Banner
Current IssueEditorial BoardOnline First ArticlesArchive
Current IssueEditorial BoardOnline First ArticlesArchive

volume 28 issue 1 (march 2008) : 14 - 17

GENETIC RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FODDER YIELD ATTRIBUTES AND PATH COEFFICIENT ANALYSIS IN NAPIER GRASS [PENNISETUM PURPUREUM (K) SCHUM]

K
K. John
1Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Regional Agricultural Research Station, Tirupati –517502, A.P., India

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- John K. (2025). GENETIC RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FODDER YIELD ATTRIBUTES AND PATH COEFFICIENT ANALYSIS IN NAPIER GRASS [PENNISETUM PURPUREUM (K) SCHUM]. Agricultural Science Digest. 28(1): 14 - 17. doi: .

ABSTRACT

Character association and path coefficient analysis for green fodder yield and eight other agro morphological traits were studied in 37 napier grass genotypes. Green fodder yield showed a significant and positive association at both genotypic and phenotypic levels for plant height and leaf width but number of tillers per plant and crude fibre content showed significant association at genotypic level only. The genotypic correlation coefficients were greater in magnitude than the phenotypic correlation coefficients indicating low environmental effect on the expression of characters. Six characters showed a positive direct effect on green fodder yield. Leaf width recorded the highest direct effect followed by plant height, panicle length, crude protein content and crude fibre content.

KEYWORDS

    REFERENCES

    1. Amritha Deverathinam, A. and Stephen Dorairaj, M (1992). Madras Agric. J. 79: 367 – 368.
    2. Bor N.L. (1960), Grasses of Burma, Ceylon, India and Pakistan. Pergamon Press. London.
    3. Dewey, D.R. and Lu, K.H. (1959). Agron. J. 51: 515-518.
    4. Johnson, H.W . et al. (1955). Agron. J. 47: 314-318.
    5. Khan, A.K.F. and Sukumar, K. (2002). Madras Agric. J. 89 (1-3): 164-166.
    6. Philomonia D. and Fazullah Khan, A.K. (1998). Madras. Agric. J. 85 (10-12): 690-692.
    7. Rang, A and Uppal. B.K. (1988). Crop Research. 1:210-217.
    8. Sreenivasan. E, et al. (1986). Agric. J. Kerala. 24, 118-121.
    9. Srivas, S.K, Singh, U.P. (2004). Agroforestry 25 (2): 149-153.
    10. Suthamathi, P. and Dorairaj. M.S. (1994). Indian J.Genet. 54: 225-228.
    11. Vijendra Das, L.D., and Ratnam Nadar, D. (1991). Orissa J.Agric. Res. 4:187-191.
    Published In
    Agricultural Science Digest
    Article Metrics
    Metrics Icon
    0
    Views
    0
    Citations
    Reviewed By
    Share Article
    Download Article
    In this Article
      Contact us
      Follow us

      volume 28 issue 1 (march 2008) : 14 - 17

      GENETIC RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FODDER YIELD ATTRIBUTES AND PATH COEFFICIENT ANALYSIS IN NAPIER GRASS [PENNISETUM PURPUREUM (K) SCHUM]

      K
      K. John
      1Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Regional Agricultural Research Station, Tirupati –517502, A.P., India

      • Submitted|

      • First Online |

      • doi

      Cite article:- John K. (2025). GENETIC RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FODDER YIELD ATTRIBUTES AND PATH COEFFICIENT ANALYSIS IN NAPIER GRASS [PENNISETUM PURPUREUM (K) SCHUM]. Agricultural Science Digest. 28(1): 14 - 17. doi: .

      ABSTRACT

      Character association and path coefficient analysis for green fodder yield and eight other agro morphological traits were studied in 37 napier grass genotypes. Green fodder yield showed a significant and positive association at both genotypic and phenotypic levels for plant height and leaf width but number of tillers per plant and crude fibre content showed significant association at genotypic level only. The genotypic correlation coefficients were greater in magnitude than the phenotypic correlation coefficients indicating low environmental effect on the expression of characters. Six characters showed a positive direct effect on green fodder yield. Leaf width recorded the highest direct effect followed by plant height, panicle length, crude protein content and crude fibre content.

      KEYWORDS

        REFERENCES

        1. Amritha Deverathinam, A. and Stephen Dorairaj, M (1992). Madras Agric. J. 79: 367 – 368.
        2. Bor N.L. (1960), Grasses of Burma, Ceylon, India and Pakistan. Pergamon Press. London.
        3. Dewey, D.R. and Lu, K.H. (1959). Agron. J. 51: 515-518.
        4. Johnson, H.W . et al. (1955). Agron. J. 47: 314-318.
        5. Khan, A.K.F. and Sukumar, K. (2002). Madras Agric. J. 89 (1-3): 164-166.
        6. Philomonia D. and Fazullah Khan, A.K. (1998). Madras. Agric. J. 85 (10-12): 690-692.
        7. Rang, A and Uppal. B.K. (1988). Crop Research. 1:210-217.
        8. Sreenivasan. E, et al. (1986). Agric. J. Kerala. 24, 118-121.
        9. Srivas, S.K, Singh, U.P. (2004). Agroforestry 25 (2): 149-153.
        10. Suthamathi, P. and Dorairaj. M.S. (1994). Indian J.Genet. 54: 225-228.
        11. Vijendra Das, L.D., and Ratnam Nadar, D. (1991). Orissa J.Agric. Res. 4:187-191.
        In this Article
          Contact us
          Follow us
          Published In
          Agricultural Science Digest

          Editorial Board

          View all (0)