Legume Research

  • 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

Exploring the Morphological and Biochemical Diversity of Tamarind (Tamarindus indica L.) in Karnataka

R. Praveenakumar1, C. Suneetha2,*, N. Nagesha3, P.N. Krishnamma4, T.R. Sunitha5, S. Yuvaraj2, S. Kavya2
  • 0009-0001-0787-9738, 0000-0003-1147-5004, 0000-0002-0562-4598, 0000-0003-0323-4112, 0000-0002-8976-3770, 0009-0005-8796-8384, 0009-0002-1091-6867
1Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Chintamani-563 125, Karnataka, India.
2Department of Horticulture, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore-560 065, Karnataka, India.
3Department of Biotechnology, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore-560 065, Karnataka, India.
4Department of Agricultural Engineering, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore-560 065, Karnataka, India.
5Department of Agricultural Entomology, College of Agriculture, Hassan-573 225, Karnataka, India.
  • Submitted10-12-2024|

  • Accepted25-04-2025|

  • First Online 07-07-2025|

  • doi 10.18805/LR-5458

Background: The present investigation was carried out at the Hoskote Forest Station, Bengaluru Rural District, India. The plant material consisted of Twenty eight accessions which were planted in June, 1998. The observations for the present investigation were recorded during 2018-19 and 2019-20 fruiting seasons. The RCBD design was followed to control variability and improve the accuracy of experimental results.

Methods: The accessions were evaluated for different morphological traits viz. bearing habit, fruit characteristics such as shape, pulp colour, length, width, thickness, weight, pulp weight per fruit, seed weight per fruit, number of seeds per fruit, shell weight per fruit, vein weight per fruit and their corresponding percentages (seed, pulp, fibre and shell). It also explores phytochemical traits in tamarind pulp, including titratable acidity (%), TSS (oBrix), pH, ascorbic acid (mg/100 g) and tartaric acid (%). Nutrient content in tamarind pulp, specifically manganese, potassium, calcium and magnesium was also analysed. The correlation co-efficient among all the possible morpho and phytochemical trait combinations were analyzed statistically.

Result: Significant differences among the tamarind accessions were noted, STAM-28 and HSTAM-40 recorded the highest values in all the growth, pod and yield characters. Correlation analysis revealed that Fruit weight was highly significant and showed association with fibre weight, thickness of fruit, pulp weight, fruit width, fruit length, shell weight, tartaric acid and titratable acidity content of pulp. This suggests that there is potential to select traits that can help identify superior genotypes/accessions in terms of both quality and yield of tamarind.

Tamarind (Tamarinds indica L.) is a highly heterozygous dicotyledonous tree in the Fabaceae family, known for cross-pollination and genetic variability. It grows up to 25 metres, with alternately even-pinnate leaves and raceme flowers. The oblong, curved fruits have firm, dark brown pulp and are commonly grown in tropical and subtropical regions. Tamarind fruit has diverse industrial and medicinal uses, with the pulp, seeds, trunk and leaves serving multiple purposes. The ripe fruit comprises 54% pulp, 35% seed and 11% fibre and shell. Its pulp contains 20.8 g moisture, 64.4g carbohydrates, 5.8 g fiber, 3.4 g protein, 2.9 g minerals and 232-285 kcal per 100 g (Muzaffar, 2017). It is highly acidic, with tartaric acid content ranging from 12.5% to 24.8% and contains leucoanthocyanidin in brown pulp and anthocyanin in red pulp.
       
India ranks first among different countries with an area and production of 38,855 ha and 151,282 MT, respectively. Karnataka accounts for an area and production of 9,560 ha and 33693 MT, respectively (Anonymous, 2024). India is the only country to tap the potential of tamarind extensively with the annual pulp production of 3 lakh tones, of which 4,000 tonnes is exported to Europe, North America, USA, Australia, African, Sri Lanka, Malaysia and Pakistan after local consumption (El-Siddig et al., 2006).
       
It is better to concentrate only on the genetically superior trees in relation to neighbouring ones and trees selected within the ecological zones. The degree of variability and quantitative assessment of each trait will reveal the potential of each tree and the opportunities for improving desirable and economically important traits through selective breeding. Understanding the nature and extent of variation and correlation between different traits and yield, is essential for selecting superior accessions. Before formulating a selection programme, it is important to assess the variability within accessions and use this information to enhance fruit and pulp production.
       
Many elite tamarind trees, originally identified from seedling sources, have been vegetatively propagated and preserved in gene banks. Various genotypes, propagated through vegetative methods, are being cultivated across different regions of Karnataka. These genotypes need to be assessed for yield and related traits. The superior accessions could play a crucial role in selection processes and in the development of new tamarind cultivars, providing valuable insights for the enhancement of the crop.
The study was carried out for two years, during 2018-19 and 2019-20 fruiting seasons, at the research wing of the Department of Forest, Government of Karnataka, maintained at Hosakote Forest Station, Bengaluru Rural District, to identify superior genotypes among the 28 established genotypes planted in 1998. Fifteen pods were randomly collected from all directions of the tree for each of the 28 genotypes.
       
This study assessed various parameters of tamarind fruit, including bearing habit, fruit characteristics, phytochemical properties and nutrient content. Bearing habit was categorized into regular, prolific and alternate bearers. Fruit shape was classified as curved or straight and pulp colour was determined using the RHS colour chart. The fruit’s dimensions (length, width, thickness) and weight (fruit, pulp, seeds, shell, fibre) were measured, with percentages of seed, pulp, fiber and shell calculated based on total fruit weight.
       
Phytochemical traits such as titratable acidity (%), total soluble solids (°Brix), pH, ascorbic acid (mg/100g) and tartaric acid (%) were analyzed using standard methods. Nutrient content including manganese, potassium, calcium and magnesium, was determined using DTPA (Diethylene  Triamine penta acetic acid) method, flame photometer method, oxalatory method and thiazole yellow method respectively. The experimental data collected on various parameters during the study were statistically analyzed using the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) method for a randomized complete block design (RCBD). Nutrients such as Mg, Ca, K and Mn were analyzed for all 28 genotypes at the Department of Horticulture, College of Agriculture, UAS, GKVK, Bengaluru.
       
The correlation coefficients for all possible combinations of morphometric and phytochemical traits, based on fruit shape and levels, were calculated using the formula provided by Al-Jibouri et al., (1958).
 
 
 
 
Where,
Covxy (m) = Morphometric covariance between x and y.
Covxy (p)  = Phytochemical covariance between x and y.
Vx (m) = Morphometric variance of character ‘x’.
Vx (p) = Phytochemical variance of character ‘x’.
Vy (m) = Morphometric variance of character ‘y’.
Vy (p) = Phytochemical variance of character ‘y’.

The growth traits of 28 tamarind genotypes, including bearing habit, fruit shape and pulp colour, were analyzed and are presented in Table 1. All the genotypes exhibited a regular bearing habit during the 2018-19 and 2019-20 seasons. Straight and curved fruits were observed (Fig 1). The straight fruit shape was observed in genotypes HSTAM-29, HSTAM-30, HSTAM-32, HSTAM-33, HSTAM-39, HSTAM-48, HSTAM-49 and HSTAM-50, while the remaining genotypes were having curved fruit shape. The pulp colour of the tamarind genotypes was classified into five categories: reddish brown, light brown, deep brown, strong brown and brown. Strong brown pulp was observed in HSTAM-29, while brown was seen in HSTAM-26, 34 and 38. Deep brown appeared in HSTAM-24, 25 and 33. Reddish brown was recorded in eight genotypes, including HSTAM-23, 27 and 28, while light brown was noted in fourteen genotypes, including HSTAM-31, 32 and 35. The results are in similar line as reported by Rao and Subramanyam (2010); Algabal et al. (2012) and Bhogave et al. (2018).

Table 1: Bearing habit, shape of fruit and colour of pulp of tamarind genotypes maintained at Hosakote Forest Station, Bengaluru rural district.



Fig 1: Variability in size and shape of fruits of tamarind accessions.


       
Among the pooled averages morphological trait data represented in Table 2, the maximum fruit length was recorded in T6 [HSTAM-28(21.36 cm)], which was statistically at par with T5 [HSTAM-27 (19.73 cm)], T26 [HSTAM-48 (18.91 cm)] and T22 [HSTAM-44 (17.74 cm)]. The shortest fruit length was observed in T14 [HSTAM-36 (11.23 cm)]. For fruit width, the maximum value was recorded in T6 [HSTAM-28 (3.34 cm)], followed by T26 [HSTAM-48 (3.27 cm)], T4 [HSTAM-26 (2.87 cm)] and T23 [HSTAM-45 (2.87 cm)]. The minimum fruit width was noted in T14 [HSTAM-36(2.20 cm)]. The maximum fruit thickness was observed in T5 [HSTAM-27/KLR-13 (2.19 cm)], followed by T22 [HSTAM-44(2.07 cm)], T21 [HSTAM-43(2.04 cm)] and T6 [HSTAM-28 (1.96 cm)]. The minimum thickness was recorded in T14 [HSTAM-36 (1.24 cm)]. Regarding fruit weight, the maximum value was observed in T6 [HSTAM-28(30.25 g)], which was statistically at par with T18 [HSTAM-40 (29.37 g)], T26 [HSTAM-48 (29.01 g)] and T2 [HSTAM-24 (28.84 g)]. The minimum fruit weight was recorded in T14 [HSTAM-36 (15.99 g)].

Table 2: Length of fruit, width of fruit, thickness of fruit weight of fruit and pulp weight per fruit of tamarind genotypes maintained at Hosakote Forest Station, Bengaluru rural district.


       
The data on pulp weight per fruit are presented in Table 2. The maximum pulp weight per fruit was observed in T6 [HSTAM-28(15.50 g)], which was statistically at par with T2 [HSTAM-24(15.42 g)], T26 [HSTAM-48 (14.82 g)] and T13 [HSTAM-35(13.88 g)]. The minimum pulp weight per fruit was recorded in T14 [HSTAM-36(6.87 g)]. For seed weight per fruit, the maximum value was recorded in T6 [HSTAM-28(8.01 g)], which was at par with T3 [HSTAM-25(7.72 g)], T18 [HSTAM-40(7.19 g)] and T13 [HSTAM-35(6.99 g)]. The minimum seed weight per fruit was observed in T14 [HSTAM-36 (4.11 g)].
       
The data on different fruit characters presented in Table 3 shows, the maximum number of seeds per fruit in T6 [HSTAM-28(11.55)], followed by T12, T25 and T13. The least number of seeds per fruit was recorded in T9 [HSTAM-31(6.52)]. The maximum shell weight per fruit was recorded in T18 [HSTAM-40(7.09 g)], followed by T3 [HSTAM-25(6.47 g)], T13 [HSTAM-35(6.79 g)] and T2 [HSTAM-24(6.62 g)]. The minimum shell weight was observed in T14 [HSTAM-36(2.99 g)]. For fibre weight per fruit, the maximum value was recorded in T6 [HSTAM-28(1.44 g)], which was at par with T18 [HSTAM-40(1.43 g)], T3 [HSTAM-25(1.36 g)] and T2 [HSTAM-24(1.29 g)]. The minimum fibre weight was observed in T14 [HSTAM-36(0.59 g)]. HSTAM-28 exhibited superior performance in most fruit traits, with a few accessions showing similar results in certain traits. This suggests that HSTAM-28 significantly influenced all fruit traits, either through direct or indirect effects. Similar variation in fruit parameter of tamarind was noticed by Divakara (2008); Singh (2014); Reddy et al., (2024).
       
The maximum seed percentage was recorded in T3 [HSTAM-25(29.40%)], followed by T7 [HSTAM-29(29.08%)], T12 [HSTAM-34(28.77%)] and T15 [HSTAM-37(26.68%)]. The minimum seed percentage was observed in T26 [HSTAM-48 (21.17%)] (Fig 2). For pulp percentage, the maximum value was observed in T19 [HSTAM-41(53.77%)], followed by T2 [HSTAM-24(53.44%)], T3 [HSTAM-25(52.83%)] and T24 [HSTAM-46(51.83%)]. The minimum pulp percentage was recorded in T18 [HSTAM-40(41.54%)] (Table 3).

Fig 2: Variability in seed traits of tamarind genotypes.



Table 3: Number of seed per fruit, shell weight per fruit (g), fibre weight per fruit (g), seed (%), pulp (%), fibre (%) and shell (%) of tamarind genotypes maintained at Hosakote Forest Station, Bengaluru rural district.


       
The data on fibre and shell percentages are presented in Table 3. The maximum fibre percentage was recorded in T21 [HSTAM-43(5.78%)], followed by T6 [HSTAM-28(5.11%)] and T4 [HSTAM-26(4.92%)]. The minimum fibre percentage was observed in T14 [HSTAM-41(3.76%)]. For shell percentage, the maximum value was observed in T24 [HSTAM-46(30.07%)], followed by T18 [HSTAM-40(25.26%)], T13 [HSTAM-35(24.88%)] and T10 [HSTAM-32(24.45%)]. The minimum shell percentage was recorded in T6 [HSTAM-28(18.10%)]. Similar variation was in Hanamashetti and Sulikeri (1997); Mastan​ et al. (1997); Prabhushankar et al., (2004) and Reddy et al., (2023).
       
The phytochemical traits, including titratable acidity, total soluble solids (TSS) and pH, were assessed across different tamarind genotypes (Table 4). The maximum titratable acidity was recorded in the genotype T12 [HSTAM-34] with 17.69%, followed by T6 [HSTAM-28] (15.61%), T3 [HSTAM-25] (15.13%) and T25 [HSTAM-47] (14.78%). Conversely, the minimum titratable acidity was observed in T17 [HSTAM-43] (7.36%). For total soluble solids (TSS), the maximum value was found in T15 [HSTAM-37] with 18.65 oBrix, which was comparable to T22 [HSTAM-44] (17.84 oBrix), T13 [HSTAM-35] (16.75 °Brix) and T27 [THTAM-49] (17.31 oBrix). The minimum TSS was recorded in T3 [HSTAM-25] with 12.82 oBrix. Regarding pH, the maximum value was observed in T22 [HSTAM-44] (3.39), followed by T6 [HSTAM-28] (3.25), T5 [HSTAM-25] (3.27) and T3 [HSTAM-29] (3.21). The minimum pH value was recorded in T12 [HSTAM-34] with 2.38. Bottom of Form Significant variations were observed among the genotypes for ascorbic acid and tartaric acid contents (Table 4). The maximum ascorbic acid content was found in T5 [HSTAM-27] (12.92 mg/100 g), followed by T21 [HSTAM-43] (11.54 mg/100 g), T7 [HSTAM-29] (10.83 mg/100g) and T19 [HSTAM-41] (10.40 mg/100g). The minimum ascorbic acid content was recorded in T3 [HSTAM-25] (5.89 mg/100 g). Regarding tartaric acid, T6 [HSTAM-28] exhibited the maximum percentage (11.82%), closely followed by T18 [HSTAM-40] (11.25%), T11 [HSTAM-33] (10.79%) and T21 [HSTAM-43] (10.77%). The minimum tartaric acid percentage was observed in T20 [HSTAM-42] (6.71%).

Table 4: Titratable acidity percentage, TSS, pH, ascorbic acid and tartaric acid percentage of tamarind genotypes maintained at Hosakote Forest Station, Bengaluru Rural District.



The higher values for titratable acidity, pH, ascorbic acid and tartaric acid in certain tamarind fruit pulps, particularly in HSTAM-28, can be attributed to genetic factors. Similar trends were observed in HSTAM-25, followed by HSTAM-28. These findings align with the results reported by Hanamashetti and Sulikeri (1997); El-Siddig et al., (2006); Divakara (2009); Sharma et al., (2015) and Mayavel et al., (2025).
       
The data on magnesium and calcium percentages are shown in Table 5. The maximum magnesium percentage was observed in T6 [HSTAM-28(2.54 %)], followed by T12 [HSTAM-34(2.16 %)] and T26 [HSTAM-48 (2.05%)]. The minimum magnesium percentage was recorded in T20 [HSTAM-42(0.85 %)]. In terms of calcium percentage, the maximum value was recorded in T12 [HSTAM-34(3.51 %)], followed by T5 [HSTAM-25 (3.14%)] and T14 [HSTAM-35(3.26 %)]. The minimum calcium percentage was observed in T22 [HSTAM-42(2.13%)].

Table 5: Nutrient composition (Mg, Ca, K and Mn percentage) of tamarind genotypes maintained at Hosakote Forest Station, Bengaluru Rural District.


       
The data on potassium and manganese percentages are presented in Table 5. The maximum potassium percentage was observed in T6 [HSTAM-28(24.18%)], followed by T2 [HSTAM-24(23.37%)] and T14 [HSTAM-36(22.41%)]. The minimum potassium percentage was recorded in T22 [HSTAM-45(14.52 %)]. In terms of manganese percentage, the maximum value was recorded in T26 [HSTAM-48 (3.29%)], followed by T17 [HSTAM-39(2.81%)] and T6 [HSTAM-28(2.65%)]. The minimum manganese percentage was observed in T13 [HSTAM-35(1.62%)].
       
The nutrient composition of tamarind fruit pulp across all tested genotypes revealed that HSTAM-28 exhibited significantly the maximum percentages of magnesium, potassium and manganese. However, HSTAM-48 was found to be at par with HSTAM-28 in terms of magnesium and potassium content. The nutrient composition of tamarind fruit pulp is genetically controlled, as demonstrated by the variation among the genotypes mentioned above. These findings are consistent with the studies of Ishola et al., (1990), Bhattacharya et al., (2008) and Parvez et al., (2003).
 
Correlation Studies
 
The correlation analysis of different traits reveals significant relationships that contribute to the understanding of yield-contributing characteristics (Table 6). Fruit weight exhibited a strong positive correlation with pulp weight (0.95**), fibre weight (0.85**) and shell weight (0.83**), concluding that larger fruits have more pulp, fibre and shell weight. Moderate correlations with fruit dimensions like width (0.59*) and length (0.54*) were observed, though the correlation with acidity (0.23) was non-significant.

Table 6: Correlation matrix of tamarind physico-chemical characters.


       
Length of fruit exhibited significant positive correlations with fibre weight (0.60**), fruit thickness (0.61**) and pulp weight (0.55*), suggesting that longer fruits often have a more substantial pulp and thicker texture. Similarly, fruit widthshowed positive correlation with pulp weight (0.65**), fibre weight (0.63**) and fruit weight (0.59*), demonstrating that wider fruits generally have more pulp and weight. Thickness of fruit was positively associated with most other traits, including fruit length (0.61**) and fiber weight (0.58**). Pulp weight was strongly correlated with fruit weight (0.95**) and shell weight (0.82**), showing these are important factors in determining pulp yield. Shell weight had strong positive correlations with fiber weight (0.86**) and fruit weight (0.83**), showing that thicker shells correlate with larger fruits. The titratable acidity showed significant positive correlation with fruit width (0.40*), but weak or non-significant relationships with other traits. The traits such as TSS, pH and ascorbic acid showed non-significant correlation with all the traits studied. Similar results were also reported by Divakara (2008), Algabal et al., (2012), Singh and Nandini (2014) and Bhogave et al., (2018).
The study showed significant variation among tamarind genotypes in morphometric, phytochemical and nutrient characteristics. HSTAM-28 outperformed others with the maximum fruit weight (30.27 g), pulp weight (15.65 g), seed weight (9.22 g) and potassium content (24.08%). HSTAM-40 had the maximum shell weight, while HSTAM-41 showed the greatest pulp percentage and HSTAM-46 the maximum seed percentage. In phytochemical traits, HSTAM-28 had the maximum tartaric acid, whereas HSTAM-27 had the maximum ascorbic acid content. HSTAM-48 recorded the maximum manganese percentage and HSTAM-34 had the maximum calcium percentage. Correlation analyses indicated a strong positive relationship between fruit weight, fibre weight, pulp weight and other fruit traits. These findings suggest that certain genotypes, especially HSTAM-28, have great potential for improving tamarind production and quality, highlighting their importance in breeding programme for better yield and nutritional value.
The present study was supported by Department of Horticulture, UAS, Bangalore-65.
 
Disclaimers
 
The views and conclusions expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of their affiliated institutions. The authors are responsible for the accuracy and completeness of the information provided, but do not accept any liability for any direct or indirect losses resulting from the use of this content.
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this article. No funding or sponsorship influenced the design of the study, data collection, analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript.

  1. Algabal, A.Q.A.Y., Pappanna, N., Ajay, B.C. and Eid, A. (2012). Studies on genetic parameters and inter-relationships for pulp yield and its attributes in tamarind (Tamarindus indica L.). Int. J. Plt. Breed. 6(1): 65-69.

  2. Al-Jibouri, H.A., Miller, P.A. and Robinson, H.F. (1958). Genetic and environmental variances and co-variances in upland cotton cross of inter-specific origin. Agron. J. 50(10): 633-637.

  3. Anonymous, (2024). Annu. Rep. (2022-23). Spices Board of India, India.

  4. Bhattacharya, S., Bal, S., Mukherjee, R.K. and Bhattacharya, S. (2008). Studies on the characteristics of some products from tamarind (Tamarindus indica) kernel. J. Food Sci. Techno. 31(5): 372-376. 

  5. Bhogave, A.F., Dalal, S.R. and Raut, U.A. (2018). Studies on qualitative traits variation in tamarind (Tamarindus indica L.). Int. J. Chem. Studies. 6(1): 396-398.

  6. Divakara, B.N. (2008). Variation and character association for various pod traits in (Tamarindus indica L.) Indian Forester. 134(5): 687-696.

  7. Divakara, B.N. (2009). Variation and character association for various pulp biochemical traits in (Tamarindus indica L.) Indian Forester. 135(1): 99-110.

  8. El-Siddig, K., Gunesana, H.P.M., Prasad, B.A., Pushpukumara, D.K. N.G., Ramana, K.V.R., Vijayananand, P. and Williams, J.T. (2006). Fruits for the future 1-Tamarind (Tamarindus indica L.) (Revised).Southampton Centre for Underutilized Crops, Southampton, UK.

  9. Hanamashetti, S.I. and Sulikeri, G.S. (1997). Evaluation of promising genotypes of tamarind (Tamarindus indica L.) Proc. Nat. Sym. on Tamarind (Tamarindus indica L.) held at Tirupathi (A.P.) organized by Department of Forest, Government of Andhra Pradesh. India.

  10. Ishola, M.M., Agbaji, E.B. and Agbaji, A.S. (1990). A chemical study of Tamarindus indica fruit grown in Nigeria. J. Sci. Food Agric. 5(1): 141-143.

  11. Mastan, M., Sivaram Prasad, N.V., ChalamaReddy, K. and Prasad Reddy, B.V. (1997). Variability in fruit characteristics of tamarind (Tamarindus indica L.) Proc. Nat. Sym. tamarind (Tamarindus indica L.) held at Tirupathi (A.P.) organized by Department of Forest, Government of Andhra Pradesh. India.

  12. Muzaffar, K. and Kumar, P. (2017). Tamarind-a mini review. MOJ Food Process Technol. 5(3): 296-297.

  13. Mayavel, A., Amaravel, M., Bagathsingh, C., Krishnan, G.R. and Nagarajan, B. (2025). Exploring morpho-biochemical diversity in tamarind (Tamarindus indica L.) for advanced breeding approaches. Legume Research. 48(3): 385- 392. doi: 10.18805/LR-5295.

  14. Parvez, S.S., Parvez, M.M., Fujii, Y. and Gemma, H. (2003). Analysis of chemical components and oxygen radical absorbance capacity of (Tamarindus indica L.). Japanese J. Trop. Agri. 47(4): 243-249.

  15. Prabhushankar, D.S., Melanta, K.R. and Chandregowda, M. (2004). Evaluation of elite clones of tamarind. Karnataka J. Agri. Sci. 7(3): 512-514.

  16. Rao, K.D. and Subramanyam, K. (2010). Varietal evaluation of tamarind under scarce rainfall zone. Agric. Sci. Digest. 30(1): 42-45.

  17. Reddy, A.G.K., Osman, M., Yadav, S.K., Prasad, T.V., Shankar, K.S., Pushpanjali, Jyothilakshmi, N., Salini, K., Singh, V.K. and Yadagiri, J. (2023). Performance of tamarind (Tamarindus indica L.) accessions under dryland conditions. Legume Research. 46(9): 1179-1183. https://doi.org/10.18805/ LR-4810.

  18. Reddy, A.G.K., Prasad, T.V., Shankar, K.S., Pushpanjali, M., Jyothilakshmi, N., Salini, K., Babu, R.R., Singh, V.K. and Yadagiri, J. (2024). Morpho-biochemical characterization of tamarind (Tamarindus indica L.). Legume Research. 47(6): 990- 995. https://doi.org/10.18805/LR-5274.

  19. Sharma, D.K., Alkade, S.A. and Virdia, H.M. (2015). Genetic variability in tamarind (Tamarindus indica L.) in South Gujarat. Curr. Hortic. 3(2): 43-46.

  20. Singh,H.S. (2014). Record of Cryptophlebiaombrodelta (Lower) (Tortricidae:Lepitoptera) on bael (Aegle marmelos) and tamarind (Tamarindus indica) in Eastern India. Insect Environ. 20(1): 24-25.

  21. Singh, T.R. and Nandini, R. (2014). Genetic variability, character association and path analysis in tamarind (Tamarindus indica L.) population of Nallur tamarind grove. SAARC J. Agri. 12(1): 20-25.

Editorial Board

View all (0)