Paper · 2026 · Scientific Reports

Genotype by environment interaction analysis for seed cotton yield stability under normal irrigation and drought stress conditions using numerical stability statistics

W. M. B. Yehia; Essam F. El-Hashash; Karima Mohamed El-Absy; et al.

17
claims
32
verbatim quotes
0
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Abstract One of the study’s main goals is to find high-yielding and stable genotypes in cotton under normal irrigation conditions (NIC) and drought stress conditions (DSC), as well as the comparison between parametric and non-parametric stability statistics. In order to achieve this objective, 24 cotton genotypes were evaluated under NIC and DSC during the 2019 and 2020 growing seasons (four environments) at the Sakha Agriculture Research Station in the Kafr El-Sheikh Governorate of Egypt. Every trial was set up using a randomized complete block design with three replications. According to the ANOVA, years under NIC and genotypes under DSC had a highly significant impact on the seed cotton yield. The AMMI analysis showed significant effects of environments (P < 0.01), genotypes, and their interaction (GEI) (P < 0.05) on seed cotton yield in four environments (two years and two irrigation conditions). The AMMI model successfully divided the variability by GEI into three principal component axes (PCs), only PC1 explained 87% of the total variability of GEI. When compared to NIC, seed cotton productivity across DSC was found to be significantly reduced, ranging from 8.54% (G5 genotype) to 42.38% (G3 genotype). The stability statistics have the ability to separate, rank, and detect stable genotypes in both irrigation conditions. According to Y i , YS i and TOP stability measures, the genotypes G1, G5, G20 and G19 were determined as the most stable genotypes (dynamically) with the highest yielding performance, while, the genotypes G8 and G4 were the most stable (statically) with moderate seed cotton yield using most other stability statistics. Based on rank, Spearman’s rank correlation, PCA biplot and heatmap data, the stability parameters can be divided into two major groups that corresponded to different dynamic and static concepts of stability under NIC and DSC. The first group includes YS i and TOP , which are strongly correlated with Y i (dynamic). While, the second group has other stability statistics, which negatively correlated with Y i , thus related to the static concept. Generally, the genotypes G5 and G8 were stable coupled with high and moderate yield, respectively. Therefore, these genotypes are used in the cotton breeding programs for the development of improved cotton varieties to address drought conditions in Egypt.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 17

Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Years under normal irrigation significantly affected seed cotton yield.

Outcome
seed cotton yielde0
Setting
NICe0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“years under NIC and genotypes under DSC had a highly significant impact on the seed cotton yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 608–704 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Genotypes under drought significantly affected seed cotton yield.

Material
genotypese0
Outcome
seed cotton yielde0
Qualifier
DSCe0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“genotypes under DSC had a highly significant impact on the seed cotton yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 628–704 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 54–60 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Environments significantly affected seed cotton yield in the AMMI analysis.

Outcome
seed cotton yielde0
Value
P < 0.01e0
Setting
environmentse0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The AMMI analysis showed significant effects of environments (P < 0.01), genotypes, and their interaction (GEI) (P < 0.05) on seed cotton yield in four environments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 706–870 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 54–60 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Genotypes significantly affected seed cotton yield in the AMMI analysis.

Material
genotypese0
Outcome
seed cotton yielde0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The AMMI analysis showed significant effects of environments (P < 0.01), genotypes, and their interaction (GEI) (P < 0.05) on seed cotton yield in four environments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 706–870 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 54–60 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Genotype by environment interaction significantly affected seed cotton yield.

Outcome
seed cotton yielde0
Value
P < 0.05e0
Setting
four environmentse0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“their interaction (GEI) (P < 0.05) on seed cotton yield in four environments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 794–870 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 54–60 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

AMMI PC1 explained 87% of genotype by environment variability.

Outcome
total variability of GEIe0
Value
87%e0
Qualifier
PC1e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“only PC1 explained 87% of the total variability of GEI”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1016–1070 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 54–60 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Drought significantly reduced G5 seed cotton productivity by 8.54% versus normal irrigation.

Material
G5 genotypee0
Treatment
DSCe0
Outcome
seed cotton productivitye0
Direction
reducede0
Value
8.54%e0
Comparator
NICe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“When compared to NIC, seed cotton productivity across DSC was found to be significantly reduced, ranging from 8.54% (G5 genotype) to 42.38% (G3 genotype)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1072–1225 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 54–60 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Drought significantly reduced G3 seed cotton productivity by 42.38% versus normal irrigation.

Material
G3 genotypee0
Treatment
DSCe0
Outcome
seed cotton productivitye0
Direction
reducede0
Value
42.38%e0
Comparator
NICe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“When compared to NIC, seed cotton productivity across DSC was found to be significantly reduced, ranging from 8.54% (G5 genotype) to 42.38% (G3 genotype)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1072–1225 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 54–60 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Stability statistics could rank and detect stable cotton genotypes under both irrigation conditions.

Outcome
separate, rank, and detect stable genotypese0
Comparator
both irrigation conditionse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The stability statistics have the ability to separate, rank, and detect stable genotypes in both irrigation conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1227–1345 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 54–60 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

G1, G5, G20 and G19 had the highest yield and dynamic stability.

Material
G1, G5, G20 and G19e0
Outcome
most stable genotypes (dynamically) with the highest yielding performancee0
Direction
higheste0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the genotypes G1, G5, G20 and G19 were determined as the most stable genotypes (dynamically) with the highest yielding performance”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1399–1529 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 54–60 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

G8 and G4 had static stability and moderate seed cotton yield.

Material
G8 and G4e0
Outcome
most stable (statically) with moderate seed cotton yielde0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the genotypes G8 and G4 were the most stable (statically) with moderate seed cotton yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1538–1627 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 54–60 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Stability parameters formed two groups corresponding to dynamic and static stability.

Outcome
two major groupse0
Value
two major groupse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the stability parameters can be divided into two major groups that corresponded to different dynamic and static concepts of stability under NIC and DSC”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1740–1891 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 54–60 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

YS i and TOP were strongly correlated with Y i.

Outcome
YS i and TOPe0
Comparator
Y ie0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“YS i and TOP , which are strongly correlated with Y i (dynamic)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1918–1981 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 54–60 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Other stability statistics were negatively correlated with Y i.

Outcome
other stability statisticse0
Direction
negativelye0
Comparator
Y ie0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“other stability statistics, which negatively correlated with Y i , thus related to the static concept”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2011–2112 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 54–60 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

G5 was stable with high yield.

Material
G5e0
Outcome
stable coupled with highe0
Direction
highe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the genotypes G5 and G8 were stable coupled with high and moderate yield, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2125–2211 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 54–60 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

G8 was stable with moderate yield.

Material
G8e0
Outcome
stable coupled with high and moderate yielde0
Direction
moderatee0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the genotypes G5 and G8 were stable coupled with high and moderate yield, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2125–2211 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 54–60 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend G5 and G8 for breeding drought-adapted cotton varieties.

Outcome
used in the cotton breeding programse0
Setting
Egypte0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“these genotypes are used in the cotton breeding programs for the development of improved cotton varieties to address drought conditions in Egypt”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2224–2368 · show in text ↑

drought · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

82 papers: 19 positive, 63 negative or no effect

62 papers in the same direction as this paper · 19 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

78 papers more in this group

See all 82 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.