Indian Journal of Agricultural Research

  • Chief EditorV. Geethalakshmi

  • Print ISSN 0367-8245

  • Online ISSN 0976-058X

  • NAAS Rating 5.60

  • SJR 0.293

Frequency :
Bi-monthly (February, April, June, August, October and December)
Indexing Services :
BIOSIS Preview, ISI Citation Index, Biological Abstracts, Elsevier (Scopus and Embase), AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Submit

Indian Journal of Agricultural Research, volume 37 issue 2 (june 2003) : 115 -119

EFFECTIVENESS AND EFFICIENCY OF THE MUTAGENS GAMMA RAYS AND ETHYL METHANE SULFONATE ON UMABEAN (PHASEOLUS LUNATUS L.)

D. Sassi Kumar, T. Nepolean, A. Gopalan
1Centre for Plant Breeding and Genetics, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore - 641 003, India

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Kumar Sassi D., Nepolean T., Gopalan A. (2024). EFFECTIVENESS AND EFFICIENCY OF THE MUTAGENS GAMMA RAYS AND ETHYL METHANE SULFONATE ON UMABEAN (PHASEOLUS LUNATUS L.). Indian Journal of Agricultural Research. 37(2): 115 -119. doi: .

ABSTRACT

Two mutagens, physical (gamma rays) and chemical (EMS) were tested on lima bean for assessing their sensitivity. Dose/concentration were fixed by LD50 value as 16 KR for gamma rays and 40 mM concentration for EMS based on germination and survival percentage. The effectiveness and efficiency was worked out by accounting lethality, injury and sterility in M1 generation of treated seeds and spectrum of viable mutants was screened in M2 generations. It was observed that the frequency decreases with increasing dose/cqncentratlon of mutagen. EMS is more effective in producing extreme chlorophyll mutants. The physical mutagen i.e., gamma rays produced more viable mutants including early maturing plants, dwarfness and higher yielder. Gamma rays at lower dose i.e. 8 to 20 KR can be imposed to obtain beneficial mutants In limabean

KEYWORDS

    REFERENCES

    1. Blixt, S. (1968). Agric. Hort. Gen., 24 . 62-74.
    2. D'Amato, F. (1962). Symp. Genet. Wheat Breed. Agric. Res. Inslt. - Hungarian Academy ofSciences, 243-264.
    3. Gaul, H. (1960). Genet. Agr. fPavia)',12:297-318.
    4. Gaul, H. (1970). In: Manual on Mutation Breeding, IAEA, Vienna 119 .-;S-99.
    5. Gautam, A.S. etaL (1992). Cytologia, 57: 85-89.
    6. Geetha, K. and Vaidyanathan, P. (1998). Agric. Sci. Digest. 18: 27-Ju.
    7. Gordon, SA and Webber, RP. (1955). PI. PhysioL, 3 : 200-210.
    8. Konzak, C.F. eta/. (1965). Efficient Chemical Mutagenesis. The Use Induced Mutations in Plant Breeding. Pergamon
    9. Press, p 49-70.
    10. Kundi, RS. eta/. (1997). Croplmprov., 24: 231·234.
    11. Mehetre, S.S. eta/. (1990). LegwneRes., 13: 149-152.
    12. Mensah, J.K. and Eruotor, P.G. (1993). Trap. Agric., 70 :342-344.
    13. Quast1er, H. and Baer (1950). BioL Abst, 24: 30984.
    14. Skoog, F. (1935). J. CeDuIar Compo Physiol., 7: 227-270.
    15. Sparrow, AH. (1961). In: Mutation and Plant Breeding. Nat. Acad. Sci. Nat. Res. Council Pub!. Washington, D.C. 892: 55-119.
    16. Thirugnanakurnar, S. (1986). M.Sc. Thesis, Tamil Nadu Agric. Univ. Coimbatore, India.
    17. Wagrnare, VN. and Mehra, R.B. (1998). FABIS Newslett., 41: 8-12.
    Reviewed By

    Download Article
    In this Article
      Contact us
      Follow us

      Editorial Board

      View all (0)