Skip to main content

Table 1 Details of experiments conducted under upland and lowland drought stress and non-stress conditions for the identification of QTL

From: Multiple major QTL lead to stable yield performance of rice cultivars across varying drought intensities

Population size Season Environment GY (kg ha-1) DTF PH (cm) YR
M H Pa M H P M H P
365 DS2011 LSS 1556 ± 357 0.80 **** 86 ± 2 0.88 **** 97 ± 5 0.82 **** 70b
365 DS2012 LMS I 2547 ± 537 0.46 **** 79 ± 3 0.86 **** 91 ± 6 0.65 **** 51
365 DS2013 LMS II 2116 ± 466 0.65 **** 83 ± 4 0.56 **** 92 ± 8 0.37 **** 57
365 DS2012 LNS I 5237 ± 789 0.67 **** 74 ± 4 0.14 * 119 ± 7 0.74 ****  
365 DS2013 LNS II 4965 ± 629 0.78 **** 74 ± 2 0.87 **** 109 ± 7 0.71 ****  
100 WS2012 UMiS 3528 ± 673 0.93 **** 84 ± 2 0.98 **** 107 ± 5 0.81 **** 33b
  1. LSS: lowland severe stress; LMS: lowland moderate stress; LNS: lowland non-stress, UMiS: upland mild stress.
  2. means ± SED (M), broad-sense heritability (H), P values (P), and percentage yield reduction (YR) for grain yield (GY, in kg ha-1), days to 50% flowering (DTF), and plant height (PH, in cm).
  3. a: probability of difference between genotypes; *, ****: significant at 5%, and 0.01% P levels, respectively; b: compared with the DS2012 LNS trial.