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 40 issue 4 (august 2017) : 624-629

Stability for disease, genotype x environment interaction for yield and its components in pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.]

Muniswamy S, R. Lokesha, Yamanura, Ramesh, J.R. Diwan
1<p>Agricultural Research Station, Aland Road,&nbsp;Kalaburagi-585 101 Karnataka, India.</p>
Cite article:- S Muniswamy, Lokesha R., Yamanura, Ramesh, Diwan J.R. (2016). Stability for disease, genotype x environment interaction for yield andits components in pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.] . Legume Research. 40(4): 624-629. doi: 10.18805/lr.v0iOF.10761.

The material for study of genotype x environment (G x E) interaction comprised of 23 genotypes, which were tested in four environments, during kharif-2012 and 2013 at two locations in Agricultural Research Station, Kalaburagi and Raddevadgi located in north eastern dry zone (Zone 2) of Karnataka. The experiment was laid out in lattice design with two replications. Highly significant differences among genotypes were observed for all the characters except number of pods per plant and yield per plant. Environmental +(Genotype x Environment) interaction was significant for days to 50 per cent flowering, day to maturity, plant height, pod bearing length, number of pods per plant and seed yield per plant. The variance due to pooled deviation was highly significant for all the characters which reflect the presence of sufficient genetic variability in the material. Stability parameters for seed yield per plant indicated that ASHA(ch) was stable and desirable, followed by RVK-275 and GRG-811 which were specifically adopted for favourable and poor environments respectively. Two years of field screening for Fusarium wilt (FW) and Sterility Mosaic Disease (SMD) yielded three genotypes viz., GRG-811, GRG-2009 and ASHA for resistance to Fusarium wilt and moderate resistance to SMD. Hence, these genotypes can be used directly as a variety or choice of parent for hybridization programme. 

  1. Balakrishnan, K. and Natarajaratnam, N. (1989). Genotype-environment interaction for yield components in pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.] Madras Agril. J., 76: 365-370.

  2. Eberhart, S.A. and Russell, W.A. (1966). Stability parameters for comparing varieties. Crop Sci., 6: 36–40.

  3. Ghodke, M. K., Jahagirdar, J. E. and Makne, V. G. (1992). Phenotypic stability of newly developed pigeonpea genotypes. Indian J. Pulses Res., 5: 125-127.

  4. Muthiah, A. R. and Kalaimagal, T. (2005). Stability analysis in hybrid pigeonpea. Indian J. Pulses Res., 18: 76-79.

  5. Niranjan Kumar, B. (2013). Stability analysis for yield and its attributing traits in advanced genotypes of pigeonpea [Cajanus cajana. (L) Millsp.] M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Univ. Agri. Sci., Raichur, Karnataka (India).

  6. Nene, Y. L. and Reddy, M. V. (1977). Leaf stapling technique to screen pigeonpea for resistance to sterility mosaic. Indian Phytopathol., 30: 153.

  7. Patel, P. T., Chauhan, R. M., Parmar, L. D. and Tikka, S. B. S. (2009). Phenotypic stability of yield and related traits in pigeonpea. Legume Res., 32: 235-239.

  8. Prashanti, L., Bhasker Reddy, B. V., Rekha Rani, K. and Haranath, N. P. (2009). Molecular marker for screening Fusarium wilt resistance in pigeonpea, Legume Res., 32:19-24

  9. Sawargaonkar, S. L., Saxena, K. B., Madrap, I. A. and Rathore, A. (2011) Stability analysis of yield and related traits in pigeonpea hybrids. J.Food Legume., 24: 184-193. 

  10. Singh, V. (1984), Mechanical diallel and stability analysis in pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.]. M.Sc. (Agri.) thes., Haryana Agric. Univ., Hissar, India.

  11. Singh, I. P., Vishwadhar and Dua, R.P., (2003). Inheritance of resistance to sterility mosaic disease in pigeonpea [Cajanus cajana (L.) Millsp.]. Indian J. of Agric. Sci., 73: 414-417.

  12. Sharma, M., Rathore, A., Mangala, U. N., Ghosh, R., Sharma, S., Upadhyay, H. D. and Pande, S. (2012). New sources of resistance to Fusarium wilt and sterility mosaic disease in a mini-core collection pigeonpea germplasm. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 133: 707-714.

  13. Sharma, M., Telangre, R and Pande, S. (2013) Identification and validation of resistance to Fusarium wilt and sterility mosaic disease in Pigeonpea, Indian J. of Plant Protection, 41: 141-146.

  14. Shoran, J., B. Pandya, B. P. and Gautam, P. L. (1981). Genotype × environment interaction analysis in pigeonpea. Crop Improv., 8: 33-36.

  15. Sreelakshmi, C., Sameer Kumar, C. V. and Shivani, D. (2010). Genetic analysis of yield and its component traits in drought tolerant genotypes of Pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.]. Electronic J. Plant Breed., 1: 1488-1491 

  16. Thanki, H.P. Sawargaonkar, S. L. and Hudge, B. V. (2010). Genotype x environment interaction for biometrical traits in pigeonpea ( Cajanus cajan L. Millsp.) under varying spacing. Electronic J. Plant Breed, 1:925-928.

  17. Vanniarajan, C., Rangasamy, P. and Nepolean, T. (2007). Stable and unstable pigeonpea genotypes for yield versus component characters. Plant Archives., 7: 427-428.

  18. Varshney, R. K., Wenbin, C., Yupeng, L., Arvind, K. B., Rachit, K. S., Jessica, A. S.,Mark, T A., Sarwar, A., Guangyi, F., Adam, M.W., Andrew, D F., Jaime, S.,Aiko, I., Reetu, T., Varma, P., Wei, W., Hari, D. U., Shiaw-Pyng, Y.,Trushar, S., Saxena, K B.,Todd, M., Richard, McCombie, Bicheng, Y.,Gengyun, Z., Huanming, Y., Jun, W., Charles, S., Douglas, R. C., Gregory,D. M., Xun, X. and Scott, A. J. (2012). Draft genome sequence of pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan), an orphan legume crop of resource-poor farmers. Nature Biotech., 30: 83-89.


Editorial Board

View all (0)