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 (2024)

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 32 issue 4 (december 2009) : 270-273

RELATIONSHIP AND PATH ANALYSIS FOR GREEN POD YIELD AND ITS CONTRIBUTING CHARACTERS OVER ENVIRONMENTS IN FRENCH BEAN (PHASEOLUS VULGARIS L.)

Anjani Kumar Singh, A.P. Singh*, S.B. Singh, Vineeta Singh
1Regional Agricultural Research Station, Tandwal, Rajouri, SKUAST-Jammu-185 131, India.
  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Singh Kumar Anjani, Singh* A.P., Singh S.B., Singh Vineeta (2024). RELATIONSHIP AND PATH ANALYSIS FOR GREEN POD YIELD AND ITS CONTRIBUTING CHARACTERS OVER ENVIRONMENTS IN FRENCH BEAN (PHASEOLUS VULGARIS L.). Legume Research. 32(4): 270-273. doi: .
Green pod yield per plant showed positive and significant association with number of pods per
plant, pod length, number of seeds per pod and 10 pod weight in all the three environments studied.
The magnitude of the genotypic correlation was higher than the phenotypic correlation but both
genotypic and phenotypic correlations followed the same direction, indicating that the selection
based on phenotypic correlation could be effective. Path coefficient analysis revealed that selection
would be based on both direct and indirect factors simultaneously to make the selection more effective.
However, in E1 and E2, selection could be based on 10 pod weight and green pod yield per plant,
because these traits had value almost equal to correlation.
  1. Aljibouri, M A. et al. (1958). Agron. J. 50:633-637.
  2. Dewey, D.R. and Lu. K.H. (1959). Agron. J. 51:515-520.
  3. Lal, T and Panda, D.S (1972). Indian J. Horti. 29:315-318.
  4. Panday, G.K. et al. (1975). Punjab Horti. J. 15:126-131.
  5. Parkash, K.S and Ram, H.H (1981). Indian J. Agric. Sci. 51:76:80.
  6. Mishra, H.N. et al. (1996). Environ. & Ecol. 14:103-106.

Editorial Board

View all (0)