Morphological and reproductive characterization of developed mutants in groundnut

 
 
 
  • Abstract
  • Keywords
  • References
  • PDF
  • Abstract


    Twenty-eight established groundnut mutants and two check cultivars were studied during Kharif-I (March-June) season of 2017 and 2018 to find out their variability and distinct character(s) as identifying keys. All the mutant lines showed erect type sequential branching habits with two seeds in each pod although they had shown significant variability in all vegetative and reproductive structures. According to cluster analysis, 30 mutants/varieties clustered into three major groups at distance level 60 based on the morphological variability of 14 characters. The variability of 14 morphological characters in three principal components was explained by 98.12% of the total variation. The characters, 100-pod weight had the highest contribution followed by branch length, plant height and 100-kernel weight. Twenty-three mutant genotypes grouped into intermediate type of the extremes in any given identifying key characteristics. Only single genotype of the whole lot showed distinctively the longest primary branch and highest secondary branch number and small seed size (D1/24-29), highest primary branch number (M6/7-25), lowest primary branch number (Mut-2), highest leaflet length and light green leaf colour (Dhaka-1), presence of stem pigmentation and pod beak and highest number of seeds pod-1 (Zhingabadam), leaflet shape lanceolate (M6/54-20). In contrast, only two mutants of the lot showed two buds raceme-1 (M6/36-24 and M6/61-6), bolder pod and seed size and highly constricted pod (Mut-2 and Mut-3). The genotypes with the above distinguished characteristic featured for being ideal genetic markers and could be used in future breeding applications as well as aids in varietal identification.

     

     



  • Keywords


    Groundnut; Morphology; Variability; Multivariate Analysis; Key Identification.

  • References


      [1] Ashri A, Levy A. Spontaneous and induced Plasmon mutants in higher plant, Arachis hypogaea L. Genetica Agraria Monog. 1979;4: 71-76.

      [2] Bayor TB, Dzomeku IK, Avornyo VK, Opoku-Agyeman MO. Morphological variation in Kersting’s groundnut landraces from northern Ghana. Agric. Biol. J. North America. 2010; 1: 290-295. https://doi.org/10.5251/abjna.2010.1.3.290.295.

      [3] Chandran K, Padya SM. Morphological characterization of Arachis species of section Arachis. Plant Genet. Resour. Newsl. 2000; 121: 38–41.

      [4] Doku EV, Asiama O. A classification of Bambara groundnut cultivars based on variation in morphological characteristics. In: Proceedings of the First National Symposium on crop improvement in Ghana. Held at the Univ. Ghana, Legon, Accra on 22-24 August 1978. Doku E. V. (Ed.), CSIR. pp. 1978;19-27.

      [5] Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), FAOSTAT database. http://www.FAO.ORG.2016

      [6] Gibbons RW, Bunting AH, Smart J. The classification of varieties of groundnut. Euphytica. 1972; 21: 78-85. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00040550.

      [7] Lara-Fioreze ACC, Tomaz CA, Fioreze SL, Pilon C, Zanotto MD. Genetic diversity among progenies of Crambe abyssinica Hochst for seed traits. Ind. Crops Prod. 2013; 42: 771-775. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2013.07.039.

      [8] Latif MA, Rafii YM, Rahman MM, Talukdar MB. Microsatellite and minisatel­lite markers-based DNA fingerprinting and genetic diversity of blast and ufra resistant rice genotypes. Comptes Rendus Biol. 2011;334: 282-289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crvi.2011.02.003.

      [9] Latif MA, Rahman MM, Ali ME, Ashkani S, Rafii MY. Inheritance studies of SSR and ISSR molecular markers and phylogenetic relationship of rice genotypes resistant to tungro virus. Comptes Rendus Biol. 2013;336: 125-133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crvi.2012.12.002.

      [10] Mondal MMA, Puteh AB. Effect of source of nitrogen on nitrate reductase activity and biomass productivity in peanut mutant. Res. Crops. 2013; 14: 507-510.

      [11] Mouli C, Patil SH. Gamma-ray induced mutant with suppressed branches in peanut. J. Hered. 1976;67: 322-324. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jhered.a108743.

      [12] Ntundu WH, Shillah SA, Marandu WYF, Christiansen JL. Morphological diversity of Bambara groundnut [Vigna subterranean (L.) Verdc.] landraces in Tanzania. Genet. Resour. Crop Evol. 2006; 53: 367-378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10722-004-0580-2.

      [13] Pasquet RS, Schwedes S, Gepts P. Isozyme diversity in Bambara groundnut. Crop Sci. 1999; 39: 1228-1236. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1999.0011183X003900040045x.

      [14] Patil SH, Mouli C. X-ray induced asynaptic mutant in groundnut. Indian J. Exp. Biol. 1977; 15: 521-523.

      [15] Patil SH. Induced mutations for improving quantitative characters of groundnut. Indian J. Genet. Plant Breed. 1972; 32: 451-459.

      [16] Rafii MY, Shabanimofrad M, Puteri Edaroyati MW, Latif MA. Analysis of the genetic diversity of physic nut, Jatropha curcas L accessions using RAPD markers. Mol. Biol. Report. 2012; 39: 6505-6511. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11033-012-1478-2.

      [17] Rohlf F. NTSYS-pc: Numerical Taxonomy System, version 2 1. Exeter Publishing Ltd., Setauket, NY, USA. 2002

      [18] Russell DF. MSTAT-C Pakage Programme. Crop and Soil Science Department, Michigan University, USA. 1986.

      [19] Upadhyaya HD. Phenotypic diversity in groundnut core collection assessed by morphological and agronomical evaluations. Genet. Resour. Crop Evol. 2003;50: 539- 550.

      [20] Zivkovic B, Radovic J, Sokolovic D, Siler B, Banjanac T, Strbanovic R. Assessment of genetic diversity among alfalfa genotypes by morphometry, seed storage proteins and RAPD analysis. Ind. Crops Prod. 2012; 40: 285–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2012.03.027.


 

View

Download

Article ID: 30338
 
DOI: 10.14419/ijag.v8i1.30338




Copyright © 2012-2015 Science Publishing Corporation Inc. All rights reserved.