Skip to main content
Log in

Interpreting genotype-by-environment interaction using redundancy analysis

  • Published:
Theoretical and Applied Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Methods for the interpretation of genotype-by-environment interaction in the presense of explicitly measured environmental variables can be divided into two groups. Firstly, methods that extract environmental characterizations from the data itself, which are subsequently related to measured environmental variables, e.g., regression on the mean or singular value decomposition of the matrix of residuals from additivity, followed by correlation, or regression, methods. Secondly, methods that incorporate measured environmental variables directly into the model, e.g., multiple regression of individual genotypical responses on environmental variables, or factorial regression in which a genotype-by-environment matrix is modelled in terms of concomitant variables for the environmental factor. In this paper a redundancy analysis is presented, which can be derived from the singular-value decomposition of the residuals from additivity by imposing the restriction on the environmental scores of having to be linear combinations of environmental variables. At the same time, redundancy analysis is derivable from factorial regression by rotation of the axes in the space spanned by the fitted values of the factorial regression, followed by a reduction of dimensionality through discarding the least explanatory axes. Redundancy analysis is a member of the second group of methods, and can be an important tool in the interpretation of genotype-by-environment interaction, especially with reference to concomitant environmental information. A theoretical treatise of the method is given, followed by a practical example in which the results of the method are compared to the results of the other methods mentioned.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abou-El-Fittouh HA, Rawlings JO, Miller PA (1969) Genotype by environment interactions in cotton — Their nature and related environmental variables. Crop Sci 9:377–381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson AC (1982) Regression diagnostics, transformations and constructed variables. J R Stat Soc Ser B 44:1–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies PT, Tso M K-S (1982) Procedures for reduced-rank regression. Appl Stat 31:244–255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denis JB (1988) Two way analysis using covariates. Statistics 19:123–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finlay KW, Wilkinson GN (1963) The analysis of adaptation in a plant-breeding programme. Aust J Agric Res 14:742–754.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman GH, Dowker BD (1973) The analysis of variation between and within genotypes and environments. Heredity, 30:97–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gabriel KR (1971) Biplot display of multivariate matrices with application to principal component analysis. Biometrika 58:453–467.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gabriel KR (1978) Least squares approximation of matrices by additive and multiplicative models. J R Stat Soc Ser B 40:186–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gabriel KR, Odoroff CL (1985) Some reflections on strategies of modelling: How, when and whether to use principal components. In: Sen PK (ed) Statistics in biomedical, public health and environmental sciences, Elsevier science publisher B.V., North Holland, pp 315–331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gauch HG Jr (1982) Noise reduction by eigenvector ordinations. Ecology 63:1643–1649.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gauch HG Jr (1988) Model selection and validation for yield trials with interaction. Biometrics 44:705–715.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gauch HG Jr, Zobel RW (1988) Predictive and postdictive success of statistical analyses of yield trials. Theor Appl Genet 76:1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gauch HG Jr, Zobel RW (1989) Accuracy and selection success in yield trial and analyses. Theor Appl Genet 77:473–481.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gauch HG Jr, Zobel RW (1990) Imputing missing yield trial data. Theor Appl Genet 79:753–761.

    Google Scholar 

  • Genstat 5 Committee (1987) Genstat 5 reference manual. Clarendon Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gollob HF (1968) A statistical model which combines features of factor analytic and analysis of variance techniques. Psychometrika 33:73–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardwick RC, Wood JT (1972) Regression methods for studying genotype-environment interactions. Heredity 28:209–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Izenman AJ (1975) Reduced-rank regression models for the multivariate linear model. J Mult Anal 5:248–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jolliffe IT (1986) Principal components analysis. Springer-Verlag, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kempton RA (1984) The use of biplots in interpreting variety by environment interactions. J Agric Sci 103:123–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krishnaiah PR, Yochmowitz MG (1980) Inference on the structure of interaction in two-way classification model. In: Krishnaiah PR (ed) Handbook of statistics, vol 1. North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam, North Holland, pp 973–994.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lefkovitch LP (1986) Linear predictivity: An alternative for MANOVA and Multivariate multiple regression. Biom J 28:771–781.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandel J (1969) The partitioning of interaction in analysis of variance. J Res Nat Bureau of Standards B Math Sci 738:309–328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandel J (1971) A new analysis of variance model fo non-additive data. Technometrics 13:1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery DC, Peck EA (1982) Introduction to linear regression analysis. Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkins JM (1972) The principal components analysis of genotype-environmental interactions and physical measures of the environment. Heredity 29:51–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao CR (1964) The use and interpretation of principal component analysis in applied research. Sankhya A26:329–358.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinink K (1991) Genotype x environment interaction for nitrate concentration in lettuce. Plant Breed 107:39–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinink K, Groenwold R, Bootsma A (1987) Genotypical differences in nitrate content in Lactuca sativa L. and related species and correlation with dry matter content. Euphytica 36:11–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snedecor GW, Cochran WG (1980) Statistical methods, 7th edn. Iowa State University Press, Ames.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stefansky W (1972) Rejecting outliers in factorial designs. Technometrics 14:469–479.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart D, Love WA (1968) A general canonical correlation index. Psych Bull 70:160–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ter Braak CJF (1987) Ordination. In: Jongman RHG, Ter Braak CJF, Van Tongeren OFR (eds) Data analysis in community and landscape ecology. Pudoc, Wageningen, The Netherlands, pp91–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ter Braak CJF (1988) CANOCO — a FORTRAN program for canonical community ordination by [partial] [detrended] [canonical] correspondence analysis, principal components analysis and redundancy analysis (version 2.1). Agricultural Mathematics Group, Wageningen, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ter Braak CJF (1990) Interpreting canonical correlation analysis through biplots of structure correlations and weights. Psychometrika 55:519–531.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler DE (1982) On the optimality of the simultaneous redundancy transformations. Psychometrika 47:77–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Wollenberg AL (1977) Redundancy analysis an alternative canonical correlation analysis. Psychometrika 42:207–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Leeden R (1990) Reduced rank regression with structured residuals. DSWO Press, Leiden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Velu RP (1991) Reduced rank models with two sets of regressors. Appl Statist 40:159–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood JT (1976) The use of environmental variables in the interpretation of genotype-environment interaction. Heredity 37:1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yates F, Cochran WG (1938) The analysis of groups of experiments. J Agric Sci 28:556–580.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zobel RW, Wright MJ, Gauch HG (1988) Statistical analysis of a yield trial. Agron J 80:388–393.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Communicated by A. R. Hallauer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

van Eeuwijk, F.A. Interpreting genotype-by-environment interaction using redundancy analysis. Theoret. Appl. Genetics 85, 89–100 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00223849

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00223849

Key words

Navigation