Legume Research

  • Chief EditorJ. S. Sandhu

  • Print ISSN 0250-5371

  • Online ISSN 0976-0571

  • NAAS Rating 6.67

  • SJR .391

  • Impact Factor .669 (2022)

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 45 issue 8 (august 2022) : 947-951

Effect of F2 Inter se Mating on Quantitative Traits Mean, Range, Variance and Heritability in Dolichos Bean (Lablab purpureus L. Sweet var. Lignosus)

Chandrakant, S. Ramesh, P.V. Vaijayanthi, A. Mohan Rao, M.S. Shivakumar
1Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore-560 065, Karnataka, India.
  • Submitted24-06-2020|

  • Accepted19-11-2020|

  • First Online 28-01-2021|

  • doi 10.18805/LR-4448

Cite article:- Chandrakant, Ramesh S., Vaijayanthi P.V., Rao Mohan A., Shivakumar M.S. (2022). Effect of F2 Inter se Mating on Quantitative Traits Mean, Range, Variance and Heritability in Dolichos Bean (Lablab purpureus L. Sweet var. Lignosus). Legume Research. 45(8): 947-951. doi: 10.18805/LR-4448.
Background: Pedigree method of breeding in predominantly self-pollinated crop like dolichos bean enable exploiting only fixable genetic effects as a result of rapid increase in homozygosis. One or a few cycles of inter-mating in F2 generation help create populations with high frequency of desired recombinants which otherwise cannot be realized in later generations. The objective of the present investigation was to assess the impact of inter se mating in F2 population on nine quantitative traits’ (QTs) mean and variability parameters.
Methods: Randomly selected 20 pairs of a single cross-derived F2 plants with flowering synchrony were inter se mated. Progenies derived from 20 paired crosses (designated as BIP F3 progenies) and those (F3) derived from their 40 F2 parents were evaluated for 9 QTs. Statistics such as mean, absolute range (AR) and standardized range (SR), variance (σ2), additive genetic variance (σ2A) and narrow-sense heritability (NS-h2) were estimated. BIP F3 progenies were compared with those of F3 progenies for QTs mean, AR/SR, σ2, σ2A and NS-h2. Significance of differences between BIP F3 progenies and F3 progenies for mean and σ2 were examined using two-sample t test and Levene’s tests, respectively. 
Result: The random mating in F2 population was effective in increasing the means, variances, σ2A and NS-h2 of racemes plant-1, fresh pods node-1, fresh pods plant-1 and fresh pod yield plant-1 in dolichos bean. Considering that random mating followed by selfing is a method of genetic improvement for future breeding rather than for immediate use, our results suggest long-term genetic gain and better prospects of deriving superior pure-lines with desired traits/combination of traits from inter-mated population in dolichos bean.
  1. Bos, L. (1977). More arguments against inter-mating F2 plants of a self pollinated crop. Euphytica. 26: 33-46.
  2. Byregowda, M., Gireesh, G., Ramesh, S., Mahadevu, M. and Keerthi, C.M. (2015). Descriptors of dolichos bean (Lablab purpureus L.). Journal of Food Legumes. 28(3): 203-214.
  3. Clegg, M.T. Allard, R.W. and Kahler, A.l. (1972). Is the gene unit of selection? Evidence from two experimental plant populations. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences (USA). 69: 2474-2478.
  4. Dutta, M. Arunachalam, V. and Bandyopadhyay, A. (1987). Enhanced cross pollination to widen the scope of breeding in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Theoretical and Applied Genetics.74: 466-470.
  5. Federer, W.T. (1961). Augmented design with one way elimination of heterogeneity. Biometrics.17: 447-473.
  6. Gauthami, R.B., Gangappa, E., Ramesh, S. and Puttaram, N. (2016). Impact of bipraental mating on grain yield and its component traits and character association in maize (Zea mays L.). Green Farming. 7(6): 1301-1305.
  7. Hallauer, A.R. (1984). Compendium of recurrent selection methods and their application. CRC Critical Reviews on Plant Sciences. 3: 1-33. 
  8. Hanson, W.D. (1959). The breakup of initial linkage blocks under selected mating systems. Genetics. 44: 857-868.
  9. Hanson, W.D. and Hayman, B.I. (1963). Linkage effects on additive genetic variance among homozygous lines arising from the cross between two homozygous parents. Genetics. 48: 755-766.
  10. Jahagirdar, J.E. Katare, N.B. and Sudewad, S.M. (2005). Biparental mating: a tool for creation of genetic variability in chickpea. Indian Journal of Pulses Research. 18(1): 12-13.
  11. Kampli, N. Salimath, P.M. and Kajjidoni, S.T. (2002). Genetic variability created through biparental mating in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Indian Journal of Genetics. 62(2): 128-130.
  12. Kearsey, M.J. (1965). Biometrical analysis of a random mating population: a comparison of five experimental designs. Heredity. 20: 205-235.
  13. Kearsey, M.J. and Pooni, H.S. (1996). The Genetical Analysis of Quantitative Traits, Chapman and Hall, London, UK.
  14. Koli, N.R. and Punia, S.S. (2012). Effect of inter-mating on genetic variability and character association in aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L.). Electronic Journal of Plant Breeding. 3(2): 830-834.
  15. Kukade, S.A. and Tidke, J.A. (2014). Reproductive biology of Dolichos lablab L. (Fabaceae). Indian Journal of Plant Sciences. 3(2): 22-25.
  16. Levene, H. (1960). Robust tests for equality of variances. In: [Olkin et al. (ed.)]. Contributions to Probability and Statistics: Essays in honour of Harold Hotelling, Stanford University Press, Stanford, pp. 278-292.
  17. Meredith, W.R. Jr. and Bridge, R.R. (1971). Breakup of linkage block in cotton G. hirsutum L. Crop Science. 11: 695-698.
  18. Miller, P.A. and Rawlings, J.O. (1967). Breakup of initial linkage blocks through inter-mating in a cotton breeding population. Crop Science. 7: 199-204.
  19. Pederson, D.G. (1974). Arguments against intermating before selection in a self-fertilizing species. Theoretical and Applied Genetics. 45: 157-162.
  20. Perkins, J.M. and Jinks, J.L. (1970). Detection of estimation of genotype-environmental, linkage and epistastic components of variation for a metrical trait. Heredity. 25: 157-177.
  21. Chand, P. (2000). Genetic effects of biparental mating in black gram (Vigna mungo L. Hepper). Annals of Agricultural Research. 21(2): 305-307.
  22. Ramesh, S. and Byregowda, M. (2016). Dolichos bean (Lablab purpureus L. Sweet var. Lignosus) genetics and breeding - present status and future prospects. Mysore Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 50(3): 481-500.
  23. Sharma, A. and Kalia, P. (2003). Studies on biparental progenies in garden pea (Pisum sativum L.). Indian Journal of Genetics. 63(1): 79-80.
  24. She, C. and Jiang, X. (2015). Karyotype analysis of (Lablab purpureus L. Sweet) using flourochrome banding fluorescence in situ hybridization with rDNA probes. Czech Journal of Genetics and Plant Breeding. 51 (3):110-116.
  25. Singh, N. (2004). Generation of genetic variability in chick pea (Cicer arietinum L.) using biparental mating. Indian Journal of Genetics. 64(4): 327-328.
  26. Stam, P. (1977). Selection response under random mating and under selfing in the progeny of a cross of homozygous parents. Euphytica. 262:169-184.
  27. van Ooijen, J.W. (1989). Estimation of additive genotypic variance with the F3 of autogamous crops. Heredity. 63: 73-81.
  28. Yunus, M. and Paroda, R.S. (1983). Extent of genetic variability created through bi-parental mating in wheat. Indian Journal of Genetics. 43: 76-81.

Editorial Board

View all (0)