Comparison of some selection procedures and objectives in faba beans (Vicia faba L.). I. direct and index selection for seed yield

Summary Starting with two heterogeneous F₂ populations, each based on 20 cross combinations, different selection procedures were applied for four consecutive selection cycles. Three of the selection procedures involved seed yield per plant (SYP): (i) direct selection for SYP (DSY); (ii) indexselection for SYP (ISY) with plant length, the ratio of the vegetative top to plant length, end of grain filling and duration of the generative stage as auxiliary characters and finally; (iii) independent culling levels selection (ICL) for the index described above and crude protein content. For ICL-selection the attention is focussed on SYP in this paper.For all three selection procedures, predicted and realized responses were calculated and expressed as percentage of a corresponding non-selected population. The intensities of selection differed over selection methods and generations, mostly due to practical constraints.As far as predicted responses are concerned, ISY-selection seemed to be slightly superior to DSY-selection and DSY-selection to ICL-selection. This order may partly be due to differences in selection intensity. However, none of the predictions was very accurate, but the predictions of ICL-selection seemed to be the most accurate. This has been ascribed also to the relative mild selection intensity applied in ICL-selection. It is concluded that a decision in favour of a complicated selection procedure like index selection based on predicted responses only cannot be defended. As far as realized responses are concerned, DSY-selection seems to be slightly superior to the other two selection procedures, as it is the only procedure that resulted in a more or less stable positive response to selection.The auxiliary characters, especially plant length, showed a marked correlated response to all three selection procedures. In case of direct selection for SYP this seemed paradoxical with the inefficiency of index selection, but, it may reflect the differences in the genuine genotypic correlations and the estimated genotypic correlations.