Determination of genetic variation for vegetative and floral traits in African marigold (Tagetes erecta)

KANWAR PAL SINGH; D V S RAJU; NAMITA; T JANAKIRAM

doi:10.56093/ijas.v84i9.43438

Authors

KANWAR PAL SINGH Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012
D V S RAJU Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012
NAMITA Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012
T JANAKIRAM Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v84i9.43438

Keywords:

Correlation coefficient, Genetic advance, GCV, Heritability, Path coefficient and PCV

Abstract

Twenty-one genotypes of African marigold were (Tagetes erecta L.) evaluated for 11 growth and flowering related traits to study their genetic parameters such as variability, heritability, genetic (GCV), phenotypic (PCV) coefficient of variation and correlation and path coefficient analysis. Analysis of variance for all the traits showed significant differences among genotypes for all the growth and flowering related traits. High range in mean performance has been observed for traits, viz. plant height (64.00-106.67 cm), plant spread (49.33-72.00 cm), flower diameter (3.77- 6.17 cm), days required for flowering (78.67-99.33 days), number of secondary branches (22.13-37.47) and flower duration (26.00-44.83 days). Higher genotypic and phenotypic coefficient of variation was observed for traits such as fresh flower weight per plant, flower fresh weight per 10 flowers, number of flowers per plant, stem girth, flowering duration, etc. The high value (> 90%) of heritability was observed for all traits except plant height, plant spread and stem girth. The genetic advance was found ranged from 1.23 for flower diameter to 288.69 for fresh flower weight per plant. High values of genetic advance as per cent of mean was recorded for number of flowers (59.79%) followed by fresh flower weight per plant (59.32%) and flower fresh weight per 10 flowers (58.09%). Fresh flower weight per plant is significantly and positively correlated both at genotypic and phenotypic level for plant spread, flower fresh weight per flower, number of flowers per plant and flower diameter. Path coefficient analysis at genotypic level revealed that the number of primary branches per plant contributed highest and has significantly positive direct effect on fresh flower weight per plant followed by number of flowers per plant, flower diameter, flower fresh weight per flower, days required for flowering and stem girth. The different genotypes were identified to be performing differently for different quantitative traits. Hence, those genotypes with superior traits could be involved in the hybridization programme for assembling of desirable traits in a single genotype.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Anuja S and Jahnavi K. 2012. Variability, heritability and genetic advance studies in French marigold (Tagetes patula L.). Asian Journal of Horticulture 7(2): 362–4.

Burton G W and Devane E H. 1953. Estimation of heritability in tall fescue from replicated clonal material. Agronomy Journal 45: 478–87. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1953.00021962004500100005x

Johnson H W, Robinson H F and Comstock R E. 1955. Estimates of genetic and environmental variability in soyabean. Agronomy Journal 47: 314–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1955.00021962004700070009x

Karuppaiah P and Kumar P S. 2010. Correlation and path analysis in African marigold (Tagetes erecta L.). Electronic Journal of Plant Breeding 1: 217–20.

Kavitha R. and Anburani A.2010. Genetic variability in African marigold (Tagetes erecta L.). Asian Journal of Horticulture 5(2): 344–6.

Kishore N and Raghava S P S. 2001. Variability studies in African marigold. Journal of Ornamental Horticulture 4(2): 124–5.

Mathew R, Beniwal B S, Bhatia S K and Deswal D P. 2005. Path coefficient analysis for flower production in French marigold (Tagetes patula L.). Research on Crops 6: 328–31.

Namita, Singh K P, Bharadwaj C, Prasad K V and Raju D V S. 2009. Studies on character association and path analysis of quantitative traits among parental lines of marigold (Tagetes erecta and T. patula) and their interspecific F1 hybrids. Indian Journal of Horticulture 66: 348–52.

Namita, Singh K P, Raju D V S, Prasad K V and Bharadwaj C. 2008. Studies on genetic variability, heritability and genetic advance in French marigold (Tagetes patula) genotypes. Journal of Ornamental Horticulture 12: 30–4.

Nyquist W E. 1991. Estimation of heritability and prediction of selection response in plant populations. Critical Reviews in Plant Science 10: 235–322. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07352689109382313

Panse V G and Sukhatame P V. 1967. Statistical Methods of Agriculture Workers, pp 58–67. Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi.

Panwar S, Singh K P, Janakiram T and Namita. 2013. Genetic variability, heritability and genetic advance in African marigold (Tagetes erecta L.) genotypes. Progressive Horticulture 45: 127–32.

Panwar S, Singh K P, Prasad K V, Satyavathi C Tara and Namita. 2012. Character association and path coefficient analysis in rose (Rosa × hybrida). Indian Journal of Horticulture 69: 231– 8.

Pratap B, Singh A K, KumarA and Chandra R. 2009. Estimation of genetic variability, heritability and genetic advance in marigold (Tagetes sp.).Current Advances in Agricultural Sciences 1(2): 89–90.

Sharma B P and Raghuvanshi A. 2011.Genetic variability and correlation studies in French marigold. Progressive Agriculture 11(1): 54–7.

Singh A K and Singh D. 2010. Genetic variability, heritability and genetic advance in marigold. Indian Journal of Horticulture 67: 132–6.

Singh K P and Saha T N. 2009. Character Association and Path Analysis. Studies in French marigold. Annals of Horticulture 2(1): 39–42.

Verma S, Santosh K and Singh D. 2008. Correlation studies in rose (Rosa Sp.). Journal of Ornamental Horticulture 11: 98– 103.

Vikas H M, Patil V S, Agasimani A D and Praveen Kumar D A. 2011. Performance and correlation studies in dahlia (Dahlia variabilis L). International Journal of Science and Nature 2: 379–83