Repeatability Between Two Intermediate Sugarcane Genotype Selection Stages in Florida

Abstract

Improved yield and disease resistance on sand soils are priorities of the Canal Point (CP) sugarcane (Saccharum spp.) breeding and selection program. Analyses of historical phenotypic data can provide helpful information in guiding selection strategies to meet these priorities. Correlation analysis was used to examine repeatability of phenotypic data used to advance genotypes from an unreplicated single location clonal crop test (stage II) to the subsequent stage (stage III; two replicate, four location clonal crop experiment). Correlations between data for four traits measured in stage II and the corresponding data pooled across soil types for the same genotypes in stage III varied across 23 series of the CP program. Generally, when correlations were statistically significant (P < 0.05), correlation values were low (means; theoretical recoverable sucrose (TRS) r = 0.40, cane yield r = 0.27, and economic index r = 0.23). Similar trends were evident for correlations between data from stage II and stage III on muck soil and stage II and stage III on sand soil across 10 series of the CP program. A 10% reduction in the number of genotypes advanced to stage III over that period would have meant losing only 1 and 13 genotypes that had commercial potential on muck and sand soils, respectively (n = 1278). Correlations between the phenotypic data were significant only for stage III comparisons between TRS and cane yield, which were negatively associated on either soil type. These results indicate that changes in the advancement strategy from stage II are not required as advancing approximately 135 genotypes identifies almost all genotypes with the genetic potential to yield well on muck or sand soils in stage III. Increasing genotypes in stages prior to stage III and changing crossing strategies to improve identification of disease-resistant, high-yielding genotypes for sand soils is recommended.

KEYWORDS:

• sugarcane breeding
• cane yield
• sucrose yield
• Histosol
• muck soil
• sand soil

This article not subject to US copyright law.

We are indebted to Sarah Lingle, Ron Rice, and James Shine, Jr. for helpful comments and suggestions on an early draft of this manuscript. Product names and trademarks are mentioned to report factually on available data; however, the USDA-ARS neither guarantees nor warrants the standard of the product, and the use of the name by USDA-ARS does not imply approval of the product to the exclusion of others that may also be suitable. The experiments reported comply with current US laws.