##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

N. Vairam S. Anandhi Lavanya C. Vanniarajan

Abstract

Mungbean, (Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek) occupies a unique position in Indian agriculture and has been grown under various agro-ecological conditions. It is cultivated in 1.61mha with production of 3.38MT and productivi-ty of 474kg/ha in India. Mungbean pods are thin and brittle when dry, so shattering is a major problem. The loss of seeds by pod dehiscence is one of the major reasons for low yield in mungbean; thus, reducing the frequency of pod dehiscence is an important objective in mungbean breeding. Induced mutations, have offered a single and short alternative to conventional breeding including isolation, screening, selection and testing generation after generation. In this study, variability was induced by gamma rays and Ethyl methane sulphonate (EMS) in two greengram geno-types viz., CO (Gg) 7 and NM 65. Screening for pod shattering was carried out in M2 and M3 populations of green-gram. The scoring for shattering was recorded at physiological maturity of the pod. The shattering percentage ranged from 14.56 (400 Gy) to 93.45 per cent (20 mM). A total of 100 shattering tolerant mutants were selected from field based on visual observation. These mutants were again scored under laboratory condition as per IITA method. A total of 12 mutants of CO (Gg) 7 and 10 mutants of NM 65 which were tolerant to pod shattering were identified in M2 generation and forwarded to M3 generation. These mutants were scored for pod shattering under laboratory con-dition and nine mutants viz., M26, M44, M46, M58, M70, M71, M84, M92 and M98 were found to be tolerant in M3 generation. This study on identification and screening of the mutants tolerant to pod shattering with high yielding potential will help to increase the production of the pods to a greater extent.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Keywords

Induced mutation, Mungbean, Pod shattering, Scoring, Elite mutants

References
Adeyeye, A.S., Togun, A.O., Akanbi, W.B., Adepoju, I.O. and Ibirinde, D.O. (2014). Pod shattering of different soybean varieties, Glycine max (L) Merrill, as affected by some growth and yield parameters. Int. J. Agric. Policy Res., 2(1): 010-015.
Agrawal A. P., Salimath, P. M. and Patil, S. A. (2003). Inheritance of pod shattering in soybean. Ind. J. Genet., 63: 265-266.
Agarwal, A.P., Patil, S.A. and Salimath, P.M. (2000). Identification of potential soybean genotypes for pod shattering resistance and seed yield. Crop Improvement., 27: 236-239.
Bhara, N., Khare, D. and Shrivastava, A.N. (2013). Studies on the factors affecting pod shattering in soybean. Indian J. Genet., 73(3): 270-277
Chandler, J., Corbesier, L., Spielmann, P., Dettendorfer, J., Stahl, D., Apel, K. and Melzer, S. (2005). Modulating flowering time and prevention of pod shatter in oilseed rape. Mol Breed., 15:87–94.
Dashell, K.E. and Bello, L. (1988). Screening for resistance to pod shattering. IITA Grain legume Improvement programme. Annual report for 1986. Nigeria, p.120.
Domingo, C., Andres, F. and Talon, M. (2007). Rice cv. ‘Bahia’ mutagenized population: a new resource for rice breeding in the Mediterranean basin. Spain J Agric Res., 5: 341-347.
Fuller, D.Q. (2007). Contrasting patterns in crop domestication and domestication rates: recent archaeobotanical insights from the OldWorld. Annals of Botany., 100(5): 903–924
Gadde, P.M. (2006). Genetic investigations in Soybean (Glycine Max (l.) Merrill). M.Sc. (Ag.) Thesis, UAS, Dharwad.
IITA (1986). A laboratory method for evaluating resistance to pod shattering in soybeans. Annual Report IITA., 58-59.
Khan, M. H., Tyagi, S.D. and Dar, Z.A. (2013). Screening of Soybean (Glycine Max (L.) Merrill) Genotypes for Resistance to Rust, Yellow Mosaic and Pod Shattering.http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/54697
Lavanya, G.R., Yadav, L., Suresh Babu, G. and Jyotipaul, P. (2011). Sodium azide mutagenic effect on biological parameters and induced genetic variability in mungbean. J. Food Leg., 24(1): 46-49
Mohammed, H. (2010). Genetic analysis of resistance to Pod Shattering in Soybean (Glycine max. (L) Merrill). M.Sc. (Ag.) Thesis, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi.
Roychowdhury, R. and Tah, J. (2013). Mutagenesis—A Potential Approach for Crop Improvement. Crop Improvement., 4:149-187
Sanjay Gandhi, E., Umavathi, S. and Mullainathan, L. (2014). Studies on induced chlorophyll mutants in green gram (Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek). International Journal of Advanced Research., 2(2): 00-04
Souframanian, J., Pawar, S.E. and Rucha, A.G. (2002). Genetic variation in gamma ray induced mutants in black gram as revealed by RAPD and ISSR markers. Indian J. Gent., 62(4): 291-295.
Thompson, K. F. and Huges, W.G. (1986). Breeding varieties. In: Scarisbrick D. H. Daniels, R. W.(eds). Oilseed Rape. Collins Professional and technical, pp. 32-82.
Tiwari, S. P. and Bhatnagar, P.S. (1991). Pod shattering as related to other agronomic attributes in soybean. Tropical Agriculture., 68:102-103.
Wani, M.R., S. Khan and M.I. Khozgar. 2012. Genetic enhancement of mungbean (Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek).through induced mutagenesis. Crop Res., 43(1, 2 & 3): 189-193.
Wilde, H.D., Chen, Y., Jiang, P. and Bhattacharya, A. (2012). Targeted mutation breeding of horticultural plants. Emir J Food Agric., 24(1): 31–41
Yamada, T., Hideyuki Funatsuki, Seiji Hagihara, Shohei Fujita, Yoshinori Tanaka, Hiroyuki Tsuji, Masao Ishimoto, Kaien Fujino and Makita Hajika. (2009). A major QTL, qPDH1, commonly involved in shattering resistance of soybean Cultivars. Breeding Science., 59:435-440
Citation Format
How to Cite
Vairam, N., Lavanya, S. A., & Vanniarajan, C. (2017). Screening for pod shattering in mutant population of mungbean (Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek). Journal of Applied and Natural Science, 9(3), 1787-1791. https://doi.org/10.31018/jans.v9i3.1439
More Citation Formats:
Section
Research Articles