Agricultural Science Digest

  • Chief EditorArvind kumar

  • Print ISSN 0253-150X

  • Online ISSN 0976-0547

  • NAAS Rating 5.52

  • SJR 0.156

Frequency :
Bi-monthly (February, April, June, August, October and December)
Indexing Services :
BIOSIS Preview, Biological Abstracts, Elsevier (Scopus and Embase), AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Agricultural Science Digest, volume 29 issue 1 (march 2009) : 7-11


K.A. Jadhav, B.V. Garad, S.S. Dhumal, D.B. Kshirsagar, B.T. Patil, K.G. Shinde
1Vegetable Improvement Project, Department of Horticulture, Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth, Rahuri-413722, India
  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Jadhav K.A., Garad B.V., Dhumal S.S., Kshirsagar D.B., Patil B.T., Shinde K.G. (2024). HETEROSIS IN BITTER GOURD (MOMORDICA CHARANTIA L.). Agricultural Science Digest. 29(1): 7-11. doi: .
Eight parental lines and their 28 F1 hybrids of bitter gourd obtained from half diallel
were studied to investigate the extent of heterosis for yield and its contributing traits. The
parents P-7(Hirakani), P-6 (DVBTG-7) and P-1(Phule Green Gold) were observed to be
three top performing parents for the fruit yield per plant. The negative heterosis which is
desirable for days to appearance of first female flower, node number of first flower and
days to first harvest were common in most of the crosses. Significant heterosis was recorded
over better and best parents. In order of merit F1 hybrids P1 (Phule Green Gold) x P4
(DVBTG-5), P3 (MC-84) x P5 (Co. White Long) and P1 (Phule Green Gold) x P3 (MC-84) were
recorded to be three best performing F1 hybrids for fruit yield per plant. The higher yield
recorded by these hybrids could be due to increased number of fruits per plant. The best
performing F1 hybrid P1 x P4 which recorded 41.48 per cent higher yield over best parent
may be exploited for commercial cultivation.
  1. Lawande, K.E. and Patil A.V. (1990) Haryana J. Hort. Sci. 19(3-4):342-348.
  2. Munshi A.D. and Sirohi P.S. (1993). Veg. Sci. 20:147-151.
  3. Ram D., et al. (1997). Veg. Sci. 24(2):99-102.
  4. Ranpise S.A., et al. (1992). South Indian Hort. 40(6):313-315.
  5. Singh Raghbir, et al. (2001). Haryana J. Hort. Sci. 30(3-4):224-227.
  6. Tewari Deepali Ram and Tewari D. (1999). Veg. Sci. 26 (1):27-29.

Editorial Board

View all (0)