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

Divya Prakash Singh Shailesh Marker

Abstract

A major challenge facing those involved in the testing of new plant varieties for Distinctness, Uniformity and Stability (DUS) is the need to compare them against all those of ‘common knowledge’. A set of maize inbred lines was used to compare how morphological and physio- logical characterization described variety relationships. An experiment was carried out to evaluate test of Distinctiveness, Uniformity and Stability using 26 physiological and 12 morphological characters. Minimum days for 50 % tasseling (50.66 and 50.66 days), minimum days for 50 % silking (53.66 and 53.66 days), minimum days for anthesis silking interval (3.0 and 2.6 days), maximum tassel branching (22.66 and 21.66), maximum cob height (89.70 and 89.16 cm) and maximum cob length (16.96 and 17.75 cm) were recorded in genotype AAIMS-1 in both experiments (2011 and 2012 respectively) and maximum cob width (12.51 and 13.11 cm) and maximum number of grain rows per cob (12.66 and 12.66) were recorded in genotype AAIMS-2 in both experiments (2011 and 2012 respectively). But maximum plant height (155.13 and 153.71cm), minimum days for maturity (86.00 and 88.00 days), maximum grain yield per plant (72.80 and 72.00 g) and maximum 100 seed weight (21.51 and 20.96 g) were recorded in genotype AAIMS-2 and AAIMS-1 respectively in both experiments conducted at experimental farm of Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Sam Higginbottom Institute of Agriculture, Technology & Sciences during the year 2011 and 2012 respectively.

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

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

Keywords

DUS, Genotypes, Maize, Morphological characters, Physiological characters

References
Agriculture statistics at a glance (2015). Directorate of Economic and statistics, the ministry of Agricultural Government of India.
Akande, S.R. and Lamidi, G.O. (2006). Performance of quality protein maize varieties and disease reaction in the derived-savanna agro-ecology of South-West Nigeria, African journal of biotechnology, 5(19): 1744-1748.
Anonymous (2014). Maize in India- India maize summit 2014 National Commodity and Derivatives Limited, New Delhi, pp. 7.
Begum, T. and Kumar, D. (2011). Usefulness of morphological characteristics for DUT testing of jute (Corchorus olitorius L. and C. capsularis L.) Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research. 9:473-483.
Beyene, Y.A., Botha, A. and Myburg, A.A. (2005). A comparative study of molecular and morphological methods of describing genetic relationship in traditional Ethiopian highland maize. African journal of biotechnology. 4:586-595.
Jha, P.B. and Ghosh, J. (1998). Genetic variability in fodder maize. Journal of Research, Birsa Agricultural University, 10:139-143.
Law, J.R., Anderson, S.R., Jones, E.S., Nelson, B.K., Mu-laosmanovic, E. and Smith, J.S. (2011). Characterization of maize germplasm: Comparison of morphological datasets compiled using different approaches to data recording. Maydica 56:1708-1711.
Law, J.R., Anderson, S.R., Jones, E.S., Nelson, B., Mulaosmanovic, E., Hall, B.D. and Smith, S.C. (2011a). Approaches determination of eligibility for plant variety protection: evaluation of morphological characteristics. Maydica 56:113-131.
Olaoye, G. (2009). Evaluation of new generation maize steak virus (MSV) resistant maize varieties for adaptation to southern guinea savanna ecology of Nigeria. African Journal of Biotechnology. 8 (19): 4906-4910.
Smykal, P., Horacek, J., Dostalova, J. and Hybl, M. (2008). Variety discrimination in pea (Pisum sativum L.) by molecular, biochemical and morphological markers. Applied genetics. 49:155-166.
Yadav, V.K. and Singh, V.K. (2010).Comparative evaluation of maize inbred lines (Zea mays L.) according to dus testing using morphological, physiological and molecu-lar markers. Agricultural Sciences,1(3):131-142.
Olakojo, S.A. and Olaoye, G. (2005). Combining ability for grain yield, agronomic traits and Striga lutea tolerance of maize hybrids under artificial Striga infestation. Afri-can Journal of Biotechnology. 4(9): 984-988.
Nazir, H., Zaman, Q. Amjad, M. Nadeeman A. and Aziz. J. (2010). Response of maize varieties under agro-ecological conditions of Dera Ismail khan. Journal of Agriculture Research. 48(1): 59-63.
Salami, A.E., S.A.O. Adegoke and O.A. Adegbite. (2007). Genetic variability among maize cultivars grown in Ekiti-State, Nigeria. Middle-East Journal of Science Research. 2(1): 09-13.
Section
Research Articles

How to Cite

Comparative evaluation of maize (Zea mays L.) genotypes based on distinctness, uniformity and stability (DUS) testing using physiological and morphological characters. (2016). Journal of Applied and Natural Science, 8(2), 652-657. https://doi.org/10.31018/jans.v8i2.853