Mustafa YAŞAR1 ,
Mehmet SEZGİN 2 ,
Abdulmelik ARAS 1
1 Muş Alparslan University, Faculty of Applied Sciences, Department of Plant and Production Technologies, Muş
2 Republic of Turkey Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Ankara Variety Registration and Seed Certification Center. Ankara
Abstract
In this study, the seed yield performance and genotype × environment interaction (GEI) of five genotypes (G1–G5) were evaluated in a multi-location field trial of sunflower grown for confectionery sunflower seed production at four locations in Türkiye (Edirne, Konya, Bursa, and Manisa). The trials were set up in a randomized block design with 4 replications; data were analyzed by combined variance analysis, and the GEI structure was separated using the AMMI model. Adaptation patterns were interpreted using the AEC and which-won-where views of the GGE biplot; the yield–stability balance was evaluated within an integrated yield-stability framework using the WAASB and WAASBY indices (wY=0.65; wS=0.35). Environment, genotype, and GEI effects were found to be significant; environment explained the largest portion of total variation (58.0%). 96.66% of the GEI was concentrated in the first two IPCA components. Average yield was highest in Konya at 3494.60 kg ha⁻¹ and lowest in Manisa at 2349.60 kg ha⁻¹. The WAASBY ranking showed that G4 was ahead in terms of overall adaptation, while WAASB showed that G1 was the most stable genotype. The Which-won-where view supported the specific adaptation potential of G3 in Konya conditions and G4 in Bursa. The WAASBY weight sensitivity analysis revealed that G4's leadership was maintained across the tested weight combinations, while the ranking of the second-place candidates (G1–G3) could vary depending on production objectives.
YAŞAR, M., SEZGİN , M., & ARAS , A. (2026). Yield and Stability in Confectionery Sunflower Genotypes: AMMI–GGE and WAASBY Approach. ISPEC Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 10(2), 561–574. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20178746
📄Andrianasolo, F.N., Casadebaig, P., Langlade, N., Debaeke, P., Maury, P., 2016. Effects of plant growth stage and leaf aging on the response of transpiration and photosynthesis to water deficit in sunflower. Functional Plant Biology, 43(8): 797–805.
📄Bustos-Korts, E., Bavière, H., Bérard, A., Braud, D., Coyne, N., Dragićević, T., et al., 2022. Environment types and adaptation zones of sunflower in Europe. Journal of Experimental Botany, 73(24): 8132–8146.
📄Clark, E.I., Moore, M.A., Khoury, C.K., Hulke, B.S., Kane, N.C., Elmendorf, S.C., 2026. Climate drives variation in optimal phenology: 46 years of multi-environment trials in sunflower. New Phytologist, 249(3): 1527–1541.
📄Dimitrijevic, A., Horn, R., 2018. Sunflower hybrid breeding: From markers to genomic selection. Frontiers in Plant Science, 8: 2238.
📄Gauch, H.G., 2006. Statistical analysis of yield trials by AMMI and GGE. Crop Science, 46(4): 1488–1500.
📄Gollob, H.F., 1968. A statistical model which combines features of factor analytic and analysis of variance techniques. Psychometrika, 33(1): 73–115.
📄Hladni, N., Miladinović, D. 2019. Confectionery sunflower breeding and supply chain in Eastern Europe. OCL 26: 29.
📄Kaya, Y., 2004. Confectionery sunflower production in Turkey. Proceedings of the 16th International Sunflower Conference, 29 August – 2 September, Fargo, USA, pp. 817–822.
📄Grossiord, C., Buckley, T.N., Cernusak, L.A., et al., 2020. Plant responses to rising vapor pressure deficit. New Phytologist, 226(6): 1550–1566.
📄Killi, D., Bussotti, F., Raschi, A., Haworth, M., 2017. Adaptation to high temperature mitigates the impact of water deficit during combined heat and drought stress in C3 sunflower and C4 maize varieties with contrasting drought tolerance. Physiologia Plantarum, 159(2): 130–147.
📄Latif, A., Rauf, S., Nazish, M., Ortiz, R., 2025. Evaluation of confectionary sunflower germplasm accessions and their derived hybrids. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution, 72(3): 3069-3081.
📄Olivoto, T., Lúcio, A.D.C., da Silva, J.A.G., Marchioro, V.S., de Souza, V.Q., Jost, E., 2019. Mean performance and stability in multi-environment trials I: Combining features of AMMI and BLUP techniques. Agronomy Journal, 111(6): 2949–2960.
📄Olivoto, T., Lúcio, A.D.C., 2020. metan: An R package for multi-environment trial analysis. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 11(6): 783–789.
📄Seneviratne, S.I., Zhang, X., Adnan, M., ve et al., 2021. Weather and Climate Extreme Events in a Changing Climate. In Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pirani, A., et al., (Eds.), Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 1513–1766.
📄Tekdal, S., Kendal, E. 2018. AMMI model to assess durum wheat genotypes in multi-environment trials. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 20(1): 153-166.
📄Wickham, H., 2016. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Springer, Cham.
📄Yan, W., Tinker, N.A., 2006. Biplot analysis of multi-environment trial data: Principles and applications. Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 86(3): 623–645.
📄Yan, W., Kang, M.S., Ma, B., Woods, S., Cornelius, P.L., 2007. GGE biplot vs. AMMI analysis of genotype-by-environment data. Crop Science, 47(2): 643–655.
📄Yaşar, M., 2023. Yield and fiber quality traits of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) cultivars analyzed by biplot method. Journal of King Saud University-Science. 35(4): 102632.
📄Yaşar, M., Çil, A.N., Çil, A., 2023. Investigation of genotype× environment interaction in some sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) genotypes in different environmental conditions. MAS Journal of Applied Sciences, 8(1); 42-55.
📄Yaşar, M., Sezgin, M., 2022. Investigation of genotype x environment interactions by AMMI analysis of oilseed sunflower genotypes grown in different environmental conditions. Journal of the Institute of Science and Technology, 12(4); 2532-2542.
📄Yaşar, M., Sezgin, M., 2023. Evaluation of Greenmass Yield of Some Soybean Varieties by Ammi Analysis Method. ISPEC Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 7(1): 173-183.
📄Zobel, R.W., Wright, M.J., Gauch, H.G., 1988. Statistical analysis of a yield trial. Agronomy Journal, 80(3): 388–393.
,
Mehmet SEZGİN 2