Table 4.

Epistatic interactions in the E9×L5 population for non-transformed data, log-transformed data and plasticity traits. Reproductive trait, flower number (FLN), fruit number (FRN) and fruit set (FRS) values were studied in three different temperature regimes (T1: 25 °C day/20 °C night; T2: 30 °C day/25 °C night; T3: 35 °C day/30 °C night). A multi-environment QTL analysis was performed with ICIMapping. QTL1 and QTL2 columns indicate major effect QTLs identified in the E9×L5 and E6203×LA1589 population. The statistical significance (p-value) of the two-way ANOVA and the epistasis types (transgressive, co-adaptive and dominant) is also presented.

		Chr1/Position1		QTL1	Chr2/Position2												QTL2	ANOVA_18 p-Value	ANOVA-19 p-Value
Trait	Temp	Chr	Pos (cM)		1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12				Epistasis Type
FLN	T1	1	85			20											fln1.2_T2_2E	ns	ns	-
		6	20								10							<0.0001	0.0008	transgressive
	T2	8	0											60				0.0001	ns	co-adaptive
		8	45										40				fln9.1_T1_18	0.0014	ns	dominant
		11	25													65		0.0005	0.0288	dominant
	T3	9	60	BCfln9.1_T1											65		fln/frn11.1_T1	<0.0001	ns	dominant
FRN	T1	7	45										75					0.0006	0.0005	co-adaptive
	T2	4	65											70			frn10.1_T2_18	0.0001	ns	dominant
		6	20								30							<0.0001	ns	transgressive
		7	60										95				BCfln9.1_T2	0.0008	ns	co-adaptive
		11	5													65	frn11.1_T1_2E	0.0025	ns	transgressive
	T3	3	105	fln3.3_T1_19											5			ns	<0.0001	transgressive
		7	95	frs7.2_T2_18										0				ns	<0.0001	transgressive
FRS	T1	3	120	fln3.1_T1_19									95				BCfln9.1_T2	0.0002	0.0003	transgressive
Log FLN	T3	8	100													105		<0.0001	ns	transgressive
Log FRN	T1	7	45										75					0.0009	0.0005	co-adaptive
	T2	7	60										95					<0.0001	ns	dominant
Log FRS	T1	3	115										90					0.0002	0.0015	dominant
	T2	2	40								5							ns	0.0001	dominant
	T3	5	20										25				frslog5.1_T3_2E	0.0002	ns	transgressive
pFLN	T2 vs. T1	8	0											60				<0.0001	ns	co-adaptive
	T3 vs. T1	7	35												0			<0.0001	ns	dominant
pFRS	T3 vs. T2	2	0			25												<0.0001	ns	dominant
		2	35					25										<0.0001	ns	dominant