GENETIC DIVERGENCE STUDIES IN HIGH ZINC AND DROUGHT TOLERANT RICE (Oryza sativa L.) ACCESSIONS USING MORPHOLOGICAL TRAITS

S.K. SINGH¹, VISHAL MAURYA², P.R. VENNELA³*, D.K. SINGH^4
1Department of Genetics & Plant Breeding, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, 221005, India
²Department of Genetics & Plant Breeding, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, 221005, India
³Department of Genetics & Plant Breeding, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, 221005, India
⁴Department of Genetics & Plant Breeding, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, 221005, India
* Corresponding Author : vprudhviraj.2@gmail.com

Received : 06-07-2018     Accepted : 27-08-2018     Published : 30-08-2018
Volume : 10     Issue : 8       Pages : 478 - 481
Genetics 10.8 (2018):478-481

Keywords : ANOVA, D2 analysis, Diversity, Drought, intra cluster and inter cluster
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Authors are thankful to IRRI, South Asia hub for providing the seed material through Harvest Plus project under principle investigation of S.K. Singh. Author also thankful to Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, 221005, India
Author Contribution : All author equally contributed

Morphological characterization of twenty three rice accessions which includes, four of high Zinc (R-RHZ-7, CGZR-1, IR83294-66-2-2-3-2 and IR83668-35-2-2-2), fifteen of drought tolerant and four checks (Swarna, MTU-1010, Sahbagidhan and NDR-97) was done to observe genetic diversity to identify suitable genotypes for future breeding program. Data on fifteen morphological characters were recorded for this study. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed the highly significant differences among the accessions for all the characters under study which explains a wide range of morphological diversity among them. These accessions were grouped into five different clusters based on Tocher method of clustering. Cluster I contains 7 out of 23 accessions, cluster II comprises 6 accessions and cluster III having 8 accessions. Clusters IV and V consist of only one accession each, indicating their distinctness among themselves and also from other accessions. The highest intra-cluster distance was observed in the cluster III (754.11) which comprised of 8 accessions. The highest inter-cluster distance (6465.17) was found between cluster II and V followed by cluster I and V (4819.21) and cluster III and V (3431.24). The smallest inter-cluster distance (555.01) was observed between I and II followed by cluster I and III (759.32) and cluster II and III (1428.35). The highest intra-cluster distance was found in cluster III (754.11) and least was found in clusters IV and V due to their monogenotypic nature. The clusters II and V found to be most diverse and hybridization between the accessions of these clusters may produce desirable segregants.

1. USDA (United States Department of Agriculture) Rice Outlook, May 2014.
2. Rao C R. (1952) Advanced statistical methods in biometrical research. John Wiley and Sons .Inc. New York.
3. Sharma A., Yadav D.V., Singh A.K., Yadav G., Gulia S., Gupta K.R.., Singh R. and Deepak Prem. (2002) National Journal of Plant Improvement 4(2),46-49.
4. Purabi Das, Avijit K., Nirmal M. and Indrani D. (2004) Journal. of Interacademicia 8(4), 488-494.
5. Chaturvedi H.P. and Maurya D.M. (2005) Advances in Plant Sciences 18(1), 349-353.
6. Chandra B. S., Reddy T.D. and Ansari N.A. (2007) Research on Crops 8(3), 600-603.
7. Bhati P.K., Singh S.K., Dhurai S.Y. and Sharma A. (2015) Electronic Journal of Plant Breeding 6(2),528-534.
8. Kumar A., Singh S.K., Sharma A., Bhati P.K. and Dhurai S.Y. (2014) Research Journal of Agricultural Sciences 5(2), 249-253.
9. Hedge S.G. and Patil C.S. (2000) Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Sciences 13(3),533-549.
10. Sharma S.K., Nandan R., Singh S.K., Sharma A.K., Kumar S., Sharma P.K., Singh M.K. and Kumar V. (2011) Progressive Agriculture 11(2),321-325.
11. Kuchanur P H, Naresh Dronavalli and Vijayakumar A.G. (2009) Crop Improvement 36(1), 20-24.
12. Ovung C.Y., Lal G.M. and Rai P.K. (2012) International Journal of Agricultural Technology, 8(3), 1059-1065.