Legume Research

  • Chief EditorJ. S. Sandhu

  • Print ISSN 0250-5371

  • Online ISSN 0976-0571

  • NAAS Rating 6.80

  • SJR 0.391

  • 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 39 issue 3 (june 2016) : 343-348

Early generation selection for yield and its related traits in soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merrill.]

Tejbir Singh*, Amitesh Sharma
1<p>Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding,&nbsp;Kisan P.G. College, Simbhaoli-245 207, Hapur, India.</p>
Cite article:- Singh* Tejbir, Sharma Amitesh (2016). Early generation selection for yield and its related traits in soybean[Glycine max (L.) Merrill.] . Legume Research. 39(3): 343-348. doi: 10.18805/lr.v0iOF.9388.

ABSTRACT

The relative efficiency of different selection criteria in early generation (F2) was evaluated in two crosses of soybean. The selection criteria used were (i) selection of plants in F2 generation having high and low mean values for different characters,           (ii) randomly selected plants and (iii) selection of plants based on an index involving highest mean values for the different characters. The selection group patterns of F3 selected F4 progeny revealed that (a) plants selected for single character identified more number of F4 progenies than on the basis of an index and randomly selected plants in both the crosses, (b) plants selected for their high mean values further screened more number of F4 progenies than having low means, and (c) selection of plants in F2 generation based on number of pods per plant proved most efficient selection criteria for seed yield improvement.

REFERENCES


  1. Allan, R.E., (1983). Harvest index of back cross-derived wheat lines differing in culm height. Crop Sci., 23: 1029-1032.

  2. Bhatt, G.M. (1980). Early generation selection criteria for yield in wheat. J. Aust. Inst. Agric. Sci. 46:14-22.

  3. Boerma, H.R. and Coopea, R.L. (1975). Performance of pure lines obtained from superior yielding heterogenous lines in soybeans. Crop Sci. 15: 300-302.

  4. Borghi, B.; Accerbi, M. and Corbelini, M. (1998). Response to early generation selection for grain yield and harvest index in breed wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Plant Breeding, 117: 13-18.

  5. Gohil, V.N.; Pandya, H.M. and Mehta, D.R. (2006). Genetic variability for seed yield and its component traits in soybean. Agricultural Science Digest 26:73–74.

  6. Grafius, J.E.; Thomas, R.L. and Barnad, J. (1976). Effects of parent component complementation on yield and components of yield in barley. Crop Sci., 16: 673-677.

  7. Hay, R.K.M. (1955). Harvest index: A review of its use in plant breeding and crop physiology. Ann. Appl. Biol., 126: 197-216. 

  8. Kumar, A.; Lal, G.M. and Mishra, P.K. (2014). Genetic variability and character association for yield and its components in soybean. Annals Plant Soil Res. 16: 48-52.

  9. Knott, D.K. (1972). Effects of selection for F2 plant yield on subsequent generation in wheat. Can. J. Plant Sci. 52: 721-726.

  10. Mahbub, M.M.; Rahman, M.M.; Hossain, M.S.; Mohmud, F. and Mir Kabir, M.M. (2015). Genetic variability, correlation and path analysis for yield and yield components in soybean. American-Eurasian J. Agric. & Environ. Sci. 15: 231-236.

  11. Malek, M.A.; Rahman, L.; Rafii, M. and Salam, M.A. (2013). Selection of a high yielding soybean variety, Binasoybean-    2 from collected germplasm. Journal of Food, Agriculture and Environment 11:545–547.

  12. Malek, M.A.; Rafii, M.; Afroz, S.S.; Nath, U.K. and Mondal, M.M.A. (2014). Morphological characterization and assessment of genetic variability, character association, and divergence in soybean mutants. Scientific World Journal 10: 1155-1163.

  13. Ojo, D.K.; Ajayi, A.O. and Oduwaye, O.A. (2012). Genetic relationships among soybean accessions based on morphological and RAPDs techniques. Pertanika Journal of Tropical Agricultural Science 35: 237–248.

  14. Pandey, M.K.; Srivastava, N. and Kole, C.R. (2007). Selection strategy for augmentation of seed yield in mungbean [Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek]. Legume Res. 30: 243-249.

  15. Raeber, J.G. and Weber, C.R. (1953). Effectiveness of selection for yield in soybean crosses by bulk and pedigree system of breeding. Agron. J. 45: 362-366.

  16. Shebeski, L.H. (1967). Wheat breeding. Proc. Can Cent. Wheat Symip. Saskatoon, Sas., Canada, pp. 249-272.

  17. Singh, B. and Bains, T.S. (2014). Effective selection criteria for yield improvement in inter-specific derivatives of mungbean [Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek]. Indian J. Appl. Res. 4: 1-5.

  18. Singh, U.; Hemchandra and Rangare, N.R. (2014). Study of genetic variability in soybean genotypes and their performance at Allahabad agroclimatic. Bioved 25: 211-216.

  19. Singh, J. and Yadava, H.S. (2000). Factors determining seed yield in early generation of soybean. Crop, Res. Hisar, 20: 239-243.

  20. Singh, T. and Balyan, H.S. (2003). Relative efficiency of various single plant selection criteria and F3 generation yield testing in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Indian J. Genet., 63: 24-29.

  21. Sirohi, A. and Kumar, L. (2006). Selection criteria for genetic improvement in mungbean {Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek}. Intern. J. Plant Sci. 1: 137-138.

  22. Sureshrao, S.S.; Singh, V.J.; Gampala, S. and Rangare, N.R. (2014). Assessment of genetic variability of the main yield related characters in soybean. Int. J. Food Agric. Vet. Sci. 4: 69-74.

  23. Tavaud-Pirra, M,; Sartre, P.; Nelson, R.; Santoni, S.; Texier, N. and Roumet, P. (2009). Genetic diversity in a soybean collection. Crop Sci. 49: 895–902.

  24. Whan, B.R.; Rathgen, A.J. and Knight, R. (1981). The relation between wheat lines derived from the F2, F3, F4 and F5 generation for grain yield and harvest index. Euphytica, 30: 419-430.

     
Reviewed By

Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    Editorial Board

    View all (0)