Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-pnlb5 Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2025-10-30T19:19:53.801Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Response to family selection based on replicated trials

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

F. England
F. England
Affiliation:
Scottish Plant Breeding Station, Pentlandfield, Roslin, Midlothian, U.K., EH25 9RF
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The theory of expected response to selection between families is extended to allow for the effects of field replication and its interactions with number of plants per plot.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 88 , Issue 1 , February 1977 , pp. 127 - 134
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1977

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Becker, W. A. (1967). Manual of Procedures in Quantitative Genetics. Pullman, Washington State University.Google Scholar
Curnow, R. N. (1961). Optimal programmes for varietal selection. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society B 23, 282–318.Google Scholar
Comstock, R. E. & Robinson, H. F. (1952). Estimation of average dominance of genes. In Heterosis (ed. Gowen, J. W.). Ames: Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
England, F. (1974). A general approximate method for fitting additive and specific combining abilities to the diallel cross with unequal numbers of observations in the cells. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 44, 378–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falconer, D. S. (1960.) Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar
Finney, D. J. (1958). Plant selection for yield improvement. Euphytica 7, 83–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardner, C. O. (1963). Estimates of genetic parameters in cross-fertilizing plants and their implications in plant breeding. In Statistical Genetics and Plant Breeding (ed. Hanson, W. D. and Robinson, H. F.), pp. 225–52. Washington: NAS/NRC publication 982.Google Scholar
Griffing, B. (1956). Concept of general and specific combining ability in relation to diallel crossing systems. Australian Journal of Biological Science 9, 463–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanson, W. D. (1963). Heritability. In Statistical Genetics and Plant Breeding (ed. Hanson, W. D. and Robinson, H. F.), pp. 125–40. Washington: NAS/NRC publication 982.Google Scholar
Kalton, R. R. & Leffel, R. C. (1955). Evaluation of combining ability in Dactylis glomerata L. III. General and specific effects. Agronomy Journal 47, 370–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kearsey, M. J. (1965). Biometrical analysis of a random mating population: a comparison of five experimental designs. Heredity 20, 205–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kempthorne, O. & Curnow, R. N. (1961). The partial diallel cross. Biometrics 17, 229–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lush, J. L. (1947). Family merit and individual merit as bases for selection. Part I. American Naturalist 81, 241–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sprague, G. F. (1966). Quantitative genetics in plant improvement. In Plant Breeding (ed. Frey, K. J.). Ames: Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar