Abstract
Use of adequate effective population size in maize ( Zea mays L.) recurrent selection programs is important because of random genetic drift and inbreeding depression. The objectives of this study were to (i) evaluate the performance of the BS11 Cycle 0 (C0) and the BS11 Cycle 5 (C5) populations from four S 1 ‐progeny selection programs each with a different effective population size (5, 10, 20, or 30) but with a common selection intensity of 20%, and (ii) compare the additive genetic variance among the C0 and C5 populations. Five cycles of selection were conducted by intermating 5, 10, 20, or 30 lines. One hundred thirty C5 S 1 lines from each of the selected populations (i.e., C5–5, C5–10, C5–20, and C5–30) and 100 C0 S 1 lines were topcrossed to BS11 C0. The resulting half‐sib progenies were evaluated at five environments in a replications‐within‐sets incomplete block design. The four selection programs resulted in significant increases in grain yield, reduced grain moisture, and reduced root and stalk lodging. For yield, the 10‐S 1 program showed the highest gain cycle −1 of 0.16 Mg ha −1 followed by the 30‐S 1 program with 0.13 Mg ha −1 cycle −1 The 5‐S 1 program had a higher gain cycle −1 than the 20‐S 1 program. The additive genetic variance for yield did not change significantly. Heritability for yield was highest for C5–20, but no significant differences were observed among populations. These results suggest little to no advantage of using larger effective population sizes to maintain genetic variability for short‐term recurrent selection.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 9
Claim · model-written summary
Selection programs significantly increased grain yield.
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The four selection programs resulted in significant increases in grain yield, reduced grain moisture, and reduced root and stalk lodging”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Selection programs reduced grain moisture.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The four selection programs resulted in significant increases in grain yield, reduced grain moisture, and reduced root and stalk lodging”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Selection programs reduced root lodging.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The four selection programs resulted in significant increases in grain yield, reduced grain moisture, and reduced root and stalk lodging”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The 10-S1 program had the highest yield gain per cycle, 0.16 Mg per hectare.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the 10‐S 1 program showed the highest gain cycle −1 of 0.16 Mg ha −1”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The 30-S1 program gained 0.13 Mg per hectare per cycle.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“30‐S 1 program with 0.13 Mg ha −1 cycle −1”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The 5-S1 program gained more per cycle than the 20-S1 program.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The 5‐S 1 program had a higher gain cycle −1 than the 20‐S 1 program”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Additive genetic variance for yield did not change significantly.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The additive genetic variance for yield did not change significantly”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Yield heritability was highest in C5-20, though population differences were not significant.
- Material
- C5–20e0
- Outcome
- Heritability for yielde0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Qualifier
- no significant differences were observed among populationse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Heritability for yield was highest for C5–20, but no significant differences were observed among populations”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Authors infer little advantage of larger effective population sizes for short-term selection.
- Outcome
- using larger effective population sizes to maintain genetic variability for short‐term recurrent selectione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“little to no advantage of using larger effective population sizes to maintain genetic variability for short‐term recurrent selection”
t0“Maize”