2007•Crop ScienceRequires access

GGE Biplot vs. AMMI Analysis of Genotype‐by‐Environment Data

Weikai Yan, Manjit S. Kang, B. L., SHEILA M. WOODS, P. L. Cornelius

Open publisher page 1,415 citations

Abstract

ABSTRACT The use of genotype main effect (G) plus genotype‐by‐environment (GE) interaction (G+GE) biplot analysis by plant breeders and other agricultural researchers has increased dramatically during the past 5 yr for analyzing multi‐environment trial (MET) data. Recently, however, its legitimacy was questioned by a proponent of Additive Main Effect and Multiplicative Interaction (AMMI) analysis. The objectives of this review are: (i) to compare GGE biplot analysis and AMMI analysis on three aspects of genotype‐by‐environment data (GED) analysis, namely mega‐environment analysis, genotype evaluation, and test‐environment evaluation; (ii) to discuss whether G and GE should be combined or separated in these three aspects of GED analysis; and (iii) to discuss the role and importance of model diagnosis in biplot analysis of GED. Our main conclusions are: (i) both GGE biplot analysis and AMMI analysis combine rather than separate G and GE in mega‐environment analysis and genotype evaluation, (ii) the GGE biplot is superior to the AMMI1 graph in mega‐environment analysis and genotype evaluation because it explains more G+GE and has the inner‐product property of the biplot, (iii) the discriminating power vs. representativeness view of the GGE biplot is effective in evaluating test environments, which is not possible in AMMI analysis, and (iv) model diagnosis for each dataset is useful, but accuracy gain from model diagnosis should not be overstated.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

ABSTRACT The use of genotype main effect (G) plus genotype‐by‐environment (GE) interaction (G+GE) biplot analysis by plant breeders and other agricultural researchers has increased dramatically during the past 5 yr for analyzing multi‐environment trial (MET) data. Recently, however, its legitimacy was questioned by a proponent of Additive Main Effect and Multiplicative Interaction (AMMI) analysis. The objectives of this review are: (i) to compare GGE biplot analysis and AMMI analysis on three aspects of genotype‐by‐environment data (GED) analysis, namely mega‐environment analysis, genotype evaluation, and test‐environment evaluation; (ii) to discuss whether G and GE should be combined or separated in these three aspects of GED analysis; and (iii) to discuss the role and importance of model diagnosis in biplot analysis of GED. Our main conclusions are: (i) both GGE biplot analysis and AMMI analysis combine rather than separate G and GE in mega‐environment analysis and genotype evaluation, (ii) the GGE biplot is superior to the AMMI1 graph in mega‐environment analysis and genotype evaluation because it explains more G+GE and has the inner‐product property of the biplot, (iii) the discriminating power vs. representativeness view of the GGE biplot is effective in evaluating test environments, which is not possible in AMMI analysis, and (iv) model diagnosis for each dataset is useful, but accuracy gain from model diagnosis should not be overstated.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1415 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

ABSTRACT The use of genotype main effect (G) plus genotype‐by‐environment (GE) interaction (G+GE) biplot analysis by plant breeders and other agricultural researchers has increased dramatically during the past 5 yr for analyzing multi‐environment trial (MET) data. Recently, however, its legitimacy was questioned by a proponent of Additive Main Effect and Multiplicative Interaction (AMMI) analysis. The objectives of this review are: (i) to compare GGE biplot analysis and AMMI analysis on three aspects of genotype‐by‐environment data (GED) analysis, namely mega‐environment analysis, genotype evaluation, and test‐environment evaluation; (ii) to discuss whether G and GE should be combined or separated in these three aspects of GED analysis; and (iii) to discuss the role and importance of model diagnosis in biplot analysis of GED. Our main conclusions are: (i) both GGE biplot analysis and AMMI analysis combine rather than separate G and GE in mega‐environment analysis and genotype evaluation, (ii) the GGE biplot is superior to the AMMI1 graph in mega‐environment analysis and genotype evaluation because it explains more G+GE and has the inner‐product property of the biplot, (iii) the discriminating power vs. representativeness view of the GGE biplot is effective in evaluating test environments, which is not possible in AMMI analysis, and (iv) model diagnosis for each dataset is useful, but accuracy gain from model diagnosis should not be overstated.

Key concepts: Biplot, Ammi, Main effect, Gene–environment interaction, Statistics, Genotype, Biology, Biotechnology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
GGE Biplot vs. AMMI Analysis of Genotype‐by‐Environment Data — Research Paper | ScholarLens