Search

Menu
Search
in Ecology

Assessment of stability and yield performance of onion (Allium cepa L.) genotypes across diverse Indian environments

28 Views


Abstract

Onion productivity in India is strongly influenced by genotype × environment interaction (GEI), complicating the identification of stable and high-yielding cultivars. Nineteen onion genotypes were evaluated in multi-environment trials across six diverse locations during two consecutive kharif seasons (2023–24), with locations treated as six distinct environments (E1-E6). Combined ANOVA revealed significant effects of genotypes, environments, and their interactions, indicating substantial GEI. AMMI analysis identified RO-1771 (G15), RO-1768 (G13), and RO-1774 (G17) as the most stable and high-yielding genotypes, while Junagadh (E3) was the most representative and discriminating environment. The first two principal components of the GGE biplot explained 83.86% of total GEI variation, efficiently capturing interaction patterns. Among the genotypes, ‘Bhima Dark Red’ (G18) consistently showed superior yield and stability, followed by RO-1768 and RO-1774, which also demonstrated broad adaptability. Junagadh was identified as an ideal site for both cultivation and varietal testing. Collectively, the GGE and AMMI analyses revealed that Bhima Dark Red (G18), RO-1768 (G13), and RO-1774 (G17) combined high yield with stability across multiple environments. These findings provide valuable guidance for onion breeding programs and support the development of cultivars adapted to diverse Indian agro-climatic conditions.

Similar content being viewed by others

AMMI and GGE biplot analysis for yield performance and stability assessment of selected Bambara groundnut (Vigna subterranea L. Verdc.) genotypes under the multi-environmental trials (METs)

Article
Open access
23 November 2021

Evaluation of genotype by environment interaction and adaptability in lowland irrigated rice hybrids for grain yield under high temperature

Article
Open access
04 August 2021

Envirotype-based delineation of environmental effects and genotype × environment interactions in Indian soybean (Glycine max, L.)

Article
Open access
21 May 2024

Data availability

The authors confirm that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the manuscript and/or in its supplementary material.

References

  1. Etana, M. B., Aga, M. C. & Fufa, B. O. Major onion (Allium cepa L.) production challenges in Ethiopia: A review. J. Biol. Agric. Healthc. 9, 42–47. https://doi.org/10.7176/JBAH (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Biswas, P., Das, S., Bar, A., Maity, T. K. & Mandal, A. R. Effect of micronutrient application on vegetative growth and bulb yield attributes of rabi onion (Allium cepa L.). Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. Appl. Sci. 9, 556–565. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2020.903.065 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Colina-Coca, C., Ancos, B. & Sanchez-Moreno, C. Nutritional composition of processed onion: S-alk(en)yl-L-cysteine sulfoxides, organic acids, sugars, minerals and vitamin C. Food Bioprocess Technol. 7, 289–298. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11947-013-1150-4 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Slimestad, R., Fossen, T. & Vagen, I. Onions: A source of unique dietary flavonoids. J. Agric. Food Chem. 55, 10067–10080. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf0712503 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  5. FAOSTAT. Onion production, area and productivity. FAO Statistics (2023). Available at: http://faostat3.fao.org/browse/Q/QC/E (accessed 10 July 2023).

  6. Gupta, A. J., Kaldate, S., Volaguthala, S. & Mahajan, V. Onion nutritional and nutraceutical composition and therapeutic potential of its phytochemicals assessed through preclinical and clinical studies. J. Funct. Foods 129, 106889. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jff.2025.106889 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gupta, A. J. et al. Studies on biochemical and nutraceutical profiling of 43 Indian onion (Allium cepa L.) genotypes. J. Food Meas. Charact. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-025-03425-0 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Khar, A. & Singh, H. Rapid methods for onion breeding. In Accelerated Plant Breeding (eds Gosal, S. S. & Wani, S. H.) 77–99 (Springer Nature, 2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47298-6_4.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Romagosa, I., Borras-Gelonch, G., Slafer, G. & van Eeuwijk, F. Genotype by environment interaction and adaptation. In Sustainable Food Production 846–870 (Springer, 2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5797-8_199

  10. Malosetti, M., Ribaut, J. M. & van Eeuwijk, F. A. The statistical analysis of multi-environment data: Modeling genotype-by-environment interaction and its genetic basis. Front. Physiol. 4, 44. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2013.00044 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Romagosa, I. & Fox, P. N. Genotype × environment interaction and adaptation. In Plant Breeding: Principles and Prospects 373–390 (Springer, 1993).

  12. Annicchiarico, P. Genotype × environment interactions – challenges and opportunities for plant breeding and cultivar recommendations. FAO, Rome, Italy (2002). Available at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/y4391e/y4391e00

  13. Yan, W. K., Kang, M. S., Ma, B., Woods, S. & Cornelius, P. L. GGE biplot vs. AMMI analysis of genotype-by-environment data. Crop Sci. 47, 643–655. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2006.06.0374 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Yan, W. K. GGE biplot – A windows application for graphical analysis of multi-environment trial data and other types of two-way data. Agron. J. 93, 1111–1118. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2001.9351111x (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Yan, W., Hunt, L. A., Sheng, Q. & Szlavnics, Z. Cultivar evaluation and mega-environment investigation based on GGE biplot. Crop Sci. 40, 597–605. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2000.403597x (2000).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Crossa, J. Statistical analysis of multilocation trials. Adv. Agron. 44, 55–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2113(08)60818-4 (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Gupta, A. J., Benke, A. P., Mahajan, V., Chauhan, H. & Singh, M. Assessment of genetic diversity and stability performance of 38 genotypes of onion (Allium cepa L.). J. Hortic. Sci. Biotechnol. 99, 560–569. https://doi.org/10.1080/14620316.2024.2315941 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Gupta, A. J. et al. Assessing onion genotypes stability and potential in diverse Indian environments. Cogent Food Agric. 10, 2360606. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311932.2024.2360606 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Tahir, M. et al. GGE biplot an effective tool to study genotype and genotype × environment interaction; a case study in onion (Allium cepa L.). Pak. J. Agric. Sci. 57, 1565–1571 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Gabriel, K. R. The biplot graphic display of matrices with application to principal component analysis. Biometrika 58, 453–467. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/58.3.453 (1971).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Zobel, R. W., Wright, M. J. & Gauch, H. G. Statistical analysis of a yield trial. Agron. J. 80, 388–393. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1988.00021962008000030002x (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Gauch, H. G. Statistical Analysis of Regional Yield Trials: AMMI Analysis of Factorial Designs (Elsevier, 1992).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Cooper, M. & Hammer, G. L. (eds) Plant Adaptation and Crop Improvement. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK; ICRISAT, Patancheru, India; and IRRI, Manila, Philippines (1996).

  24. Yan, W. & Tinker, N. A. Biplot analysis of multi-environment trial data: Principles and applications. Can. J. Plant Sci. 86, 623–645. https://doi.org/10.4141/P05-169 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kaya, Y., Akcura, M. & Taner, S. GGE-biplot analysis of multi-environment yield trials in bread wheat. Turk. J. Agric. For. 30, 325–337 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hagos, H. G. & Abay, F. AMMI and GGE biplot analysis of bread wheat genotypes in the northern part of Ethiopia. J. Plant Breed. Genet. 1, 12–18 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  27. Hossain, M. A. et al. Integrating BLUP, AMMI, and GGE models to explore GE interactions for adaptability and stability of winter lentils (Lens culinaris Medik.). Plants 12, 2079. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12112079 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  28. Omrani, A. et al. Evaluation of grain yield stability in some selected wheat genotypes using AMMI and GGE biplot methods. Agronomy 12, 1130. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12051130 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Wang, R. et al. Assessment of yield performances for grain sorghum varieties by AMMI and GGE biplot analyses. Front. Plant Sci. 14, 1261323. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1261323 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Stansluos, A. A. L. et al. Genotype × trait (GT) biplot analysis for yield and quality stability in some sweet corn (Zea mays L. Saccharata Sturt.) genotypes. Agronomy 13, 1538. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13061538 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Hnizil, O. et al. Dissecting genotype-by-environment interactions in Moroccan wheat: An advanced biplot and heatmap analysis unveiling agronomic, quality traits, and genotypic stability for tailored breeding strategies. Plants 13, 1068. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13081068 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  32. Sultana, F. et al. Heatmap clustering and performance analysis of cotton genotypes in response to environmental conditions. Sci. Rep. 15, 19297. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-02682-9 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  33. Li, Z., Zheng, B. & He, Y. Understanding the effects of growing seasons, genotypes, and their interactions on the anthesis date of wheat sown in North China. Biology 10, 955. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology10100955 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kunjaroenruk, J., Koonmanee, S., Singkham, N., Chankaew, S. & Suriharn, K. Genotypic variation and seasonal effects on rice (Oryza sativa L.) grain protein content and yield in tropical savannah environment. J. Agric. Food Res. 20, 101778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2025.101778 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  35. Glaz, B. & Kang, M. S. Location contributions determined via GGE biplot analysis of multi-environment sugarcane genotype-performance trials. Crop Sci. 48, 941–950. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2007.06.0315 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  36. Oyekunle, M. et al. Assessment of early-maturing maize hybrids and testing sites using GGE biplot analysis. Crop Sci. 57, 2942–2950. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2016.12.1014 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Gupta, A. J. et al. Complement test for distinctiveness, uniformity and stability testing of kharif onion (Allium cepa L.) varieties. Genet. Resour. Crop Evol. 69, 2217–2229. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10722-022-01372-z (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  38. Yan, W. & Kang, M. S. GGE Biplot Analysis: A Graphical Tool for Breeders, Geneticists, and Agronomists 267 (CRC Press, 2003). https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420040371.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Munawar, M., Hammad, G. & Shahbaz, M. Evaluation of maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids under different environments by GGE biplot analysis. Am.-Euras. J. Agric. Environ. Sci. 13, 1252–1257. https://doi.org/10.5829/idosi.aejaes.2013.13.09.11036 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  40. Farshadfar, E., Zali, H. & Mohammadi, R. Evaluation of phenotypic stability in chickpea genotypes using GGE biplot. Ann. Biol. Res. 2(6), 282–292 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  41. Rakshit, S. et al. GGE biplot analysis to evaluate genotype, environment and their interactions in sorghum multi-location data. Euphytica 185, 465–479. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-012-0648-6 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  42. Yang, R. C., Crossa, J., Cornelius, P. L. & Burgueno, J. Biplot analysis of genotype × environment interaction: Proceed with caution. Crop Sci. 49, 1564–1576. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2008.11.0665 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  43. Kocaturk, M. et al. GGE biplot analysis of genotype × environment interaction in soybean grown as a second crop. Turk. J. Field Crops 24(2), 145–154. https://doi.org/10.17557/tjfc.615175 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  44. Gauch, H. G. & Zobel, R. W. Identifying mega-environments and targeting genotypes. Crop Sci. 37, 311–326. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1997.0011183X003700020002x (1997).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Mare, M., Manjeru, P., Ncube, B. & Sisito, G. GGE biplot analysis of genotype-by-environment interaction on Sorghum bicolor L. (Moench) in Zimbabwe. Afr. J. Plant Sci. 11, 308–319. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJPS2017.1538 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  46. Sousa, M. B. E., Damasceno-Silva, K. J., Rocha, M. D. M., Menezes, J. A. N. & Lima, L. R. L. Genotype by environment interaction in cowpea lines using GGE biplot method. Rev. Caatinga 31, 64–71. https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-21252018v31n108rc (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  47. Kendal, E. GGE biplot analysis of multi-environment yield trials in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) cultivars. Ekin J. Crop Breed. Genet. 2(1), 90–99 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  48. Yihunie, T. A. & Gesesse, C. A. GGE biplot analysis of genotype by environment interaction in field pea (Pisum sativum L.) genotypes in Northwestern Ethiopia. J. Crop Sci. Biotechnol. 21, 67–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12892-017-0099-0 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  49. Gungor, H., Cakir, M. F. & Dumlupinar, Z. Evaluation of wheat genotypes: genotype × environment interaction and GGE biplot analysis. Turk. J. Field Crops 27(1), 149–157. https://doi.org/10.17557/tjfc.1081513 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  50. Akter, A. et al. GGE biplot analysis for yield stability in multi-environment trials of promising hybrid rice (Oryza sativa L.). Bangladesh Rice J. 19, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.3329/brj.v19i1.25213 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  51. Yan, W. & Kang, M. S. GGE Biplot Analysis: A Graphical Tool for Breeders, Geneticists, and Agronomists 1st edn. (CRC Press, 2003). https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420040371.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Gauch, H. G. A simple protocol for AMMI analysis of yield trials. Crop Sci. 53, 1860–1869. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2013.04.0241 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  53. Gauch, H. G. Statistical analysis of yield trials by AMMI and GGE. Crop Sci. 46, 1488–1500 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors sincerely acknowledge networking centers of AINRPOG, ICAR-DOGR for their support and technical inputs. This work was financially supported by Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi.

Funding

Authors gratefully thanks to the networking centers of All India Network Research Project on Onion and Garlic [AINRPOG], ICAR-Directorate of Onion and Garlic Research, Pune for their support and technical inputs. This work was financially supported by Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Crop Improvement, ICAR-Directorate of Onion and Garlic Research, Rajgurunagar, Pune, Maharashtra, India

    Amar Jeet Gupta, Kavya V. Aribenchi, Supriya Kaldate, Hem Raj Bhandari, Pranjali A. Gedam, Yogesh P. Khade, Rajiv B. Kale & Vijay Mahajan

  2. Department of Crop Improvement, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, Reginal Sation, Baner, Pune, Maharashtra, India

    Anil Khar

Authors

  1. Amar Jeet Gupta
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anil Khar
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kavya V. Aribenchi
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Supriya Kaldate
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Hem Raj Bhandari
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Pranjali A. Gedam
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Yogesh P. Khade
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Rajiv B. Kale
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Vijay Mahajan
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Author [Amar Jeet Gupta] contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation and data collection were performed by [Amar Jeet Gupta], [Vijay Mahajan] and [Anil Khar]. The manuscript was prepared by [Amar Jeet Gupta] and [Kavya V. Aribenchi]. Analysis of data and interpretation was performed by [Amar Jeet Gupta] and [Kavya V. Aribenchi] and [Supriya Kaldate]. Manuscript edition and finalization were performed by [Amar Jeet Gupta], [Hem Raj Bhandari], [Pranjali A. Gedam], [Yogesh P. Khade], [Rajiv B. Kale] and [Vijay Mahajan] and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to
Amar Jeet Gupta.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

The work is presented in the manuscript with the consent of all authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Supplementary Material 2

Supplementary Material 3

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gupta, A.J., Khar, A., Aribenchi, K.V. et al. Assessment of stability and yield performance of onion (Allium cepa L.) genotypes across diverse Indian environments.
Sci Rep (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-30152-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-30152-9

Keywords

  • Onion
  • GGE biplot
  • AMMI
  • Stability
  • GEI
  • Bulb yield

Source: Ecology - nature.com

Ecosystem carbon use efficiency at global scale from upscaling eddy-covariance data with machine learning and MODIS products

Diversity and persistence of the RNA virome of Philaenus spumarius, the European vector of Xylella fastidiosa

This portal is not a newspaper as it is updated without periodicity. It cannot be considered an editorial product pursuant to law n. 62 of 7.03.2001. The author of the portal is not responsible for the content of comments to posts, the content of the linked sites. Some texts or images included in this portal are taken from the internet and, therefore, considered to be in the public domain; if their publication is violated, the copyright will be promptly communicated via e-mail. They will be immediately removed.

Back to Top
Close