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 (2023)

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
Legume Research, volume 42 issue 4 (august 2019) : 473-478

Relative potential of seed yield component traits as selection criteria in the segregating generations of a desi × kabuli cross of chickpea

H.B. Santosh, C. Bharadwaj, V.S. Hegde, S. Savitha, C. Angadi, J. Kumar
1ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI), New Delh-110 010, India.
  • Submitted29-06-2017|

  • Accepted12-02-2018|

  • First Online 20-06-2018|

  • doi 10.18805/LR-3909

Cite article:- Santosh H.B., Bharadwaj C., Hegde V.S., Savitha S., Angadi C., Kumar J. (2018). Relative potential of seed yield component traits as selection criteria in the segregating generations of a desi × kabuli cross of chickpea. Legume Research. 42(4): 473-478. doi: 10.18805/LR-3909.
To assess the response to early generation selection in chickpea, a total of 150 F4 progenies derived from selection for total branches per plant, pods per plant, seeds per pod, seed yield per plant and 100-seed weight as independent selection criteria in F2 population of Pusa 362 (desi) × PG 0515 (kabuli) cross were evaluated along with their parents and unselected F2 bulk. The F2 population revealed high variability for all the yield components and transgressive segregation for all traits except 100-seed weight. Mean of the F4 families relative to the corresponding F2 plants was high, indicating effectiveness of early generation selection for all characters studied except branch number per plant. Significant correlated response for seed yield was also observed in F4. Based on realized response to selection as percentage of mean, realized heritability and realized generalized response values, we suggest utilization of pods per plant, seed yield per se and 100-seed weight as selection criteria in desi-kabuli introgression breeding for higher genetic gains.
  1. Amadabade, J., Arora, A., Sahu, H. and Singh, M.K. (2015). Heterosis in relation to gene action in chickpea. Trends in Biosciences, 8(12): 3111-3117.
  2. Bhardwaj, R., Sandhu, J. S. and Gupta, S. K. (2009). Gene action and combining ability estimates for yield and other quantitative traits in chickpea (Cicer arietinum). Indian. J. Agr. Sci., 79(11): 897-900.
  3. Boerma, H. R. and Cooper, R. L. (1975). Comparison of three selection procedures for yield in soybeans. Crop Sci., 15: 225-229.
  4. Chohota, R. K., Kishore, N., Dhiman, K. C., Sharma, T. R. and Sharma, S. K. (2007). Predicting transgressive segregants in early generation using single seed descent method-derived micro- macrosperma genepool of lentil (Lens culinaris Medikus). Euphytica, 156(3): 305-310.
  5. Cooper, R. L. (1981). Development of short statured soybean cultivars. Crop Sci., 21: 127-131.
  6. Desai, K., Tank, C. J., Gami, R. A., Patel, A. M. and Chauhan, R. M. (2015). Genetic variability in indigenous collection of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) genotypes for seed yield and quality traits. J. Prog. Agr., 6(1): 10-13.
  7. FAOSTAT (2016). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Crop Production Statistics available at http://www.fao.org/    faostat/en/#data/QC; accessed on 10 January 2018.
  8. Hawtin, G.C. and Singh, K.B. (1980). Kabuli-Desi Introgression: Problems and Prospects. In: Proceedings of the international Workshop on Chickpea Improvement, 28 Feb-2 Mar 1979, Hyderabad, A.P., India. pp 51-60.
  9. Kumar, J. (2001). Correlated response to selection in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). New Botanist, 28 (1): 167-170.
  10. Mather, K. and Jinks, J. L. (1982). Biometrical Genetics, 3rd ed. Chapman and Hall, London.
  11. Maynez, M., Moreno, M. T. and Gil, J. (1993). Desi/kabuli introgression for yield improvement in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). J. Genet. Breed., 47(1): 61-64.
  12. Monpara, B. A. and Dhameliya, H. R. (2013). Genetic behaviour of earliness related traits and seed yield in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Pak. J. Biol. Sci., 16(18): 955-959.
  13. Moreno, M. and Cubero, J. I. (1978). Variation in Cicer arietinum L. Euphytica, 27: 465–485.
  14. Muehlbauer, F. J., Simon, C. J., Spaeth, S. C. and Haddad, N. I. (1990). Genetic improvement of chickpea: key factors to be considered for a breakthrough in productivity. In: Chickpea in the nineties: proceedings of the second international workshop on chickpea improvement, (eds.) van Rheenen, H.A. Saxena, M.C., Walby, B.J. and Hall, S.D. 4-8 December 1989, ICRISAT Center, India. pp. 209-216.
  15. Omvir, and Gupta, V. P. (1999). Early generation testing and response to selection in macrosperma × microsperma derived gene pool of lentil. Indian J. Genet., 59(4): 473-478.
  16. Purushothaman R., Upadhyaya H. D., Gaur P. M., Gowda C. L. L. and Krishnamurthy, L. (2014). Kabuli and desi chickpeas differ in their requirement for reproductive duration. Field Crops Res., 163: 24-31.
  17. Rahman, M. A. and Bahl, P. N. (1985). Comparison of single seed descent mass selection and random bulk methods in chickpea. Indian J. Genet., 45(2): 186-193. 
  18. Reddy, Y. S. (2012) Creation of genetic variability and early generation evaluation for yield and yield related traits in lentil (Lens culinaris Medik.). Ph.D thesis. IARI, New Delhi.
  19. Reddy, Y. S., Talukdar, A., Dikshit, H. K., Singh, V. P., Rana, M., and Pathania, A. (2017). Response of different yield components as selection criteria for yield and yield components in early generations of lentil (Lens culinaris L.) Legume Res., 40(1): 160-164
  20. Salimath, P. M. and Bahl, P. N. (1985). Early generation selection in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) II effect of selection pressure independently for deed yield and its components. Indian J. Genet., 45(1): 105-110.
  21. Santosh, H. B., Bharadwaj, C., Santosh, S., Raghavendra, K. P. and Kumar, J. (2017). Genetic diversity analysis for productivity enhancement through desi-kabuli introgression breeding in chickpea. Elec. J. Plant Breed., 8(1): 125-133.
  22. Sharma, J. R. (1998). Statistical and biometrical techniques in plant breeding, New Agric. International Publishers, New Delhi. 
  23. Singh, A. and Singh, N. P. (2009). Estimation of genetic parameters in recombinant inbred population derived from interspecific cross of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Indian J. Genet., 69(2): 122-126. 
  24. Singh, A. K., Singh, I. S. and Gupta, A. K. (1998). Early generation evaluation for yield and yield related traits in lentil. Indian J. Genet., 58(4): 495-501.
  25. Singh, D. P. and Singh, B. B. (2016). Varietal improvement of pulse crops in India: introspection and prospectives. Indian. J. Agr. Sci., 86 (1): 3-24.
  26. Singh, T. (2016). Estimation of genetic parameters and character associations for yield and quality traits in chickpea. Indian J. Agr. Res., 50 (2): 117-121.
  27. Sneep, J. (1977) Selecting for yield in early generation of self-fertilizing crops. Euphytica, 26:27–30. 
  28. Thudi M, Chitikineni A, Liu X, et al., (2016). Recent breeding programs enhanced genetic diversity in both desi and kabuli varieties of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Sci Rep., 6: 38636. doi: 10.1038/srep38636.
  29. Tripathi, S., Sridhar, V., Jukanti, A. K., Suresh, K., Rao, B. V., Gowda, C. L. L. and Gaur, P. M. (2012). Genetic variability and interrelationships of phenological, physicochemical and cooking quality traits in chickpea. Plant Genet. Resour-C., 10(3): 194-201. 
  30. Upadhyaya, H. D., Ortiz, R., Bramel, P. J. and Singh, S. (2002). Phenotypic diversity for morphological and agronomic characteristics in chickpea core collection. Euphytica, 123(3): 333-342.
  31. Weber, W. E. (1983). Selection in early generation. In: Efficiency in Plant Breeding. (eds.) Lange, W., Zeven, A.C. and Hagenboom, N.G. Proc 10th Congress Europe Association for Research on Plant Breeding, EUCARPIA, Pudoc, Wageningen. pp. 72–81. 
  32. Yadav, M. K. and Raje, R. S. (2008). Response to selection in early segregating generation in fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-graecum L.) Indian J. Genet. Pl. Breed. 68(4): 414-418.
  33. Yadav, S. S., Kumar, J., Turner, N. C., Berger, J., Redden, R., McNeil, D., Materne, M., Knights, E. J. and Bahl, P. N. (2004). Breeding for improved productivity, multiple resistance and wide adaptation in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Plant Genet. Resour-C., 4:181-187. 
  34. Yang, R. (2009) When is early generation selection effective in self-pollinated crops? Crop Sci., 49 (6): 2065-2079. 

Editorial Board

View all (0)