TABLE 7.

Genetic parameters [heritability as broad sense heritability (H²) and genotypic values (best linear unbiased predictors)] of micronutrient densities (Fe and Zn) and fruit yield created from a linear fully randomized model on a yearly basis.

	Fe density (mg 100 g–1 FW)		Zn density (mg 100 g–1 FW)		Fruit yield (kg/pooled rep)
	2015	2016	2015	2016	2015	2016
H (broad sense)	0.24	0.31	0.21	0.43	0.86	0.95
Grand mean (±standard error)	0.54 (±0.04)	0.70 (±0.05)	0.35 (±0.03)	0.25 (±0.01)	3.52 (±0.29)	3.87 (±0.28)
Spearman’s rank correlation rho	0.52 p-value = 0.02098		0.64 p-value = 0.002778		0.88 p-value < 2.2e-16
Pearson’s correlation	0.49 p-value = 0.02709		0.66 p-value = 0.001582		0.95 p-value = 2.582e-10

Cultivar = genotype	Genotypic value	Mean (predicted)	Rank	Genotypic value	Mean (predicted)	Rank	Genotypic value	Mean (predicted)	Rank	Genotypic value	Mean (predicted)	Rank	Genotypic value	Mean (predicted)	Rank	Genotypic value	Mean (predicted)	Rank
Amoroso F1	0.036	0.574	7	−0.050	0.646	13	0.004	0.351	10	−0.020	0.228	13	−0.454	3.065	14	−0.054	3.814	9
Annamay F1	0.000	0.539	10	−0.034	0.662	12	0.099	0.447	4	−0.002	0.246	11	−0.222	3.297	11	0.209	4.077	6
Auriga	−0.097	0.442	18	−0.092	0.604	15	−0.083	0.264	17	−0.025	0.223	15	−0.209	3.310	10	−0.373	3.495	14
Bartelly F1	−0.006	0.533	11	0.100	0.796	4	0.016	0.363	9	0.057	0.305	3	0.357	3.876	6	0.386	4.254	5
Benarys Gartenfreude	−0.014	0.525	12	0.302	0.998	1	0.027	0.374	8	0.086	0.333	1	−0.889	2.630	17	−0.803	3.065	18
Black Cherry	0.006	0.545	9	0.075	0.771	8	−0.008	0.340	11	0.035	0.283	6	−0.408	3.111	12	−0.678	3.190	17
Bocati F1	−0.086	0.452	15	−0.199	0.497	20	−0.088	0.260	18	−0.082	0.166	20	2.192	5.711	1	1.588	5.456	4
Campari F1	−0.083	0.456	14	0.068	0.764	9	−0.071	0.277	16	0.019	0.267	8	0.047	3.566	8	0.003	3.871	8
Cappricia F1	−0.149	0.389	20	−0.168	0.529	17	−0.101	0.247	20	−0.064	0.184	18	1.845	5.364	3	1.879	5.747	3
Goldita	0.094	0.633	3	0.099	0.795	5	0.115	0.463	1	0.017	0.265	9	−1.523	1.996	19	−1.537	2.331	19
Green Zebra	0.028	0.567	8	−0.140	0.556	16	−0.036	0.312	13	−0.052	0.196	16	−0.637	2.882	15	−0.330	3.538	13
Harzfeuer F1	−0.095	0.444	17	−0.021	0.675	11	−0.068	0.280	14	−0.019	0.228	12	0.850	4.369	5	−0.233	3.635	11
Lyterno F1	−0.081	0.458	13	−0.185	0.511	18	−0.069	0.279	15	−0.062	0.186	17	1.511	5.029	4	2.047	5.915	1
Primabella	0.210	0.749	2	0.024	0.720	10	0.039	0.387	6	0.015	0.263	10	−1.008	2.511	18	−0.426	3.442	15
Primavera	0.076	0.615	5	0.076	0.772	7	0.103	0.451	2	0.035	0.283	7	0.125	3.644	7	0.141	4.009	7
Resi	0.222	0.760	1	0.168	0.864	2	0.103	0.451	3	0.050	0.297	4	−2.421	1.098	20	−2.562	1.306	20
Roterno F1	−0.108	0.431	19	−0.193	0.504	19	−0.096	0.252	19	−0.067	0.181	19	2.175	5.694	2	1.929	5.797	2
Sakura F1	−0.095	0.444	16	0.081	0.777	6	−0.009	0.339	12	0.046	0.294	5	−0.409	3.110	13	−0.329	3.539	12
Supersweet 100 F1	0.093	0.632	4	0.156	0.852	3	0.084	0.432	5	0.057	0.305	2	−0.886	2.633	16	−0.660	3.208	16
Tastery F1	0.051	0.589	6	−0.066	0.630	14	0.039	0.387	7	−0.024	0.224	14	−0.035	3.484	9	−0.198	3.670	10

The genotypic values were ranked for single years, and correlations between both years were calculated. *Could not estimate Pooled Rep cause of singularity but we kept it in the model. After checking, it did not change the model results.