Legume Research

  • Chief EditorJ. S. Sandhu

  • Print ISSN 0250-5371

  • Online ISSN 0976-0571

  • NAAS Rating 6.80

  • SJR 0.391

  • Impact Factor 0.8 (2023)

Frequency :
Monthly (January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November 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
Legume Research, volume 33 issue 3 (september 2010) : 201 - 205

ASSOCIATION OF PHENOLOGICAL TRAITS WITH PRODUCTIVITY AND ITS COMPONENTS IN CHICKPEA [CICER ARIETINUM (L.)]

Sidramappa*, S.A. Patil, P.M. Salimath
1Department of Genetics & Plant Breeding, College of Agriculture, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad-580 005, India
  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Sidramappa*, Patil S.A., Salimath P.M. (2024). ASSOCIATION OF PHENOLOGICAL TRAITS WITH PRODUCTIVITY AND ITS COMPONENTS IN CHICKPEA [CICER ARIETINUM (L.)]. Legume Research. 33(3): 201 - 205. doi: .
High variability for maturity and its components traits indicating earliness like days to
flower initiation, days to 50% flowering and days to pod initiation was observed in a recombinant
inbred lines (RILs) developed from cross between ICCV 2 and JG-62. Duration of reproductive
period (DRP) was computed based on the difference between physiological maturity and days
to flowering initiation. DRP did not show any correlation with maturity indicating the possibility
of getting varying lines of DRP with a range of maturity levels in a given environment. A critical
length of DRP of 50-60 days was found more ideal with a crop duration of about 90 days as
observed from the study. It is suggested to investigate the DRP for chickpea ecologies with
different characteristic maturity period. Association analysis indicated that DRP influences yield
mainly through pods per plant.
  1. Calagno, F. and Gallo, G. (1993). Physiological and morphological basis of abiotic stress resistance in chickpea. In
  2. Breeding for stress tolerance in cool season food legumes, (Singh. K. B and Saxena. M. C, Eds.), Wiley, SAY
  3. Co-publication.
  4. Horva, E. Or. and Abbao, S. (1999). A major gene for flowering time in chickpea. Crop Sci., 39: 315-322.
  5. Kumar, J. and Rao, B. V. (1996). Super early chickpea developed at the ICRISAT Asia Center. Int. Chickpea Pigeonpea
  6. Newsletter, 3: 17-18.
  7. Vol. 33, No. 3, 2010 205
  8. Kumar, J., Sethi, S. C., Johansen, C., Kelley, T. G., Van Rheenen, H. A. and Rahman, M. M. (1996). Potential of
  9. short duration varieties in chickpea. Indian J. Dryland Agril. Development, 11: 26-29.
  10. Neter Pal Singh, Ramkrishna and Kumar, R., (2001). An assay of effect of different traits on chickpea grain yield.
  11. Annuals Agril. Res. News Series, 22: 564 – 569.
  12. Ram, C., Choudhary, M. A., Chandra, S. and Jatasra, D. S., (1980). Association in segregating populations of
  13. chickpea. Indian J. Genetics Pl. Breeding, 40: 117 – 121.
  14. Sidramappa, B., (2003). Relationship of phenological traits with productivity in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). M.Sc.(Agri.)
  15. Thesis, Univ. of Agril. Sci., Dharwad, India.
  16. Yadav, R. K., (1990). Path analysis in segregating population of chickpea. Indian J. Pulse Res., 3: 107 – 110

Editorial Board

View all (0)