Agricultural Reviews

  • Chief EditorPradeep K. Sharma

  • Print ISSN 0253-1496

  • Online ISSN 0976-0741

  • NAAS Rating 4.84

Frequency :
Quarterly (March, June, September & December)
Indexing Services :
AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Submit

Agricultural Reviews, volume 36 issue 4 (december 2015) : 305-312

Combining ability and heterosis for yield and water use efficiency traits in grounndut - A review

K. John*, P. Raghava Reddy
1<p>Regional Agricultural Research Station,&nbsp;S.V.Agricultural College, Tirupati-517502, India.</p>
Cite article:- John* K., Reddy Raghava P. (NaN). Combining ability and heterosis for yield and water use efficiency traits in grounndut - A review . Agricultural Reviews. 36(4): 305-312. doi: 10.18805/ag.v36i4.6667.

ABSTRACT

Hybridization followed by selection in segregating generations is the main mode of varietal development in self-pollinated crops like groundnut.  Before making crosses, it is important to know which of the parents are going to nick well and yield desirable segregants in terms of yield and other desirable attributes aimed at. There are different mating designs to identify the parents to be included in hybridization programmes. One of the widely used and most informative one is diallel mating design.  After identification of parents more suitable to be involved in breeding programme, it is necessary to know the mode of inheritance of the traits to be improved to make wise choice of selection approaches to be followed in segregating generations. Therefore the breeder is constantly needing to determine the potential of additional germplasm as parents, Earlier studies suggest the importance of additive general combining ability (GCA) and non additive (specific combining ability and heterosis) genetic effects in evaluating hybrid performance among parental groundnut lines. The prominent effects on crop plants are reduction in plant growth and changes in various physiological processes. Moisture stress can also adversely influence yield attributes like number of mature pods per plant, 100-pod weight, 100-kernel weight, shelling per cent and harvest index. 

REFERENCES


  1. Ali N, Nawaz M S and Khurram Bashir Mirza M Y (2001) Combining ability estimates in F2 and F3 generations for early maturity and agronomic traits in peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Pakistan J. Botany 33: 93-99.

  2. Arunachalam V, Bandopadhyay A, Nigam S N and Gibbons R W (1984) Heterosis in relation to genetic divergence and specific combining ability in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) Euphytica 33: 33-39.

  3. Baker R J (1968) Issues in diallel analysis. Crop Sci. 18: 533-536.

  4. Bansal U K, Satija D R and Ahuja K L (1992) Combining ability in inter and intra growth habit crosses for quality traits in groundnut. SABRAO J., 24: 1-6.

  5. Bansal V K, Satiya P R, Gupta V P, Sangh A S and Verma MM (ed.) D S Virk G S Chahal (1993) Heterosis in relation to plant type in groundnut for yield in heterosis breeding in crop plants theory and application short communication Symposium Ludhiana 23-24 Feb. 1993, 6-7.

  6. Basu M S, Vaddoria M A, Singh N P and Reddy P S (1987) Combining ability for yield and its components in a diallel cross of groundnut. Indian J. Agric. Sci., 57: 82-84.

  7. Briggs L J and Shantz (1913) The water requirements of plants II. A review of the literature. J. Agric. Res., 3: 1-64.

  8. Chandra Reddy K (1986) Genetic analysis of certain quantitative characters in a 6 x 6 diallel set of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) in the F2 generaiton M.Sc. (Ag.). Thesis Andhra Pradesh Agricultural University, Hyderabad.

  9. Dasaradha Rami Reddy C and Suneetha K (2004) Combining ability and heterosis in groundnut pp. 28-29. Short Papers Presented at the National Symposium On “ Enhancing Productivity of Groundnut for Sustaining Food and Nutritional Security” 11-13 October-2004 at NRCG, Junagadh. 

  10. Dhillon B S (1975) The applicability of partial diallel crosses in plant breeding. Crop improve., 2: 1-17.

  11. Donald C M (1968) The breeding of crop ideotypes. Euphytica 17: 385-403.

  12. Dwivedi S L Nigam S N Chandra S and Ramraj V M (1998) Combining ability of biomass and harvest index under short and long-day conditions in groundnut. Annals of Applied Bio., 133: 237-244.

  13. Francies R M and Ramalingam R S (1999) Combining ability in groundnut. Legume Res., 22: 267-269.

  14. Habib A F, Joshi M S, Kullaiswamy B Y and Bhat B N (1985) Combining ability estimates in peanuts (Arachis hypogaea L.) Indian J. Genet. and Plant Breeding 45: 236-239.

  15. Halward T M, Wynee J C and Monteverdepenso E J (1990) The effectiveness of early generation testing applied to a recurrent selection programme in peanut. Peanut Sci. 17: 44-47.

  16. Hariprasad A S (1990) Genetic analysis of the combining ability, heritability and correlations in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) M.Sc. (Ag.) Thesis Andhra Pradesh Agricultural University, Hyderabad.

  17. Hariprasanna K, Chuni Lal, Radhakrishnan T, Gor H K and Chikani B M (2008) Analysis of diallel cross for some physical-quality traits in peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Euphytica 160: 49-57.

  18. Hebbar K B 1990 Studies on genotypic variation in water use efficiency in groundnut and its relevance to productivity under field condition. M.Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, submitted to University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore.

  19. Hsiao T C and Bradford K J (1983) Physiological consequences of cellular water deficits in limitations to efficient water use in crop production (eds. J M Payler, W R Jordan and T R Sinclair) American Society of Agronomy Incorporated, Crop Science Society of America, Incorporated, Soil Science Society of America Incorporated, Madison, USA.

  20. Jagannadha Reddy B and Raja Reddy C (1987) Estimation of heterosis in intra - sub - specific crosses of groundnut. J. Oilseeds Rese., 4: 249-251.

  21. Jayalakshmi V, Reddy C R, Reddy P V and Reddy G L K (2000) Character association among morphological attributes in parental genotypes and groundnut hybrids. Legume Rese., 23: 102-105.

  22. Jayalakshmi V and Reddy G L (2005) Heterosis and inbreeding depression for yield and physiological attributes in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L). Indian J. Agric. Rese., 39: 25-30.

  23. Jivani L L, Kelaiya G R, Ponkia H P and Padhar P R (2007) Genetics of quantitative characters in groundut (Arachis hypogaea L) Rese. on Crops 8: 496-499.

  24. Jivani L L, Khanpara M D, Kachhadia V H and Modhvadia J M (2008) Heterosis and inbreeding depression for pod yield and its related traits in Spanish bunch groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Res. on Crops 9: 670-674.

  25. Jivani L L, Khanpara M D, Kachhadia V H and Vacchani J H (2009) Combining ability for pod yield and its components in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L) International J. Agric. Sci., 5: 248-250.

  26. John K and Vasanthi R P (2006) Heterosis in six single crosses of groundnut Legume Res., 29: 262-265.

  27. Kalaimani S and Thangavelu S (1996) Combining ability studies in groundnut. Madras Agric. J., 83: 691-693.

  28. Khanovkar S M, Tiwari S P, Shukla A K, Nagaraj G and Pathak K K (1984) Combining ability, gene action and correlation for qualitative and quantitative characters in rabi- summer groundnut. J. Cytology and Genet., 19: 60-66.

  29. Konarev V G (1974) Physiological and biochemical aspects of heterosis “Heterosis in Plant Breeding” Proceedings of VII Congress Eucarpia, Budapest, pp. 265-271.

  30. Makne V G (1992) Diallel analysis for studying the inheritance of branches, developed pods and harvest index in groundnut. J. Maharastra Agric. Univ., 17: 153-154.

  31. Makne V G and Bhale N L (1987) Combining ability analysis for yield, protein and oil in groundnut. Indian J. Agric. Scie., 57: 617-621.

  32. Makne V G and Bhale N L (1989) Inheritance of pod yield and its components in groundnut. J. Maharastra Agric. Univ., 14: 30-33

  33. Manivel P, Mathur R K ,Gor H K and Chikani B M (2003) Heterotic potential of crosses in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). J. Oil Seeds Rese., 20: 116-117.

  34. Manoharan V, Vindhiyavarman P, Sundaram N and Thangavelu S (1985) Analysis of combining ability in groundnut. Madras Agric. J., 72: 601-605.

  35. Mathur R K, Manivel P and Gor H K (2000) Genetics of reproductive efficiency and yield in groundnut. Annals of Agric. Rese., 21: 65-68.

  36. Mohinder Singh (1983) L x T analysis for pod yield and other characters in groundnut. Madras Agric. J., 7: 638-643.

  37. Monteverde - Penso E J and Wynne J C (1998) Evaluation of three cycles of recurrent selection for fruit yield within a population of Virginia type peanut. Crop Sci. 28: 75-78.

  38. Nageswara Rao R C (1992) Some crop physiological approaches for groundnut improvement. J. Oilseeds Rese., 9: 286-296.

  39. Nageshwara Rao R C, Williams J H, Wadia K D R, Hubick K T and Farquhar G D (1993) Crop growth, water use efficiency and CID in groundnut genotypes under end season drought conditions. Annals of Applied Botany 122: 357-367.


  40. Nigam S N, Uapdhyaya H D, Chandra S, Nageswara Rao R C, Wright G C and Reddy A G C (2001) Gene effects for specific leaf area and harvest index in three crosses of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Annals of Applied Biology 139: 301-306.

  41. Nimitr Vorasoot, Sirichai Chooprapawan and Somyot Detpiratmonkol (1988) Root growth and yield of groundnut under different soil conditions in North East Thailand. In Proceedings of the Sixth Thailand National Groundnut Meeting, Songkhla, Thailand: 334-343.

  42. Nisar Ahmed (1995) Heterosis, combining ability and inter relationships among yield and yield attributes in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) M.Sc. (Ag.) Thesis, Andhra Pradesh Agricultural University, Hyderabad, India.

  43. Padma B (1983) Heterosis and combining ability analysis in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L). M.Sc. (Ag.) Thesis Andhra Pradesh Agricultural University, Hyderabad.

  44. Parmar D L, Kumar A L R and Bharodia P S (2000). Genetic analysis of pod and seed characters in crosses of large seeded Virginia genotypes of groundnut. International Arachis Newsletter, No. 20:10-11.

  45. Parmar D L, Rathnakumar L, Bharodia P S and Dobaria J R (2004) Genetic basis of heterosis in crosses involving adapted and exotic groundnut germplasm. Short Papers Presented at the National Symposium On “ Enhancing Productivity of Groundnut for Sustaining Food and Nutritional Security” 11-13 October-2004 at NRCG , Junagadh, 

  46. Ramachandra Reddy J (1986) Evaluation of progenies of 15 single and 45 double crosses derived out of 6 x 6 diallel set involving three botanical varieties of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) in the F2 and F3 generation. Ph.D. Thesis Andhra Pradesh Agricultural University, Hyderabad.

  47. Reddy B J and Reddy C R (1988) Combining ability estimates in groundnut. The Andhra Agric. J., 35: 26-29.

  48. Reddy P S and Murthy T G K (1994) Genetic improvement of groundnut in India Priorities and Prospects pp. 1-16 In Sustainability in oilseeds (ed. M V R Prasad, G V Raghaviah, R K Sastry and T Damodaram). Indian Society of Oilseeds Research, Hyderabad, India, pp. 247-254.

  49. Rosario D A and Fajardo F F (1988) Morphophysiological responses to water stress of ten varieties of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) Phillippine J. Crop Scie., 13, Supplement l, Field Crop Abstracts 42: 8.

  50. Rudraswamy P, Nehru S D, Kulkarni R S and Manjunath A (1999) Estimation of genetic variability and inbreeding depression in six crosses of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Mysore J. Agric. Sci., 33: 248-252.

  51. Sateera Banu S (1992) Line x Tester analysis of the combining ability, heritability and character association in the F4 generation of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). M.Sc. (Ag.) Thesis, Andhra Pradesh Agricultural Univeristy, Hyderabad.

  52. Senthil N, Vindhiyavarman P (1998) Heterotic combinations in inter-sub specific crosses of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Annals of Agric. Res., 19: 404-406.

  53. Seshadri P (1990) Genetic analysis of yield and yield components in intra and interspecific crosses of Arachis hypogaea L. Ph.D. Thesis, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore.

  54. Sharma L K and Gupta S C (2008) Combining ability analysis in groundut (Arachis hypogaea L). Res. on Crops 9: 375-379. 

  55. Siva Kumar P L V (1984) Studies on heterosis, combining ability and character association for certain traits in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L). M.Sc. (Ag.) Thesis Andhra Pradesh Agricultural University, Hyderabad.

  56. Skyes E E and Michaels T E (1986) Combining ability of Ontario grown peanuts (Arachis hypogaea L.) for oil, fatty acids and taxonomic characters. Peanut Sci., 13: 93-97.

  57. Sprague G P and Tatum L S (1942) General vs specific combining ability in six crosses of corn. Agric. J., 34: 923-932.

  58. Stuber C W and Moll R H (1971) Epistasis in maize. Comparison of selected with unselected populations. Genet., 67: 137-149.

  59. Suresh Kumar S (1993) Studies on combining ability, variability and interrelationship in 15 F3 progenies of 6 x 6 diallel of groundnut. M.Sc (Ag.) Thesis APAU, Hyderabad.

  60. Swe S T and Branch W D (1986) Estimates of combining ability and heterosis among peanut cultivars. Peanut Sci., 13: 70-74.

  61. Tanner C B and Sinclair T R (1983) Efficient water use in crop production. Research or Re-search ? In: Taylor H M, Jordon I R and Sinclair T R, ed. Limitations to efficient water use in crop production. American Society of Agronomy Crop Science. Society of America and Soil Science Society of America 1-27.

  62. Upadhyaya H D, Gopal K, Nadaf H L and Vijaya Kumar S (1992) Combining ability studies for yield and its components in groundnut. Indian J. Genet. and Plant Breeding 52: 1-6.

  63. Varman P V and Raveendran T S (1994) Line x Tester analysis of combining ability in groundnut. Madras Agric. J., 81: 529-532.

  64. Varman P V and Raveendran T S (1997) Comparison of single and three way crosses in groundnut. Madras Agric. J., 84: 70-73.

  65. Varman P V (1998) The analysis of diallel cross for pod weight in groundnut. Madras Agric. J., 85: 175-176.

  66. Varman P V (2000) Combining ability estimates in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) Madras Agric. J., 87: 462-466.

  67. Wells R B T, Anderson W F and Wynne J C (1991) Peanut yield as a result of fifty years of breeding. Agronomy J., 83: 957-961.

  68. Wright G C, Hubick K T and Farquhar 1988 Discrimination in carbon isotopes of leaves correlates with water use efficiency of field grown peanut cultivars. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology. 15: 815-825.

  69. Wright G C, Sarwanto T A, Rahmiana A and Syarifuddin A (1992) Investigation of drought tolerance traits conferring adaptation to drought stress in peanut. 74-84 ACIAR Proceedings No. 40, Canberra, Australia.

  70. Wright G C, Kerry Hubick, K T Farquhar G D and Nageswara Rao R C (1993) Genetic and Environmental Variation in transpiration efficiency and its correlation with carbon isotope discrimination and specific leaf area in peanut p. 247-267 In J. Ehleringer et al. (ed.). “Stable isotopes and plant carbon water relations” Academic Press San Diego. CA.

  71. Wright G C, Nageswara Rao R C and Farquhar G D (1994) Water use efficiency and carbon isotope discriminate in peanut under water deficit conditions. Crop Scie., 34: 92-97.
Reviewed By

Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    Editorial Board

    View all (0)