Advertisement

Euphytica

, Volume 156, Issue 3, pp 305–310 | Cite as

Predicting transgressive segregants in early generation using single seed descent method-derived micro-macrosperma genepool of lentil (Lens culinaris Medikus)

Predicting transgressive segregants in lentil
  • R. K. Chahota
  • N. Kishore
  • K. C. Dhiman
  • T. R. Sharma
  • S. K. Sharma
Article

Abstract

In a self-fertilised crop like lentil, the identification of transgressive segregants for economically important trait such as seed yield is an important aspect of any practical breeding programme. The prediction of expected transgressive segregants in F1 generation obtained as a ratio of additive genic effect [d] and additive variance (D) i.e. [d]/√D was studied in 28 crosses of lentil generated in a diallel fashion involving four parents each of macrosperma (exotic) and microsperma (Indian) types, respectively, resulting in three hybridization groups. The seed material advanced to F2, F3 and F4 generations through single seed descent method was evaluated to determine the observed transgressive segregants for seed yield/plant. The observed frequency of crosses showing more than 20% transgressive segregants in F2 to F4 generations were exhibited in 9(32%) crosses, of which 7(77%) crosses were of macrosperma × microsperma type. Genotypes Precoz and HPL-5 of the exotic group (macrosperma) produced maximum number of transgressive segregants with the genotypes L-259, L-4145 and PL-406 of the Indian origin (microsperma). Goodness of fit (non-significant χ2 value) in F2 generation was observed for 19(68%) crosses of the total genepool, out of which 9(56%) crosses each in F3 and F4 generation belonged to the macrosperma × microsperma group, depicting it as the gene pool of paramount importance to obtain maximum transgressive segregants, therefore establishing the efficacy of the method used.

Keywords

Lentil Macrosperma Microsperma Transgressive segregants Single seed descent method 

References

  1. Bernardo R (2003) On the effectiveness of early generation selection in self pollinated crops. Crop Sci 43:1558–1560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Deshmukh RB, Patil JV, Chaudhari GB (2004) Comparison of selection methods in chickpea. Legume Res 27:193–196Google Scholar
  3. Fasoulus A (1981) Principles and methods of plant breeding. Pub. no. 11. Aristotelian University of Thessaloniki, GreeceGoogle Scholar
  4. Griffing B (1956) A generalized treatment of the use of diallel crossed in quantitative inheritance. Heredity 10:31–50Google Scholar
  5. Hawtin GC, Singh KB, Saxena MC (1980) Some recent development in the understanding and improvement of Cicer and Lens. In: Summerfield RJ, Bunting AH (eds) Advances in legumes science. Proceedings of the International Legume Conference, Kew, 31 July–4 August 1978. Royal Botanic Garden, Kew, the Missouri Botanical Garden, and the University of Reading, UK, pp 613–623Google Scholar
  6. Hayman BI (1954a) The theory and analysis of diallel crosses. Genetics 39:789–809PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Hayman BI (1954b) The analysis of variance of diallel tables. Biometrics 10:235–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Jinks JL (1983) Biometrical genetics of heterosis. In: Frankel R (ed) Heterosis: reappraisal of theory and practice. New York, pp 1–46Google Scholar
  9. Jinks JL, Perkins JM (1972) Predicting the range of inbred lines. Heredity 28:399–403PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Jinks JL, Pooni HS (1976) Predicting the properties of recombinant inbred lines derived by single seed descent. Heredity 36:253–266Google Scholar
  11. Jinks JL, Pooni HS (1980) Comparing prediction of mean performance of environmental sensitivity of recombinant inbred lines based upon F3 and triple test cross families. Heredity 45:305–312Google Scholar
  12. Kant L, Singh DP (1998) Transgressive segregation of yield and yield components in lentil. Indian J Genet 58:343–347Google Scholar
  13. Kishore N, Gupta VP (2002) Early generation selection in microsperma-macrosperma derived gene pool of lentil. Indian J Genet 62:34–37Google Scholar
  14. Mather K, Jinks JL (1982) Biometrical genetics, 3rd edn. Chapman and Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. Muehlbauer FJ, Cubero JI, Summerfield RJ (1985) Lentil (Lens culinaris Medik.). In: Summerfield RJ, Roberts EH (eds) Grain legume crops. Collins, London, pp 266–311Google Scholar
  16. Pooni HS, Jinks JL, Johannes D (1986) Comparison of inbreds extracted from two single crosses and their double cross by single seed decent. Heredity 56:263–276Google Scholar
  17. Powell W, Thomas WTB (1992) A comparison of the phenotypic distribution of single seed decent families and second cycle hybrids in barley. J Genet Plant Breeding 46:96–98Google Scholar
  18. Sharma SK, Chahota RK, Lal C (1992) Genetic diversity and agronomic evaluation of microsperma and macrosperma lentils. Genetic Res Crop Evol 42:217–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. K. Chahota
    • 1
  • N. Kishore
    • 1
  • K. C. Dhiman
    • 1
  • T. R. Sharma
    • 2
  • S. K. Sharma
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Plant Breeding & GeneticsCSK HP Agricultural UniversityPalampurIndia
  2. 2.Advanced Centre of Hill Bioresources & BiotechnologyCSK HP Agricultural UniversityPalampurIndia
  3. 3.National Bureau of Plant Genetic ResourcesNew DelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations