Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution

, Volume 66, Issue 7, pp 1515–1531 | Cite as

Stability of grass pea (Lathyrus sativus L.) genotypes in different agroclimatic zone in eastern part of India with special reference to West Bengal

  • Chandrasekhar Chatterjee
  • Manojkanti Debnath
  • Nilima KarmakarEmail author
  • Raghunath Sadhukhan
Research Article


A total of twenty-five grass pea (Lathyrus sativus L.) genotypes of released varieties, advanced lines, mutants and local collections were explored in this study. These genotypes were cultivated for two succeeding years in three different locations namely red lateritic zone (Shekhampur), gangetic alluvial zone (Kalyani) and saline zone of Sundarban region of west Bengal (Kakdwip) to evaluate the performance on the basis of yield and quality traits. The stability of the genotypes was established by AMMI and Biplot analysis. It was found that the neurotoxin content of grass pea, β-L-oxalyl-2,3diaminopropionic acid (β-ODAP), did not show any difference under various environmental conditions and the gangetic alluvial zone was proved to be the ideal test location for grass pea genotypes. The BK-37-2 advanced line was found to be the most stable genotype in respect of yield under all the tested environments and can be used in future breeding programmes.


Grass pea β-ODAP Stability Yield AMMI Biplot 



The authors sincerely acknowledge the help received from Department of Genetics, BCKV, Mohanpur, staff members in phenotyping work. The funding for this experiment was beared jointly from the financial support of Department of Agricultural Co-operation (DAC)-India and ICARDA.


  1. Abate M, Mekbib F, Ayana A, Nigussie M (2015) Genotype × environment and stability analysis of oil content in sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) evaluated across diverse agro-ecologies of the Awash Valleys in Ethiopia. Am J Exp Agric 9(2):1–12Google Scholar
  2. Abd El-Moneim AM, van Dorrestein B, Baum M (2000) Improving the nutritional quality and yield potential of grasspea (Lathyrus sativus). Food Nutr Bull 21:493–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ahmadi J, Vaezi B, Shaabani A, Khademi K (2012) Multi-environment yield trials of grass pea (Lathyrus sativus L.) in Iran using AMMI and SREG GGE. J Agric Sci Technol 14:1075–1085Google Scholar
  4. Allkin R, Macfarlance TD, White RJ, Bisby FA, Adey ME (1983) Names and synonyms of species and subspecies in the Vicieae. Vicieae Database Proj Publ 2(2):46Google Scholar
  5. Balzarini M, Bruno C, Arroyo A (2005) Análisis de ensayos agrícolas multiambientales: Ejemplos con Info-Gen. Ed. ISBN 987-05-0349-7. Córdoba, 141Google Scholar
  6. Basford KE, Cooper M (1998) Genotype × environment interactions and some considerations of their implications for wheat breeding in Australia. Aust J Agric Res 49(2):154–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Becker HC, Leon J (1988) Stability analysis in plant breeding. Plant Breed 101(1):1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brahim NB, Combes D, Marrakchi M (2001) Autogamy and allogamy in genus Lathyrus. Lathyrus Lathyrism Newsl 2:21–26Google Scholar
  9. Campbell CG, Briggs CJ (1987) Registration of low neurotoxin content Lathyrus germplasm LS 8246. Crop Sci 27:821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ceccarelli S (1989) Wide adaptation: How wide? Euphytica 40:197–205Google Scholar
  11. Communication Team ICARDA. (3/12/2007). ICARDA Annual Report 2006. Aleppo, Syria: The International Center for Agriculture Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA)Google Scholar
  12. Communication Team ICARDA. (4/11/2008). ICARDA Annual Report 2007. Aleppo, Syria: The International Center for Agriculture Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA)Google Scholar
  13. Cornelius PL, Crossa J, Seyedsadr MS (1996) Statistical test and estimators of multiplicative models for genotype-by-environment interaction: genotype by environment interaction. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 199–234Google Scholar
  14. Crinò P, Polignano GB, Tavoletti S (2004) Grass pea, a potentially important crop in Mediterranean agriculture. Grain Leg 40:6–7Google Scholar
  15. Crossa J, Cornelius PL (1997) Sites regression and shifted multiplicative model clustering of cultivar trials sites under heterogeneity of variances. Crop Sci 37:406–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Crossa J, Cornelius P, Yan W (2002) Biplots of linear bilinear models for studying crossover genotype × environment interaction. Crop Sci 42:619–633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dixit GP, Parihar AK, Bohra A, Singh NP (2016) Achievements and prospects of grass pea (Lathyrus sativus L.) improvement for sustainable food production. Crop J 4(5):407–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Duke JA (1981) Handbook of legumes of world economic importance. Plenum Press, New York, p 345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Eberhart SA, Russel WA (1966) Stability parameters for comparing varieties. Crop Sci 6:36–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Frutos E, Galindo MP, Leiva V (2014) An interactive biplot implementation in R for modeling genotype-by-environment interaction. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 28:1629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gabriel KR (1971) The biplot graphical display of matrices with applications to principal component analysis. Biometrika 58:453–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Granati E, Bisignano V, Chiaretti D, Crinò P, Polignano GB (2003) Characterization of Italian and exotic Lathyrus germplasm for quality traits. Genet Resour Crop Evol 50(3):273–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hanbury CD, Sarker A, Siddique KHM, Perry MW (1995) Evaluation of Lathyrus germplasm in a mediterranean type environment in south-western Australia. Co-operative Research Centre for Legumes in Mediterranean Agriculture. Occasional Paper No. 8Google Scholar
  24. Hanbury CD, Siddique KHM, Galwey NW, Cocks PS (1999) Genotype-environment interaction for seed yield and ODAP concentration of Lathyrus sativus and L. cicera in Mediterranean-type environments. Euphytica 110(1):45–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hanbury CD, White CL, Mullan BP, Siddique KHM (2000) A review of the potential of L. sativus and L. cicera grain for use as animal feed. Anim Feed Sci Technol 87:1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. ICAR (2009) Project Coordinator’s report of all India coordinated research project on mungbean, urdbean, lentil, lathyrus, rajmash and pea. Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  27. Jackson P, Robertson M, Cooper M, Hammer GL (1998) The role of physiological understanding in plant breeding: from a breeding perspective. Field Crops Res 49:11–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kang MS (1997) Using genotype-by-environment interaction for crop cultivar development. Adv Agron 62:199–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lakew B, Mehari M, Alamerew S (2014) Genotype × environment interaction and yield stability of malt barley genotypes evaluated in Tigray, Ethiopia using the AMMI analysis. Asian J Plant Sci 13(2):73–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lal MS, Agrawal I, Chitale MW (1986) Genetic improvement of chickling vetch ( Lathyrus sativus L.) in Madhya Pradesh, India. In: Kaul AK, Combes D (eds) Lathyrus and lathyrism. Third World Medical Research Foundation, New York, pp 146–160Google Scholar
  31. Lazányi J (2000) Grass pea and green manure effects in the Great Hungarian Plain. Univ. West. Aust., Centre Leg. Med. Agric., Lathyrus Lathyrism Newsl 1Google Scholar
  32. Lowry OH, Rosebrough NJ, Farr AL, Randall RJ (1951) Protein measurement with folin phenol reagent. J Biol Chem 193:265–275Google Scholar
  33. Malek MA (1998) Genetic resources of grass pea (Lathyrus sativus L.) in Bangladesh. In: Mathur PN, Rao VR (eds) Lathyrus genetic resources network: Proceedings of IPGRI-ICARDA-ICAR regional working group meeting. National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources, IPGRI Office for South Asia, New Delhi, India, pp 1–6Google Scholar
  34. Mera M, Tay J, France A (2003) Luanco-INIA, a large-seeded cultivar of Lathyrus sativus released in Chile. Lathyrus Lathyrism Newsl 3:26Google Scholar
  35. Nassar R, Hühn M (1987) Studies on estimation of phenotypic stability: tests significance for nonparametric measures of phenotypic stability. Biometrics 43(1):43–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nel MM, Agenbag GA, Purchase JL (1998) Sources of variation for yield, protein content and hectoliter mass of spring wheat cultivars of the Western and Southern Cape. S Afr J Plant Soil 15(2):72–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Palmer VS, Kaul AK, Spencer PS (1989) International Network for the Improvement of Lathyrus sativus and the eradication of lathyrism (INILSEL): a TWMRF initiative. In: Spencer PS (ed) The grasspea: threat and promise. Third World Medical Research Foundation, New York, pp 219–223Google Scholar
  38. Pandey RL, Chitale MW, Sharma RN et al (1996) Status of Lathyrus research in India. In: Arora RK, Mathur PN, Riley KW et al (eds) Lathyrus genetic resources in Asia: Proceedings of regional workshop. Indira Gandhi Agricultural University, Raipur, India. IPGRI Office for South Asia, New Delhi, India, pp 45–52Google Scholar
  39. Pearson K (1901) On lines and planes of closest fit to systems of points in space. Philos Mag 2:559–572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Petterson DS, Sipsas S, Mackintosh JB (1997) The chemical composition and nutritive value of Australian pulses. Grains Research and Development Corporation, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  41. Polignano GB, Bisignano V, Tomaselli V, Uggenti P, Alba V, Della Gatta C (2009) Genotype × environment interaction in grass pea (Lathyrus sativus L.) lines. Int J Agron. Google Scholar
  42. Prodanov M, Sierra I, Vidal-Valverde C (2004) Influence of soaking and cooking on the thiamin, riboflavin and niacin contents of legumes. Food Chem 84(2):271–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Qayyum KM, Abdul MS (2001) Analysis of genome differentiation between high toxin and low toxin accessions of Lathyrus sativus using RAPD markers. Pak J Biol Sci 4:1526–1530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Ramagosa I, Fox PN (1993) Genotype-environment interaction and adaptation. In: Hayward MD, Bosemark NO, Romagosa I (eds) Plant breeding: principles and prospects. Chapman and Hall, London, pp 373–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rao SLN (1978) A sensitive and specific calorimetric method for determination of á, â-diaminopropionic acid and Lathyrus sativus neurotoxin. Anal Biochem 86:386–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sharma RN, Chitale MW, Ganvir GB, Geda AK, Pandey RL (2000) Observations on the development of selection criterion for high yield and low neurotoxin in grass pea based on genetic resources. Lathyrus Lathyrism Newsl 1:15–16Google Scholar
  47. Tadesse W, Bekele E (2003) Phenotypic diversity of Ethiopian grass pea (Lathyrus sativus) in relation to geographical regions and altitudinal range. Genet Resour Crop Evol 50:497–505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Vaz Patto MC, Hanbury CD, Moorhem MV, Lambein F, Ochatt SJ, Rubiales D (2011) Grass pea. In: Kole C (ed) Genetics, genomics and breeding of cool season grain legumes. Genetics, genomics and breeding of crop plants. Science Publishers, Enfield, pp 151–204Google Scholar
  49. Yadav CR (1996) Genetic evaluation and varietal improvement of grasspea in Nepal. In: Arora RK, Mathur PN, Riley KW et al (eds) Lathyrus geneticresources in Asia: Proc regional work-shop. Indira Gandhi Agricultural University, Raipur, India. IPGRI Office for South Asia, New Delhi, India, pp 21–27Google Scholar
  50. Yan W, Tinker NA (2006) Biplot analysis of multi-environment trial data: principles and applications. Can J Plant Sci 86:623–645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Yang HM, Zhang XY (2005) Considerations on the reintroduction of grass pea in China. Lathyrus Lathyrism Newsl 4:22–26Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chandrasekhar Chatterjee
    • 1
  • Manojkanti Debnath
    • 2
  • Nilima Karmakar
    • 3
    Email author
  • Raghunath Sadhukhan
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Faculty of AgricultureBCKVMohanpur, NadiaIndia
  2. 2.Department of Statistics, Faculty of AgricultureUBKVPundibari, Cooch BeharIndia
  3. 3.Department of Soil Science and Agricultural Chemistry, NM College of AgricultureNavsari Agricultural UniversityNavsariIndia

Personalised recommendations