Chief Editor:

J. S. Sandhu

Vice Chancellor, SKN Agriculture, University, Jobner, VC, NDUAT, Faizabad, Deputy Director General (Crop Science), Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), New Delhi

Frequency:Monthly

Indexing:

BIOSIS Preview, ISI Citation Index, Biological Abstracts, Elsevier (Scopus and Embase), AGRICOLA, Go...

COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS AND EFFICIENCY OF PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL MUTAGENS IN CHICKPEA (CICER ARIETINUM L.)

Anju Pathania, B.C. Sood

Affiliations

¹Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, CSK HPKV, Palampur-176062, Himachal Pradesh, India.

Submitted|
First Online |
doi

Cite article:- Pathania Anju, Sood B.C. (2025). COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS AND EFFICIENCY OF PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL MUTAGENS IN CHICKPEA (CICER ARIETINUM L.). Legume Research. 30(3): 186 - 191. doi: .

ABSTRACT

Mutagenic effectiveness and efficiency of gamma-rays and EMS (Ethyl methane sulphonate) in two cultivars of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) viz., HPG-17 (bold seeded) and Himachal chana-1 (small seeded), have been worked out to identify the useful mutagens as well as doses/concentrations. 30kR dose of gamma-rays has been found most effective and efficient on M2 family and M2 plant basis in HPG-17. Among different doses, 0.15% dose of EMS was found more effective on M2 family basis and 0.30% dose was found effective on M2 plant basis and 0.30% dose of EMS was found efficient in HPG-17. In Himachal chana-1, 30kR dose was most effective and 50kR dose of gamma-rays was found to be most efficient and among different doses of EMS, 0.15% dose was observed as the most effective and 0.30% dose as most efficient. In general, EMS was found to be more effective and gamma-rays more efficient in bold seeded variety, whereas in small seeded variety, EMS was found to be more effective and efficient. Combined analysis of mutagens and varieties showed that chemical mutagen (EMS) was more effective and efficient than physical mutagen (gamma-rays) in inducing mutations and mutation rate was more in small seeded variety than in bold seeded variety.

KEYWORDS

REFERENCES

Gad, A.A., and El-Sawah, M.H. (1985). Egyptian J Genet Cytol, 14: 213-220.
Kaul, M.L.H., and Bhan, A.K. (1977). Theor Appl Genet, 50: 214-246.
Kharkwal, M.C. et al. (1986). Proceedings of a workshop, Pullman, Washington, USA, July 1-5, pp. 89-100.
Kharkwal, M.C. (1998). Indian J Genet, 58: 158-167.
Kharkwal, M.C. (1999). Indian J Genet, 59: 451-464.
Konzak, C.F. et al. (1965). Radiat. Bot., 15: 49-70.
Solanki, I.S., and Sharma, B. (1994). Indian J Genet, 54: 72-76.
Srivastava, L. S. et al. (1973). Sci and Cult, 39:345-347.
Waghmare, V.N., and Mehra, R.B. (2001). Indian J Genet, 61: 53-56.

Disclaimer :

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Copyright :

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.