GENETIC VARIABILITY OF DIVERSE CULTIVATED FINGER MILLET [ELEUSINE CORACANA (L.) GAERTN] GENOTYPES

A.E. SUNIL SUBRAMANYA¹*, S. PHADNIS², R.L. RAVIKUMAR^3
1Department of Plant Biotechnology, University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK, Bengaluru, 560065, Karnataka, India
²Department of Plant Biotechnology, University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK, Bengaluru, 560065, Karnataka, India
³Department of Plant Biotechnology, University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK, Bengaluru, 560065, Karnataka, India
* Corresponding Author : sunilae929@gmail.com

Received : 05-11-2019     Accepted : 18-12-2019     Published : 30-12-2019
Volume : 11     Issue : 12       Pages : 680 - 683
Genetics 11.12 (2019):680-683

Keywords : Finger millet, Genetic variability, Heritability, Genetic advance
Academic Editor : Vipul N Kapadia
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Authors are thankful to All India Coordinated Research Project on Small Millets (AICRPSM), GKVK, Bengaluru for providing seed material. Authors are also thankful to ISCB-Ragi network and Department of Science Technology (DST) - Fund for Improvement of S&T infrastructure in universities & higher educational institutions (FIST) for providing research facilities.
Author Contribution : All authors equally contributed

The genetic variability of 33 selected finger millet genotypes were assessed for magnitude of genetic variability, heritability and genetic mean advance for yield and yield contributing traits. Significant genotypic difference was observed among genotypes for all the 15 yield and yield contributing characters. The traits such as main earhead weight recorded the highest estimates of GCV (57.87 %) followed by grain yield per plant (33.90 %) and shoot dry weight (33.56 %). All the characters except test weight, number of fingers per main ear, number of tillers per plant and number of earheads per plant recorded high heritability in the present study indicated the relatively lower influence of environmental factors on these characters and where, phenotypic selection would be effective. The grain yield per plant recorded significant low differences between GCV and PCV coupled with high heritability and high genetic mean advance. Therefore, grain yield per plant could be potentially used in the genetic improvement of finger millet through selection and hybridization.

1. Sood S., Kumar A., Babu B.K., Gaur V.S., Pandey D., Kant L. and Pattnayak A. (2016) Frontier in Plant Science, 7, p1634.
2. Ceasar A.S., Maharajan T., Ajeesh Krishna T.P., Ramakrishnan M., Victor Roch G., Satish L. and Ignacimuthu S. (2018) Frontier in Plant Science, 9, e1054.
3. Dhami N.B., Kandel M. and Shrestha J. (2019) Journal of Genetics,
a. Genomics & Plant Breeding, 3(1), 23-28.
4. Sakamma S., Umesh K.B., Girish M.R., Ravi S.C., Satishkumar M. and Bellundagi V. (2018) Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 10, 162-179.
5. Bhandari H.R., Bhanu A.N., Srivastava K., Singh M.N. and Shreya (2017) Advances in Plants and Agriculture Research, 7(3), 00255.
6. Nirmalakumari A., Salini K. and Veerabadhiran P. (2010) Electronic Journal of Plant Breeding, 1(2), 148-155.
7. Ganapathy S., Nirmalakumari A. and Muthiah A.R. (2011) World Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 7(2), 185-188.
8. Lule D., Tesfaye K., Fetene M. and De V.S. (2012) International Journal of Genetics, 2(2), 12-21.
9. Karad S.R. and Patil J.V. (2013) International Journal of Integrative sciences, Innovation and Technology, 2(4), 37-43.
10. Devaliya S.D., Singh M., Intawala C.G. and Bhagora R.N. (2018) International Journal of Pure and Applied Biosciences, 6(1), 1007-1011.
11. Fisher R.A. (1930) The genetic theory of natural selection, The Clarendon Press.
12. Shet R.M., Jagadeesha N., Lokesh G.Y., Gireesh C. and Jayarame G. (2010) International Journal of Plant Science, 5(1), 24-29.
13. Ulaganathan V. and Nimalakumari A. (2013) Plant Archives, 13(2), 211-220.
14. Suryanarayana L., Sekhar D. and Rao V.D. (2014) International Journal of Current Microbiology Applied Science, 3(4), 931-936.
15. Reddy C.V., Reddy P.V.R.M., Munirathnam P. and Gowada J. (2013) Indian Journal of Agricultural Research, 47(6), 459-552.
16. Falconer D.S. (1989) Introduction to Quantitative Genetics, 3, 438.
17. Johnson H.W., Robinson H.F. and Comstock R.E. (1955) Agronomy Journal, 47, 314-318.
18. Robinson H.F. (1966) Genetics, 40, 45-60
19. Honson C.H., Robinson H.F. and Constock R.E. (1956) Agronomy Journal, 48, 214-246.
20. Panse V.G. (1957) Indian Journal of Genetics, 17(2), 318-328.
21. Priyadharshini C., Nirmalakumari A., Joel A.J. and Raveendran M. (2011) Madras Agricultural Journal, 98(1/3), 18-21.
22. Ravikumar R.L. and Seetharam A. (1994) Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 64(2), 103-106.
23. Kadam D.D., Nigade R.D. and Karad S.R. (2010) International Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 6(2), 383-385.