Morphological characterization of parental lines and cultivated genotypes of bottle gourd (Lagenaria siceraria)


Abstract views: 310 / PDF downloads: 165

Authors

  • KALYANRAO KALYANRAO Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012
  • B S TOMAR Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012
  • BALRAJ SINGH National Research Centre on Seed Spices, Ajmer
  • AHER B M BACA, AAU, Anand, Gujarat

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v86i1.55217

Keywords:

Bottle gourd, Genotypes, Genetic diversity, Principle component, Quantitative characters, Qualitative characters

Abstract

Genetic diversity and relatedness were assessed among fifteen most common commercial bottle gourd [Lagenaria siceraria (Mol.) Standl.] genotypes of public sector institutes in India; the fifteen genotypes were grown in the field for two seasons under RCBD with three replications in New Delhi condition. Data were collected on morphological features of bottle gourd which include vine, leaf, flower, fruit and seed characteristics. A descriptor list with selected 32 morphological (qualitative and quantitative) characters were adopted from NBPGR guidelines and used for characterization. The data was used to calculate genetic similarity and to construct a dendrogram using the unweighted pair-group method with arithmetic average (UPGMA). Data on quantitative characters was subjected to ANOVA using SAS and effects declared significant at 5% level. The procedure PRINCOMP was then used to perform a principle component (PC) analysis using fourteen quantitative variables and genotypes plotted on two dimensions using the first two principle components (PC1 and PC2). The results of quantitative characters of Pusa Santusti, Pusa Sandesh and Arka Bahar demonstrated highly significant variation between genotypes. Results of the principle component analyses for the traits indicated that the first five PCs explained a total of 80% of the total variation. The high morphological diversity observed among public sector genotypes emphasizes the need to expand the genetic base of the cultivated bottle gourd in India.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abdullah A A, Hegazi H H and Almousa I A. 2003. Evaluation of locallygrown pumpkin genotypes in the central region of Saudi Arabia. Journal of King Saud University 15(1): 13–24.

Agbagwa I O and Ndukwu B C. 2004. The value of morpho- anatomical features in the systematics of Cucurbita species in Nigeria. African Journal of Biotechnology 3(10): 541–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5897/AJB2004.000-2106

Aruah C B, Uguru, M I and Oyiga B C. 2010. Variations among some Nigerian Cucurbita landraces. African Journal of Plant Science 4(10): 374–86.

Bisognin D A. 2002. Origin and evolution of cultivated cucurbits. Ciencia Rural 32(5): 715–23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-84782002000400028

Huh Y C, Solmaz I and Sari N. 2008. Morphological characterization of Korean and Turkish watermelon germplasm. (In) Proceedings of the 9th EUCARPIA meeting on Genetics and Breeding of Cucurbitaceae. Pitrat M (ed.). INRA, Avignon (France), 21 May 2008.

Mondal S N, Rashid A K, Hossain A K and Hossain M A. 1989. Genetic variability, correlation and path-coefficient analysis in watermelon. Bangladesh Journal of Plant Breeding and Genetics 2(1-2): 31–5.

Nee M.1990. The domestication of cucurbita (Cucurbitaceae). Economic Botany 44(3 Suppl): 56–68. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02860475

Querol D.1987. Genetic Resources-A Practical Guide to their Conservation. Pp 55–57. Zed Books Ltd, London and New Jersey.

Stephenson A G, Devlin B and Horton J B.(1988). The effects of seed number and prior fruit dominance on the pattern of fruit production in Cucurbita pepo. Annals of Botany 62: 653–61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a087705

Downloads

Submitted

2016-01-21

Published

2016-01-22

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

KALYANRAO, K., TOMAR, B. S., SINGH, B., & M, A. B. (2016). Morphological characterization of parental lines and cultivated genotypes of bottle gourd (Lagenaria siceraria). The Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 86(1), 65–70. https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v86i1.55217
Citation