Journal of Innovative Agriculture: 9(2) : 1-4, 2022

DOI: 10.37446/jinagri/rsn/9.2.2022.1-4
Research Note

Adaptability study and yield performance of

food barley (Hordeum vulgare L.)
Workineh Mekasa Buli

Researcher/Cereal Breeder, Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research (EIAR), Ambo Agricultural Research Center (AARC), Ethiopia

A total of ten food barley varieties were evaluated to study their adaptability and
yield performance and the combined analysis showed significant differences
(p<0.001). Varieties HB-1966 and EH-1493 showed promising results and
preferred among the tested varieties. The combined over locations’ grain yield of
Received: 17 June 2022
Accepted: 26 June 2022 the varieties ranged from 1589 to 2689 Kg ha-1, while the range was from 1589 to
Published: 30 June 2022 4713 Kg ha-1. This shows that how big the effect of the environment is on the yield
of the varieties. The highest grain yield was recorded for HB-1966 followed by EH-
*Correspondence
Workineh Mekasa Buli
1493, where the lowest yield was recorded for Harbu variety. The principal
wmekasa@gmail.com component analysis of the varieties studied showed that the first two PCAs
accounted for 85.17% of the total variability in grain yield. Genotypes 2, 5 and 7
are located near the concentric circle and are likely to be stable among the
varieties studied.
Key words: adaptability, food barley, yield, principal component analysis

INTRODUCTION

Barley is a crop used for different purposes and better and latitude regions (Lister et al., 2018). Barley can be
produced on degraded soil than other cereal crops. It is grown performed well in the low fertile and drought in the mountain
over wide environmental conditions. Barley has been slope while compare to other cereal crops (Ceccarelli et al.,
produced as a major cereal crop for so long time period and it 1999). Barley can be adapted to altitudes from below 1000 to
is the fourth important cereal crop of the globe after wheat, above 3000 masl. Nevertheless, the potential area for barley
rice and maize (FAO, 2005). It is one of major cereal crops in production is the altitude ranging from 2300 – 2800 masl.
Ethiopia with area coverage of 926,106.9 hectares with total This altitudinal range is ideal area also for grain and other
production of 2,339,109.9 tones and ranks fifth in production quality parameters of barley not only yield, since this area is
following maize, wheat, Teff, and sorghum. The productivity of accompanied by ample moisture with even distribution for
barley is 2.53 t ha-1 which has slightly increasing trend efficient use of inputs and potential growth and productivity
through years (CSA, 2021). Barley production makes Ethiopia of the crop. The overall weather conditions determine the
among top ten producers of the world. The country is one of adaptability and yield performance of any crop. Climatic
the center of diversity for the crop and it is estimated that conditions represent major environmental variations like soil
there are about 16,000 barley accessions in the Ethiopian type, fertility and moisture status of grain development. It is
biodiversity institute. Ethiopian barley is given recognition for possible to evaluate comparable or nearly similar grain
having typical botanical varieties. Besides, it has a group of samples of genotypes within similar growing conditions
inter-fertile lines distinguished by its spike patterns (Zemede (Zecevic et al., 2004). The problem of crop breeding is the
Asfaw, 1988). Barley is a highly resilient crop, can be grown in relationship between target environment and selection i.e
various types of marginal environments, like in high altitude whether the selection is for broad or specific adaptation

www.jinagri.com Buli, 2022 1

(Ceccarelli, 1989). Hence, adaptability study of barley length, plant height and number of kernels per spike were
varieties whether it is for wide or specific adaptation, was measured on plant basis; whereas days to 50% heading, days
found imperative and released varieties of food barley to physiological maturity, yield and stand count were recorded
varieties were studied at different locations in the highlands on plot basis.
of West Shoa to study the adaptability and evaluate the grain
yield and parameters contributing for yield in food barley Data analysis
varieties at different districts.
The analysis was done using PROC GLM in SAS software
MATERIALS AND METHODS version 9.4 (Gomez and Gomez, 1984). Mean was separated
using t-test.
Experimental design and materials
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Ten food barley varieties including the local check (HB-1307,
HB-1966, Harbu, Shege, HB- 42, Dimtu, HB-1965, Cross- The combined ANOVA showed the barley varieties showed
41/98, EH-1493 and a local variety popular to the study areas, highly significant differences statistically at (p<0.001) for all
known as Balemi) were studied using RCBD in three traits tested. The location by variety interaction was also
replications at Mida-Kegn, Jibat, Cheliya and Dire-Inchini significantly different, where it was non-significant for grain
districts for their adaptability and yield performance. The trial filling period (Table 1). The grain yield of the varieties for
was planted in six rows of 2.5m length each spaced with 0.2m combined analysis over locations ranged from 1589 to 2689
inter row spacing. The seeds were drilled at a rate of 125 Kg Kg ha-1, where the highest yield was recorded for HB-1966
ha-1 and fertilizer was applied at a rate of 100 Kg ha-1 DAP and followed by EH-1493. Nevertheless, the range of yield of
100 Kg ha-1 UREA each. Twice hand weeding was practiced varieties for individual locations is from 1589 to 4713 Kg ha-1.
and finally the four middle rows were harvested for yield data. This showed how big the effect of environment was on the
yield performance of genotypes. It is important to take in to
Data collection consideration the environmental condition like edaphic
factors, the climate and others for the production and grain
Data were collected for yield and traits contributing for yield quality of barley crop (Buli & Ali, 2021). In this study, the
viz. grain filling period (GFP), plant height (PlH), stand stand percent of the varieties was observed strongly
percent, spike length (SL) and grain yield (YLD) on plant and correlating with the grain yield (Table 2). Varieties with high
plot basis. On plant basis, data were collected from five plants stand percent were also seen to be high in grain yield. This
randomly selected from the four middle rows of each plot. The result is in agreement with previous study of barley genotypes
two side-rows were excluded as borders and the mean values (Buli & Beyene, 2021). GGE biplot analysis is presented
of those five plants was computed and used as plot data for (Figure 1 & 2) for grain yield using PCA1 and PCA2. The figure
analysis, where the on plot basis data were collected from the illustrates which genotype performs best where or which is
four middle rows and finally harvested for the plot data. Spike best in which environment.

Table 1. Analysis of variance (Mean squares) for food barley characters

Mean squares
S.V DF PlH GFP Stand SL YLD
Loc 3 1948.21** 10.51NS 4520.34** 3.19* 2877754.08**
Gen 9 543.95** 36.64** 479.89** 6.85** 202390.46**
Loc x gen 27 78.10** 47.73** 165.64** 1.31* 83210.53**
Error 7.18 3.46 38.60 0.45 8418.30
CV 3.18 2.79 7.46 10.42 14.33

Table 2. Growth, yield and yield related parameters mean values for food barley varieties
Varieties’ Mean Values
GFP PH Stand SL YLD
Harbu 57.3D 93.6E 67.5E 5.1F 386.2E
HB-1307 60.2AB 90.3F 82.1CD 6.2DE 702.2B
HB-1965 61.6A 88.2FG 85.8BCD 6.5 CD 643.6BC
Shege 57.8CD 87.4G 81.7CD 7.3AB 645.8BC
HB-42 59.0BC 108.8A 86.6ABC 5.7E 610.3C
Dimtu 55.5E 102.6B 83.6BCD 7.7A 476.7D
EH-1493 59.0BC 98.9CD 91.3A 6.4D 798.7A
Cross-41/98 58.8BC 99.8C 85.5BCD 7.0BC 693.7B
HB-1966 59.6B 94.4E 87.4AB 6.1DE 806.8A
Local check 57.0DE 97.0D 81.3D 6.0DE 637.8BC
Mean 58.6 96.1 83.3 6.4 640.2
LSD 1.5 2.2 5.1 0.6 74.9
CV 3.2 2.8 7.5 10.4 14.3

www.jinagri.com Buli, 2022 2

 stress tolerance or resistance and so have different reaction to
varying seasons (Mahasi et al., 2006). Even the stable
genotypes may react differently to varying seasons. In the
current study, variety HB-1965 was the second highest yielder
next to HB-1966 in 2019 where it has drastically fallen in
2020.

CONCLUSION

The barley varieties interacted highly by the environment and

finally variety HB-1966 gave the highest yield followed by EH-
1493. There was high genotype by environment interaction.
The first PCA with 55.75% accounted for most of the
variability in yield trait. The first and second PCAs added up to
85.17% of the total variability in yield trait.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Workineh Mekasa Buli planned and executed the experiment.

The data management, analysis and interpretation was also
carried out and finally the paper is written by the same author.

Figure 1. First and second PCA plot for ten food barley ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
varieties
I acknowledge Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural research for
the financial support to execute the experiment. My
acknowledgement also goes to Barley National Research
Program and Mr. Niguse Tamene, senior Technical assistant in
cereal crops research of Ambo Agricultural Research Center,
for field management and data recording.

COMPETING INTERESTS
The author has no conflict of interests.

ETHICS APPROVAL

Not applicable

REFERENCES

Asfaw, Z. (1988). Variation in the morphology of the spike

within Ethiopian barley, Hordeum vulgare L.(Poaceae). Acta
Agriculturae Scandinavica, 38(3), 277-288.
Figure 2. First and third PCA plot for ten food barley
Buli, W. M., & Ali, H. M. Assessing genetic Variability in Malt
varieties
Barley (Hordeum distichon L.) Genotypes in Southeastern
Ethiopia. International Journal of Research Studies in
Accordingly, genotypes 2, 7, 9, 4 and 5 were with large positive
Agricultural Sciences (IJRSAS), 7(8), 23-26.
scores, having the highest mean grain yield in the indicated
order. The first two PCAs accounted for 85.17% (PCA1=
55.75% and PCA2=29.42%) of the total principal components. Buli, W.M., & Beyene, M.M. (2021). Participatory varietal
The first principal component on its own accounted above half selection of malt barley (Hordeum distichon L.)
of the variability in yield trait of the varieties studied. From genotypes. Journal of Innovative Agriculture, 8(4), 43-46.
the principal component analysis it was observed that
genotypes 2, 5 and 7 were seen most likely to be stable. Ceccarelli, S. (1989). Wide adaptation: How wide?.
Varieties located near the concentric circle are more stable Euphytica, 40(3), 197-205.
while those located far away from it are more responsive.
Varieties that are located within the same quadrant interact Ceccarelli, S., Grando, S., Shevstov, V., Vivar, H., Yayaoui, A., El-
positively while those that are located in the opposite Bhoussini, M., & Baum, M. (1999). The ICARDA strategy for
quadrant have negative interaction (Laurentin & Montilla, global barley improvement. Rachis, 18(2), 3-12.
1999). Genotypes have different characters in growth habit, in

www.jinagri.com Buli, 2022 3

CSA., (2016). Central Statistics Authority Report on Area and
Production of Crops. Agricultural Sample Survey, Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia.

FAO., (2005). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United

Nations. Estimates of world production and harvested area.
http//www.faostat.fao.org.

Gomez, K. A., & Gomez, A. A. (1984). Statistical procedures for

agricultural research. John wiley & sons.

Laurentin, H. E., & Montilla, D. (1999). Analysing genotype by

environment interaction in sesame (Sesamum indicum L.)
population. Sesame and safflower newsletter, (14), 27-32.

Lister, D. L., Jones, H., Oliveira, H. R., Petrie, C. A., Liu, X.,
Cockram, J., ... & Jones, M. K. (2018). Barley heads east: Genetic
analyses reveal routes of spread through diverse Eurasian
landscapes. PloS one, 13(7), e0196652.

Mahasi, M. J., Pathak, R. S., Wachira, F. N., Riungu, T. C., Kinyua,

M. G., & Waweru, J. K. (2006). Genotype by environment (GxE)
interaction and stability in safflower (Carthamus tinctorious
L.). Asian Journal of Plant Sciences.

Zecevic, V., Knežević, D., & Mićanović, D. (2004). Genetic

correlations and path coefficient analysis of yield and quality
components in wheat. Genetika, 36(1), 13-21.

www.jinagri.com Buli, 2022 4