Legume Research

  • Chief EditorJ. S. Sandhu

  • Print ISSN 0250-5371

  • Online ISSN 0976-0571

  • NAAS Rating 6.80

  • SJR 0.32, CiteScore: 0.906

  • Impact Factor 0.8 (2024)

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
Submit

Research Article

Legume Research, volume 44 issue 2 (february 2021) : 131-137

Genetic diversity in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) based on reaction to biotic stresses and productivity parameters

M.A. Saleem1, G.K. Naidu1,*, H.L. Nadaf1, P.S. Tippannavar1
1AICRP on Groundnut, Main Agriculture Research Station, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad-580 005, Karnataka, India.

  • Submitted20-09-2018|

  • Accepted20-12-2018|

  • First Online 13-03-2019|

  • doi 10.18805/LR-4084

Cite article:- Saleem M.A., Naidu G.K., Nadaf H.L., Tippannavar P.S. (2019). Genetic diversity in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) based on reaction to biotic stresses and productivity parameters . Legume Research. 44(2): 131-137. doi: 10.18805/LR-4084.

ABSTRACT

A set 184 mini core genotypes along with twelve checks of groundnut were evaluated for their reaction to Spodoptera litura, late leaf spot and rust at hotspot location in addition to their studies on eight productivity traits to assess the genetic diversity during rainy season of 2017. D2 analysis based on the aforesaid traits grouped the196 genotypes into twenty-five clusters. Maximum inter cluster distance was between cluster XXIII and cluster VI (836.06) while the same for intra cluster was in cluster IV (95.94). Genotypes with resistance to different biotic stresses were distributed mainly in different solitary clusters. Cluster XIV (ICG 5051) and cluster XII (ICG 76) had genotypes with resistance to Spodoptera litura.The genotype, (ICG 12625) also belonging to solitary cluster XVIII had shown resistance to late leaf spot while the genotypes in clusters XVII (ICGV 87157) and cluster XXII (ICG 13723) had resistance to rust. Number of primary branches per plant (48.41%), hundred seed weight (13.13%), reaction to Spodoptera litura (11.33%), and yield per plant (8.33%) mainly contributed to diversity in the groundnut mini core. The genotypes, ICG 5051, ICG 76, ICG 12625, ICG 76 and ICG 4412 may serve as diverse sources for resistance to different biotic stresses in groundnut. ICG 2381, a multiple stress resistant genotype (Spodoptera litura, late leaf spot and rust) in the cluster IV can be utilised in the multiple stress resistance breeding in groundnut.

INTRODUCTION

Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) is one of the important oilseed crops of the world. It contains 48-50 per cent oil, 25-28 per cent easily digestible protein, 10-20 per cent carbohydrates and provides 564 kcal of energy for every 100 g of kernel (Arya et al., 2016). In addition, groundnut is a rich source of several micronutrients and health enhancing components, including minerals, antioxidants and vitamins along with some biologically active polyphenols, flavonoids and isoflavones (Janila et al., 2013).
       
Though, India is a leading producer of groundnut covering an area of 5.80 m ha out of world coverage of 27.66 m ha, its productivity is low (1182 kg ha-1) compared to USA (4118 kg ha-1), China (3674 kg ha-1), Argentina (2928 kg ha-1) and world average productivity of 1590 kg ha-1 (FAO, 2016). Among the several reasons for low yield levels in India like lack of improved high yielding cultivars, cultivation under shallow soils of low fertility, uneven rainfall distribution, lack of crop rotation, low plant population, incidence of biotic and abiotic stresses, the latter two, particularly, tobacco cutworm (Spodoptera litura), late leaf spot and rust causes significant reduction in yield. In groundnut, yield loss due to Spodoptera litura reported to be 66.6 per cent (Kulkarni, 1989) while, foliar diseases, late leaf spot and rust cause 50-80 per cent in India (Sandhikar et al.,1989).
       
Genetic diversity for the traits of interest is a pre-requisite for successful crop improvement. Earlier studies conducted in groundnut to assess the genetic diversity are mainly based on productivity and quality traits (Yadav et al., 2014; Ganapati et al., 2014; Bhakal and Lal, 2015; Wagmode et al., 2017; Mahesh and Hasan, 2018) and rarely on biotic stresses viz., late leaf spot and rust (Chaudhari et al., 2017). Therefore, the purpose of this study is to screen and identify diverse sources of resistance to different biotic stresses viz., Spodoptera litura, late leaf spot and rust along with productivity traits from groundnut mini core.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A mini core set of groundnut comprising 184 genotypes along with four control (ICG 11457, ICG 12370, ICG 13099 and ICG 13723), three susceptible (JL 24, TMV 2, TAG 24) and five resistant genotypes (ICGV 86031, ICGV 87157, ICGV 87160, ICG 2271 and ICG 1657) as checks  under different stress conditions were sown during rainy season of 2017 at Main Agriculture Research Station (MARS), University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad, India (15° 13’ N, 75° 07’ E, 678 m above MSL and 800 mm average annual rainfall).
               
In mini core, each genotype was sown in a row of 2-meter length in 4 blocks following randomized incomplete block design replicated twice. A spacing of 30 cm between rows and 10 cm between plant to plant for Spanish and Virginia bunch types while, 60 cm between rows and 10 cm between plant to plant for Virginia runner types was followed. Normal package of practices excluding plant protection measures were followed to raise the crop. The genotypes were evaluated for their reaction to foliar diseases viz., late leaf spot and rust and insect pest (Spodoptera litura) at Dharwad, a hot spot for all the aforesaid three biotic stresses. Susceptible check JL 24 was planted after every 10 rows to build the infestation and disease inoculums. The  genotypes were also assessed for their morphological [days to initiation of flowering, days to fifty per cent flowering, plant height (cm), number of primary branches] and productivity traits [number of pod per plant, pod yield per plant (g), shelling per cent (%) and hundred seed weight (g)] following standard procedures.
 
Screening for various biotic stresses
 
Visual observations following the standard scale (0-9) (Fig 1) (Anonymous, 2015) for per cent leaf damage due to S. litura (0-100%) at 70 days after sowing (coinciding with peak incidence of the insect pest) was noted from extent of damage of top, middle and bottom leaves from 5 plants showing maximum incidence of insect in each genotype and expressed as per cent leaf damage.
 

Fig 1: Leaf damage for visual scoring due to Spodoptera litura damage in groundnut.


       
The evaluation of genotypes against late leaf spot (LLS) and rust was done at 80 days after sowing (DAS) which was considered as the highest possible incidence as evidenced by highest field disease score in susceptible genotypes for both LLS and rust. Assesment for per cent leaf area damage by pathogen of rust and LLS was done following modified 9-point scale (Subrahamanyam et al., 1995) as presented in Fig 2 and 3 for rust and late leaf spot, respectively.
 

Fig 2: The modified 9-point scale for field evaluation against rust.


 

Fig 3: The modified 9-point scale for field evaluation of late leaf spot.


 
Statistical analysis
 
Statistical analyses of the data on various morphological, productivity parameters and reaction to Spodoptera litura, late leaf spot and rust were done in Windostat statistical package version 9.1. The data were subjected to multivariate analysis (Rao,1952). The original mean values were transformed to normalized variables and all possible D2 values were calculated. The criterion suggested by Rao (1952) was followed for determining the clusters. The average inter-cluster distance was computed taking into consideration of all the component D2 values among the members of the two clusters considered. The square root of D2 values gave the genetic distance (D) between clusters. Grouping of the genotypes was carried out by following the Tocher’s method (Rao, 1952).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Based on the D2 statistics, 196 groundnut genotypes were grouped into 25 clusters (Table 1). Cluster I with 90 genotypes was the largest followed by cluster II (55) and cluster IV (21). All other clusters were mono-genotypic except cluster III with eight genotypes and Cluster XXIII with two genotypes. The magnitude of D2 values observed in the study suggested considerable diversity in the mini core set for resistance to insect, disease and for productivity parameters. Interestingly, genotypes with different pedigree and geographic origin but with the same level of performance of the trait under study belonged to the same cluster. This may be evidenced from the belonging of the genotype ICG 13787 with bunch growth habit from West Africa and the genotype ICG 2925 with runner growth habit from South Asia to same cluster (II) might be due to having same level of resistance reaction to Spodoptera litura (Saleem, 2018). Earlier, no relationship between geographical distribution and genetic diversity was observed in confectionary groundnuts (Venkateswarlu et al., 2011). Lack of relationship between genetic and geographic diversity could have arisen from genetic drifts and selection in a particular environment (Murthy and Arunachalam, 1966). Similar clustering pattern in groundnut based on productivity traits and reaction to late leaf spot has been reported earlier by Vijay (2015) and Chaudhari et al. (2017). Therefore, selecting genotypes as parents in the crossing programme on the basis of genetic divergence analysis would be more rewarding than the choice made only on the basis of geographic diversity (Bhakal and Lal, 2015; Chaudhari et al., 2017). Conspicuously, 20 clusters (V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, X, XI, XII, XIII, XIV, XV, XVI, XVII, XVIII, XIX, XX, XXI, XXII, XXIV and XXV) were solitary indicating that these genotypes might have completely different genetic makeup from the rest of the genotypes and from each other and thus led to the formation of such monogenotypic clusters. Also, such solitary clusters generally exhibit -superior/inferior performance for few traits due to total isolation preventing gene flow or due to intensive natural/artificial selection for diverse adaptive complexes (Chaudhari et al., 2017; Mahesh and Hasan, 2018).
 

Table 1: Distribution of different genotypes of the mini core into different clusters.


 
Twenty nine genotypes showing resistance to Spodoptera litura limited their distribution among nine clusters (I, II, IV, XI, XII, XIII, XIV, XVI and XXIII) where cluster II had fifteen such genotypes followed by six in cluster IV. Distribution of resistant genotypes in different clusters indicated diversity with respect to other traits as well. For example, ICG 13787 and ICG 928 were resistant to Spodoptera litura but they differed with respect to their performance to late leaf spot, shelling per cent and yield per plant. Five genotypes  resistant to late leaf spot were found distributed in the clusters II, IV, XVIII, XIX and XXI indicating diversity among them. Interestingly, two rust resistant genotypes  were distributed in two clusters (IV and XXII). Conspicuously, the genotype ICG 2381 with resistance to all the three biotic stresses (Saleem, 2018) belonged to cluster IV. The susceptible check genotypes JL 24 and TMV 2 belonged to cluster III where no resistant genotypes belonged. Therefore, diversity in distribution of resistant genotypes into different clusters facilitates utilizing them in resistance breeding programme as a diverse source of material from different genetic background.
       
Maximum inter-cluster distance observed between cluster XXIII and cluster VI (836.06) followed by cluster XX and cluster XV (733.80) and cluster XV and cluster XX (733.80) (Fig 4),  indicated that crossing between genotypes belonging to these clusters may help in production of transgressive segregants leading to opportunity for selecting better genotypes in succeeding generations (Zaman et al., 2010; Bhakal and Lal, 2015; Chaudhari et al., 2017; Mahesh and Hasan, 2018). Lowest inter cluster distance between cluster VIII and cluster IX (24.68) (Fig 4) suggested existence of low genetic diversity between them. Maximum intra cluster distance among the genotypes belonging to the cluster IV (95.94) followed by cluster III (78.49), cluster II (61.09) and cluster I (42.97) (Fig 4) indicated substantial variation existing among the genotypes of such clusters. Therefore, the 21 genotypes in cluster IV having highest intra-cluster distance when compared to 90 genotypes in cluster I having low intra cluster distance can be effectively used in the breeding programme to diversify the population and also may be used to produce good recombinants from the same cluster. Earlier, Chaudhari et al., (2017) also reported more intra cluster distance in the cluster containing less number of genotypes in groundnut. Larger inter cluster distances than intra cluster distances indicated wider diversity present among the genotypes of distant groups.
 

Fig 4: Cluster distance diagram (Tocher’s diagram) indicating the intra and inter-cluster distance in groundnut mini core.


       
The mean values of each of the 11 traits studied for all the genotypes in 25 clusters presented in Table 3 revealed that the genotype ICG 1519 belonging to solitary cluster XXIV had the highest mean 41.05 for damage due to Spodoptera litura while the genotypes ICG 5051 and ICG 76 also belonging to solitary clusters XIV and XII had the least damage of 5.35 and 6.85, respectively. In case of late leaf spot, lowest cluster mean was observed in solitary clusters XVIII and XIX (2.5) with the genotypes ICG 12625, an accession from South America and ICG11426 an accession from South Asia, respectively. With respect to rust, lowest cluster mean was observed in solitary clusters XVII and cluster XXII (3.5). ICG 2381 (cluster IV), a land race from Brazil was found resistant to late leaf spot, rust and Spodoptera litura (Saleem, 2018). Earlier, this genotype was reported to be resistant to rust and Aspergilus flavus with good oil quality (Upadhayaya et al. 2014) but low yielding (Saleem, 2018). Therefore, diversity in distribution of resistant genotypes into different clusters facilitates utilizing those genotypes in resistance breeding programme as a diverse source of material. The susceptible genotypes JL 24 and TMV 2 have been associated with cluster III.
 

Table 2: Cluster means for biotic stresses and productivity parameters in mini core germplasm of groundnut.


 

Table 3:Relative contribution of different traits towards divergence in mini core of groundnut.


       
Highest mean number of pods per plant was found in solitary clusters XVII (ICG 87157 -28.55) followed by cluster XXIII (ICG 4538 and ICG 11855 -26.05) and lowest mean was observed in cluster X (ICGV 5286 -9.45). ICG 4538 and ICG 11855 also exhibited resistance to Spodoptera litura. So, these genotypes can be utilised in resistance breeding to get Spodoptera litura resistance along with desirable productivity parameters. With respect to shelling percentage, highest mean was observed in cluster XIX (74.70%) followed by cluster XXI (73.45%). However, highest mean hundred seed weight was observed in cluster XXII (ICG 13723-55.20 g) followed by cluster XVI (ICG 513-54.40 g). Among these, ICG 13723 showed resistance to rust and ICG 513 showed resistance to Spodoptera litura. ICG 875 belonging to cluster XXI produced the highest mean yield per plant (30.55 g) followed by ICG 76 (25.20 g) of cluster XII. Interestingly, both these two genotypes exhibited resistance to late leaf spot and Spodoptera litura. Hence, these genotypes may be tested under artificial epiphytotic conditions to confirm their resistance before they can be tested over locations to confirm their suitability for release as high yielding cultivars.
       
Among all the morphological traits studied, number of primary branches per plant (48.41%) contributed most towards divergence followed by hundred seed weight (13.13%) and reaction to Spodoptera litura (11.33%) (Table 3). Days to fifty per cent flowering (0.03%), shelling per cent (0.59%), reaction to late leaf spot (1.3%) and rust (0.52%) contributed very less to the divergence.The present findings were in conformity with Chaudhari et al., (2017) but in contrast to those of Bakal and Lal (2015), Mahesh and Hasan (2018) and Raza et al. (2018) who opined that productivity parameters like haulm yield, shelling per cent and yield per plant contributed more to the divergence of the population while number of branches exhibited no contribution towards the divergence. In the present experiment, mini core comprised genotypes from 6 botanical varieties and each of them have different branching pattern and have different mean number of branches. Further, some of such varieties are bunch and runner types with varying number of branches which might be one of the reasons for more contribution of number of branches towards the divergence. Generally, the traits rendering maximum contribution towards divergence are given importance for selection of genotypes in breeding programme. Reaction to Spodoptera litura significantly contributed to the diversity of the germplasm. This might have been due to different genotypes in the mini core set had different level of resistance reaction to Spodoptera litura. Cluster means together with information on the traits that contributed maximum towards divergence would help in selection of parents for hybridization. Therefore, the genotypes ICG 76 and ICG 4412 from diverse origin having resistance to Spodoptera litura along with higher hundred seed weight and yield per plant can be used as potential donors in the groundnut breeding programme. Multiple stress resistant (Spodoptera litura, late leaf spot and rust) genotype ICG 2381 possessing higher number of pods and hundred seed weight but low yield per plant (9.3g) can be utilised in the backcross breeding programme as a donor to transfer the multiple biotic stress resistance to agronomically superior cultivars.

CONCLUSION

Achieving high and sustainable yields under disease and insect infestation pressure is a real challenge for groundnut growers. In this regard assessing genetic diversity appears important step to identify resistant sources along with productivity parameters from diverse genetic background. Utilization of diverse parents with respect to resistance to insects and  pathogens and also for productive parameters helps to obtain progenies bearing higher heterotic effect with broad based variability for biotic stresses. Therefore, from the present investigation, based on traits contributed  significantly towards the divergence of the population, the genotypes ICG 76 and ICG 4412 can be used in the hybridization programme for development of groundnut cultivars with resistance to Spodoptera litura along with higher hundred seed weight and yield per plant. ICG 2381 a multiple stress resistant genotype (Spodoptera litura, late leaf spot and rust) but with low pod yield can be utilised in the backcross breeding programme as donor parent.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors are highly thankful to Dr. H. D. Upadhyaya, Head, Genetic Resource Unit, ICRISAT, Hyderabad for supplying the groundnut mini core. The authors also extend their thanks to the University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad for financial support in the form of staff research project.

REFERENCES


  1. Anonymous,(2015). Proc. Annu. Groundnut Workshop. Crop Protection, 13, April, 2015,Junagadh Agric. Univ., Junagadh (India), pp. 22-23. 

  2. Arya, S. S., Salve, A. R. and Chauhan, S., (2016). Peanuts as functional food: a review. J. Food Sci. Technol., 53: 31-41. 

  3. Bhakal, M. and Lal, G. M., (2015). Studies on genetic diversity in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) germplasm. J. Plant Sci. Res., 2(2): 128-132.

  4. Chaudhari, S., Khare, D., Sundravadana, S., Manohar, S. and Variath, M. T., (2017). Capturing genetic diversity in genomic selection panel of groundnut for foliar disease resistance, yield and nutritional quality traits. Int. J. Genet.,9(5): 278-283.

  5. FAO, (2016). FAOSTAT data base. http://www.faostat.org.

  6. Ganapati, M., Nadaf, H. L., Gowda, M. V. C., Bhat, R. S. and Upadhyaya, H. D., (2014). Genetic diversity analysis based on nutritional, oil quality and yield component traits in mini core collection of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Karnataka J. Agric. Sci.,27(2): 219-221.

  7. Janila, P., Venuprasad, R., Abhishek, R., Aruna, R., Kanaka, R., Farid, W. and Nigam, S. N., (2013). Genetic analysis of resistance to late leaf spot in interspecific groundnuts. Euphytica,193: 13-25.

  8. Kulkarni, K. A., (1989). Bio ecology and management of Spodopter alitura (F.) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) on groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Ph. D. Thesis. Univ. Agric. Sci., Dharwad, Karnataka, India.

  9. Mahesh, R. H. and Hasan, K., (2018). Analysis of genetic diversity of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) genotypes collected from various parts of India. J. Pharmacognosy Phytochem.,7(2): 1100-1103.

  10. Murty, B. R. and Arunachalam, V., (1966). The nature of divergence in relation to breeding systems in crop plants. Indian J. Genet., 25: 188-198. 

  11. Rao, (1952). Advanced Statistical Methods in Biometrical Research. John Willey and Sons, New York, pp. 357-363.

  12. Raza, M., Reddi, S. M., Priya, M. S., Prasad, T.N.V.K.V. and Rajarajeswari, V., (2018). Genetic diversity studies for pod yield and nutrient uptake related traits in groundnut. Indian J. Agric. Res., 52(4): 380-385.

  13. Saleem, M. A., (2018). Genetic analysis of resistance to biotic stresses with special reference to Spodoptera litura in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.), M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Univ. Agric. Sci., Dharwad. India.

  14. Sandhikar, R. N., Bulbule, S. Y. and Mayee, C. D., (1989). Prediction models for rust epidemic in groundnut. Indian J. Mycol. Pl. Pathol., 19: 60-67. 

  15. Subrahamanyam, P., McDonald. D., Waliar, F., Reddy, L. J., Nigam, S. N., Gibbons, R. W., et al (1995). Screening methods and sources of resistance to rust and late leaf spot of groundnut. Information Bull., No. 47, International Crops Research Institute for Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru, Hyderabad (India), pp. 54-58. 

  16. Upadhyaya, H. D., Dwivedi, S. L., Vadez, V., Hamidou, F., Singh, S., Varshney, R. K. and Liao, B., (2014). Multiple resistant and nutritionally dense germplasm identified from mini core collection in peanut. Crop Sci., 54(2): 679-693.

  17. Venkateswarlu, O., Sudhakar, B.V.G., Reddi Sekhar M. and Sukhakar P., (2011). Genetic divergence in confectionary types of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Legume Res., 34 (1): 1-7.

  18. Vijay, K., (2015). Genetic diversity and trait association studies for some economic traits in rice (Oryza sativa L.).The Bioscan, 10(2): 899-904.

  19. Waghmode, B. D., Navhale, V. C., Sonone, N. G. and Bhave, S. G., (2017). Assessment of genetic diversity in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) genotypes under Konkan condition in Maharashtra. Adv. Agric. Res. Technol. J.,1(1): 84-87.

  20. Yadav, S. R., Rathod, A. H., Shinde, A. S., Patade, S. S., Patil, C. N. and Vaghela, P. O., (2014). Genetic variability and divergence studies in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Int. J. Agric. Sci.,10(2): 691-694.

  21. Zaman, M. A., Tuhina-Khatun, M., Bhuiyan, M. M. H., Moniruzzamn, M. and Yousuf, M. N., (2010). Genetic divergence in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Bangladesh J. Plant Breed. Genet.,23(1): 45-49. 
Reviewed By

Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    Editorial Board

    View all (0)