PRYT

AcronymDefinition
PRYTPhoenix Rising Yoga Therapy
References in periodicals archive ?
Phenotypic correlation coefficients for seed yield between PRYT and the mean of the 1996 tests were positive and significant (P [is less than] 0.
For selection in the PRYT, the average percentage of lines selected for seed yield was 37% by the family and 49% by the line method.
Even though fewer lines were chosen by the family method, the acceptance error was similar to the line method in the PRYT and in the 1996 tests.
The mean percentage of lines incorrectly rejected in the PRYT was 57% by the family and 41% by the line method.
The results indicated no advantage in maintaining family structure for selection of seed yield in either the PRYT or the individual replications in 1996.
The percentage of lines that had to be selected in the PRYT to retain the highest yielding line in the replicated tests ranged from 2 to 35% for the four populations, with an average of 14% (Table 4).
Correlations between the selected single row 1996 PRYT and advanced yield testing were variable, dependant upon the population.
Population Comparison A3733 x Burlison 1996 PRYT yield to 1997 + 1998 yield([sections]) (n = 30) 1996 PRYT yield rank to 1997 + 1998 yield rank Burlison x Edison 1996 PRYT yield to 1997 + 1998 yield (n = 30) 1996 PRYT yield rank to 1997 + 1998 yield rank Jack x Edison 1996 PRYT yield to 1997 + 1998 yield (n = 30) 1996 PRYT yield rank to 1997 + 1998 yield rank Jack x Resnik 1996 PRYT yield to 1997 + 1998 yield (n = 30) 1996 PRYT yield rank to 1997 + 1998 yield rank Jack x Thorne 1996 PRYT yield to 1997 + 1998 yield (n = 30) 1996 PRYT yield rank to 1997 + 1998 yield rank All populations 1996 PRYT yield to 1997 + 1998 yield (n = 150) 1996 PRYT yield rank to 1997 + 1998 yield rank Population r ([dagger]) P ([double dagger]) A3733 x Burlison 0.
Yield means for the top, middle, and bottom 10 1996 PRYT were compared with a yield mean of the 1997 + 1998 advanced yield test.
Comparison of means between 1996 PRYT and 1997 + 1998 advanced yield tests.
Matrices for each population were created to deter mine the change in ranking of the lines from PRYT to advanced yield tests.
In conclusion, the data from the populations examined reveals lines selected for advanced testing from the Asgrow A3733 x Burlison and Jack x Resnik populations were the most stable when PRYT testing is compared to advanced yield testing.