Estimation of mean performance and genetic association of yield components and drought related traits in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.

Transcription

1 Legume Research, 38 (1) 2015: Print ISSN: / Online ISSN: AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATION CENTRE Estimation of mean performance and genetic association of yield components and drought related traits in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) H.P. Meena* and J. Kumar Division of Genetics, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi , India. Received: Accepted: DOI: / ABSTRACT This study was conducted to evaluate the effect of drought stress on 22 chickpea genotypes and one check by analyzing ecophysiological traits in field condition. Field experiments were carried out during in two separate irrigated and non-irrigated conditions with randomized complete block design in three replications. Yield and yield components (RWC) were measured in each experiment, separately. Drought resistance indices of Relative water content (RWC) and membrance stability index (MSI) were recorded under rainfed condition. Results indicated that values of studied traits significantly decreased in non-irrigated experiment compared to irrigated one. Correlation analysis revealed that grain yield/plant had significant genotypic and highly significant phenotypic relationship with number of pods/plant, number of seeds/pod, harvest index and biological yield/plant. Therefore, it is suggested that these traits should be used as selection criteria for yield improvement in chickpea. Key words: Cicer arietinum L., Chickpea, Correlation, Drought, Seed yield. INTRODUCTION Drought is the most important environmental stress in agriculture and many efforts have been made to improve crop productivity under water-limiting conditions. While natural selection has favoured mechanisms for adaptation and survival, breeding activity has directed selection towards increasing the economic yield of cultivated species. More than 80 years of breeding activities have led to some yield increase in drought environments for many crop plants. Meanwhile, fundamental research has provided signiûcant gains in the understanding of the physiological responses of plants to water deficits, but there is still a large gap between yields in optimal and stress conditions. Minimizing the yield gap and increasing yield stability under different stress conditions are of strategic importance in guaranteeing food for the future. It is known that chickpea thrives well under drought prone condition. However, there is a greater variability for yield performance of different chickpea genotypes under drought situation. Chickpea production has remained static for last three decades. The major limiting factor has been the susceptibility of cultivars to different biotic and abiotic stresses that adversely affect the yield. Although progress towards alleviating biotic stresses affecting chickpea productivity has been satisfactory, the work on abiotic stresses needs immediate attention. The most important abiotic stress is the drought, which severely affect the productivity of chickpea under rainfed production system. Yield losses occur due to reduction in germination, plant growth (biomass) and seed size. Therefore, a strong breeding programme is needed to develop genotypes suitable for moisture stress conditions. This requires a simple and fast procedure for selection of drought tolerant genotypes in segregating populations and evaluating cultivars. According to Levitt (1980) two important mechanisms by which plants adapt to drought are drought escape and drought resistance. Quisenberry (1982) defined drought resistance as the ability of a plant variety to produce a higher yield than another at a given limiting level of water availability. The aim of the present study was to generate information on mean value of the yield and yield contributing traits under rainfed and irrigated conditions. Determination of correlation between yield and yield component is important for the selection of favourable gene recombinants for effective chickpea breeding programmes. MATERIALS AND METHODS The present investigations on chickpea were carried out at the Division of Genetics, Indian Agricultural *Corresponding author s hari9323@gmail.com and Address: Directorate of Oilseeds Research, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad

2 86 LEGUME RESEARCH Research Institute, New Delhi. The farm is situated at 228.6m altitude, with N latitude and E longitudes. The zone has a sub-tropical semi-arid climate with dry summer and cold winter with loam to sandy loam soil. In the present experiment 22 genotypes (Table 1) were tested under rainfed and irrigated environment during the years The experiment was conducted in randomized block design (RBD) with three replications maintaining 30 cm row to row and 10 cm plant to plant distances in a plot of four rows. The material for this experiment comprised of F 6 progenies of six crosses (Pusa- 256 x F , Pusa-256 x F 6 936, Pusa- 256 x Vijay, Pusa- 256 x SAKI-9516, Pusa-362 x SAKI-9516 and Pusa-362 x Vijay) made between parents involving drought tolerance (Pusa-256 and Pusa-362) and yield parameters (high yielder Pusa-362, SAKI-9516 and Vijay) which have been advanced from F 2 to F 6 generation by selection for drought and yield parameters. The parameters for drought tolerance were relative water content (RWC) and membrance stability index (MSI) and yield parameter was the seed yield / plant. Observation at seedling, vegetative, reproductive and maturity stages were recorded for different traits like, seed yield / plant, biological yield / plant, plant height, number of pods / plant, number of seeds / pod, days to 50% TABLE 1: Pedigree and category of twenty two genotypes of chickpea Genotypes Pedigree Category DG-104 Pusa-256 x F L-H DG-105 Pusa-256 x F L-H DG-106 Pusa-256 x F L-L DG-107 Pusa-256 x F L-L DG-108 Pusa-256 x F H-H DG-109 Pusa-256 x F H-L DG-110 Pusa-256 x F H-L DG-111 Pusa-362 x SAKI-9516 H-L DG-112 Pusa-362 x SAKI-9516 L-H DG-113 Pusa-362 x SAKI-9516 L-L DG-114 Pusa-362 x Vijay H-L DG-115 Pusa-362 x Vijay H-L DG-116 Pusa-362 x Vijay H-L DG-117 Pusa-362 x Vijay L-H DG-118 Pusa-362 x Vijay L-L DG-119 Pusa-256 x Vijay L-L DG-120 Pusa-256 x Vijay L-L DG-121 Pusa-256 x SAKI-9516 H-L DG-122 Pusa-256 x SAKI-9516 L-H DG-123 Pusa-256 x SAKI-9516 L-H DG-124 Pusa-256 x SAKI-9516 L-L DG-125 Pusa-256 x SAKI-9516 L-L PUSA-362 (check) (BG-203 x P-179) BG-303 In category coloum first letter (L) indicates yield and second letter (H) indicates physiological parameters L = Low value and H = High value and H= High physiological parameter (MSI & RWC) value flowering, days to maturity, harvest index and 100-seed weight, under irrigated and rainfed conditions. Under rainfed conditions RWC and MSI were also recorded. The analysis of variance was carried out as per standard method (Panse and Sukhatme, 1964 and Singh and Chaudhary, 1977) for all the characters under study. Phenotypic and genotypic correlations were obtained by the use of formulae given by Al-Jibouri et al. (1958). Mean value for each character was worked out by dividing the total with corresponding number of observations, while lowest and highest values of each character were taken as range. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Analysis of variance revealed significant differences between the genotypes for all the characters under study (Table 2 and 3). The mean performance and range of different genotypes for various characters is given in Table 4 and 5. Mean performances of genotypes under irrigated and rainfed conditions: In general, reduction in almost all the traits was observed under rainfed as compared to irrigated condition. In the present investigation, seed yield / plant was reduced significantly under rainfed condition, when compared with irrigated condition. The reduction in yield was more in some of the genotypes while others showed less reduction. Similar results were also reported earlier by Turner et al. (2003) and Rao et al. (2003). The harvest index always depends on seed yield and biological yield. It is always calculated on the basis of the performance of seed yield and biological yield. Therefore, it increases or decreases accordingly and different index could be observed under different environments. Biological yield / plant were reduced significantly under rainfed conditions as compared to irrigated conditions. Similar findings were also reported by and Chaturvedi and Dua (2003). The reduction in number of seeds / pod was also observed under rainfed condition. Similar results were reported by Turner et al. (2003). The reduction in number of pods / plant was also confirmed the earlier findings of Shane et al. (2003). The similar pattern of reduction in duration of days to maturity was also reported by Rao et al. (2003). Form the foregoing discussion we may conclude that there was a significant effects of moisture-stress on the different characters under study. Again it was also clear that tolerant and susceptible genotypes respond differently for different characters under study under moisture-stress condition. In general, relative leaf water content (RWC) was higher under irrigated condition as compared to rainfed condition for all the genotypes. It was in conformity with the results reported by Deshmukh et al. (2000) and Goyal et al.

3 Volume 38, Issue 1, TABLE 2: Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for eleven characters under rainfed conditions Source of variation D. F. Characters SY BY PH PP DF DM SP HI SW RWC MSI Replication Treatment ** ** 59.83** ** 52.80** 37.43** 0.081** ** 14.85** 84.56** ** Error SY: Seed yield per plant (g); BY: Biological yield per plant (g); PH: Plant height (cm); PP: Pods per plant; DF: Days to 50% flowering; DM: Days to maturity; SP: Seeds per pod; HI: Harvest index (%); SW: 100-seed weight (g); RWC: Relative water content (%) and MSI: Membrane stability index (%) *, ** indicates significance at 1% and 5% level of significance TABLE 3: Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for nine characters under irrigated conditions Source of variation D. F. Characters SY BY PH PP DF DM SP HI SW Replication Treatment ** ** 19.95** ** 74.97** 26.26** 0.043** ** 26.64** Error SY: Seed yield per plant (g), BY: Biological yield per plant (g), PH: Plant height (cm), PP: Pods per plant, DF: Days to 50% flowering, DM: Days to maturity, SP: Seeds per pod, HI: Harvest index (%), SW: 100-seed weight (g) *, ** indicates significance at 1% and 5% level of significance TABLE 4: Mean performances of twenty two genotypes for seed yield and related traits under irrigated and rainfed conditions Genotypes SY BY PH PP Under rainfed Irrig. Rainf. Irrig Rainf. Irrig. Rainf. Irrig. Rainf. RWC MSI DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG PUSA-362 * Mean S.E C.D. at 5% Range PUSA-362 * : Check Variety SY: Seed yield per plant (g); BY: Biological yield per plant (g); PH: Plant height (cm); PP: Pods per plant Irrig : Irrigated condition, Rainf. : Rainfed Condition

4 88 LEGUME RESEARCH TABLE 5: Mean performances of twenty two genotypes for seed yield and related traits under irrigated and rainfed conditions Genotypes DF DM SP HI SW Irrig. Rainf. Irrig Rainf. Irrig. Rainf. Irrig. Rainf. Irrig. Rainf. DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG DG PUSA-362* Mean S.E C.D. at 5% Range PUSA-362 * : Check Variety DF: Days to 50% flowering, DM: Days to maturity, SP: Seeds per pod, HI: Harvest index (%), SW: 100- seed weight (g) Irrig : Irrigated condition, Rainf. : Rainfed Condition (2000). Membrane injury increased under rainfed condition as compared to irrigated condition possibly due to effect of moisture-stress and higher temperature under rainfed than irrigated condition. Similar results have also been reported by Gupta et al. (2000) and Talwar (2002). The per se performance of chickpea genotype revealed that there was a substantial variability among genotypes for all the characters except for number of seeds / pod under irrigated and rainfed conditions. Based on the mean performance, DG-115 was the best for seed yield / plant and under rainfed conditions genotype DG-119 was the best for seed yield / plant and harvest index. For relative water content (RWC %), the genotype DG-117 showed highest mean values and genotype DG-104 had highest mean values for membrane stability index (MSI %) under rainfed conditions. Correlation study: The phenotypic and genotypic correlation coefficients between all the nine and eleven pairs of characters under irrigated and rainfed conditions respectively are presented in Table 6. Correlation among the traits may be the consequence of pleiotropy or the genetic linkage among the characters. From the breeder s view point, the type of association of grain yield and its component traits is of paramount importance. The genotypic correlations were generally higher than their corresponding phenotypic correlations. The lower values of phenotypic correlations might be attributed to lower modifying effect of environment on the association of characters at the gene level (Mamun-Hossain and Joarder, 1987). The results of correlation analysis revealed that the grain yield / plant had significant genotypic and highly significant phenotypic relationship with number of pods / plant, number of seeds / pod, harvest index and biological yield / plant in both irrigated and rainfed conditions. The similar results were also reported by Bhavani et al., (2008) and Vekariya et al., (2008). Therefore, this study suggested that for success in chickpea improvement programme based on these characters as selection criteria should be given more emphasis.

5 Volume 38, Issue 1, TABLE 6: Genotypic and phenotypic correlations among different characters under irrigated and rainfed conditions Character -combination Genotypic correlation under Phenotypic correlation under Rainfed Irrigated Rainfed Irrigated Seed yield -Biological yield 0.558** 0.636** 0.497* 0.622** do -Plant height do -Pods/plant 0.580** * 0.403* do -Days to flowering * do -Days to maturity do -100-seed weight do -Seeds/pod 0.401* do -Harvest index * 0.491* 0.541** do -RWC do -MSI Biological yield -Plant height do -Pods/plant 0.661** 0.611** 0.671** 0.605** do -Seeds/pod do - Days to flowering ** do -Days to maturity do -100-seed weight do -Harvest index ** * do -RWC * * - do -MSI 0.508* * - Plant height -Pods/plant 0.405* * do -Seeds/pod do - Days to flowering * do -Days to maturity do -100-seed weight do -Harvest index do -RWC do -MSI Pods/plant - Seeds/pod do - Days to flowering do -Days to maturity do -100-seed weight do -Harvest index do -RWC do -MSI Seeds/pod -Days to flowering do -Days to maturity do -100-seed weight do -Harvest index do -RWC do -MSI D. F. -Days to maturity 0.569** do -100-seed weight do -Harvest index do -RWC do -MSI D.M seed weight do -Harvest index do -RWC do -MSI SW - Harvest index do -RWC do -MSI RWC - MSI MSI = Membrane stability index, RWC = Relative water content *, ** indicate significance at 5% and 1% level of significance

6 90 LEGUME RESEARCH References Al-Jibouri, H.A. Miller, P.A. and Robinson, H.F. (1958). Genotypic and environmental variance in upland cotton cross of interspecific origin. Agronomy Journal, 50 : Amandeep Singh and Sandhu, J.S. (2008). Correlation and path analysis in chickpea under different environments. Journal of Food Legume, 21(2): Bhavani, A.P. Sasidharan, N. Shukla, Y.M. and Bhatt, M.M. (2008). Correlation studies and path analysis in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Research on Crops, 9(3): Chaturvedi, S.K. and Dua, D.P. (2003). Breeding chickpea for late sown conditions in northen India. International Chickpea Conferance, Netherland, Deshmukh, P.S. Sairam, R.K. Sunita Kumari, Kushwaha, S.R. and Pankaj Kumar. (2000). Physiological traits for yield improvement of chickpea in drought prone environments. In: National Seminar on Plant Physiology at Interface of Agri-horticultur and industry held at 20 Dec., 1999 to Ist Jan., 2000, RAU, Udaipur, India, Pp.104. Duarte I Cordeiro A I de-sousa, M.M.T. Monjardino, P. de-camara A and Carnide V. (2000). Chickpea breeding for drought tolerance. Breeding for stress tolerance in fodder crops and amenity grasses. Proceeding of the 23 rd Meeting of the Fodder Crops and Amenity Grasses Section of EUCARPIA, Azores, Portugal, 1-4) October, 2000., Pp Goyal, V. Jain, S. Bishnoi, N.R. and Munjal, R. (2000). Department of botany and Plant Physiology, CCS Haryana Agric. Univ., Hisar. Gupta, S.C. Rathore, A.K. Sharma, S.N. and Saini, R.S. (2000). Response of chickpea cultivars to water stress. Indian Journal of Plant Physiology, 5(3): Johansen C Krishnamurthy L Saxena N P and Sethi S C. (1994). Genotypic variation in moisture response of chickpea grown under source sprinklers in a semi-arid tropical environment. Field Crops Research, 37: Levitt. (1980). Responses of plants to environmental stresses. II. Radiation, salt and other stresses (2 nd edn.). Academic Press New York. Mamun Hossain, A.R.M. and Joarder, N. (1987). Studies on some mechanical cells in the basal internode of some rice cultivars in relation to lodging. Pakistan Journal of Agriculture Resarch, 8: Panse, V.G. and P.V. Sukhatme. (1964). Statistical Methods for Agricultural Research Workers. ICAR., New Delhi,.381. Quisenberry, J.E. (1982). Breeding for drought resistance and plant water efficiency. In: Breeding Plants for Less Favorable Environments. (Eds. Christiansen MN and Lewis, CP John Wiley Publishers: New York). Rao, Y.K. Durga, K.K. and Reddy, M.V. (2003). Performance of chickpea genotypes under irrigated and unirrigated conditions. International Chickpea Conference, Raipur, India, January 20-22, Pp. 31. Sahane, D.V. Mhase, L.B. and Jamadagni, B.M. (2003). Performance of desi and kabuli chickpea genotypes under irrigated and rainfed conditions. International Chickpea Conferance, Raipur, India, January 20-22, Pp.92. Singh, R.K. and Chaudhary. B.P. (1977). Biometrical Methods in Quantitative Genetic Analysis. Kalyani Publishers, Ludhiana: 304. Talwar, H.S. Chandra Sekhar, A. and Nageshwara Rao, R.C. (2002). Genotypic variability in membrane thermostability in groundnut. Indian Journal of Plant Physiology, 7 (2): Turner, N.C. Leport, L. and Siddique, K.H.M. (2003). Adoption of chickpea to drought. International Chickpea Conferance, Raipur, India, January 20-22, Pp.84. Vekariya, D.H. Pithia, M.S. and Kalawadia, R.L. (2008). Correlation and path analysis in F 2 generation of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Research on Crops, 9(2):