Abstract
Due to the ongoing global warming, maize production worldwide is expected to be heavily inflicted by droughts. The grain yield of maize hybrids is an important factor in evaluating their suitability and stability. In this study, we utilized the AMMI model and GGE biplot to analyze grain yield of 20 hybrids from the three tested environments in Inner Mongolia in 2018 and 2019, aiming at selecting drought-tolerant maize hybrids. AMMI variance analysis revealed highly significant difference on main effects for genotype, environment, and their interaction. Furthermore, G11 (DK159) and G15 (JKY3308) exhibited favorable productivity and stability across all three test environments. Moreover, G10 (LH1) emerged as the most stable hybrid according to the AMMI analysis and the GGE biplot. Bayannur demonstrated the highest identification ability among the three tested sites. Our study provides accurate identification for drought-resilient maize hybrids in different rain-fed regions. These findings can contribute to the selection of appropriate hybrids that exhibit productivity, stability, and adaptability in drought-prone conditions.
Similar content being viewed by others
Introduction
Water scarcity, large fluctuations in weather patterns, and the unpredictable nature of drought pose a crucial threat to maize production worldwide1,2. Maize is the most important cereal crop in China, with the latest estimation indicating a total annual production of approximately 270–280 million tons3. In 2021, there were 175 million spring maize among them. Drought-related production losses range from 5 to 30% annually in China's northwest and southwest maize-producing regions, which provide almost one-third of the country's spring maize grain yield4. Maize is such a substantial crop for both food and feed purposes in the world, there is tremendous interest in and demand for improving maize drought tolerance5.
In the multi-location trials of crop breeding, evaluating yield potential and stability is crucial for assessing the value of promoting new varieties6,7. Variance analysis and multiple comparisons of yield allow for easy measurement of yield differences among varieties. However, the stability of varieties primarily arises from the genotype-environment interaction (G × E) effect. G × E analysis enable to evaluate genotype stability and adaptability in terms of yield and yield-related traits8,9. Genotype effects are influenced by both genotype and environment, as well as their interaction10. The environment often impacts the potential genetic effects of traits, particularly in interfering with artificial selection of quantitative traits such as yield, leading to diminished genetic effects in the offspring7. G × E analysis aids breeders in evaluating new varieties in representative growing environments, facilitating the identification of varieties with broad adaptability11,12. Moreover, G × E analysis also holds significant value in the final selection stage of core breeding materials.
Currently, there are several statistical methods widely used to analyze G × E effects, including the additive main effects and multiplicative interaction model (AMMI) and the genotype + genotype-by-environment (GGE) biplot analysis13,14. The AMMI analysis utilizes principal component analysis (PCA) to minimize the dimensionality of the data. This model is extensively applied in analyzing yield traits across multi-location in variety selecting trials and breeding test experiments. On the other hand, the GGE biplot provides a graphical representation of G × E effects, allowing for visual identification of patterns, relationships, and outliers, facilitating the interpretation and communication of results. However, both AMMI15 and GGE16,17 model are only representative when two principal components (PCs) are significant. To address this, optimizations have been made, such as the use of two PCs for AMMI stability index (ASI) and AMMI stability value (ASV), in order to better showcase genotype stability18,19. Furthermore, several selection indices have been developed to choose genotypes with high yield stability, such as Bajpai Index20, simultaneous selection index (SSI)21, and non-parametric genotype selection index22, which utilize stability parameters and grain yield data to guide simultaneous selection for stability and high yield23.
Multi-location trials for selecting drought tolerant maize hybrid were conducted in Inner Mongolia during the year 2018 and 2019. In this study, the AMMI model and GGE biplot were applied to assess grain yield data obtained from 3 rain-fed environments over two years trails. The main objectives were to evaluate the impact of G × E interaction and identify drought tolerant genotypes with high grain yield, stability and narrow or broad adaptability. Additionally, the study aimed to provide drought-resilient hybrids for spring maize cultivation in rain-fed regions of China or similar environments.
Materials and methods
Plant materials and experimental site
A total of 20 hybrids, including 19 tested hybrids and one control hybrid (XY335), were used in the drought-tolerant maize hybrid selection trials conducted in Inner Mongolia. The experiment took place over two planting seasons in 2018 and 2019. The hybrids were planted at three different locations: Hangjinhouqi Experimental Station of Bayannur Academy of Agriculture and Animal Husbandry Sciences, Bayannur (107.15°, 40.88°, sandy soil with a pH of 7.4, bulk density of 1,584 kg.m−3, organic carbon content of 0.17% m/m, and organic matter content of 13.15 g/kg); Maize Research Center of Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Salaqi (110.52°, 40.56°, sandy soil with a pH of 7.2, bulk density of 1,578 kg.m−3, organic carbon content of 0.23% m/m, and organic matter content of 14.17 g/kg); and Chengzi Experimental Station of Chifeng Academy of Agriculture Sciences, Chifeng (118.93°, 42.29°, sandy soil with a pH of 7.1, bulk density of 1,586 kg.m−3, organic carbon content of 0.21% m/m, and organic matter content of 13.63 g/kg). This constituted a 2-year, three-location trial, the pedigree information of 20 tested hybrids and the rainfalls of three locations are shown in Tables 1 and 2. Collection of plant material, must fully comply with relevant institutional, national, and international guidelines and legislation.
Experimental design
The experiment was conducted using a randomized complete block design. The 20 tested hybrids underwent two replications of drought-tolerant trials. The experimental plots were arranged in four rows, with a row spacing of 60 cm and a row length of 5 m. The planting density was determined to be 75,000 plants per hectare. Four protective rows were included around the experimental area. The plants were only watered before sowing, and no additional irrigation was provided throughout the entire growth period. During harvest, the two middle rows were selected, and the first and last plants from each row were removed for yield measurement.
Statistical analysis
In this experiment, the AMMI model was employed to analyze the interaction between genotypes and environments, effectively capturing the interaction components of each genotype or environment. The AMMI model for analyzing yield data in maize hybrids is represented by the following equation10,24:
where Yge represents the yield of genotype (G) in the environment (E); μ is thegrand mean; αg is the genotype average deviation; λn is the eigenvalue of the nthprincipal component (PCA) axis, N is the total number of PCA, γgn and ηen are the genotype and environmental PCA scores for the n th PCA axis, and θge is the residual.
The AMMI stability value (ASV) was calculated according to Purchase, Hatting and Van Deventer18,25 as follows:
where SS is the sum of squares of the IPCAs and IPCA1 and IPCA2 are the first and second interaction principal component axes, respectively. Means of the genotypes were used for GGE biplot analysis.
GGE biplot: The grain yield data collected from three experimental sites were organized into a three-column data table of genotype-environment-yield, where each value represents the average yield of the corresponding genotype in the respective environment, known as the phenotype value (Yger). The linear statistical model for GGE biplot analysis is presented as follows16,26:
where Yger represents the yield value of genotype g in environment e for the rth replication; μ is the overall mean; βe represents the main effect of environment e; ρge is the residual of genotype g in environment e; εger represents the overall error; λn is the singular value of the nth principal component; γgn is the genotype g’s score for the nth eigenvector; δge is the environment e's score for the nth eigenvector. The parameters λnγgn and γnδen are defined as the GGE principal component scores for genotype g and environment e, respectively, also known as IPCAn or PCn. The data analysis was performed using Microsoft Excel 365 and Genstat 23 software on the Windows operating system.
Results
AMMI analysis of grain yield for drought-resilient maize hybrid selection
The average grain yield differences of the experimental hybrids varied widely, ranging from 8.46 to 15.94 ton per hectare. Table 3 displays the two-year grain yield of the 20 maize hybrids across three environments in Inner Mongolia. AMMI variance analysis revealed highly significant (P < 0.001) main effects for genotype, environment, and their interaction. The interaction between genotypes and environments were decomposed into interaction principal component axes 1 (IPCA1), interaction principal component axes 2 (IPCA2) and interaction principal component axes 3 (IPCA3) (Table 4). IPCA1 and IPCA2 were found to be highly significant, explaining 59.51% and 37.34% of the total variation of G × E interaction (Fig. 1a), respectively. G11 (DK159) exhibited the highest average yield across all tested sites (Fig. 1b and Table 3) and also demonstrated broad adaptability, as indicated by its proximity to the origin (Fig. 1a). In contrast, G16 and G13 were highly influenced by environmental interaction (Fig. 1a). All of the environments were positioned far from the origin, indicating strong interaction forces with genotype, and the angles between the tested environments suggested distinctiveness in selecting drought-tolerant hybrids (Fig. 1a).
GGE biplot analysis of G × E interaction
Which won where model
A “which-won-where” polygon view was presented, illustrating the relationship between genotypes and environments (Fig. 2). The biplot analysis accounted for 76.84% of the total observed variation, with 50.02% explained by the first principal component (PC1), and 26.82% by the second principal component (PC2). Genotypes G11, G9, G3, G18, G17 and G16 were situated at the corners of the “which-won-where” polygon, indicating their exceptional performance in specific environments (Yan and Ticker. 2006). Among these genotypes, G11 exhibited the highest grain yield in four out of six tested environments: Ba18, Ba19, Sa18, and Sa19. The CK (G9) outperformed in terms of yield in the Cf18 and Cf19 environments(Fig. 2).
Environmental vector view
The "Environmental vector view" function plot of GGE biplot was utilized to analyze the hybrids. The angles between the Ba and Cf environments were greater than 90 degrees, suggesting a negative correlation and opposite ranking of hybrids between these two environments (Fig. 3). On the other hand, the angles between all other environments were less than 90 degrees, indicating a positive correlation among them. The length of the environmental line represents the discrimination ability of the test sites for the hybrids. Among the test environments, Ba18 had the strongest the discrimination ability (Table S1). The mega-environment function plot revealed that Cf formed a distinct type, while Ba and Sa belonged to another type (Fig. 2 and Supplemental Fig. 1).
Ranking biplot mean vs stability view
In the positive direction, the biplot indicates that G11 has the closest projection onto the Average Environment Coordinate (AEC) axis, suggesting G11 exhibited significantly higher yield compared to the other hybrids. The stability analysis of each hybrid shows that G10 have the shortest perpendicular distance to the AEC axis, indicating the highest stability in yield. Conversely, G16 and G3 have the longest vertical distance, indicating the lowest stability in grain yield (Fig. 4).
Best hybrid and best environment by GGE biplot
Based on the best genotype comparison biplot, the top-performing hybrid across the three tested environments was G10, followed by G15 and G11, which consistently displayed above-average grain yield in all environments (Fig. 5a). Other desirable genotypes, including G9 and G19, which were located on the second concentric circles, respectively. The AEC view comparing environments relative to an ideal environment is presents. It indicates that environments Sa18 and Sa19 were closer to the center of the concentric circle (Fig. 5b). Compared to the other two locations, Salaqi was identified as the ideal environment (Fig. 5b).
Discussion
The significant G × E effects observed in recent study indicate that the evaluated genotypes do not exhibit consistent performance across different test environments27,28,29,30. This highlights the importance of investigating the nature and magnitude of G × E, which cannot be adequately captured by a standard analysis of variance18,31. The AMMI model, which combines PCA and analysis of variance, allows for a comprehensive analysis of genotype and environment interactions and facilitates the identification of interaction patterns32. IPCA1 of our AMMI analysis contributed 59.51% to the total variation across the tested environments, which implies genotypes and environments have strong interaction33. IPCA1 and IPCA2 accounted for 96.85% of the interaction sum of squares. As a result, IPCA3 did not achieve significantly difference (Table 4). AMMI with the first two multiplicative terms was deemed to be the best predictive model in a previous study24. On the other hand, the GGE biplot visually presents data in a graph form, providing an intuitive visualization of the specific characteristics of varieties7,27. It complements the AMMI model by offering a graphical representation that facilitates the interpretation of G × E interactions28,30.
The AMMI stability values, such as the ASI and ASV, provide additional information on the variation among genotypes20. The genotypes with ASV values close to zero are considered stable34. In our study, G15 (JKY3308) exhibited an ASV of 3.906, suggesting it may possess genes for adaptability to various agroclimatic conditions (Table S2). However, it is important to note that while G15 ranked as one of the top stable hybrids based on the GGE biplot (Fig. 5), it may not be the most stable hybrid. Therefore, there might be some differences in the results obtained from the AMMI and GGE biplot analyses. To obtain a more reliable analysis, breeders often combine the insights gained from both approaches7,35,36.
The selection of appropriate test locations plays a crucial role in crop breeding programs37,38. The effectiveness and accuracy of variety selection are directly influenced by the identification ability of the test environments39. In this study, we focused on evaluating three rain-fed regions in Inner Mongolia, each characterized by distinct geographical and ecological conditions, using the AMMI model and GGE biplot (Fig. 1a). An environment with long vector and limited angle offers a richer and more accurate representation38. Our findings revealed that the test site in Bayannur demonstrated a stronger overall identification ability throughout the two-year period compared to the other two environments (Fig. 3, Tables 2 and S1). This can be attributed to factors such as lower average annual rainfall and significant day-night temperature differences in Bayannur. In future studies, we intend to incorporate additional ecological test environments and rainproof chambers to further enhance our drought tolerant hybrids identification programs. This will allow us to accurately evaluate the stability and adaptability of hybrids or elite inbred lines. By expanding the scope of our evaluations, we aim to improve the precision and reliability of hybrid selection in maize breeding.
Conclusion
Our comprehensive analysis has revealed insights into the performance of maize in the drought-tolerant hybrid selection trials by AMMI model and GGE biplot. AMMI variance analysis revealed highly significant difference on main effects for genotype and environment. G11 (DK159) and G15 (JKY3308) exhibited highest productivity and stability among 20 hybrids. G10 (LH1) was identified as the most stable hybrid across the three test environments. Three test sites belong to distinctive rain-fed types and Bayannur test site exhibited the highest identification ability among them. The integration of the AMMI model and GGE biplot has provided a robust and comprehensive approach for evaluating and identification of drought-resilient maize hybrids in drought-prone regions of China or similar environments.
Data availability
All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article and its supplementary information files.
References
Wang, X. et al. Genetic variation in ZmVPP1 contributes to drought tolerance in maize seedlings. Nat. Genet. 48, 1233–1241. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.3636 (2016).
Boyer, J. S. et al. The US drought of 2012 in perspective: A call to action. Glob. Food Sec. 2, 139–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2013.08.002 (2013).
Pickson, R. B., Gui, P., Chen, A. & Boateng, E. Empirical analysis of rice and maize production under climate change in China. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 29, 70242–70261. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-20722-z (2022).
Yu, C. China’s water crisis needs more than words. Nature 470, 307–307. https://doi.org/10.1038/470307a (2011).
Gao, H. et al. Natural variations of ZmSRO1d modulate the trade-off between drought resistance and yieldby affecting ZmRBOHC-mediated stomatal ROS production in maize. Mol. Plant 15, 1558–1574. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molp.2022.08.009 (2022).
Adewale, B. D., Okonji, C., Oyekanmi, A. A., Akintobi, D. A. C. & Aremu, C. O. Genotypic variability and stability of some grain yield components of Cowpea. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 5, 874–880. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJAR.9000374 (2010).
Oladosu, Y. et al. Genotype×Environment interaction and stability analyses of yield and yield components of established and mutant rice genotypes tested in multiple locations in Malaysia. Acta Agric. Scand. B Soil Plant Sci. 67, 590–606. https://doi.org/10.1080/09064710.2017.1321138 (2017).
Ali, Y., Aslam, Z., Hussain, F. & Shakur, A. Genotype and environmental interaction in cowpea (Vigna Unguiculata-L) for yield and disease resistance. IJEST 1, 119–123. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03325824 (2004).
Aremu, C. O., Ariyo, O. J. & Adewale, B. D. Assessment of selection techniques in genotype X environment interaction in cowpea Vigna unguiculata (L.) walp. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 2, 352–355. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJAR.9000075 (2007).
Horn, L., Shimelis, H., Sarsu, F., Mwadzingeni, L. & Laing, M. D. Genotype-by-environment interaction for grain yield among novel cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.) selections derived by gamma irradiation. Crop J. 6, 306–313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cj.2017.10.002 (2018).
De Vita, P. et al. Genetic improvement effects on yield stability in durum wheat genotypes grown in Italy. Field Crops Res. 119, 68–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2010.06.016 (2010).
Karimizadeh, R. et al. GGE biplot analysis of yield stability in multi-environment trials of lentil genotypes under rainfed condition. Not. Sci. Biol. 5, 256–262. https://doi.org/10.15835/nsb529067 (2013).
Yan, W., Kang, M. S., Ma, B., Wood, S. & Cornelius, P. L. GGE biplot vs. AMMI analysis of genotype-by-environment data. Crop Sci. 47, 643–653. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2006.06.0374 (2007).
Yan, W. & Tinker, N. A. Biplot analysis of multi-environment trial data: Principles and applications. Can. J. Plant Sci. 86, 623–645. https://doi.org/10.4141/P05-169 (2006).
Gauch, H. G. Model selection and validation for yield trials with interaction. Biometrics 44, 705. https://doi.org/10.2307/2531585 (1988).
Yan, W., Hunt, L. A., Sheng, Q. & Szlavnics, Z. Cultivar evaluation and mega-environment investigation based on the GGE biplot. Crop Sci. 40, 597–605. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2000.403597x (2000).
Yan, W. & Kang, M. S. GGE Biplot Analysis: A Graphical Tool for Breeders, Geneticists, and Agronomists (CRC Press, 2002). https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420040371.
Purchase, J. L., Hatting, H. & Van Deventer, C. S. Genotype × environment interaction of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in South Africa: II. Stability analysis of yield performance. S. Afr. J. Plant Soil. 17, 101–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/02571862.2000.10634878 (2000).
Tumuhimbise, R., Melis, R., Shanahan, P. & Kawuki, R. Genotype×environment interaction efects on early fresh storage root yield and related traits in cassava. Crop J. 2, 329–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cj.2014.04.008 (2014).
Bajpai, P. K. & Prabhakaran, V. T. A new procedure of simultaneous selection for high yielding and stable crop genotypes. Ind. J. Genet. 60, 141–146 (2000).
Rao, A. R. & Prabhakaran, V. T. Simultaneous selection of cultivars for yield and stability in crop improvement trials. Ind. J. Genet. 67, 161–165 (2007).
Farshadfar, E. Incorporation of AMMI stability value and grain yield in a single non-parametric index (GSI) in bread wheat. Pak. J. Biol. Sci. 11, 1791–1796. https://doi.org/10.3923/pjbs.2008.1791.1796 (2008).
Anuradha, N. et al. Comparative study of AMMI-and BLUP-based simultaneous selection for grain yield and stability of finger millet [Eleusine coracana (L.) Gaertn.] genotypes. Front. Plant Sci. 12, 786839. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2021.786839 (2022).
Zobel, R. W., Wright, M. J. & Gauch, H. G. Statistical analysis of a yield trial. Agron. J. 80, 388–393. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1988.00021962008000030002x (1988).
Mekonnen, T. W., Mekbib, F., Amsalu, B., Gedil, M. & Labuschagne, M. Genotype by environment interaction and grain yield stability of drought tolerant cowpea landraces in Ethiopia. Euphytica 218, 57–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-022-03011-1 (2022).
Yan, W. GGE biplot vs. AMMI graphs for genotype-by-environment data analysis. J. Indian Soc. Agric. Stat. 65, 183–193 (2011).
Khan, M. M. H., Rafii, M. Y., Ramlee, S. I., Jusoh, M. & Mamun, M. AMMI and GGE biplot analysis for yield performance and stability assessment of selected Bambara groundnut (Vigna subterranea L. Verdc) genotypes under the multi-environmental trials (METs). Sci. Rep. 11, 22791. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-11781-w (2021).
Kumar, A. et al. Precision agriculture innovation focuses on sustainability using GGE biplot and AMMI analysis to evaluate GE interaction for quality essential oil yield in Eucalyptus citriodora Hook. Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 107, 104603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bse.2023.104603 (2023).
Mohammadi, R., Jafarzadeh, J., Poursiahbidi, M. M., Hossein, H. & Ahmed, A. Genotype-by-environment interaction and stability analysis for grain yield in durum wheat using GGE biplot and genotypic and environmental covariates. Agric. Res. 6, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40003-023-00661-y (2023).
Zhang, H. et al. Genotype by environment interaction for grain yield in foxtail millet (Setarai italica) using AMMI model and GGE biplot. Plant Growth Regul. 99, 101–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10725-022-00885-y (2023).
Gauch, H. G. A simple protocol for AMMI analysis of yield trials. Crop Sci. 53, 1860–1869. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2013.04.0241 (2013).
Gupta, V. et al. AMMI and GGE biplot analysis of yield under terminal heat tolerance in wheat. Mol. Biol. Rep. 50, 3459–3467. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11033-023-08298-4 (2023).
Crossa, J. Statistical analysis of multi-location trials. Adv. Agron. 44, 55–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2113(08)60818-4 (1990).
Mahmodi, N., Yaghotipoor, A. & Farshadfar, E. AMMI stability value and simultaneous estimation of yield and yield stability in bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Aust. J. Crop Sci. 5, 1837–1844. https://doi.org/10.3316/informit.005709931410019 (2011).
Gerrano, A. et al. Genotype and genotype × environment interaction efects on the grain yield performance of cowpea genotypes in dryland farming system in South Africa. Euphytica 216, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-020-02611-z (2020).
Ajay, B. C. et al. Evaluation of genotype×environment interaction and yield stability analysis in peanut under phosphorus stress condition using stability parameters of AMMI model. Agric. Res. 9, 477–486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40003-020-00458-3 (2020).
Yan, W. A systematic narration of some key concepts and procedures in plant breeding. Front. Plant Sci. 12, 724517. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2021.724517 (2021).
Yan, W., Kang, M. S., Ma, B., Woods, S. & Cornelius, P. GGE biplot vs AMMI analysis of genotype-by-environment data. Crop Sci. 47, 643–655. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2006.06.0374 (2007).
Mohammadi, R. & Amri, A. Comparison of parametric and non-parametric methods for selecting stable and adapted durum wheat genotypes in variable environments. Euphytica 159, 419–432. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-007-9600-6 (2008).
Acknowledgements
We thank Ruilian Wang in Bayannur Academy of Agriculture and Animal Husbandry Sciences, Fansheng Meng and Hao Zhang in Chifeng Academy of Agriculture Sciences for their help and support in field material planting and phenotype collection.
Funding
This study was financially supported by Inner Mongolia Education Department (BR22-11-02), National Key Research Program (2017YFD0300802) and National Natural Science Foundation of China (32260511).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Y.L. and H.B. conducted field testing and collected phenotype data, analyzed data, and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. Z.X. participated in the data analysis. S.H. contributed to the field management. Z.W. and J.S. contributed suggestions for the project and revised the first draft. X.Y. and J.G. conceived the project and produced the final version of the manuscript. All authors provided suggestions during revision of the manuscript.
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Li, Y., Bao, H., Xu, Z. et al. AMMI an GGE biplot analysis of grain yield for drought-tolerant maize hybrid selection in Inner Mongolia. Sci Rep 13, 18800 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-46167-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-46167-z
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.