English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Parental, F(1) , F (2) , BC (1) and BC (2) generations of four crosses involving four cultivars of durum wheat (Triticum durum Desf.) were evaluated at two sites in Tunisia. A three-parameter model was found inadequate for all cases except crosses Chili x Cocorit 71 at site Sidi Thabet and Inrat 69 x Karim at both sites. In most cases a digenic epistatic model was sufficient to explain variation in generation means. Dominance effects (h) and additive x additive epistasis (i) (when significant) were more important than additive (d) effects and other epistatic components. Considering the genotype-by-environment interaction, the non-interactive model (m, d, h, e) was found adequate. Additive variance was higher than environmental variance in three crosses at both sites. The estimated values of narrow-sense heritability were dependent upon the cross and the sites and were 0%-85%. The results indicate that appropriate choice of environment and selection in later generations would increase grain protein content in durum wheat.

Epistasis and genotype-by-environment interaction of grain protein content in durum wheat