the most suitable model for accurately estimating the shear strength of FRP-reinforced rectangular RC beams is identified. Notably, Xgboost emerges as the superior performer, boasting an impressive R2 value of 0.901. It outperforms other algorithms and demonstrates the lowest RMSE, MAE, and MAPE values, establishing itself as the most accurate and reliable predictor. Furthermore, a sensitivity analysis is conducted using artificial neural networks to assess the influence of input variables. This additional research facet sheds light on the critical factors shaping shear strength outcomes. The study, as a whole, represents a substantial contribution to advancing the development of accurate and dependable prediction models. The practical implications of this work are far-reaching, particularly for engineering applications in the realm of structures reinforced with FRP. The findings have the potential to transform the approach to the design and assessment of such structures, elevating safety, efficiency, and performance to new heights. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainable Building Materials: An Eco-Approach for Construction)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Correlation analysis of FRP-strengthened RC beams.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Visual representation of model performance evaluation.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Comparison of predicted and actual shear strength in FRP-strengthened RC beams.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Comparative analysis of prediction errors in shear strength estimation for FRP-strengthened RC beams.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Residual analysis of predicted vs. actual values in Shear strength estimation for FRP-strengthened concrete beams.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Distribution analysis of residuals in shear strength prediction for FRP-strengthened beams.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Flowchart of artificial neural networks used in this study.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Relative importance of input parameters.</p>
Full article ">
13 pages, 2943 KiB  
Article
Identification of High-Yielding Genotypes of Barley in the Warm Regions of Iran
by Alireza Pour-Aboughadareh, Shirali Koohkan, Hassan Zali, Akbar Marzooghian, Ahmad Gholipour, Masoome Kheirgo, Ali Barati, Jan Bocianowski and Alireza Askari-Kelestani
Plants 2023, 12(22), 3837; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12223837 - 13 Nov 2023
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 1279
Abstract
One of the most important effects of climatic changes is increasing temperatures and expanding water deficit stress in tropical and subtropical regions. As the fourth most important cereal crop, barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) is crucial for food and feed security, as well [...] Read more.
One of the most important effects of climatic changes is increasing temperatures and expanding water deficit stress in tropical and subtropical regions. As the fourth most important cereal crop, barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) is crucial for food and feed security, as well as for a sustainable agricultural system. The present study investigates 56 promising barley genotypes, along with four local varieties (Norooz, Oxin, Golchin, and Negin) in four locations to identify high-yielding and adapted genotypes in the warm climate of Iran. Genotypes were tested in an alpha lattice design with six blocks, which were repeated three times. Traits measured were the number of days to heading and maturity, plant height, thousand kernels weight, and grain yield. A combined analysis of variance showed the significant effects of genotypes (G), environments (E), and their interaction (GEI) on all measured traits. Application of the additive main-effect and multiplicative interaction (AMMI) model to the grain yield data showed that GEI was divided into three significant components (IPCAs), and each accounted for 50.93%, 30.60%, and 18.47%, respectively. Two selection indices [Smith–Hazel (SH) and multiple trait selection index (MTSI)] identified G18, G24, G29, and G57 as desirable genotypes at the four test locations. Using several BLUP-based indices, such as the harmonic mean of genotypic values (HMGV), the relative performance of genotypic values (RPGV), and the harmonic mean of the relative performance of genotypic values (HMRPGV), genotypes G6, G11, G22, G24, G29, G38, G52, and G57 were identified as superior genotypes. The application of GGE analysis identified G6, G24, G29, G52, and G57 as the high-yielding and most stable genotypes. Considering all statistical models, genotypes G24, G29, and G57 can be used, as they are well-adapted to the test locations in warm regions of Iran. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Selected barley genotypes using Smith–Hazel (<b>A</b>) and multiple trait selection (<b>B</b>) indices. The red circle represents the point separating the desired genotypes, which is marked with a red point. Venn diagram (<b>C</b>) for selected genotypes based on both SH and MTSI indices. The numbers indicate the genotype codes.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>(<b>A</b>) View of the GGE ‘which–won–where’ biplot of winning genotypes for grain yield in each sector. (<b>B</b>) Biplot for simultaneous selection of grain yield and stability of barley genotypes tested. (<b>C</b>) A view of the ‘discriminating power and representativeness’ of the GGE biplot. (<b>D</b>) Comparison of promising barley genotypes with the ‘ideal’ genotype in terms of grain yield and stability at four test locations. Numbers indicade the genotype codes.</p>
Full article ">
Back to TopTop