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
Submit

Legume Research, volume 31 issue 3 (september 2008) : 188 - 191

FREQUENCY AND SPECTRUM OF MORPHOLOGICAL MUTANTS IN M2 GENERATION OF CLUSTER BEAN (CYAMOPSIS TETRAGONOLOBA (L.) TAUB)

S. Velu, L. Mullainathan, D. Arulbalachandran, E. Sudhakar
1Department of Botany, Annamalai University, Annamalai Nagar-608 002, India.

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Velu S., Mullainathan L., Arulbalachandran D., Sudhakar E. (2024). FREQUENCY AND SPECTRUM OF MORPHOLOGICAL MUTANTS IN M2 GENERATION OF CLUSTER BEAN (CYAMOPSIS TETRAGONOLOBA (L.) TAUB). Legume Research. 31(3): 188 - 191. doi: .

ABSTRACT

In the present investigation, viable macromutants with changes in stature, duration, leaf,
pod and sterility were recorded in M2 generation of cluster bean. A total of 54 and 39 macromutants were isolated from EMS and SA treatments, respectively. In the EMS treatments, the mutation spectrum was much wider (nine types of mutants identified) at 0.8% and narrow
(four types of mutants identified) at 1.0% and in SA treatments the mutation spectrum was
wider at 0.03% (ten types of mutants identified) and narrow at 0.01% (two types of mutants
identified). In general, the mutation frequency was high on M1 plant basis than M2 plant basis
for both the mutagens viz. EMS and SA. The frequency of viable mutation on M1 and M2 plant
basis exhibited an inconsistent trend with increase in EMS and SA treatments.

KEYWORDS

    REFERENCES

    1. Charumathi, M. et al. (1992). J. Nucl. Agric. Biol., 21: 299-302.
    2. Gautam, A.S. and Mittal R K (1998). Crop. Res., 16: 344 – 348.
    3. Goswami, L.C. (1980). Genet. Agra., 32: 299-311.
    4. Gottschalk, W. (1967). Gatert Blen. Berlin., 2: 139-146.
    5. Kanaklata, J. (1995). Ph.D Thesis, Nagpur University, Nagpur, India.
    6. Karpate, R.R. and Choudhary, A.D. (1997). J. Cytol Genet. 32: 41-48.
    7. Kharkwal, M.C. (1999). Indian J. Genet. 59: 451.
    8. Mahapatra, B.K. (1983). Ph.D. Thesis IARI, New Delhi, India.
    9. Manapure, P. and Patil, S. (1997). J. Soil Crops, 7: 208.209.
    10. Nilan. R.A. et al. (1977). Ann New York Acad 287: 367-384.
    11. Sarkar, A. (1985). Ph.D Thesis, IARI. New Delhi, India.
    12. Sharma, S.K. (1990). Cytologia 55: 243.
    13. Singh, O.P. (1980). Trop. Grain Legume Bull., 19: 30-34.
    14. Singh, R.K. (1987). Plant Breeding 99: 27-29.
    15. Solanki, I..S. et al (2004). Natnl. J. Pl. Improve. 6(1): 22-25.
    16. Tripathi, Vandana A and Dubey, D.K. (1994). Lens Newsl. 21: 16.
    17. Vanniarajan. C. (1989). M.Sc., (Ag.) Thesis, Tamil Nadu Agri. Univ. Coimbatore, India.
    18. Vanniarajan. C. (1993). Crop. Improv. 20: 215 – 218.
    Reviewed By

    Download Article
    In this Article
      Contact us
      Follow us

      Editorial Board

      View all (0)