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 29 issue 4 (december 2006) : 266 - 269


N.B. Singh·, Th. Renuka Devi
1Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, College of Agriculture, CAU, Imphal- 795 004, Manipur, India
  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Singh· N.B., Devi Renuka Th. (2024). BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF GAMMA RAYS ON M1 GENERATION OF RICEBEAN {VIGNA UMBELLATA (THUNB.) OHWI AND OHASHI}. Legume Research. 29(4): 266 - 269. doi: .
Three local ricebean varieties, viz., RBM-6, RBM-13 and RBM-31 were treated with 5 gamma ray doses of 0, 150, 300, 450 and 600 GY and their biological effects were studied in M1 generation for 15 characters. Out of 15 characters studied, the characters, viz., seed germination, seedling survival, root length and seed fertility were, in general, reduced with the increase of gamma ray doses; while the characters viz., seed yield and its components, i.e., days to flowering, days to maturity, number of primary branches per plant, number of pods per plant, number of clusters per plant, number of seeds per pod, 100 grain weight and grain yield per plant showed random effect revealing that the former group of characters were important for the study of gamma ray sensitivity in M1 generation of ricebean. The response of the varieties differentially to gamma ray for many of the characters under study also suggested that mutagen sensitivity of ricebean to gamma ray was dependent on genotype.
    1. Bhadra, S.K. (1982). Ph.D. Thesis,JARI, New Delhi.
    2. Borah, H.K. (1991). Anna. Agric. Res., 13: 281-283.
    3. Gaul, H. (1959). In: Proc. 2'd Congr. European Association for Research on Plant Breeding, Cologne, pp. 65-69.
    4. Gomez, KA and Gomez, AA (1987). Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. John Wiley and Sons Inc., New York.
    5. Ignacimuthu, S. and Babu, C.R. (1988). Indian J. Genet., 48: 331-342.
    6. ,Konjak, C.F. (1965). Efficient Chemical Mutagenesis. Rad. Bot. (Suppl.), 5: 49-70.
    7. Kundu, SK and Singh, D.P. (1982). EMS induced variability for quantitative characters in Blackgram (Vigna mungo L.) Hepper In: Genetic improvement of pulses crops vol. 2 Jafar Nizam, Premier Publication, Kothi, Hyderabad, India, pp. 58. .
    8. Kamini, K and Akhaury, S.B. (1988). Proc. Cytol. Genet., 1: 188-191.
    9. Mohna, S.K. et al. (1989). Curro Sci., 58(10): 582-584. .
    10. Mehetre, 5.5. et a/. (1990). Legume Res., 13: 149-152.
    11. Subramaniam, D. (1980). Indian J. Genet., 40: 187-190.
    12. Sinha, S.S.N. and Akhaury, S.B. (1982). Indian J. Bot., 5(1): 91-97.
    13. Sharma, D. (1987). M.Sc. Thesis, MU, Jorhat, India

    Editorial Board

    View all (0)