000			03675nab|a22004097a|4500
001			69370
003			MX-TxCIM
005			20251211134552.0
008			20259s2025||||mx |||p|op||||00||0|eng|d
022			_a0179-9541
022			_a1439-0523 (Online)
024	8		_ahttps://doi.org/10.1111/pbr.70024
040			_aMX-TxCIM
041			_aeng
100	1		_aAleri, I. _918056
245	1	0	_aComparison of hybrid maize (Zea mays L.) performance developed through conventional pedigree and doubled haploid breeding methods
260			_aUnited Kingdom : _bJohn Wiley & Sons Ltd., _c2025.
500			_aPeer review
520			_aPedigree breeding and doubled haploid (DH) methods are the two widely used breeding approaches in maize by the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) to derive fixed inbred lines. The objective of this study was to compare the variability and performance of testcross hybrids developed through pedigree and DH breeding methods from two breeding crosses. From each breeding cross, 40-45 fixed lines developed via pedigree and DH methods were used. The lines were crossed with a single cross tester from a complementary heterotic group, and the resulting testcrosses alongside the commercial checks were evaluated under optimum and stress conditions in Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda. The means and homogeneity of variances of grain yield and agronomic traits of the pedigree and DH lines were compared by using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. We found that the DH lines were distributed in the same manner as the pedigree lines for all traits under stress and optimum conditions. Both methods produced hybrids that were higher grain yielding than the best commercial checks included in the trials. Although the pedigree method had more opportunity for recombination than the DH method, our results indicated that it did not produce a sample of recombinants that differed significantly from the DH lines; thus, both methods were equally efficient for use in deriving homozygous lines from F1 hybrids. Both pedigree selection and DH breeding methods have their particular strengths and weaknesses, but neither is superior nor inferior in the development of inbred lines. However, the adoption of the DH method is increasing in large commercial maize breeding programmes due to faster production of genetically homozygous lines than the pedigree method.
546			_aText in English
591			_aAleri, I. : Not in IRS staff list but CIMMYT Affiliation
591			_aChavangi, A. : Not in IRS staff list but CIMMYT Affiliation
597			_dBill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) _dFoundation for Food & Agriculture Research (FFAR) _dUnited States Agency for International Development (USAID) _dAccelerating Genetic Gains in Maize and Wheat (AGG) _dCGIAR Research Program on Maize (MAIZE) _aClimate adaptation & mitigation _aNutrition, health & food security _bAccelerated Breeding _bBreeding Resources _cGenetic Innovation _uhttps://hdl.handle.net/10568/178122 _fBreeding for Tomorrow
650			_adoubled haploid
650		7	_aGenetic variation _2AGROVOC _91129
650		7	_aHomogenization _2AGROVOC _940338
650		7	_aMaize _2AGROVOC _91173
650		7	_aPedigrees _2AGROVOC _922812
700	1		_aBeyene, Y. _gGlobal Maize Program _8INT2891 _9870
700	1		_aChavangi, A. _911193
700	1		_aGowda, M. _gGlobal Maize Program _8I1705963 _9795
700	1		_aBurgueño, J. _gGenetic Resources Program _8INT3239 _9907
700	1		_aChaikam, V. _gGlobal Maize Program _8INT3356 _9936
773	0		_tPlant Breeding _dUnited Kingdom : y John Wiley & Sons Ltd., 2025. _x0179-9541 _gIn press _wu445212
942			_cJA _n0 _2ddc
999			_c69370 _d69362