Efficiency of Index-Based Selection Methods for Stem Borer Resistance in Maize (Zea mays L.)
- 5 Downloads
Breeders need a simple and reliable index that could be used to make selection quickly in a breeding program. A study was conducted at the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Nigeria, to compare efficiency of four selection indices in selecting the best genotypes in a population improvement program involving a yellow-grained (DMR ESR-Y) and white-grained (DMR ESR-W) maize (Zea mays L.) population under artificial stem borer infestation. Rank summation index (RSI), Base index (BSI), Multiplicative index (MI), and Optimum index that uses heritability as weight (OI) were compared using grain yield, plant aspect, ear aspect, stalk breakage, and tolerance to stem borer as selection criteria. The selection criteria had moderate to high narrow-sense heritability. Each of the traits had a significant correlation with all selection indices, except MI in DMR ESR-Y. The BSI had the highest selection differential (23.32%) followed by OI (21.45%) in the white maize population. It also had the highest (29.11%) followed by RSI (20.99%) in the yellow maize population. The BSI also had strongest correlation with RSI in the white (−0.95**) and the yellow maize population (−0.90**). Percentage similarity was highest between BSI and RSI in the white (82.6%) and yellow maize populations (72.3%). This suggested that both BSI and RSI are good selection indices that could be used in improvement programs for stem borer resistance in maize.
Key wordsCorrelation economic weight population improvement predicted gains selection differential
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
This work was supported by the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Nigeria.
- Ajala SO. 1992. Inheritance of resistance in maize to the spotted stem borer, Chilo partellus (Swinhoe). Maydica 37: 363–369Google Scholar
- Ajala SO. 2010. Expected responses to aggregate trait selection in maize (Zea mays L). Int. J. Food, Agric. Environ. 8(1): 185–189Google Scholar
- Ajala SO, Ago CE, Olaoye G. 2009. Comparism of predicted responses to three types of recurrent selection procedures for the improvement of a maize (Zea mays L.) population. J. Plant Breed. Crop Sci. 1(8): 284–292Google Scholar
- Asghar, MJ, Mehdi SS. 2010. Selection indices for yield and quality traits in sweet corns. Pak. J. Bot. 42(2): 775–789Google Scholar
- Baker RJ. 1986. Selection Indices in Plant Breeding, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA, 218 ppGoogle Scholar
- Falconer DS. 1989. Introduction to Quantitative Genetics, 3rd edition, New York, Longman Inc. 438Google Scholar
- Hazel LN. 1943. The genetic basis for constructing selection index. Genetics 28: 476–490Google Scholar
- Mehdi SS. 1986. Predicted response to S1 selection for yield and disease resistance traits in two sunflower populations. Ph.D. thesis, South Dakota State Univ., Brookings, SD, USAGoogle Scholar
- Mohammadi M, Karimzadeh R, Youseiazar M. 2013. Investigation of selection efficiency in safflower (Cartamus thinctorius L.) genotypes. Nat. Mont. Pod. 12: 165–180Google Scholar
- Mulumba NN, Mock JJ. 1978. Improvement of yield potential of Eto Blanco maize (Zea mays L.) population by breeding for plant traits. Egypt. J. of Genet. Cytol. 7: 40–51Google Scholar
- Oloyede-Kamiyo QO. 2013. Genetic variability for stem borer resistance in two adapted early-maturing maize (Zea mays L.) populations. Ph.D. Thesis. Department of Agronomy, University of Ibadan. NigeriaGoogle Scholar
- Robinson HB, Comstock RE, Harvey PH. 1951. Genotypic and phenotypic correlations in corn and their implications in selection. Agron. J. 43: 283–287Google Scholar
- Shankar K, Ahluwalia M, Jain SK. 1963. The use of selection indices in the improvement of a pearl millet population. Ind. J. Genet. Plant Breed. 23: 30–33Google Scholar
- Sikka SM, Jain KBL. 1958. Correlation studies and the application of discriminant function in Aestivum wheats for varietal selection under rain fed condition. Ind. J. Genet. Plant Breed. 18:178–186Google Scholar
- Singh KB, Mehndiratta PD. 1970. Path analysis and selection indices for cowpea. Ind. J. Genet. Plant Breed. 30: 471–475Google Scholar
- Subandi, Compton WA, Empig LT. 1973. Comparison of efficiencies of selection indices for three traits in two variety crosses of corn. Crop Sci. 13: 184–186Google Scholar