Agricultural Science Digest

  • Chief EditorArvind kumar

  • Print ISSN 0253-150X

  • Online ISSN 0976-0547

  • NAAS Rating 4.75

  • SJR .118 (2022)

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


P.K. Verma, M.A. Shah
  • Email
1Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, MPUAT, Rajasthan College of Agriculture, Udaipur - 313 001, India
  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Verma P.K., Shah M.A. (2023). HETEROSIS FOR GRAIN YIELD AND HEAT TOLERANCE CHARACTERS IN BREAD WHEAT (TRITICUM AESTIVUM L.). Agricultural Science Digest. 28(4): 241 - 245. doi: .
10 parents (C 306, GW 190, HD 2687, Hindi 62, NI 5439, PBW 343, Raj 3077, Raj 3765, UP 2335 and UP 2425) and their forty-five F1s, obtained by crossing in diallel fashion (without reciprocal) were evaluated during rabi 2002–03 for grain yield pewr plant and heat tolerance characters in very late sowing condition. The objective was to assess the magnitude of heterosis and heterobeltiosis for grain yield and heat tolerance characters under heat stress conditions. None of the crosses showed uniformly high heterosis for all the characters under the study. Out of forty-five crosses, sixteen and ten crosses exhibited significant and positive heterosis and heterobeltiosis for grain yield per plant. The magnitude of heterosis and heterobeltiosis for grain yield per plant varied from −31.75 to 97.50 and −33.25 to 95.64 per cent. The most of the high heterobeltiotic crosses for grain yield per plant also depicted significant heterobeltiosis for one or more heat tolerance characters also, particularly for praline content, seedling vigour index and heat injury
    1. Afiah, S.A.N. (2000). Ann. Agric. Sci., Cairo., 45:257-280.
    2. Arunachalam, V. et al. (1984). Euphytica, 33:33-99.
    3. Bates, I.S. (1973). Plant and Soil. 39:205-207.
    4. Blum, A. and Ebercon, A. (1981). Crop Sci., 21:43-47.
    5. Deshpande, D.P. and Nayeem, K. A. (1999). Indian J. Genet., 59:13-22.
    6. El-Hennawy, M.A. (1996). Faculty Agric. Univ. Cairo, 47:379-392.
    7. Fonseca, S. and Patterson, F.L. (1968). Crop Sci., 8:85-88.
    8. Grafius, J.E. (1959). Agron. J., 51:551-554.
    9. Khan, N.U. (1995). Sarhad J. Agric., 11:477-484.
    10. Mather, K. (1949). Biometrical Genetics : The study of continuous variation. Methuon & Co., Ltd., London.
    11. Munir, I (1999). Sarhad J. Agric., 15:299-303.
    12. Nayeem, K.A. and Mahajan, A.R. (1991). Indian J. Genet., 51:363-369.
    13. Patil, V. R. (1998). Adv. Plant Sci., 11:285-289.
    14. Rasul, I. (2002) Int. J. Agric. Biol., 4:214-216.
    15. Sullivan, C.Y. (1972). In : Sorghum in the Seventies (Rao N.G.P. and House L.R. ed.) Oxford & IBH Publishing Co., New Delhi.
    16. Shull, G.H. (1909) Am. Breeder’s Assoc. Rep., 5:51-59.
    17. Whitehouse, R.N.H. et al. (1958). Euphytica., 7:147-169.

    Editorial Board

    View all (0)