Multilocation Trial

IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science
PAPER • OPEN ACCESS
Grain Yield, Stability and Adaptability of 11 Prospective Genotypes

Across 16 Multilocation Trials
To cite this article: Budi Setyawan et al 2019 IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 347 012089
View the article online for updates and enhancements.
This content was downloaded from IP address 178.171.45.169 on 09/11/2019 at 01:06

6th International Conference on Sustainable Agriculture, Food and Energy IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 347 (2019) 012089 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/347/1/012089
Grain Yield, Stability and Adaptability of 11 Prospective

Genotypes Across 16 Multilocation Trials
Budi Setyawan1, Irfan Suliansyah1(a), Aswaldi Anwar1, and Etti Swasti1

1
Department of Agrotechnology, Faculty of Agriculture, Andalas University, Kampus
Limau Manis, Padang 25163, Indonesia. (a) Corresponding author:
irfansuliansyah@agr.unand.ac.id
Abstract. Maize breeding in Indonesia is not only directed to obtain new cultivars with high
grain yield potential in arable soil with favourable weather but also must be able to adapt well to
the alteration of agro-climatic condition throughout Indonesia. The objective of this study was
to evaluate and filtering grain yield, adaptability and stability of 11 (eleven) new hybrid maize
prospective genotypes conducted at 16 locations in 4 (four) provinces with the different agro-
climatic condition. Eleven new hybrid maize prospective genotypes which consisted of 5 single
cross hybrids and 6 three-way cross hybrids were evaluated for grain yield in this study. These
11 prospective genotypes were the outcome of a breeding program which began in 1997. As
control cultivars, BISI 18 and Sukmaraga were selected. BISI 18 represented hybrid maize
cultivars, especially single cross hybrids, while Sukmaraga represented open-pollinated maize
cultivars. The result of this study showed that four prospective genotypes which performed
better or equal with BISI 18, which were SSUSX48274, SSUSX06145, SSUSX76844 and
SSUSX68849 can be released as new national superior varieties to compete with BISI 18 in
maize production center of Indonesia.
1. Introduction
As second major commodity after rice in Indonesia and it diversity of utilization both for food or feed,
drive maize (Zea mays L.) to domestically shortage and has to be fulfilled by import. As of November
2016, import of this cereal had been reached 900,000 metric tons [1]. Low productivity which is only
50.7% of United States maize [2], along with poor post -harvest management, considered as the cause
of Indonesian national maize supply deficiency.
Maize breeding in Indonesia is not only directed to obtain new cultivars with high grain yield
potential in arable soil with favourable weather but also must be able to adapt well to the alteration of
agro-climatic condition throughout Indonesia. Indonesia is the largest archipelago in the world, with a
total area of 5.22 million km2, consisting of 1.92 million km2 of land and about 3.30 million km2 of
water/sea. The area is made up of 17,508 islands, of which about 6,000 islands are inhabited islands [3].
Stretching as far as 5,152 km from west to east or 1/8 of the circumference of the Earth, 1,770 km from
north to south and home to more than 300 ethnic groups speaking more than 250 languages [4].
A vast territory also has a diversity of climate, particularly micro-climate. Along with the diversity
of geomorphology causing the diversity of agricultural type of soil, from fertile soil in Java and Bali to
low nutrient alluvial soil in Kalimantan. Climate is also varied, from wet climates with high rainfall in
the highlands of Sumatra to the dry climate with low rainfall in East Nusa Tenggara [3]. All of this
phenomenon result to diversity of cropping patterns and commodities in each region. To be accepted by
maize farmers, a new variety should possess superior adaptability to the above mentioned agro-climatic
condition. Prospective genotypes as the output of breeding programs must be tested in several regions
Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
with different agro-climate before can be approved as new national superior varieties [5], [6], [7], [8].
The objective of this study was to evaluate and filtering grain yield, adaptability and stability of 11
(eleven) new hybrid maize prospective genotypes that had passed the preliminary grain yield potential
trials conducted by [9]. Expectations from this study is that 11 new hybrid maize prospective genotypes
produce significantly higher grain yield and perform better adaptability at 95% significant level (ά=0.05)
than the Cultivar of Sukmaraga (control genotype) or at least similar when compared to Cultivar BISI
18 (control genotype) that currently exist in the national maize seed market.
The new hybrid maize prospective genotypes consisted of 5 (five) single cross hybrid genotypes
and 6 (six) three-way cross hybrid genotypes. Cultivar BISI 18 was intended to represent hybrid cultivars
segment [6], while Sukmaraga cultivar was elected to represent open-pollinated cultivars segment [6],
[10]. The study was conducted at 16 locations with different agro-climatic condition.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Location and Time of Research

This study was conducted at 16 locations in 4 (four) provinces with different agro-climatic condition.
Description of the research locations are presented in Table 1.
Table 1. Description of the research locations

Elevation Previous Date of Date of
No Village District County Province Type of Field Type of Soil
(m-asl) Crop Planting Harvesting
1 Koto Sani X Koto Singkarak Solok West Sumatra Paddy field Latosol 210 Paddy-fish 03/06/2016 06/17/2016
2 Samura Kabanjahe Karo North Sumatra Dry land Grumusol 1.200 Cabbage 03/26/2016 08/22/2016
3 Tanah Garam Lubuk Sikarah Solok West Sumatra Dry land Organosol 600 Maize 10/23/2016 02/09/2017
4 Siluluk VII Koto Tebo Jambi Paddy field Litosol 80 Sweetcorn 10/05/2016 01/12/2017
5 Kutalimbaru Kutalimbaru Deli Serdang North Sumatra Dry land Red-Yellow Podzolic 270 Uncultivated 10/03/2016 01/13/2017
6 Labruk Kidul Sumbersuko Lumajang East Java Paddy field Latosol 65 Paddy 05/22/2016 08/28/2016
7 Bungatan Bungatan Situbondo East Java Dry land Mediteran 90 Uncultivated 03/02/2016 06/08/2016
8 Kuta Bangun Tiga Binanga Karo North Sumatra Dry land Podzol 650 Maize 03/03/2016 06/29/2016
9 Jatiguwi Sumberpucung Malang East Java Dry land Regosol 305 Water melon 08/01/2016 11/11/2016
10 Maesan Maesan Bondowoso East Java Dry land Andosol 470 Cassava 07/12/2016 10/26/2016
11 Rejotangan Rejotangan Tulungagung East Java Paddy field Latosol 120 Maize 05/11/2016 08/17/2016
12 Kanigoro Kanigoro Blitar East Java Paddy field Latosol 100 Paddy 06/01/2016 09/08/2016
13 Blayu Wajak Malang East Java Paddy field Aluvial 495 Paddy 04/07/2016 07/23/2016
14 Gayam Gurah Kediri East Java Dry land Regosol 70 Maize 08/11/2016 11/17/2016
15 Tigasan Wetan Leces Probolinggo East Java Paddy field Aluvial 110 Paddy 06/12/2016 09/21/2016
16 Keting Jombang Jember East Java Paddy field Aluvial 10 Paddy 05/24/2016 08/29/2016
Remark : m-asl = meters above sea level
This research was conducted in dry season 2016 to the rainy season in 2016/2017.
2.2. Research Materials and Methods

Eleven new hybrid maize prospective genotypes which consisted of 5 single cross hybrids and 6 three
way cross hybrids were evaluated for grain yield in this study (Table 2). These 11 prospective genotypes
were the outcome of breeding program which began in 1997. The prospective genotype progenitors
were 23 inbred lines which were extracted from landrace populations. These landrace populations were
introduced from 7 countries (USA, Mexico, Colombia, India, Thailand, Malaysia, Philippines) and some
indigenous landraces of particular areas in Indonesia for their better adaptability. These eleven
prospective genotypes also had been evaluated for resistance to stress of downy mildew
Peronosclerospora maydis [11] in Kediri, East Java, northern corn leaf blight Exserohilum turcicum
[12] and had passed the preliminary trial of grain yield potential [9], which were carried out in The
District of Mardingding, Tanah Karo, North Sumatra.
As control cultivars, BISI 18 and Sukmaraga were selected. BISI 18 represented hybrid maize
cultivars, especially single cross hybrids, while Sukmaraga represented open-pollinated maize cultivars
[6]. Both cultivars had also been widely accepted by maize farmers in their respective segment in
2
Indonesia. Complete data on the 11 prospective genotypes and 2 control cultivars are presented in Table
2.
Table 2. Prospective genotypes, cross, pedigree and control cultivars
Female Parent
No. Genotype Cross Male Parent Remark
Female Male
01 SSU3X17782 Threeway cross SSU3X17782FF SSU3X17782FM SSUSX02791M Prospective genotype
06 SSU3X68276 Threeway cross SSU3X68276FF SSU3X68276FM SSU3X68276M Prospective genotype
07 SSUSX02791 Single cross SSUSX02791F SSUSX02791M Prospective genotype
12 BISI 18 Single cross - - Control cultivar
13 Sukmaraga Open pollinated - - Control cultivar
Randomized block design with 3 replications was adopted in this study [13], [14]. Each plot size
of 5 m x 2.8 m, was tilled with complete soil tillage system which initiated by first plowing, followed
by second plowing and harrowing, at 14 days of intervals among process. Every plot consisted of 4
rows. Row spacing was 70 cm, while hole spacing was 20 cm. Prospective genotypes and control
cultivars were planted in each plot with 2 seeds per hole. It was expected that there were 200 plants per
plot at the time of planting (50 seeds per row by 4 rows).
First plant population thinning was conducted at 7 days after the first fertilization (22 days after
planting), by removing unwanted plants, especially in holes which consisted 2 plants. It was expected
that 120 plants remained per plot after the first plant population thinning (30 plants per row by 4 rows)
regardless plant count per hole. Plant count per hole could be either 1 plant or 2 plants, as long as total
plants count per plot were 120. The second plant population thinning was conducted at 34 days after
planting. Thinning method was similar to the first one. After the second plant population thinning until
harvest time, 100 remaining plants had to be maintained in a every plot regardless plant count per hole.
Fertilization were applied 2 times during the growing period. The first fertilization was done at
15 days after planting using Urea, SP-36 and KCl which were applied at a dose of 250 kg, 100 kg and
50 kg per hectare respectively. Second fertilization was done when the plants were at 35 days after
planting, by applying only 100 kg per hectare of Urea. Dosage of fertilization was adapted from local
farmers who had experienced in the cultivation of hybrid maize. Weeding and hilling-up were done 2
times manually (using a hoe).
Weeding and hilling-up were on the same day right after fertilizer application. The water needed
by plants at dry land field locations in this study was fully rely on rainfall, without any other artificial
irrigation. Meanwhile at paddy field locations with technical irrigation system, irrigation water were
applied regularly from planting until dough stage (R5). At paddy field locations with natural irrigation
system, irrigation water were applied regularly only if irrigation water sufficient, otherwise it relied on
rainfall. Harvesting, husking and shelling was done by hand. It was done after more than 95% plants
had reached physiological maturity and grain moisture content could be measured using analog and
digital grain moisture content tester.
Observation and evaluation of grain yield were carried out after harvest. Evaluation of grain yield
was performed only on cobs which harvested from the 2 middle rows out of 4 rows in every plot [5],
[13]. Grain yield components which were observed including the number of plants per plot, number of
cobs per plot, weight of freshly harvested cob without husk, fresh shelled maize grain weight, and fresh
maize grain water content on harvest time. The data obtained was then converted into grain yield per
hectare at 15% moisture content by utilizing the following formula:
3
10,000 100 - MC
Y = x x GW
HA 100 - 15
Where: Y = Grain yield (kg/ha)
HA = Harvested area per plot (m2)
MC = Moisture content at harvest time (%)
GW = Harvested grain weight per plot (kg)
The variance of data obtained was tested using analysis of variance, both at each location as well
as the composite at all location. If the variance among genotypes was found, least significant difference
at 95% confidence level (LSD05) would be utilized as advanced test. Stability and adaptability analysis
at all locations, was utilized the analysis of stability and adaptability based on the method of [15] using
regression test as follows:
Σj(Ȳij - Ȳi.)(Ȳ.j - Ϋ)
bi =
2
Σj(Ȳ.j - Ϋ)
Where: bi = The coefficient of regression
Ȳij = Observed genotype i grain yield response in the environment j (kg/ha)
Ȳi. = The average grain yield of genotype i at all locations (kg/ha)
Ȳ.j = The average grain yield of all genotype at location j (kg/ha)
Ϋ = Average grain yield at all locations (kg/ha)
The value of bi = 0 was considered to be stable in all location. Since the locations of the research
were chosen because of the variability condition, they could represent a certain environment. Thus, if bi
= 0, the prospective genotype was considered to be stable in all environment. If bi > 0, the prospective
genotype would only prefer favourable environments, meanwhile bi < 0 indicate that the prospective
genotype only stable at marginal or unfavourable environments.
3. Result and Discussion

In general, seed germination of research materials were excellent, ranging from 87% to 100%. As of the
first fertilization at 14 days after planting (dap), which was followed by weeding and hilling up, plant
populations were still as good as the germination. There were no signs of germination pest at all locations
like black cutworm, white grub, corn rootworm, etc. Irrigation was done at this time right after hilling
up was finished, especially at the locations where technical irrigation available, otherwise it was rely on
rainfall. The first population thinning was done as scheduled 7 days after first fertilization,
Second or final population thinning was conducted at 34 dap or 1 day before the second
fertilization. At this time, most of the plants were knee-high tall. There were no signs of pests such as
Asiatic corn borer and army worm as well as no symptoms of diseases such as northern corn leaf blight,
downy mildew, or rust. Weeding and hilling up during planting time were also accomplished in this
stage. Pollination at all locations were relatively fair to good depending on genotypes and locations.
Harvest was done as scheduled except at Samura, in line with the temperature drop at grain filling
period and prolong genotypes physiological maturity (eventually last genotypes physiological maturity
was achieved at 149 dap). There was no symptom of stress both biotic and abiotic during the growing
period. Plants standability were good and no stalk lodging at all genotypes and locations.
Generally, based on Table 3, composite grain yield of all prospective genotypes showed
significantly better performance compared to composite grain yield of Sukmaraga. Meanwhile 6
prospective genotypes performed equal to BISI 18 and only 1 prospect genotype, which was
SSUSX48274 showed significantly better performance compared to BISI 18. All off prospective
genotypes which were single cross hybrid perform at least equal to BISI 18 which was also a single
cross hybrid.
Interesting phenomenon was showed by prospective genotype SSU3X29131 which was a three
way cross hybrid, able to compete to be equal with BISI 18 which was a single cross hybrid. According
4
to [16], [17], [18], [19], seed production cost of three way cross hybrid only 25% if compared to single
cross hybrid. This will reduce seed expenditure of maize farmers and gain higher profit. This fact was
in line with [20], [21], and [22], that farmers would prefer lower seed price for similar hybrid
performance. Ministry of Agriculture (2016) [23] also encouraged seed producer to sell premium low
price three way cross hybrids to allow maize farmer wider options in this unpredictable climate
situations [24].
Table 3. Grain yield of all genotypes at all locations

Grain Yield at 15% Moisture Content
Genotype Tanah Pulau Labruk Kuta Tigasan Composite
Koto Sani Samura Kutalimbaru Bungatan Jatiguwi Maesan Rejotangan Kanigoro Blayu Gayam Keting
Garam Mainan Kidul Bangun Wetan
SSU3X17782 9.314,5 a 9.046,8 b 9.409,3 b 8.547,1 b 6.354,9 a 8.318,4 b 5.567,8 a 7.285,8 a 8.436,2 ac 8.458,7 b 9.243,8 b 8.999,4 b 8.825,3 bc 8.410,5 b 9.714,6 bc 9.914,0 b 8.490,4
b
SSU3X28871 10.350,3 bc 9.547,4 b 10.027,7 bc 8.940,1 b 10.071,3 b 10.923,5 b 6.480,8 a 8.849,4 b 7.290,0 ac 7.320,4 a 8.752,0 bc 7.925,0 b 8.867,8 bc 11.746,2 bc 10.386,9 bc 9.294,6 b 9.173,3
b
SSU3X29131 10.459,7 bc 11.177,8 b 10.809,6 bc 7.253,6 a 10.605,3 b 11.205,0 b 12.423,0 bd 14.110,0 b 10.763,2 bd 12.682,2 bc 10.465,9 bc 11.090,0 bc 11.363,3 bd 9.034,2 b 12.414,9 bc 12.917,2 bc 11.173,4 bc
SSU3X30735 11.090,8 bc 9.458,1 b 7.064,9 a 7.729,3 a 10.510,0 b 5.621,5 a 9.535,3 bc 8.999,4 b 11.015,8 bd 8.184,4 a 9.646,0 bc 8.795,5 b 7.551,7 b 11.214,0 bc 7.922,4 a 10.515,7 b 9.053,4
b
SSU3X45172 11.623,1 bc 10.835,6 b 11.555,7 bc 11.848,3 b 9.069,4 a 9.828,0 b 11.648,6 bd 9.365,5 b 14.616,4 bd 8.940,1 a 11.943,4 bc 10.435,1 b 10.022,5 bc 7.774,7 b 11.670,3 bc 8.797,3 b 10.623,4
b
SSU3X68276 12.017,0 bc 11.693,4 bc 14.487,6 bd 10.155,6 b 10.739,9 b 10.490,0 b 10.856,9 bd 13.272,9 b 12.349,0 bd 13.913,6 bc 14.058,5 bd 12.851,1 bc 7.861,7 bc 12.079,6 bc 10.703,1 bc 7.070,2 a 11.537,5
bc
SSUSX02791 12.114,3 bc 15.467,2 bc 9.059,5 b 11.280,6 b 10.663,8 b 12.337,0 bc 11.249,2 bd 16.585,1 bc 8.510,5 ac 15.582,3 bc 8.595,8 bc 11.219,7 bc 13.905,7 bd 16.074,4 bd 10.930,3 bc 14.226,3 bc 12.362,6
bc
SSUSX06145 14.725,1 bd 15.296,4 bc 11.264,4 bc 11.984,1 b 12.025,2 b 13.073,8 bc 11.884,7 bd 17.596,3 bc 11.013,6 bd 16.553,1 bc 9.462,0 bc 11.906,2 bc 14.763,0 bd 17.022,4 bd 11.578,5 bc 15.073,2 bc 13.451,4 bc
SSUSX48274 14.936,5 bd 16.973,9 bd 16.963,9 bd 16.131,6 bc 12.833,7 bc 13.960,1 bc 16.704,0 bd 16.353,0 bc 13.985,2 bd 13.838,5 bc 16.818,0 bd 17.865,9 bd 15.452,9 bd 15.642,9 bd 16.553,3 bd 17.239,0 bd 15.765,8 bd
SSUSX68849 13.017,1 bc 14.919,3 bc 17.837,0 bd 13.603,4 bc 12.849,6 bc 16.870,6 bd 8.838,8 bc 10.413,8 b 12.838,8 bd 15.459,5 bc 8.036,7 bc 9.622,2 b 8.512,8 bc 11.587,8 bc 11.774,6 bc 13.780,4 bc 12.497,7 bc
SSUSX76844 12.816,7 bc 13.906,7 bc 10.402,4 bc 13.552,6 bc 11.491,1 b 15.070,8 bc 15.211,4 bd 15.314,8 bc 13.808,4 bd 8.784,7 a 12.837,8 bc 13.468,3 bc 11.686,8 bd 13.056,4 bc 12.438,1 bc 12.152,4 bc 12.875,0 bc
BISI 18 12.270,2 b 14.130,4 b 11.365,8 b 14.789,8 b 14.433,2 b 14.501,6 b 9.160,0 b 16.464,4 b 8.350,8 b 14.761,2 b 10.667,1 b 12.489,1 b 9.389,2 b 12.347,6 b 11.583,6 b 13.211,5 b 12.494,7
b
Sukmaraga 7.616,1 6.233,6 5.930,0 6.039,4 7.177,3 3.473,6 6.561,2 5.855,2 6.753,8 5.101,0 5.140,5 4.166,3 5.097,0 3.704,0 6.566,3 6.616,5 5.752,0
Average 11.719,3 12.206,7 11.244,4 10.912,0 10.678,8 11.205,7 10.470,9 12.343,5 10.748,6 11.506,1 10.436,0 10.833,4 10.253,8 11.515,0 11.095,2 11.600,6 11.173,1
CV 12,2 12,5 9,3 11,4 10,9 11,9 8,9 9,8 10,8 11,9 12,9 9,3 10,0 10,0 10,8 10,5 17,2
LSD05 2.418,8 2.565,4 1.768,2 2.099,7 1.954,8 2.244,4 1.570,3 2.035,4 1.948,6 2.298,9 2.277,2 1.690,6 1.726,6 1.944,8 2.020,4 2.047,1 1.343,3
Remark: a = equal to Sukmaraga, b = significantly better than Sukmaraga, c = equal to BISI 18, d = significantly better than BISI 18, all at confident level 95% (a = 0.05)
All of prospective genotypes showed significantly higher grain yield if compared to OPV cultivar
Sukmaraga. The grain yield performance of all prospective genotypes range from 147.6%
(SSU3X17782) to as high as 274.1% (SSUSX48274). All three way cross prospective genotypes which
were purposed to replace OPV cultivars which was represented by Sukmaraga performed excellent grain
yield ranging from 147.6% (SSU3X17782) to more than twice or 200.6% (SSU3X68276), but this
champion of three way cross prospective genotype still fail to compete single cross cultivars which was
represented by BISI 18 by 7.7% lower grain yield, it was in line with [25] and [26].
All of single cross prospective genotypes showed equal performance in grain yield if compared
to BISI 18 except prospective genotype SSUSX48274 which performed significantly higher than BISI
18. Two single cross prospective genotypes although had statistically equal performance compared with
BISI 18, but absolute grain yield were proven to be higher by 3,0% (SSUSX76844) and 7,7%
(SSUSX06145). This advantage could be considered as important income for farmers in this
unpredictable climate condition which frequently happen recently as stated by Indonesian Agency for
Meteorology, Climatology and Geophysics [27].
Prospective genotype SSUSX48274 showed superior performance in grain yield compared both
control cultivars. In composite grain yield it produced 174,1% more grain if compared to Sukmaraga
and 26,2% more grain if compared to BISI 18. As calculated by [28] cost of seed only contribute 7.6%
of total maize production cost, thus the enhancement provided by prospective genotype SSUSX48274
was much beyond the seed cost.
All of three way cross prospective genotype as seen in Table 1, adapt better than Sukmaraga at
all altitude, field type, soil type and previous crops. These were proven by higher grain yield at all
locations. It could conclude that in terms of grain yield and adaptability, three way cross prospective
genotypes were able to be upgrading replacements for OPV cultivar throughout Indonesia. Meanwhile,
their single cross counterpart still hard to compete BISI 18. Even the best prospective SSUSX48274
5
which was significantly better than BISI 18, were defeated by BISI 18 at 4 locations (Kutalimbaru,
Labruk Kidul, Kuta Bangun and Maesan), but defeated BISI 18 at the rest 12 locations. The rest 5 single
cross prospective defeated each other with BISI 18 across all locations. It could be concluded that in
terms of grain yield and adaptability, all single cross prospective genotypes perform at least equal to
BISI 18.
In order to be accepted by maize farmers all over Indonesian Archipelago with its agro-climate
diversity besides superior in term of grain yield, prospective genotypes had to possess high stability
across those diverse environments. According to [15] new genotype is considered performing high
stability if bi lies between -1 < 0 < 1. As stated in Table 4, it can be seen that superior prospective
genotype SSUSX48274 performed the highest grain yield and stable in all location although it tent to
produce higher grain yield in more fertile soil when environment was favourable.
Table 4. Regression components of all genotypes

Composite Yield
No. Genotype bi (x variable) Intercept
(kg/ha)
1 SSU3X17782 0,1068 10.267 8.490
2 SSU3X28871 0,4092 5.699 9.173
3 SSU3X29131 -0,1669 12.591 11.173
4 SSU3X30735 -0,1725 10.518 9.053
5 SSU3X45172 0,1573 9.288 10.623
6 SSU3X68276 -0,0627 12.070 11.538
7 SSUSX02791 -0,0941 13.162 12.363
8 SSUSX06145 -0,0434 13.821 13.451
9 SSUSX48274 0,4412 12.020 15.766
10 SSUSX68849 0,6311 7.139 12.498
11 SSUSX76844 -0,5035 17.150 12.875
12 BISI18 -0,0983 13.329 12.495
13 Sukmaraga -0,1095 6.681 5.752
Average 0,0381 11.056 11.173
Six prospective genotypes (SSUSX48274, SSUSX06145, SSUSX76844, SSUSX68849,

SSUSX02791 and SSU3X68276) produced higher grain yield compared to average composite grain
yield but only 4 prospective genotypes which performed better and equal stability with BISI 18, which
were SSUSX48274, SSUSX06145, SSUSX76844 and SSUSX68849. All three way cross prospective
genotypes performed better than Control Cultivar Sukmaraga, but only 2 of them lied above average
composite grain yield and had similar stability compared to Sukmaraga. Three three-way cross which
were SSU3X68276, SSU3X29131 and SSU3X30735 tent to perform slightly better at sub-optimal soil
and unfavourable environment with bi range from -0,1725 to -0,0627.
4. Conclusions
Base on the above stated result and discussion regarding grain yield, adaptability and stability can
conclude as follows: 1. Four prospective genotypes which performed better or equal with BISI 18, which
were SSUSX48274, SSUSX06145, SSUSX76844 and SSUSX68849 can be released as new national
superior varieties to compete with BISI 18 in maize production centre of Indonesia. 2. All of three -way
cross genotypes can be released as new national superior varieties in order to upgrade cultivar in
development maize areas which mostly sub-optimal soil and located remotely from feed industries.
References
[1] Statistic Indonesia 2016 Foreign Trade Statistical Bulletin: Imports Jakarta Indonesia: BPS-
Statistic Indonesia
Statistic Indonesia
[3] Göltenboth, F, KH Timotius, PP Milan, and J Margraf 2006 Ecology of Insular Southeast Asia.
Elsevier BV Amsterdam The Netherlands
6
[4] Rigg, J 1997 Southeast Asia: The Human Landscape of Modernization and Development
[5] Ministry of Agriculture 2008 The Release Procedure of Food Crop Varieties Jakarta Indonesia:
Directorate General of Food Crops
[6] Ministry of Agriculture 2013 Descriptions of Corn Varieties Jakarta Indonesia: Agency
Agricultural Research and Development
[7] Ali, Q, M Ahsan, NH Khan, M Waseem and F Ali 2014 "An overview of Zea mays for the
improvement of yield and quality traits through conventional breeding" Nature and Sci. vol.
12, no. 8
[8] Abate, T, B Shiferaw, A Menkir, D Wegary, Y Kebede, K Tsfaye, M Kassie, G Bogale, B
Tadesse, T Keno 2015 Factors that transformed maize productivity in Ethiopia International
Maize and Wheat Improvement Center Mexico City
[9] Setyawan, B., I Suliansyah, A Anwar, and E Swasti 2016 Agronomic Characters, Yield
Components and Grain Yield Evaluation of 11 New Hybrid Maize Prospective Genotypes.
International Journal on Advanced Science, Engineering and Information Technology Vol.6
(4): 483-488
[10] Aqil, M dan RY Arvan 2014 Deskripsi Varietas Unggul Jagung. Badan Litbang Pertanian, Jakarta
[11] Setyawan, B, I Suliansyah, A Anwar, and E Swasti 2016 Preliminary Trial of 11 New Hybrid
Maize Genotype to the Resistance on Java Downy Mildew (Peronosclerospora maydis)
International Journal on Advanced Science, Engineering and Information Technology Vol.6
(2): 2088-5334.
[12] Setyawan, B, I Suliansyah, A Anwar, and E Swasti 2016 Short Communication: Resistance of
eleven new hybrid maize genotypes to Turcicum leaf blight (Exserohilum turcicum) BIO
DIVERSITAS Volume 17 (2): 604-608
[13] CIMMYT 1999 Managing Trials and Reporting Data for CIMMYT’s International Maize Testing
Program Mexico City Mexico: International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center
[14] Badu-Apraku, B, MAB Fakorede, A Menkir, and D Sanogo, editors 2012. Conduct and
Management of Maize Field Trials IITA Ibadan Nigeria
[15] Finlay, KW and GN Wilkinson 1963 The analysis of adaptation in a plant breeding programme.
Aust. J. Agric. Res. 14, 742-754
[16] Freeling, M dan V Walbot 1994 The Maize Handbook Springer-Verlag New York USA.
[17] Hallauer, AR 2008 Corn Breeding Iowa State Research Farm Progress Reports Paper 549.
[18] Bennetzen, JL dan S Hake 2009 Handbook of Maize: Its Biology Springer Science + Business
Media New York USA
[19] MacRobert, JF, PS Setimela, J Gethi dan M Worku 2014 Maize Hybrid Seed Production Manual
International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center, Mexico City
[20] Ibeawuchi, II, E Matthews-Njoku, O Miriam, Anyanwu, P Chinyere and V NOnyia 2008 Plant
Spacing, Dry Matter Accumulation and Yield of Local and Improved Maize Cultivars Mexico
City Mexico: International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center.
[21] Priana, H, R Dwiastuti, and R Isaskar 2012 Loyality Level Analysis on Maize Seed Brand in
Trayang, Ngronggot, Nganjuk.Brawijaya University Malang
[22] Badu-Apraku, B, MAB Fakorede and M Oyekunle 2014 Agronomic traits associated with genetic
gains in maize yield during three breeding eras in West Africa, Maydica 59
[23] Ministry of Agriculture 2016 Technical Guidelines for The Development of Hybrid Corn Jakarta
Indonesia: Directorate General of Food Crops
[24] Bahadori, A, HR Mobasser dan HR Ganjali 2015 Influence of Water Stress and Plant Density on
some Characteristics in Corn Biological Forum 7(1): 673-678
[25] Kumar, A, J Kumari, JC Rana, D Paul, R Kumar, H Singh and TP Singh 2014 "Variation in
agronomic performance and grain quality of Indian maize landraces of high altitude region of
Jammu Kashmir and Himachal Pradesh," Maize Genetics Cooperation Newsletter vol. 88, pp.
1-11
[26] Le Gall, H., F Philippe, J Domon, F Gillet, J Pelloux and C Rayon 2015 Cell Wall Metabolism
7
in Response to Abiotic Stress Plants 4: 112-166

[27] BMKG 2017 Prakiraan Cuaca Badan Meteorologi, Klimatologi, dan Geofisika Jakarta
Statistic Indonesia

Multilocation Trial

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Multilocation Trial

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS

Grain Yield, Stability and Adaptability of 11 Prospective Genotypes

View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 178.171.45.169 on 09/11/2019 at 01:06

Grain Yield, Stability and Adaptability of 11 Prospective

Budi Setyawan1, Irfan Suliansyah1(a), Aswaldi Anwar1, and Etti Swasti1

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Location and Time of Research

Table 1. Description of the research locations

2.2. Research Materials and Methods

3. Result and Discussion

Table 3. Grain yield of all genotypes at all locations

Table 4. Regression components of all genotypes

Six prospective genotypes (SSUSX48274, SSUSX06145, SSUSX76844, SSUSX68849,

in Response to Abiotic Stress Plants 4: 112-166

You might also like