Article Id: ARCC862 | Page : 155 - 165
Anju Pathania*, B.C. Sood and S. Bhateria anju_pathania@rediffmail.com
Address : Department of Crop Improvement, CSK Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishwadhyalya, Palampur – 176 062, India


Seed samples of two varieties of chickpea namely HPG-17and Himachal chana-1 were irradiated with 30kR, 40kR, 50kR doses of gamma – rays to induce variability for yield and related traits. Significant shift in mean values for quantitative traits was observed in M2 and M3 generations. Genetic parameters were higher for seed yield and related traits in M3 generation of HPG-17 and M2 generation of Himachal chana-1. The magnitude of parameters of variability was more in 30kR treated population of HPG-17 and 40kR treated population of Himachal chana-1. High heritability coupled with high genetic advance observed for plant height, biological yield and seed yield per plant in HPG-17 and for pod bearing branches per plant in Himachal chana-1, indicate that these traits are likely to respond effectively to phenotypic selection. Significant positive additive and dominance effects were observed for majority of traits studied in 40kR and 50kR treated populations of HPG-17 and for 30kR and 40kR treated populations of Himachal chana-1.


Cicer arietinum L; Gamma-rays; Induced additive effect Induced dominance effects; Mutation;
Quantitative traits
Induced variations.


  1. Abbo, S., Berger, J. and Turner N.C. (2003). Evolution of cultivated chickpea: Four bottlenecks limit diversity and constrain adaptation. Func. Pl. Bio., 30 : 1081-1087.
  2. Anonymous (2008). FAOSTAT database. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nation, Rome, Italy. http://faostat.fao.org.
  3. Anonymous (2007). FAOSTAT database. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nation, Rome, Italy. http://faostat.fao.org.
  4. Blixt, S. (1970). Studies of induced mutations in pea. XXVI. Genetically controlled differences in radiation sensitivity. Agri. Hort. Genet., 28 : 55- 116.
  5. Brock, R.D. (1971). The role of induced mutations in plant improvement. J Rad Bot., 11 : 181-196.
  6. Brock, R. D. (1965). Induced mutation affecting quantitative characters. J Rad Bot., 5 : 451-464.
  7. Cheema, A.A. and Atta, B.M. (2003). Radio sensitivity studies in Basmati rice. Pak J Bot., 35 : 197-207.
  8. Frey, K. J. (1968). Induced variability in diploid and polyploidy Avena sp. (1). Reprinted from gamma field symposia No. 7. The present state of mutation breeding. pp. 41-46.
  9. Gaul, H. and Astveit, K. (1966). Induced variability of culm length in different genotypes of hexaploid wheat following X-irradiation & EMS treatment. Proc. Fifty Yugoslav Symp. Res. in Wheat. pp 265-267.
  10. Hayman, B.I. (1958). The theory and analysis of diallel crosses II. Genetics, 43 : 63-85.
  11. Jai Dev and Gupta,V. P. (1998). Radiation induced additive and dominance gene effects and their utility in breeding for polygenic traits in Phaseolus vulgaris L. Crop Improv, 25 : 76-82.
  12. Jinks, J.L. (1954). The analysis of continuous variation in a diallel crosses of Nicotiana rustica varieties. Genetics, 39: 767-788.
  13. Johnson, H.W., Robinson, H.F. and Comstock R.E. (1955). Estimates of genetic and environmental variability in soybean. Agr. J., 47 : 314-318.
  14. Khundi, R. S., Gill, M. S., Singh, T. P., Phul, P. S. (1997). Radiation induced variability for quantitative traits in soybean (Glycine max L. Merril). Euphytica, 25 :211-217
  15. Ladizinsky, G. and Adler, A. (1976). The origin of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Euphytica, 25 : 211-217.
  16. Larik, A.S., Memon, S. and Soomro, Z.A. (2009). Radiation induced polygenic mutations in Sorghum bicolor L. J Agric. Res., 47 : 11-19.
  17. Larik, A.S. and Rajput, L.S. (2000). Estimation of selection indices in Brassica juncea L. and Brassica napus L. Pak J Bot., 33 : 323-330.
  18. Larik, A. S. and Jamro, G. H. (1993). Genotypic response to physical mutagens. Proc. 2nd All Pak Int Sci Conf, December 20-30. pp. 161- 163.
  19. Larik, A. S. and Hafiz, H. M. I. (1981). Wheat improvement by induced mutation. Wheat Infor. Serv., 53: 35-39.
  20. Lev-Yadun, S., Gopher, A. and Abbo, S. (2000). The cradle of agriculture. Science, 288 : 1062-1063.
  21. Lawrence, C.W. (1965). Radiation induced polygenic mutation. ‘The use of induced mutations in Plant Breeding’. Pergamon Press, Oxford: 491-496.
  22. Micke. A. (1996). 70 years induced mutation to be reconsidered? Mut. Breed. NL, 42 : 22-25.
  23. Palenzona, D.L. (1965). Stima della varianza dovuta all effectto ambientale nell’ anolis di tipo gerarohico. Genet. Agr, 19 : 338-350.
  24. Scossiroli, R.E., Palenzona, D.L. and Scossiroli Pallegrini, S. (1966). Studies on the induction of new genetic variability for quantitative traits by seed irradiation and its use for wheat improvement. In : Mutations in Plant Breeding, IAEA: 197-229.
  25. Sharma, J.R. (1998). Statistical and Biometrical Techniques in Plant Breeding. New Age International (P) Limited, pp. 429.
  26. Sheeba, A., Ibrahim, S.M., Yogameenakshi, P. and Babu, S. (2003). Effect of mutagens on quantitative traits in M2 generation in sesame (Sesamum indicum L.). Indian J Genet, 63 : 173-174.
  27. Singh, R.B., Singh, B.D., Singh, R.M. and Laxmi, V. (1978). Seedling injury, pollen sterility and morphological mutations induced by gamma-rays and EMS in pearl millet. Indian J Genet, 38 : 380-390.
  28. Uma, M.S. and Salimath, P.M. (2001). Effect of ionizing radiations on germination and emergence of cowpea seeds. Karnataka J Agric. Sci., 14 : 1063-1064.
  29. Virk, D.S., Jinks, J.L. and Pooni, H.S. (1978). The assessment of induced continuous variation in pure-breeding lines following selfing. Heredity, 40 : 255-268.
  30. Yonezawa, K. (1979). Some additional considerations on the method of genetical analysis for induced continuous variation of self-fertilizing plants. Heredity,43 :191-204.

Global Footprints