IMPACT OF INDUCED EMS MUTAGENESIS ON SEED YIELD OF GROUNDNUT (ARACHIS HYPOGEAE.L) GENOTYPES
378 / 294
Authors
-
A. YUGANDHAR
Department of Genetics, Osmania University, Hyderabad, Telangana State-07
-
K. SRINIVAS NAIK
Department of Genetics, Osmania University, Hyderabad, Telangana State-07
-
BHATTU RAJESH NAYAK
Department of Genetics, Osmania University, Hyderabad, Telangana State-07
-
G. KUMARA JOSHI
Department of Genetics, Osmania University, Hyderabad, Telangana State-07
-
G. VIJAY KUMAR
Department of Genetics, Osmania University, Hyderabad, Telangana State-07
Keywords:
EMS, Groundnut mutants, M1 generation, M2 generation, Seed yieldAbstract
The aim of the study is to investigate the effect of induced Ethyl methanesulfonat (EMS) on seed yield of three groundnut genotypes under various EMS concentrations. The field work was carried out with three groundnut genotypes viz; ICG2106, ICG5236, ICG76) collected from plant molecular lab, ICRISAT, Hyderabad. The results showed that all three genotypes recorded lower seed yield under 0.3 percent EMS, 0.4 percent EMS, and 0.5 percent EMS over their control where as in M2 generation the results showed that all three genotypes recorded higher seed yield under 0.3% EMS, 0.4% EMS, and 0.5% EMS over their control. ICG2106 was recorded higher seed yield at 0.3% EMS (37.90 gm per plant), 0.4% MS (33.90 gm per plant) and 0.5% EMS (32.30 gm per plant) over its control plant (24.70) and compare to their other genotypes. It was observed the higher seed yield was at 0.3% EMS followed by 0.4% EMS and 0.5% EMS. It is revealed that when the concentration of EMS increased the seed yield of the groundnut is increased in M2 generation.It is revealed that when the concentration of EMS increased the seed yield of the groundnut is decreased in M1 generation and increased in M2 generation. Hence highest increase of seed yield was observed by the variety ICG2106- 0.3% (37.90 gm) followed by ICG5236- 0.3% (30.30 gm) and ICG76- 0.3% (29.97gm) under three various EMS concentrations in M2 generation.
References
1. Anbuselvam, Y., Elangaimannan, R.,
2. Venkatesan, M., Kathikeyan, P., and
3. Palaniraja, K. 2010. Chemically induced
4. mutagenesis in Black gram (Vigna
5. mungo L. Hepper). Electronic Journal of
6. plant breeding. 1(4): 921-924.
7. Bell, S.L. 2008. Groundnut (Arachishypogeae
8. L.) and their classification under the
9. HTSUS. http:/www.cbp.gov.
10. Ehrenberg, L. 1965. Induced mutations inx
11. plants: Mechanism and principles.
12. Journal of GeneticaArraria. 12: 364-389.
13. Girija, M., Dhanavel, D. 2009. Mutagenic
14. effectiveness and efficiency of gamma
15. rays, Ethyl methane Sulfonate (EMS) and
16. their combined treatments in cowpea
17. (Vigna unguiculata. L). International
18. journal of Molecular Sciences. 4: 68-75.
19. Gottwald, S., Bauer, P., Komatsuda, T.,
20. Lundqvist, U., and Stein, N. 2009.
21. TILLING in the two-rowed barely cultivar
22. ‘Barke’ reveals diversity in the gene
23. HvHox1. BMC Research. 2(1), 1-14.
24. Gunasekaran A. and P. Pavadai. 2015. Studies
25. on induced physical and chemical
26. mutagenesis in groundnut
27. (Arachishypogaea L.).International
28. Letters of Natural Sciences, (8):25-35.
29. Gupta, S.K. 2019. Mutagenic effects of EMS
30. on days to 50% of flowering and yield
31. attributes in groundnut (Arachishypogeae
32. L.). Journal of agricultural science and
33. technology, 19(2): 351-362.
34. Gustafsson, A. K. 1947. “Mutations in
35. agricultural plants”. Hereditas33. 1-2: 1
36. 100.
37. Kalyanababu, B. 2019. Induced mutagenesis
38. in groundnut (Arachishypogeae L.) using
39. EMS and gamma rays. Journal of
40. environmental science, computer
41. science and biotechnology, 8(1): 12-20.
42. Kumar, V. 2020. Induced mutagenesis in
43. groundnut (Arachishypogeae L.) using
44. EMS.Journal of plant breeding and crop
45. science, 12(2), 1-9 Lethin, J., Shakil, S.S.M., Hassan, S., Sirijovski,
46. N., Topel, M., and Olsson, O. 2020.
47. Development and characterization of an
48. EMS mutagenized wheat population and
49. identification of salt-tolerant wheat lines.
50. BMC plant biology. 20(1), 1-15.
51. Mahtab, S.G., Zaman, M.A., Valiollah, R.,
52. Maryam, H., and Afshin, E. (2015).
53. Evaluation of agronomic traits of mutants
54. induced by gamma irradiation in PF and
55. RGS003 varieties of rapeseed (Brassica
56. napusL.). Journal of Crop Breeding.
57. 7(15):135-144.
58. Menshah, J. K and Obadoni, B. 2007. Effect
59. of sodium azide on yield parameters of
60. groundnut (Arachishypogeae L). African
61. Journal of Biotechnology. 6: 668-671.
62. Patel, J.R. 2020. Genetic variability and
63. correlation studies in groundnut
64. (Arachishypogeae L.) under rainfed
65. conditions. Journal of plant breeding and
66. crop science, 12(1): 1-9.
67. Raina Aamir, R. A., Laskar, M. R., Wani, B. L.,
68. Jan, S., Ali and S. Khan 2022. Gamma
69. Rays and Sodium Azide Induced Genetic
70. Variability in High-Yielding and
71. Biofortified Mutant Lines in Cowpea
72. (Vigna unguiculata L. Walp.) Frontiers in
73. plant science, 13, Article 911049.
74. Reddy, P.S 2019. Evaluation of groundnut
75. (Arachishypogeae.L) mutants for yield
76. and yield components. Journal of plant
77. breeding and crop science, 11(1), 1-9
78. Singh, R. K. 2020. Mutageneic effects of EMS
79. on peanut (Arachishypogeae.L) M2
80. generation. Journal of plant breeding
81. and crop science, 13(1), 1-9
82. Sudhakar, S. W. 2019. Improvement of
83. groundnut (Arachishypogeae.L).
84. Through chemical mutagen (EMS).
85. ‘Research journey’ international E
86. Research Journal, Special Issue 110 (E)
87. Botany
88. Chen Tingting., Luping Huang., Miaomiao
89. Wang., Yang Huang., Ruier Zeng.,
90. Xinyue Wang., Leidi Wang., Shubo Wan
91. and Lei Zhang. 2020. Ethyl Methyl
92. Sulfonate-Induced Mutagenesis and Its
93. Effects on Peanut Agronomic, Yield and
94. Quality Traits. Agronomy 2020. 10: 655.
95. Wang, J., Qiao, L., Zhao, L., Wang, P., Guo,
96. B., Liu, L., and Sui, J. 2015. Performance
97. of groundnut mutants and their offspring
98. generated from mixed high-energy
99. particle field radiation and tissue culture.
100. Genetics and Molecular Research. 14,
101. 10837-10848.
102. Yugandhar, A., Srinivas Naik, K., Bhattu Rajesh
103. Nayak., Kumara Joshi, G and Vijay
104. Kumar, G. 2023. In vitro Analysis of
105. Seedling Parameters in Groundnut
106. under Induced EMS Mutagenesis.
107. Biological Forum -An International
108. Journal. 15(10): 393-397
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The author owns the article's copyright until the article is accepted for publication. After acceptance, the author(s) assigns the article's copyright jointly to both the authors and the Publishers of the Journal of Research ANGRAU (ANGRAU) and licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 4.0 International License.
