Genetic improvement for yield through induced mutagenesis in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.)

DOI: 10.18805/lr.v0i0.7019    | Article Id: LR-3561 | Page : 32-35
Citation :- Genetic improvement for yield through induced mutagenesisin groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) .Legume Research.2017.(40):32-35

Dr. Kavera1* and H. L. Nadaf2

Address :

AICRP on Groundnut, MARS, UAS Dharwad-580 005, Karnataka, India.

Submitted Date : 11-07-2015
Accepted Date : 10-10-2016


Groundnut is one of the primary economic crops of the world, which has been exposed extensively to mutagenic treatments for induction of variability. The present research was aimed towards yield improvement in two groundnut cultivars (GPBD-4 and TPG-41) through induced mutagenesis using EMS and gamma rays. One hundred true breeding mutants were isolated at M3 and were evaluated for yield at M4/M5. Thirteen superior mutants showing consistent performance across the generations were further evaluated for economic traits at M6. Greater magnitude of induced variability was found for number of pods per plant (13.65-52.65; 11.83-34.62), pod yield per plant (10.40-49.71; 16.40-41.28) and 100 seed weight (30.18-52.20 g; 37.36-87.65) in GPBD-4 and TPG-41 mutant populations respectively in M4 generation. Mutants G2-214 (34.51 Q/ha) and TE-147 (31.75 Q/ha) recorded 27.53 and 31.75 per cent increase in pod yield over the respective parents GPBD-4 (27.06 Q/ha) and TPG-41 (23.80 Q/ha). Most of the superior mutants were associated with increased 100-seed weight. The high yielding mutants identified in the present study have the dual advantages i.e. desirable agronomic characters and favorable oil chemistry. In this direction mutant G2-214 which recorded highest pod yield (34.51 Q/ha) was also accompanied with increased O/L ratio (3.23) over parent GPBD-4 (1.76) 


Calibration Ethyl methane sulphonate Fatty acids Gas chromatography Gamma rays Groundnut Induced variability Yield.


  1. Brock, R. D., (1965). Induced mutations affecting quantitative characters. The use of induced mutations in plant breeding, Rep. FAO/ IAEA, Tech. Meeting, Rome, Pregammon Press, Oxford. pp. 443-450.
  2. Deshmukh, S. N., (1997). Identification of confectionery groundnut variety adapted to the Vidarbha region of Maharashtra. Internat. Arachis News Lett., 17: 27.
  3. Fore, S. P., Morris, N. J., Mack, C. H., Freeman, A. F. and Bickford, W. G., (1953). Factors affecting the stability of crude oils of 16 varieties of peanuts. J. American Oil Chem. Soc., 30: 298-301.
  4. Gunstone, F. D., (2006). Minor speciality oils in shadhi F, Nutraceutical and speciality lipids and their co products, New York, Marcel, Dekker, Inc., 91-125
  5. Halward, T. M., Staker, H. T., Larue, E. A. and Kochert, G. A., (1991). Genetic variation detectable with molecular markers among unadapted germplasm resources of cultivated peanut and related wild species. Genome, 34: 1013-1020.
  6. Holley, K. T. and Hammons, R. O., (1968). Strain and seasonal effects on peanut characteristics. Research Bulletin 32, University Georgia, College, Agriculture Experiment Station, pp. 1-27.
  7. Kodym, A. and Afza, R., (2003). Physical and chemical mutagenesis. Methods molecular Biology. 236:189-204.
  8. Lopez. Y., Smith, D. D., Senseman, S. A. and Rooney, W. L., (2001). Genetic factors influencing high oleic acid content in Spanish market- type peanut cultivars. Crop Sci., 41: 51-56.
  9. Mensah, J. K. and Obadoni, B., (2007). Effects of sodium azide on yield parameters of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). African Journal of Biotechnology, 6:668-671.
  10. Mondal, S., Badigannavar, A. M., Kale, D. M. and Murty, G. S. S., (2007), Induction of genetic variability in a disease-    resistant groundnut breeding line. BARC News Lett., 285: 237-246.
  11. Motagi, B. N., Gowda, M. V. C. and Nigam, S. N., (2005). Fatty acid composition, oil quality and oil yield in foliar disease resistant groundnut genotypes. Karnataka J. Agril. Sci., 18: 660-663.
  12. Ojomo, A. O., Omueti, O. and Raji, J. A., (1979). Studies in induced mutation in cowpea: The variation in protein content following ionizing radiation. Nig. J. Appl. Sci.. 21: 61-64
  13. Ramanathan, T. (1983). Induced mutations for qualitative characters in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Madras Agric. J., 70:377-381
  14. Sadhanakumari And Snehalatha, R., (1998). Oil and protein quality of the selected groundnut varieties. J. Oilseeds Res., 15: 339-342.
  15. Sanders, T. H., (1982). Peanut triacylglycerols: effect of season and production location. J. American Oilseed Chem. Soc., 59:346-351.
  16. Patil, S. H., (1966). Mutations induced in groundnut by X-rays. Indian J. Genet. 26: 334-348.
  17. van Harten, A. M., (1998). A book on Mutation Breeding: Theory and Practical applications.
  18. Venkataramana, P., (2001). Variability and correlation studies in groundnut. Crop Res., 21: 81-83
  19. Young, C. T. Waller, G. R., (1972). Rapid oleic/linoleic microanalytical procedure for peanuts. J. Agril. Food Chem., 20: 1116-1118.

Global Footprints