The aim of this research was to verify whether the use of wheat yield trials results analysis, using the Papadakis method, modifies the assumptions of the mathematical model and indicators of experimental precision. Wheat productivity data, 2008 to 2011 years, obtained from 48 cultivar yield trials under randomized block design were considered. In each trial, either with or without the use of the Papadakis method, the assumptions, analysis of variance and hypothesis tests were verified as well as the calculations to identify the experimental precision. The assumptions were not violated by both methods (with or without de Papadakis method). With the Papadakis method (neighboring plots) the differentiation of the Fasoulas index increased, 29.7 compared to 15.5 without the use of the method, and the selective accuracy, 0.95 against 0.90 without the method. Trials using three replications when analysed by the Papadakis method allowed to identify superior bean varieties with 90% precision. In order to maintain the same precision (90%), six replications would be necessary without the Papadakis method.
anova assumptions; precisions measure; spatial analysis; Triticum aestivum
