[Balzarini M. 2002. Applications of mixed models in plant breeding. In: Quantitative genetics, genomics, and plant breeding (ed.: M.S. Kang). CABI Publishing, UK, 353-365.]Search in Google Scholar
[Bradu D., Gabriel K.R. 1978. The biplot as a diagnostic tool for models of two-way tables. Technometrics, 20, 47-68. DOI: 10.1080/00401706.1978.10489617.10.1080/00401706.1978.10489617]Search in Google Scholar
[Cooper M., DeLacy I.H. 1994. Relationships among analytic methods used to study genotypic variation and genotype-by-environment interaction in plant breeding Multi-environment experiments. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 88, 561-572. DOI: 10.1007/BF01240919.10.1007/BF01240919]Search in Google Scholar
[Cornelius P.L., Crossa J. 1999. Prediction assessment of shrinkage estimators of multiplicative models for multi-environment cultivar trials. Crop Science, 39, 998-1009. DOI: 10.2135/cropsci-1999.0011183X003900040007x.]Search in Google Scholar
[Cornelius P.L., Seyedsadr M. 1997. Estimation of general linear-bilinear models for two-way tables. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation, 58, 287-322. DOI: 10.1080/00949659708811837.10.1080/00949659708811837]Search in Google Scholar
[Cornelius P.L., Crossa J., Seyedsadr M. 1996. Statistical tests and estimators of multiplicative models for cultivar trials. In: Genotype- by-Environment Interaction (eds.: M.S. Kang, H.G. Gauch, Jr). CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, 199-234.]Search in Google Scholar
[Correia I., Alia R., Yan W., David T., Aguiar A., Almeida M.H. 2010. Genotype × environment interactions in Pinus pinaster at age 10 in a multi-environment trial in Portugal: a maximum likelihood approach. Annals of Forest Science, 67, 612p1-612p9. DOI: 10.1051/forest/2010025.10.1051/forest/2010025]Search in Google Scholar
[Crossa J. 2012. From genotype × environment interaction to gene × environment interaction. Current Genomics, 13 (3), 225-244. Available at: http://ejournals.ebsco.com.prxy4.ursus.maine.edu/direct.asp?ArticleID=473EADE10B8406E6D70F.10.2174/138920212800543066]Search in Google Scholar
[Ding M., Tier B., Yan W., Wu H.X., Powell M.B., McRae T.A. 2008. Application of GGE biplot analysis to evaluate Genotype (G), Environment (E), a nd G×E interaction on Pinus radiata: a case study. New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science, 38 (1), 132-142. Available at: http://www.scionresearch.com/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/5596/NZJFS_38_12008_Ding_et_al_132-142.pdf.]Search in Google Scholar
[Eberhart S.A., Russell W.A. 1966. Stability parameter for comparing varieties. Crop Science, 6, 36-40. Available at: http://www.sap.uchile.cl/descargas/fisiogenetica/Stability%20parameters%20for%20comparing%20varieties_Eberhart_Russell1966.pdf.10.2135/cropsci1966.0011183X000600010011x]Search in Google Scholar
[Finlay K.W., Wilkinson G.N. 1963. The analysis of adaptation in a plant breeding programme. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 14, 742-754. DOI: 10.1071/AR9630742.10.1071/AR9630742]Search in Google Scholar
[Gabriel K.R. 1971. The biplot graphic display of matrices with application to principal component analysis. Biometrika, 58, 453-467. DOI: 10.1093/biomet/58.3.453.10.1093/biomet/58.3.453]Search in Google Scholar
[Gabriel K.R. 1972. Analysis of meteorological data by means of canonical decompositions and biplots. Journal of Applied Meteorology, 11, 1071-1077. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1972)011<1071:AOMDBM>2.0.CO;2.10.1175/1520-0450(1972)011<1071:AOMDBM>2.0.CO;2]Search in Google Scholar
[Gabriel K.R. 1978. Least squares approximation of matrices by additive and multiplicative models. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 40, 186-196. Available at: http://www.jstor.org.prxy4.ursus.maine.edu/stable/2984752.]Search in Google Scholar
[Gauch H.G. 1988. Model selection and validation for yield trials with interaction. Biometrics, 44, 705-715. DOI: 10.2307/2531585.10.2307/2531585]Search in Google Scholar
[Gauch H.G 1992. Statistical Analysis of Regional Yield Trials: AMMI Analysis of Factorial Designs. Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands.]Search in Google Scholar
[Gauch G.H., Zobel R.W. 1997. Interpreting mega- -environments and targeting genotypes. Crop Science, 37, 311-326. DOI: 10.2135/cropsci1997 .0011183X003700020002x.]Search in Google Scholar
[Golub G.H., Reinsch C. 1971. The singular value decomposition and least squares solutions. In: Handbook for Automatic Computation (eds.: J.H. Wilkinson, C. Renisch). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 134-151.]Search in Google Scholar
[Hocking R.R., Speed F.M. 1975. A full-rank analysis of some linear model problems. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 70, 706-712. DOI: 10.2307/2285959.10.2307/2285959]Search in Google Scholar
[Hotelling H. 1933. Analysis of a complex of statistical variables into principal components. Journal of Educational Psychology, 24, 417-441, 498-520. DOI: 10.1037/h0071325.10.1037/h0071325]Search in Google Scholar
[Hotelling H. 1936. Relations between two sets of variates. Biometrika, 27, 321-377. DOI: 10.2307/2333955.10.2307/2333955]Search in Google Scholar
[Jolliffe I.T. 1972. Discarding Variables in a Principal Component Analysis. I: Artifical Data. Applied Statistics, 21, 160-173. DOI: 10.2307/2346488.10.2307/2346488]Search in Google Scholar
[Jolliffe I.T. 1973. Discarding Variables in a Principal Component Analysis. II: Real Data. Applied Statistics, 22, 21-31. DOI: 10.2307/2346300.10.2307/2346300]Search in Google Scholar
[Khattree R., Naik D.N. 2000. Multivariate data reduction and discrimination with SAS software. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.]Search in Google Scholar
[Kempton R.A. 1984. The use of biplots in interpreting variety by environment interactions. Journal of Agricultural Science, 103, 123-135. DOI: 10.1017/ S0021859600043392.]Search in Google Scholar
[Kim I., Kwon H., Ryu K., Choi W.Y. 2008. Provenance by Site Interaction of Pinus densiflora in Korea. Silvae Genetica, 57 (3), 131-139.]Search in Google Scholar
[Littell R.C., Milliken G.A., Stroup W.W., Wolfinger R.D. 1996. SAS system for mixed models. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.]Search in Google Scholar
[Liu G., Cornelius P.L. 2001. Simulations and derived approximations for the means and standard deviations of the characteristic roots of a Wishart matrix. Communications in Statistics - Simulation and Computation, 30, 963-989. DOI: 10.1081/SAC-100107791.10.1081/SAC-100107791]Search in Google Scholar
[McCabe G.P. 1984. Principal Variables. Technometrics, 26 (2), 137-144. DOI: 10.2307/1268108.10.2307/1268108]Search in Google Scholar
[Murillo O. 2001. Genotype by environment interaction and genetic gain on unbalanced Pinus oocarpa provenances trials. Agronomia Costarricense 25 (1), 21-32.]Search in Google Scholar
[Patterson H.D., Thompson R. 1971. Recovery of inter- -block information when block sizes are unequal. Biometrika, 58, 545-554. DOI: 10.2307/2334389.10.2307/2334389]Search in Google Scholar
[Patterson H.D., Thompson R. 1975. Maximum likelihood estimation of components of variance. Proceedings of 8th International Biometric Conference, 197-207.]Search in Google Scholar
[Pearson K. 1901. On lines and planes of closest fit to systems of points in space. Philosophical Magazine, 2 (11), 559-572. DOI: 10.1080/14786440109462720.10.1080/14786440109462720]Search in Google Scholar
[Piepho H.P. 1998. Empirical best linear unbiased prediction in cultivar trials using factor analytic variance- covariance structures. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 97, 195-201.]Search in Google Scholar
[Piepho H.P., Möhring J. 2006. Selection in cultivar trials - is it ignorable? Crop Sciences, 46, 192-201.]Search in Google Scholar
[SAS Institute Inc. 2013. SAS/STAT® 13.1 User’s Guide. Cary, NC:SAS Institute Inc.]Search in Google Scholar
[Saxton A.M. 2004. Genetic analysis of complex traits using SAS. SAS Institute, Inc. Cary, N.C.]Search in Google Scholar
[Sixto H., Gil P.M., Ciria P., Camps F., Cañellas I., Voltas J. 2015, Interpreting genotype-by-environment interaction for biomass production in hybrid poplars under short-rotation coppice in Mediterranean environments. GCB Bioenergy. DOI: 10.1111/ gcbb.12313.]Search in Google Scholar
[Taibi K. 2014. Title of dissertation “Integrated approach for addressing assisted population migration programs in forest management to climate change: Out- -planting performance, genotype by environment interactions, physiological and molecular response”. The Polytechnic University of Valencia, Spain.]Search in Google Scholar
[Ukalska J., Kociuba W. 2013. Phenotypical diversity of winter triticale genotypes collected in the Polish Gene Bank between 1982 and 2008 with regard to major quantitative traits. Field Crops Research, 149, 203-212. DOI: 10.1016/j.fcr.2013.05.010.10.1016/j.fcr.2013.05.010]Search in Google Scholar
[Ukalski K., Śmiałowski T., Ukalska J. 2010a. Analysis of oat yield environments using graphical GGE method. Colloquium Biometricum, 40, 81-93.]Search in Google Scholar
[Ukalski K., Śmiałowski T., Ukalska J. 2010b. Analiza plonowania i stabilności genotypów owsa za pomocą metody graficznej typu GGE. Żywność. Nauka. Technologia. Jakość, 3 (70), 127-140.]Search in Google Scholar
[Yan W. 1999. A study on the methodology of cultivar evaluation based on yield trial data with special reference to winter wheat in Ontario. Ph.D. thesis, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada.]Search in Google Scholar
[Yan W. 2001. GGE biplot: a Windows application for graphical analysis of multi-environment trial data and other types of two-way data. Agronomy Journal, 93, 1111-1118. DOI: 10.2134/agronj2001.9351111x.10.2134/agronj2001.9351111x]Search in Google Scholar
[Yan W. 2002. Singular-value partitioning in biplot analysis of multienvironment trial data. Agronomy Journal, 94, 990-996. DOI: 10.2134/agronj2002.0990.10.2134/agronj2002.0990]Search in Google Scholar
[Yan W., Cornelius P.L., Crossa J., Hunt L.A. 2001. Two types of GGE biplots for analyzing multienvironment trial data. Crop Science, 41, 656-663. DOI: 10.2135/cropsci2001.413656x.10.2135/cropsci2001.413656x]Search in Google Scholar
[Yan W., Hunt L.A. 2001. Interpretation of genotype x environment interaction for winter wheat yield in Ontario. Crop Science, 41, 19-25. DOI: 10.2135/ cropsci2001.41119x.10.2135/cropsci2001.41119x]Search in Google Scholar
[Yan W., Hunt L.A., Sheng Q., Szlavnics Z. 2000. Cultivar evaluation and mega-environment investigation based on the GGE biplot. Crop Science, 40, 597-605. DOI: 10.2135/cropsci2000.403597x.10.2135/cropsci2000.403597x]Search in Google Scholar
[Yan W., Kang M.S. 2003. GGE biplot analysis: a graphical tool for breeders, genetics and agronomists. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.10.1201/9781420040371]Search in Google Scholar
[Yan W., Rajcan I.R. 2002. Biplot analysis of test sites and trait relations of soybean in Ontario. Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 42, 11-20. DOI: 10.2135/ cropsci2002.0011.]Search in Google Scholar
[Yan W., Tinker N.A. 2005. An integrated biplot analysis system for displaying, interpreting, and exploring genotype-×environment interactions. Crop Science, 45, 1004-1016. DOI: 10.2135/cropsci2004.0076.10.2135/cropsci2004.0076]Search in Google Scholar
[Yan W., Tinker N.A. 2006. Biplot analysis of multi-environment trial data: Principles and applications. Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 86, 623-645.]Search in Google Scholar
[Zhao X., Xia H., Wang X., Wang C., Liang D., Li K., et al. 2016. Variance and stability analyses of growth characters in half-sib Betula platyphylla families at three different sites in China. Euphytica, 208, 173-186. DOI: 10.1007/s10681-015-1617-7.10.1007/s10681-015-1617-7]Search in Google Scholar
[Zobel R.W., Wright M.J., Gauch H.G. 1988. Statistical analysis of a yield trial. Agronomy Journal, 80, 388-393. DOI: 10.2134/agronj1988.000219620080 00030002x.]Search in Google Scholar