IDENTIFYING PROMISING GENOTYPES FOR GENETIC DIVERGENCE AND PATH ANALYSIS IN SOYBEAN [Glycine max (L.) Merr.]

R.R. SHETE¹, S.U. BORALE², V.V. THORAT³, Y.A. SHANIWARE⁴*, V.S. GIRASE^5
1Department of Agricultural Botany, College of Agriculture, Dhule, 424004, Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth, Rahuri, 413722, Maharashtra, India
²Department of Agricultural Botany, College of Agriculture, Dhule, 424004, Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth, Rahuri, 413722, Maharashtra, India
³Department of Agricultural Botany, College of Agriculture, Dhule, 424004, Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth, Rahuri, 413722, Maharashtra, India
⁴Department of Agricultural Botany, College of Agriculture, Dhule, 424004, Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth, Rahuri, 413722, Maharashtra, India
⁵Department of Agricultural Botany, College of Agriculture, Dhule, 424004, Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth, Rahuri, 413722, Maharashtra, India
* Corresponding Author : shaniwareyogesh@gmail.com

Received : 26-10-2023     Accepted : 27-11-2023     Published : 30-11-2023
Volume : 15     Issue : 11       Pages : 12763 - 12766
Int J Agr Sci 15.11 (2023):12763-12766

Keywords : Soybean, Genetic divergence, Path analysis, Significance
Academic Editor : Rajkumar Ramteke
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Authors are thankful to Department of Agricultural Botany, College of Agriculture, Dhule, 424004, Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth, Rahuri, 413722, Maharashtra, India
Author Contribution : All authors equally contributed

Forty elite genotypes collected from different sources were evaluated for path analysis and genetic divergence studies. Forty genotypes were grouped into twelve groups with differing levels of divergence based on D? analysis. Thes genotypes were quite different, according to D? analysis, with D? values ranging from 6.94 to 26.25. The largest inter-cluster distance (28.25) was found between clusters IV and XII. The two clusters with the shortest inter-cluster distances, IV and V, were 6.94. Cluster VI (12.88) has the largest intra-cluster distance. In contrast, clusters III, IV, V, VII, VIII, IX, X, and XII only had one genotype. From the path analysis studies, we can conclude that the quantity of seeds produced per plant had positive direct effect with the traits like days to maturity, number of pods per plant, number of seeds per pod, number of branches per plant, weight of 100 seeds, and protein content. The genotypes KDS-344, DS-228, JS-335, JS-9305, HIMSO-1691, NRC-128, MACS-1701, MAUS-768, MacS-450, MACS-NRC-1647, may be useful for upcoming crop improvement programmes based on the examined divergence classes during this research project

1. Khadar V. (2019) Acta Scientific Nutritional Health, 3(3), 44-498.
2. National Mission on Oilseeds and Oil palm (NMOOP) (2018) Available from, www.nfsm.gov.in/StatusPaper/NMOOP2018.pdf, 1-72.
3. Abady S.F., Merkeb and Dilnesaw Z. (2013) J. Environ. Sci. Water Res., 2(8), 270-276.
4. The Soybean Processors Association of India (2021) Available from, www.sopa.org/statistics/worldsoybean-production.
5. Arunachalam V. and Bandopadhay A. (1984) Indian J. Genet., 44(3), 548-554.
6. Badkul A., Shrivastava A.N., Bisen R. and Mishra S. (2014) Soybean Res., 2, 44-50.
7. Bairwa A., Shukla P.S., Singh K. and Dhaka N. (2020) Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci., 9(03), 978-985.
8. Balla M.Y. and Ibrahim S.E. (2017) Open Access J., 2471-6774.
9. Banaszkiewicz T. (2011) Nutritional Value of Soybean Meal, Soybean and Nutrition, Edited by Hany El-Shemy, IntechOpe, 1.
10. Baraskar V. V., Vachhani J.H., Kachhadia V.H., Patel M.B. and Barad H.R. (2015) Electron. J. Plant Breed., 6(2), 570-573.
11. Carter T.Jr., Hymowitz T., Nelson R. (2004) Springer, 47-59.
12. Da silva A.F., Dos santos silva F.C., Bezerra A.R.G., Sediyama T., Rosa D.P. and Barros J.P.A. (2022) Functional plant Breed. J., 4(2).
13. Hang Vu T.T., Cham Le T.T., Vu D.H., Nguyen T.T. and Ngoc T. (2019) Asian J. Crop Sci., 11, 32-39.
14. Joshi D., Pushpendra, Singh K. and Adhikari S. (2018) Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci., 7(1), 700-709.
15. Kachhadiya V.H., Baraskar V.V., Vachhani M.B., Patel M.B. and Barad H.R. (2014) Electronic J. Plant Breed., 5(3), 563-566.
16. Kim M.Y., Van K., Kang Y.J., Kim K.H., Lee S.H. (2012) Breed. Sci., 61, 445-452.
17. Kumar A., Pandey A., Aochen C. and Pattanayak A. (2014) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., India, Sect. B Biol. Sci., 85(2), 397-405.
18. Mishra A.K. (2019) Soybean Res., 17(1&2), 30-39.
19. Nagarajan D., Kalaimagal T. and Murugan E. (2015) Int. J. Farm Sci., 5(3), 28-34.
20. Nag S.K. and Sarawgi A.K. (2021) J. Pharm. Innov., 10(6), 475-478.
21. Nag S.K., Sarawgi A.K., Mehta N., Verulkar S.B. and Saxena R.R. (2017) Bull. Env. Pharmacol. Life Sci., 6(4), 45-50.
22. Shadakshari T. V., Kalaimagal T., Senthil N., Boranayaka M.B., Kambegowda R. and Rajesha G. (2012) Asian J. Bio. Sci., 6(1), 7-11.
23. Tyagi S. D. and Sethi J. (2011) Res. J. Agric. Sci., 2(2), 288-290.
24. Verma S. (2019) MSc Thesis, Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya (IGKV), Raipur, India, 1-82.