| |
|
|
 | Acesso ao texto completo restrito à biblioteca da Embrapa Caprinos e Ovinos. Para informações adicionais entre em contato com cnpc.biblioteca@embrapa.br. |
|
Registro Completo |
|
Biblioteca(s): |
Embrapa Caprinos e Ovinos. |
|
Data corrente: |
19/08/2003 |
|
Data da última atualização: |
25/08/2023 |
|
Autoria: |
ATLIN, G. N.; COOPER, M.; BJORNSTAD, A. |
|
Título: |
A comparison of formal and participatory breeding approaches using selection theory. |
|
Ano de publicação: |
2001 |
|
Fonte/Imprenta: |
Euphytica, v. 122, n. 3, p. 463-475, 2001. |
|
Idioma: |
Inglês |
|
Conteúdo: |
Progress from plant breeding has been slow in some marginal environments. Conventional or formal plant breeding (FPB) programs conducted by international agricultural research centres or national programs in developing coun- tries have been criticized for ignoring indigenous germplasm, failing to breed for conditions facing poor farmers, and emphasizing selection for broad versus local adaptation. A suite of techniques, referred to as participatory plant breeding (PPB) and including farmer-participatory or farmer-Ied selection, on-farm evaluation, and use of local landraces, has been advocated in response to this critique. PPB programs are diverse in scope and approach, but often rely heavily on farmer visual evaluation or phenotypic mass selection to select for simply-inherited traits, with limited replicated yield testing in multiple-environment trials (MET), one of lhe main tools of FPB. Prediction equations derived from selection theory can be used to examine the conditions under which idealized versions of FPB and PPB may be expected to achieve genetic progress for traits such as yield. The effectiveness of any selection environment is determined by both the genetic correlation between genotype performance in it and the target environment (rG) and the heritability of genotypic differences in the selection environment (Hs). rG is a measure of the accuracy with which performance of genotypes in the selection environment predicts performance in the target environment; H is a measure of the precision with which performance differences among genotypes can be measured in the selection environment. We compare FPB and PPB with respect to these determinants of selection response, using examples from self -pollinated species. Particular areas examined include: (i) selection for broad versus specific adaptation; (ii) on-station versus on-farm selection; and (iii) selection under high-yield versus low-yield conditions. In general, PPB systems attempt to maximize gains through the use of on-farm evaluation and the skills of farmer-selectors to maximize rG. FPB exploits METs to maximize Hs. PPB is most likely to develop cultivars that out-perform the products of FPB when it is applied in low-yield cropping systems, because it is in such situations that rG between high-yield breeding nurseries and low-yield target environments is likely to be low or negative. To make continued gains, and to compete with internationally-supported FPB programs, PPB systems will need to counter the obscuring effects of uncontrollable within-field, site-to-site, and year-to-year heterogeneity. Simple and robust designs for on-farm METs are needed for this purpose. MenosProgress from plant breeding has been slow in some marginal environments. Conventional or formal plant breeding (FPB) programs conducted by international agricultural research centres or national programs in developing coun- tries have been criticized for ignoring indigenous germplasm, failing to breed for conditions facing poor farmers, and emphasizing selection for broad versus local adaptation. A suite of techniques, referred to as participatory plant breeding (PPB) and including farmer-participatory or farmer-Ied selection, on-farm evaluation, and use of local landraces, has been advocated in response to this critique. PPB programs are diverse in scope and approach, but often rely heavily on farmer visual evaluation or phenotypic mass selection to select for simply-inherited traits, with limited replicated yield testing in multiple-environment trials (MET), one of lhe main tools of FPB. Prediction equations derived from selection theory can be used to examine the conditions under which idealized versions of FPB and PPB may be expected to achieve genetic progress for traits such as yield. The effectiveness of any selection environment is determined by both the genetic correlation between genotype performance in it and the target environment (rG) and the heritability of genotypic differences in the selection environment (Hs). rG is a measure of the accuracy with which performance of genotypes in the selection environment predicts performance in the target environment; H is... Mostrar Tudo |
|
Palavras-Chave: |
Avaliação participativa; Herdabilidade; Interação genótipo x ambiente; Marginal environment; Melhoramento de plantas; Multiple-environment trial; On-farm evaluation. |
|
Thesaurus Nal: |
Genotype-environment interaction; Heritability; Plant breeding; Plant genetics. |
|
Categoria do assunto: |
-- |
|
Marc: |
LEADER 03526naa a2200277 a 4500
001 1529610
005 2023-08-25
008 2001 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d
100 1 $aATLIN, G. N.
245 $aA comparison of formal and participatory breeding approaches using selection theory.$h[electronic resource]
260 $c2001
520 $aProgress from plant breeding has been slow in some marginal environments. Conventional or formal plant breeding (FPB) programs conducted by international agricultural research centres or national programs in developing coun- tries have been criticized for ignoring indigenous germplasm, failing to breed for conditions facing poor farmers, and emphasizing selection for broad versus local adaptation. A suite of techniques, referred to as participatory plant breeding (PPB) and including farmer-participatory or farmer-Ied selection, on-farm evaluation, and use of local landraces, has been advocated in response to this critique. PPB programs are diverse in scope and approach, but often rely heavily on farmer visual evaluation or phenotypic mass selection to select for simply-inherited traits, with limited replicated yield testing in multiple-environment trials (MET), one of lhe main tools of FPB. Prediction equations derived from selection theory can be used to examine the conditions under which idealized versions of FPB and PPB may be expected to achieve genetic progress for traits such as yield. The effectiveness of any selection environment is determined by both the genetic correlation between genotype performance in it and the target environment (rG) and the heritability of genotypic differences in the selection environment (Hs). rG is a measure of the accuracy with which performance of genotypes in the selection environment predicts performance in the target environment; H is a measure of the precision with which performance differences among genotypes can be measured in the selection environment. We compare FPB and PPB with respect to these determinants of selection response, using examples from self -pollinated species. Particular areas examined include: (i) selection for broad versus specific adaptation; (ii) on-station versus on-farm selection; and (iii) selection under high-yield versus low-yield conditions. In general, PPB systems attempt to maximize gains through the use of on-farm evaluation and the skills of farmer-selectors to maximize rG. FPB exploits METs to maximize Hs. PPB is most likely to develop cultivars that out-perform the products of FPB when it is applied in low-yield cropping systems, because it is in such situations that rG between high-yield breeding nurseries and low-yield target environments is likely to be low or negative. To make continued gains, and to compete with internationally-supported FPB programs, PPB systems will need to counter the obscuring effects of uncontrollable within-field, site-to-site, and year-to-year heterogeneity. Simple and robust designs for on-farm METs are needed for this purpose.
650 $aGenotype-environment interaction
650 $aHeritability
650 $aPlant breeding
650 $aPlant genetics
653 $aAvaliação participativa
653 $aHerdabilidade
653 $aInteração genótipo x ambiente
653 $aMarginal environment
653 $aMelhoramento de plantas
653 $aMultiple-environment trial
653 $aOn-farm evaluation
700 1 $aCOOPER, M.
700 1 $aBJORNSTAD, A.
773 $tEuphytica$gv. 122, n. 3, p. 463-475, 2001.
Download
Esconder MarcMostrar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original: |
Embrapa Caprinos e Ovinos (CNPC) |
|
|
Biblioteca |
ID |
Origem |
Tipo/Formato |
Classificação |
Cutter |
Registro |
Volume |
Status |
URL |
Voltar
|
|
|
| Registros recuperados : 32 | |
| 8. |  | COOPER, M.; CASTRO, S. S. de; COELHO, M. R. Micromorfologia do solo. In: TEIXEIRA, P. C.; DONAGEMMA, G. K.; FONTANA, A.; TEIXEIRA, W. G. (Ed.). Manual de métodos de análise de solo. 3. ed. rev. e ampl. Brasília, DF: Embrapa, 2017. pt. 5, cap. 1, p. 527-564.| Tipo: Capítulo em Livro Técnico-Científico |
| Biblioteca(s): Embrapa Solos. |
|    |
| 10. | | TSENG, C. L.; POSADAS, A. N. D.; VAZ, C. M. P.; COOPER, M.; CRESTANA, S. Abordagem multifractal 3D e microtomografia computadorizada de raios-x na avaliação de um solo submetido a diferentes tipos de manejo. In: SIMPÓSIO NACIONAL DE INSTRUMENTAÇÃO AGROPECUÁRIA, 4., 2019, São Carlos, SP. Ciência, inovação e mercado: anais. São Carlos, SP: Embrapa Instrumentação, 2019. Editores: Paulino Ribeiro Villas-Boas, Maria Alice Martins, Débora Marcondes Bastos Pereira Milori, Ladislau Martin Neto. SIAGRO 2019. 195-199| Tipo: Artigo em Anais de Congresso |
| Biblioteca(s): Embrapa Instrumentação. |
| |
| 12. | | BENEDETTI, M. M.; SPAROVEK, G.; COOPER, M.; CURI, N.; CARVALHO FILHO, A. de. Representatividade e potencial de utilização de um banco de dados de solos do Brasil. Revista Brasileira de Ciência do Solo, Viçosa, MG, v. 32, n. 6, p. 2591-2600, nov/dez. 2008.| Tipo: Nota Técnica/Nota Científica |
| Biblioteca(s): Embrapa Solos. |
| |
| 13. | | MAFRA, A. L.; SILVA, E. F.; COOPER, M.; DEMATTE, J. L. I. Pedogenese de uma sequencia de solos desenvolvidos de arenito na regiao de Piracicaba, SP. Revista Brasileira de Ciencia do Solo, Vicosa, v.25, n.2, p.355-369, 2001.| Biblioteca(s): Embrapa Solos. |
| |
| 15. | | SOUZA, Z. M. de; MARQUES JÚNIOR, J.; COOPER, M.; PEREIRA, G. T. Micromorfologia do solo e sua relação com atributos físicos e hídricos. Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira, Brasília, DF, v. 41, n. 3, p. 487-492, mar. 2006 Título em inglês: Soil micromorphology and its relation with physical and hydrical attributes.| Biblioteca(s): Embrapa Unidades Centrais. |
| |
| 20. | | PESSOA, T. N.; COOPER, M.; NUNES, M. R.; UTEAU, D.; PETH, S.; VAZ, C. M. P.; LIBARDI, P. L. 2D and 3D techniques to assess the structure and porosity of Oxisols and their correlations with other soil properties. Catena, v. 210, 105899, 2022. 16 p.| Tipo: Artigo em Periódico Indexado | Circulação/Nível: A - 1 |
| Biblioteca(s): Embrapa Instrumentação. |
|  |
| Registros recuperados : 32 | |
|
| Nenhum registro encontrado para a expressão de busca informada. |
|
|
