Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
R. Baker (1988)
TESTS FOR CROSSOVER GENOTYPE-ENVIRONMENTAL INTERACTIONSCanadian Journal of Plant Science, 68
B. Westcott (1986)
Some methods of analysing genotype—environment interactionHeredity, 56
D. Zelterman (1990)
On tests for qualitative interactionsStatistics & Probability Letters, 10
K. Kubinger (1986)
A Note on Non‐Parametric Tests for the Interaction in Two‐Way LayoutsBiometrical Journal, 28
J. Hill (1975)
Genotype-environment interaction – a challenge for plant breedingThe Journal of Agricultural Science, 85
Lin Lin, Binns Binns (1994:)
Concepts and methods for analyzing regional trial data for cultivar and location selectionPlant Breed. Rev., 12
G Freeman (1973)
Statistical methods for the analysis of genotype-environment interactions2Heredity, 31
De Kroon De Kroon (1986:)
Rank interactionEncycl. Statist. Sci., 7
J. Crossa (1990)
Statistical analyses of multilocation trialsAdvances in Agronomy, 44
Denis Denis (1982:)
Test de l'interaction sous contraintes d'ordreBiométrie-Praximétrie, 22
Virk Virk, Mangat Mangat (1991:)
Detection of cross over genotype × environment interactions in pearl milletEuphytica, 52
Denis Denis (1979:)
Sous‐modèles interactifs respectant des contraintes d'ordreBiométrie-Praximétrie, 19
Wricke Wricke (1965:)
Die Erfassung der Wechselwirkung zwischen Genotyp und Umwelt bei quantitativen EigenschaftenZ. Pflanzenz., 53
Crossa Crossa, Cornelius Cornelius, Seyedsadr Seyedsadr, Byrne Byrne (1993:)
A shifted multiplicative model cluster analysis for grouping environments without genotypic rank changeTheoret. Appl. Genetics, 85
Gregorius Gregorius, Namkoong Namkoong (1986:)
Joint analysis of genotypic and environmental effectsTheoret. Appl. Genetics, 72
Skrøppa Skrøppa (1984:)
A critical evaluation of methods available to estimate the genotype × environment interactionStudia Forestalia Suecica, 166
Seyedsadr Seyedsadr, Cornelius Cornelius (1992:)
Shifted multiplicative models for nonadditive two‐way tablesComm. Statist. B Simul. Comput., 21
Hildebrand Hildebrand (1980:)
Asymptotisch verteilungsfreie Rangtests in linearen ModellenMed. Inform. Statist., 17
Van Der Laan Van Der Laan (1987:)
Extensive tables with exact critical values of a distribution‐free test for crossover‐interaction in a two‐way layoutBiuletyn Oceny Odmian, 12
Cox Cox (1984:)
InteractionInt. Statist. Rev., 52
Azzalini Azzalini, Cox Cox (1984:)
Two new tests associated with analysis of varianceJ. Royal Statist. Soc. B, 46
G. Freeman (1985)
The analysis and interpretation of interactionsJournal of Applied Statistics, 12
De Kroon De Kroon, Van Der Laan Van Der Laan (1981:)
Distribution‐free test procedures in two‐way layouts; a concept of crossover‐interactionStatist. Neerland., 35
Cornelius Cornelius, Seyedsadr Seyedsadr, Crossa Crossa (1992:)
Using the shifted multiplicative model to search for “separability” in crop cultivar trialsTheoret. Appl. Genetics, 84
M. Gail, R. Simon (1985)
Testing for qualitative interactions between treatment effects and patient subsets.Biometrics, 41 2
M. Hühn, J. Léon (1995)
Nonparametric Analysis of Cultivar Performance Trials: Experimental Results and Comparison of Different Procedures Based on RanksAgronomy Journal, 87
The objective of this study was to compare five statistical procedures (analysis of variance, the Azzalini/Cox test, the Hildebrand procedure, the Kubinger approach, and the de Kroon/van der Laan technique) for the analysis of genotype × environment interactions in cross‐classified data sets from cultivar performance yield trials with rows = cultivars and columns = environments (locations and/or years). The procedures Hildebrand, Kubinger and de Kroon/van der Laan are non‐parametric methods based on ranks, while analysis of variance and the Azzalini/Cox test proceed from the original absolute yield data. These very different statistical techniques were applied to extensive data sets from German official registration trials (1985–1989) with winter oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.), faba bean (Vicia faba L.), oat (Avena sativa L.), fodder beet (Beta vulgaris L.) and sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.). The Azzalini/Cox and de Kroon/van der Laan methods are based on the crossover concept of interaction (different rank orders) while the other methods are based on the usual concept of interaction (deviations from additivity of main effects). For an analysis of usual interactions the procedures Hildebrand, Kubinger and analysis of variance are approximately equivalent. For the crossover concept of interaction, the Azzalini/Cox approach is recommended, especially if one is particularly interested in rank changes between environments within genotypes.
Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science – Wiley
Published: Dec 1, 2000
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.