Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 490

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mean Performance and Stability in Multi‐Environment Trials I: Combining Features of AMMI and BLUP Techniques

Olivoto, Tiago, Lúcio, Alessandro D.C., da Silva, José A.G., Marchioro, Volmir S., de Souza, Velci Q., Jost, Evandro·2019·Agronomy Journal

Abstract

Additive main effect and multiplicative interaction (AMMI) and best linear unbiased prediction (BLUP) are popular methods for analyzing multi‐environment trials (MET). The AMMI has nice graphical tools for modeling genotype‐vs.‐environment interaction (GEI) but fails in some aspects, such as accommodating a linear mixed‐effect model (LMM) structure. The BLUP provides reliable estimates but new insights to deal graphically with a random GEI structure are needed. This article compares the predictive success of BLUP and AMMI, shows how to generate biplots for modeling GEI in MET analysis using LMM, and proposes a new quantitative genotypic stability measure called WAASB, which is the W eighted A verage of A bsolute S cores from the singular value decomposition of the matrix of BLUPs for the GEI effects generated by an LMM. We also introduced the theoretical basis of a superiority index that allows weighting between mean performance and stability, which was conveniently called WAASBY. The B LUP was found to outperform AMMI in the analysis of four real MET trials. The application of our indexes is illustrated using an oat (Avena sativa L.) MET dataset. It was shown that reliable measures of stability using WAASB may help breeders and agronomists to make correct decisions when selecting or recommending genotypes. In addition, the simultaneous selection index, WAASBY, will be useful when the selection should consider different weights for stability and mean performance. Some advantages over existing statistics are discussed. Finally, the implementation of the procedures of this article in future studies is facilitated by an R package containing all required functions. Core Ideas The predictive accuracy of BLUP and AMMI was investigated using four real datasets. BLUP was found to outperform AMMI in all datasets analyzed. A genotypic stability index that inherits the principles of AMMI and BLUP was proposed. A superiority index that allows weighting between mean performance and stability was proposed. An R package with useful functions for MET analysis is presented.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2134/agronj2019.03.0220

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 30 references

Metadata

Authors
Olivoto, T., Lúcio, A. D. C., da Silva, J. A. G., Marchioro, V. S., de Souza, V. Q., & Jost, E.
Venue
Agronomy Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-11
Volume
111
Issue
6
Pages
2949-2960
ISSN
  • 0002-1962 (ISSN-L)
  • 1435-0645
OpenAlex
W2973747394
Cited by
490
References
30
FWCI
15.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Mean Performance and Stability in Multi‐Environment Trials I: Combining Features of AMMI and BLUP Techniques. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2134/agronj2019.03.0220
The paper
Olivoto, T., Lúcio, A. D. C., da Silva, J. A. G., Marchioro, V. S., de Souza, V. Q., & Jost, E. (2019). Mean Performance and Stability in Multi‐Environment Trials I: Combining Features of AMMI and BLUP Techniques. Agronomy Journal. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2019.03.0220

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.