ISSN : 0975-2862
EISSN : 0975-9158
U. ROY1*, M.C. PALOTI2, A. TIGGA3, R.S. PATIL4
1Department of Plant Breeding & Genetics, Assam Agriculture University, Jorhat, 785013, Assam, India
2VNR Seeds PVT Ltd, Telangana, India
3Department of Plant Breeding & Genetics, Dr Rajendra Prasad Central Agricultural University, Pusa, 848125, India
4Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad, 580005, India
* Corresponding Author : royuasd@gmail.com
Received : 12-08-2019 Accepted : 26-10-2019 Published : 30-10-2019
Volume : 11 Issue : 10 Pages : 660 - 663
Genetics 11.10 (2019):660-663
Keywords : Genetic advance, GCV, Heritability, PCV, Transgressive segregants
Academic Editor : Suleyman Cylek, Katiyar Manoj
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Authors are thankful to Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad, 580005, India. Authors are also thankful to Hebbali Farm, UAS, Dharwad, Karnataka, 580005
Author Contribution : All authors equally contributed
The genetic variability present in the available germplasm may be utilized either for direct selection or for hybridization programme. The experimental material comprised of four F2 populations along with respective parents of crops. This study was carried out in the kharif 2015-16 at Agricultural Research Station, Hebbali, UAS, and Dharwad. All the selected three characteristics (seed cotton yield per plant, number of bolls per plant and boll weight) of F2 populations of four promising hybrids showed the greater phenotypic coefficient of variation (PCV) values than the genotypic coefficient of variation (GCV) values, alluding to influence of environment on the expression of these traits. Among the studiedF2 hybrid, HBS1 X Suvin (82.14% & 93.63%) showed the highest GCV and heritability value in all three characters, respectively. Simultaneously the cross FQT-37 x SB-YF-425, showed 82.14%, and 88.47% heritability in two characters i.e. seed cotton yield per plant and number of balls per plant respectively. High heritability was recorded for all the three traits and this high heritability was coupled with high genetic advance indicating that selection can be done based on the mean performance for the respective traits. The highest number of transgressive segregants was recorded in the F2 generation of cross FQT-37 x SB-YF-425 (28 nos.) followed by HBS-1 x Suvin (23 nos.) and FQT-26 x Suvin (21 nos.) for the trait, seed cotton yield. These selected transgressive segregant plants can be advanced to further generations to help in isolating and stabilizing superior genotypes. All the characters i.e. seed cotton yield per plant, number of bolls per plant and boll weight showed high heritability with high genetic advance that revealed the substantial contribution of additive gene action in the expression of traits, which is most valuable in further selection.
1. Percival E. and Kohel R.J. (1990) Adv. Agron., 44,225-228.
2. Anonymous (2016) Ann. Report, 3-7.
3. Johnson H.W., Robinson H.F. and Comstock R.E. (1955) Agron., J47,314-318.
4. Nilsson Ehle H. (1909) Bd5Nr., 2,1-22.
5. East F.M. (1916) Genet., 1,164-176.
6. Charles D.R. and Smith H.H. (1939) Genet., 24,34-38.
7. Powers L. (1942) Genet., 27,561-575.
8. Powers L., Locke L.F. and Gorret J.C. (1950) USDA Tech Bull, 998,56
9. Atta Y.T., Awad H.Y. and El-Gharbwy M.A. (1982) Agric. Res. Rev., 60,17-31.
10. Dabholkar A.R. (1992) New Delhi, India.
11. Falconer D.S. and Mackay T.F.C. (1996) 4th Edn., Benjamin Cummings, England.
12. Burton G.W. and Devane E.W. (1953) Agron., J45,478-486.
13. Singh R.K. and Chaudhary B.D. (1977) Kalyani Publishers, New Delhi.
14. Sharma R.K., Kumar S., Maji S., Pandey V.K., Singh S., Dubey A.K. and Kumar P. (2016) The Bioscan, 11(2),1153-1158.
15. Hanson C.H., Robinson H.F. and Comstock R.K. (1956) Agron., J48,314- 318.
16. Gururajan K.N. (2000) J Indian Soc. Cotton Improv., 25(2),17-22.
17. Kaushik S.K. and Kapoor C.J. (2006) J. Cotton Res. Dev., 20(2),185-190.
18. Gitte V.K., Misal M.B., Kalpande H.V. and Deshmukh J.D. (2007) J. Cotton Res. Dev., 21(1),27-28.
19. Menon S., Ansari B.A., Mari S.A., Soomro Z.A. and Rajper A.A. (2008) Pakist. J. Agric. Eng. Vet. Sci., 24 (1),5-13.
20. Magadum S., Banerjee U., Ravikesavan R., Gangapur D. and Boopathi M.N. (2012) Bioinfolet, 9(4A),484-487.
21. Vineela N., Sambamurthy J.S.V., Ramakumar P.V. and Ratna Kumari S. (2013) J. Agric. Vet. Sci., 4(3),7-10.
22. Divya R., Amalabalu P., Pushpa R. and Kavithamani D. (2014) Afr. J. Pl. Sci., 8(1),1-5.
23. Venkatesha K.T. and Patil R.S (2014) Trends in Biosci., 7(11),1099-1102.
24. Kumar MNV and Katageri IS (2017) Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. Agri. Sci., 6(6),975-983.
25. Kumar M.N.V., Katageri I.S., Kumar G.S. and Gowda A. (2017) Int. J. Curr. Microbiol, App. Sci., 7(1),1040-1051.
26. Kumari B., Kajjidoni S.T. and Salimath P.M. (2010) J. Agric. Sci., 23(3),491-494.
27. Raza H., Khan N.U., Khan S.A., Gul S., Latif A., Hussain I., Khan J., Raza S. and Baloch M. (2016) J. Animal Plant Sci., 26(4),1-7.
28. Uma R.B., Venkataravana P. and Priyadarshini S.K. (2018) J. Pharmacog. Phytochem., 7(5),3139-3143.
29. Muhammad J.B., Rehana L., Wajid A.J., Abdul W.B. and Muhammad A.A. (2018) Pak. J. Sci. Ind. Res. Ser. B. Biol. Sci., 61B(3),136-144.
30. Lingaiah N., Sarla N., Radhika K., Venkanna V., Vishnu V.R.D and Surender R. (2018) Intl. J. Agric. Sci., 10(9),5956-5957.
31. Rajolli M.G., Lingaiah H.B., Ishwaree R.M., Shivapriya M. and Kattegoudar J. (2017) Int. J. Pure App. Biosci., 5(6),965-970.
32. Venkatesan M., Eswaran R., Karthikeyan P. and Saravanan K.R. (2019) J. Pharmacog. Phytochem., SP2,10-14.
33. Kalaiselvan S., Subramanian A., Thirumurugan T. and Rajanbabu V. (2019) Elect. J. Pl. Breed., 10(2),601-613.
34. Vrinda J. and Patil B.R. (2018) Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci., 7(8),125-129.