Banner
Current IssueEditorial BoardOnline First ArticlesArchive
Current IssueEditorial BoardOnline First ArticlesArchive

volume 33 issue 2 (june 2010) : 124 - 127

GENETIC DIVERGENCE OF NEW GERMPLASM AND ADVANCED BREEDING LINES OF GROUNDNUT (ARACHIS HYPOGAEA L.) STUDIED UNDER LATE KHARIF SITUATION

I
I. Sudhir Kumar1
P
P. Venkataravana
N
N. Marappa
1AICRP on Groundnut, Agricultural Research Station, Chintamani - 563 125, India.

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Kumar1 Sudhir I., Venkataravana P., Marappa N. (2025). GENETIC DIVERGENCE OF NEW GERMPLASM AND ADVANCED BREEDING LINES OF GROUNDNUT (ARACHIS HYPOGAEA L.) STUDIED UNDER LATE KHARIF SITUATION. Legume Research. 33(2): 124 - 127. doi: .

ABSTRACT

Analysis of genetic divergence of sixty four genotypes (39 new germplasm accessions and
25 advanced breeding lines) of groundnut revealed wide range of D2 values ranging between
4.52 and 27.75 suggesting the presence of considerable amount of genetic diversity in the
genotypes studied, which were grouped in to seven clusters where, cluster VII (28) was the
largest followed by cluster I (24) and cluster VI (4). Maximum inter cluster distance was recorded
between IV and VI representing wide divergence among these clusters. On the basis of intercluster
distance and cluster means the genotypes viz., ICGV-05033, ICGV-05052, PAFRGVT-
58, GG-20×ICGV-91114, ICGX-020063-F2-B1-SSD-P20-B1, ICGX-020055-F2-SSD-P37-B1 were
widely diverse therefore may be considered for future breeding programmes.

REFERENCES

  1. Arunachalam, V. et al. (1981). Euphytica, 33: 33-39.
  2. Cochran, W.G. and Cox, G.M., (1957). Experimental Designs. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, pp 611.
  3. Fisher, R. A. (1936). Ann. Eugenics 7: 179-188.
  4. Gan, X. M. et al. (1985). Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 6: 27-31.
  5. Katule, B. K. et al. (1992). J. Maharashtra Agric. Univ., 17: 302-303.
  6. Mahalanobis, P.C. (1936). Proc. of National Academy of Sci., India, 2:49-55.
  7. Nayak, P. K. and Patra, G. J. (1997). Environment and Ecology, 15(2): 249-254.
  8. Rao, C.R. (1952). Advanced Statistical Methods in Biometrics Research. Hafner Pu, Co., Carion, pp 371-378.
  9. Smith, H. F. (1936). Ann. Eugenics 7: 240-250.
  10. Venkataravana, P. et al. (2000). Mysore J. Agric. Sci., 34: 125-129.
  11. Vijaysekhar, C. et al. (2005). J. Oilseeds Res., 22: 350-352.
Published In
Legume Research
Article Metrics
Metrics Icon
0
Views
0
Citations
Reviewed By
Share Article
Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    volume 33 issue 2 (june 2010) : 124 - 127

    GENETIC DIVERGENCE OF NEW GERMPLASM AND ADVANCED BREEDING LINES OF GROUNDNUT (ARACHIS HYPOGAEA L.) STUDIED UNDER LATE KHARIF SITUATION

    I
    I. Sudhir Kumar1
    P
    P. Venkataravana
    N
    N. Marappa
    1AICRP on Groundnut, Agricultural Research Station, Chintamani - 563 125, India.

    • Submitted|

    • First Online |

    • doi

    Cite article:- Kumar1 Sudhir I., Venkataravana P., Marappa N. (2025). GENETIC DIVERGENCE OF NEW GERMPLASM AND ADVANCED BREEDING LINES OF GROUNDNUT (ARACHIS HYPOGAEA L.) STUDIED UNDER LATE KHARIF SITUATION. Legume Research. 33(2): 124 - 127. doi: .

    ABSTRACT

    Analysis of genetic divergence of sixty four genotypes (39 new germplasm accessions and
    25 advanced breeding lines) of groundnut revealed wide range of D2 values ranging between
    4.52 and 27.75 suggesting the presence of considerable amount of genetic diversity in the
    genotypes studied, which were grouped in to seven clusters where, cluster VII (28) was the
    largest followed by cluster I (24) and cluster VI (4). Maximum inter cluster distance was recorded
    between IV and VI representing wide divergence among these clusters. On the basis of intercluster
    distance and cluster means the genotypes viz., ICGV-05033, ICGV-05052, PAFRGVT-
    58, GG-20×ICGV-91114, ICGX-020063-F2-B1-SSD-P20-B1, ICGX-020055-F2-SSD-P37-B1 were
    widely diverse therefore may be considered for future breeding programmes.

    REFERENCES

    1. Arunachalam, V. et al. (1981). Euphytica, 33: 33-39.
    2. Cochran, W.G. and Cox, G.M., (1957). Experimental Designs. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, pp 611.
    3. Fisher, R. A. (1936). Ann. Eugenics 7: 179-188.
    4. Gan, X. M. et al. (1985). Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 6: 27-31.
    5. Katule, B. K. et al. (1992). J. Maharashtra Agric. Univ., 17: 302-303.
    6. Mahalanobis, P.C. (1936). Proc. of National Academy of Sci., India, 2:49-55.
    7. Nayak, P. K. and Patra, G. J. (1997). Environment and Ecology, 15(2): 249-254.
    8. Rao, C.R. (1952). Advanced Statistical Methods in Biometrics Research. Hafner Pu, Co., Carion, pp 371-378.
    9. Smith, H. F. (1936). Ann. Eugenics 7: 240-250.
    10. Venkataravana, P. et al. (2000). Mysore J. Agric. Sci., 34: 125-129.
    11. Vijaysekhar, C. et al. (2005). J. Oilseeds Res., 22: 350-352.
    In this Article
      Contact us
      Follow us
      Published In
      Legume Research

      Editorial Board

      View all (0)