Evaluating sugarcane families by the method of dynamic technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (DTOPSIS)

1Citations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Enlarging the quantity of seedlings of elite families and discarding inferior sugarcane (Saccharum spp.) families could improve sugarcane breeding and selection efficiency. The feasibility of using the method Dynamic Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (DTOPSIS) method was explored to identify superior sugarcane families. Data on 5 traits: Brix, millable stalks per stool (MS), stalk diameter (SD), plant height (PH), and percent pith were collected from two family trials having 17 families and two check cultivars at two sites including plant-cane and frstratoon crops. The rest of the seedlings were planted into field for routine selection in the regular program. The DTOPSIS method calculates a comprehensive index (Ci) which expresses the closeness of a solution to the ideal solution and was used in this study to test the distance of each family to the ideal family. The Ci of the families was compared to the family selection rate in the regular program by determining the selection rate at Stage 1 to Stage 4 for each family in the regular program. The result indicated that the Ci values calculated from family trials were significantly (p<0.01) correlated to the selection rate at Stage 2 (r=0.8059), Stage3 (r=0.7967), and Stage 4 (r=0.8202), and indicating that promising clones were selected from families with higher Ci values in the family trial. Thus, it could be feasible to use DTOPSIS to determine elite sugarcane families and to eliminate inferior families and thereby, increasing the variety selection efficiency.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Zhao, P., Todd, J., Zhao, J., Liu, J., Yao, L., Hou, C., … Chen, X. (2014). Evaluating sugarcane families by the method of dynamic technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (DTOPSIS). Bragantia, 73(3), 229–236. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-4499.0126

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free