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 39 issue 5 (october 2016) : 709-712

Estimation of genetic divergence in garden pea (Pisum sativum var. hortense L.) germplasm to facilitate the selection of potential parents for hybridization programme

Rakesh kumar*, Manish Kumar
1<p>Department of Vegetable Science, Dr YS Parmar University of Horticulture and Forestry, Nauni-Solan-173 230, India</p>
Cite article:- kumar* Rakesh, Kumar Manish (2015). Estimation of genetic divergence in garden pea (Pisum sativum var. hortense L.) germplasm to facilitate the selection of potential parents for hybridization programme . Legume Research. 39(5): 709-712. doi: 10.18805/lr.v0iOF.6851.

Genetic divergence in the 54 genotypes of pea was worked-out using Mahalanobis’s D2 statistics to identify the potential parents to be involved in the hybridization programme so that superior segregants can be selected in the segregating generations. On the basis of performance of various traits, 54 genotypes of pea were grouped into four clusters and maximum number of genotypes was accommodated in cluster II. The average intra-cluster distance was found maximum in cluster II and minimum in cluster III. Inter-cluster distance was maximum between cluster II and III indicating that hybridization between genotypes from cluster II and III can be utilized for getting the superior recombinants in segregating generations. Furthermore, on the basis of cluster means for various traits studied, cluster II was found superior for number of pods per plant, pod length, number of seeds per pod, shelling percentage, pod yield, total sugars and total soluble solids, whereas cluster III was found superior for plant height and total phenols. Hence, hybridization between parents from cluster II and cluster III for these characters may produce new recombinants with desired traits in the segregating generations which can be further purified by various plant breeding schemes.


  1. Anonymous. (2009). Package of Practices for Vegetable Science. Dr YSPUHF Nauni, Solan Himachal Pradesh. 

  2. Dhama, S. K., N. K. Tyagi. and S. P. S. Sirohi. (2009). Studies on genetic diversity under varying environments in pea (Pisum sativum L.). Legume Res. 32: 173-179.

  3. Dixit, G. P., I. P. Singh. and A. P. Khare. (2002). Genetic divergence study in field pea. Legume Res. 25: 199-201.

  4. Gomez, K. A. and A. A. Gomez (1983). Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. John Wiley and Sons Inc., New York. pp. 357-427.

  5. Gupta, A. J. and Y. V. Singh. (2006). Genetic divergence in garden pea (Pisum sativum L.). Indian J. Genet. Plant Breed. 66: 341-342.

  6. Katiyar, P. K. and G. P. Dixit. (2009). Multivariate analysis for genetic divergence in field pea (Pisum sativum L. var. arvence) germplasm. Indian J. Agr. Sci. 79: 181-183.

  7. Mahalanobis, P. C. (1936). On the generalized distance in statistics. In: Proceedings of Institute of Science, India 2: 49-55.

  8. Rao, R. (1952). Advanced Statistical Methods in Biometrical Research. John Wiley and Sons Inc., New York. pp. 357-363.

  9. Singh, G. and S. P. Singh. (2003). Genetic divergence in pea (Pisum sativum L.). Legume Res. 26: 131-133.

  10. Singh, J. D. and I. P. Singh. (2006). Genetic divergence in advanced genotypes for grain yield in field pea (Pisum sativum L.). Legume Res. 29: 301-303.

  11. Singh, R. K. 1987. Genetic divergence in pea. Crop Improvement 14: 165-168.

  12. Yadav, R., Srivastava., R. Kant. and R. Singh. (2009). Studies on genetic divergence in field pea (Pisum sativum L. var. arvence). Legume Res. 32: 121-124.

     

Editorial Board

View all (0)