Three rapid methods of measuring yield (small plots harvested at the green stage, and single plants harvested at the green or at the mature stage) were tested for correlation with yield from a replicated multiple-harvest yield trial to determine how well they predicted performance of 10 hybrids in 1981, and 18 lines and cultivars tested in 1982. Only 2 methods of measuring yield were evaluated in 1981, small plots harvested once-over at the green stage and the standard replicated multiple-harvest trial. In that year, the most efficient method for measuring yield, based on capacity of the method to handle lines and to predict multiple-harvest trial performance, was 2 or 3 replications of 3 m plots harvested once-over. Those methods had a calculated advantage (relative capacity × correlation coefficient) of 43% to 80% over the replicated multiple-harvest trial. The most efficient method for measuring yield, of the 4 tested in 1982, was single plots with 1, 2, or 3 replications harvested once-over at the green stage. The tests had a calculated advantage of 102 to 107% over the replicated multiple-harvest trial, respectively. It was concluded that 2 or 3 replications in the test would provide the best results by controlling environmental variability without using an excessive number of seeds per family. In addition, the best correlation with yield in the multiple-harvest test was obtained when all fruit from the plot were counted, rather than just those of marketable size (38 to 60 mm diameter).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wehner et al. (1984) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: