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

Legume Research, volume 29 issue 2 (june 2006) : 102 - 105

EVALUATION OF GROUNDNUT VARIETIES FOR YIELD AND QUALITY CHARACTERS

Chuni Lal, T. Radhakrishnan, R.K. Mathur, P. Manivel, M.Y. Samdur, H.K. Gor, B.M. Chikani

Affiliations

¹National Research Centre for Groundnut, Junagadh - 362 001, India

Submitted|
First Online |
doi

Cite article:- Lal Chuni, Radhakrishnan T., Mathur R.K., Manivel P., Samdur M.Y., Gor H.K., Chikani B.M. (2025). EVALUATION OF GROUNDNUT VARIETIES FOR YIELD AND QUALITY CHARACTERS. Legume Research. 29(2): 102 - 105. doi: .

ABSTRACT

Six groundnut varieties were evaluated under rainfed situations for yield and quality characters for stability analysis. Mean square due to G × E (linear) interaction was significant for pod yield and hundred pod weight only. Non-linear component was significant for all the traits indicating the presence of variability among the varieties regulated by various environmental conditions prevailing in different years. S-2d was significant for all the characters studied invalidating the linear prediction of performance of varieties. The variety B 95 registered highest pod yield, hundred-pod weight and hundred-kernel weight across the environments. Based on its non-responsiveness to the fluctuating environmental conditions this variety was adjudged to be more adaptive for these characters.

KEYWORDS

REFERENCES

Chuni Lal, et al. (1998). Indian J. Genet., 58: 125-126.
Eberhart, S.A. and Russel, W.A. (1966). Crop Sci., 6: 36-40.
Joshi, H.J. et al. (2003). Legume Res., 26: 20-23.
Kandaswami, M. (1989). Madras Agric. J., 76: 323-332.
Kumar, P. et al. (1984). HAU J. Res., 14: 180-183.
Patil, P.S. et al. (1984). Madras Agric. J., 71: 78-80.
Senapati, B.K. and Sarkar, G. (2002). J. Oilseeds Res., 19: 26-31.
Singh, M. et al. (1975). Indian J. Genet., 35: 26-28.
Sojitra, V.K. and Pertain, K.V. (1994). Indian J. Genet., 54: 321-324.
Sojitra, V.K. and Pertain, K.V. (1998a). Legume Res., 21: 213-216.
Sojitra, V.K. and Pertain, K.V. (1998b). Indian J. Genet., 58: 215-218.
Tai, P.Y.P. and Hammons, R.O. (1978). Peanut Sci., 5: 72-74.
Vindhiya Varman, P. et al. (1989). Madras Agric. J., 76: 247-251.
Yadav, T.P. and Kumar, P. (1978). India J. Agric. Res., 12: 1-14.
Yadav, T.P. and Kumar, P. (1979). Indian J. Agric. Sci., 49: 318-321.

Disclaimer :

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Copyright :

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Reviewed By

Share options

Editorial Board

View all (0)

EVALUATION OF GROUNDNUT VARIETIES FOR YIELD AND QUALITY CHARACTERS

ABSTRACT

KEYWORDS

REFERENCES

Reviewed By

In this Article

APC

Publish With US

Become a Reviewer/Member

Open Access

Products and Services

Support and Policies

Editorial Board