Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-m9kch Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-17T02:54:59.955Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Estimates of combining ability, reciprocal effects and heterosis for yield and yield components in a common bean diallel cross

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

M. R. Foolad  and
A. Bassiri
M. R. Foolad
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, College of Agriculture, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
A. Bassiri
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, College of Agriculture, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

A diallel crossing system involving two Pinto and two Kidney common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cultivars was evaluated in the field. Pin toes were significantly different from the Kidneys in seed yield and numbers of pods and seeds per plant and 100·seed weight. All the traits showed statistical significance among crosses and in comparisons involving parental v. cross means. Heterosis values were large and significant for yield, numbers of pods and seeds per plant, number of seeds per pod and number of days from planting to flowering. The ratio of general to specific combining ability mean squares was low for yield, numbers of pods and seeds per plant and high for 100·seed weight and number of days to flowering. Significant reciprocal effects were found for seed yield and number of seeds per plant, but this effect was completely absent for 100·seed weight.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 100 , Issue 1 , February 1983 , pp. 103 - 108
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Griffing, B. (1956). Concept of general and specific combining ability in relation to diallel crossing system. Australian Journal of Biological Sciences 9, 462–493.Google Scholar
Gritton, E. T. (1975). Heterosis and combining ability in a diallel cross of peas (Pisum salivum L.). Crop Science 15, 453–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kheradnam, M. (1971). Combining ability in cowpeas. M.Sc. thesis, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran.Google Scholar
Krarup, A. & Davis, D. W. (1970). Inheritance of seed yield and its components in a six-parent diallel cross in peas. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science 95, 795–797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paschal, E. H. & Wilcox, J. R. (1975). Heterosis and combining ability in exotic soybean germplasm. Crop Science 15, 344–349.Google Scholar
Sarafi, A. (1978). A yield-component selection experiment involving American and Iranian cultivars of the common bean. Crop Science 18, 5–7.Google Scholar
Sarafi, A., Yazdi-Samadi, B. & Zali, A. A. (1976). Heterosis and heritability for yield components in F 1, and F 2 generations of a bean cross. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Research 4, 3–6.Google Scholar
Weber, C. R., Empig, L. T. & Thorne, J. C. (1970). Heterotic performance and combining ability of twoway F 1 soybean hybrids. Crop Science 10, 156–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yates, F. (1947). Analysis of data from all possible reciprocal crosses between a set of parental lines. Heredity 1, 287–301.Google Scholar