Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-94d59 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-28T22:05:33.124Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Morphological variability of greater yam (Dioscorea alata L.) in Malaysia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2008

Sayed M. Zain Hasan*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agro-technology and Food ScienceKolej Universiti Sains dan Teknologi Malaysia (KUSTEM), 21030 Mengabang Telipot, Kuala Terengganu, Malaysia
Andrew A. Ngadin
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agro-technology and Food ScienceKolej Universiti Sains dan Teknologi Malaysia (KUSTEM), 21030 Mengabang Telipot, Kuala Terengganu, Malaysia
Ramisah M. Shah
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agro-technology and Food ScienceKolej Universiti Sains dan Teknologi Malaysia (KUSTEM), 21030 Mengabang Telipot, Kuala Terengganu, Malaysia
Norizan Mohamad
Affiliation:
Faculty of Science and Technology, Kolej Universiti Sains dan Teknologi Malaysia (KUSTEM), 21030 Mengabang Telipot, Kuala Terengganu, Malaysia
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: sayed@kustem.edu.my

Abstract

An assessment of morphological variation among 70 accessions of greater yam (Dioscorea alata L.) collected throughout Malaysia was made. Data of 47 morphological variables measured from the accessions were subjected to multivariate analysis using principal component (PCA) and cluster analysis (CA). The PCA results indicated that the characters contributing largely to the species variability were those related to the shape, size and flesh colour of underground tubers; shape and colour of aerial tubers; position, shape, size and vein colour of the leaves; petiole colour; shoot growth rate; and number of days for shoots to germinate. The two-dimensional plot of the first two PCs showed a separation between accessions of purple tuber groups and those of white tuber groups, but was unable to distinguish accessions according to tuber shape groups, i.e. irregular, oblong and round, as revealed by visual observation. The dendrogram of CA revealed four major groups of D. alata in Malaysia, which supported the PCA grouping. This study demonstrated that D. alata in Malaysia consists of numerous genotypes revealing wide inter- and intra-group variability.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © NIAB 2008

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

Burkill, IH (1951) The rise and decline of the greater yam in the service of man. Advances in Science, London 7(28): 443448.Google Scholar
Burkill, IH (1966) A Dictionary of the Economic Products of the Malay Peninsula. Kuala Lumpur: Ministry of Agriculture and Co-operatives.Google Scholar
Coursey, DG (1967) Yams. An Account of the Nature, Origins, Cultivation and Utilization of the Useful Members of the Dioscoreaceae. London: Longman.Google Scholar
IPGRI(1997) Descriptors for Yam (Dioscorea spp.). Rome, Italy: International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI)/International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA).Google Scholar
Jeffers, JNR (1967) Two cases studies in the application of principal component analysis. Applied Statistics 16: 225236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lebot, V, Trilles, B, Noyer, J and Modesto, J (1998) Genetic relationship between Dioscorea alata L. cultivars. Journal of Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 45: 499509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, FW (1976) Tropical Yams and their Potential. Series – Part 3. Dioscorea alata. USDA Handbook No. 495. Washington, DC: United States Department of Agriculture.Google Scholar
Martin, FW and Delpin, H (1978) New, superior varieties of Dioscorea alata, the Asian greater yam. Journal of the Agricultural University Puerto Rico 62: 6475.Google Scholar
Martin, FW and Rhodes, AM (1973) Correlations among greater yam (Dioscorea alata L.) cultivars. Tropical Agriculture 59(3): 183192.Google Scholar
Martin, FW and Rhodes, AM (1977) Intra-specific classification of Dioscorea alata. Tropical Agriculture (Trinidad) 54: 113.Google Scholar
Norman, HN (2004) SPSS Version 12.0 for Windows. Chicago, USA: SPSS Inc.Google Scholar
Okoli, OO (1988) Yam germplasm diversity, uses and prospects for crop improvement. In: Ng, NQ, Persino, P, Attere, F and Zedan, H (eds) Crop Genetic Resources of Africa, vol. II. Nigeria: IITA/IBPGR/UNEP, pp. 109117.Google Scholar
Onwueme, IC (1978) The Tropical Tuber Crops. University of lfe lle-lfe, Nigeria: Wiley.Google Scholar
Onwueme, IC and Ganga, ZN (1996) Dioscorea alata L. Plant Resources of South-East Asian. No. 9, Plant Yielding Non-Seed Carbohydrates. Bogor: PROSEA.Google Scholar
Purseglove, JW (1983) Tropical Crops: Monocotyledons. London: Longman, pp. 97117.Google Scholar
Rohlf, FJ (2000) NTSYS-pc. Numerical Taxonomy and Multivariate Analysis System, Version 2.10. New York: Applied Biostatistics.Google Scholar
Sastrapradja, S (1982) Dioscorea alata: Its Variation and Importance in Java, Indonesia. In: Miege, J and Lyonga, SN (eds) Yams: Ignames. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 4449.Google Scholar
Sokal, RR and Michener, CP (1958) A statistical method for evaluating systematic relationships. University of Kansas Science Bulletin 38: 14091438.Google Scholar
Velayudhan, KC, Muralidharan, VK, Amalraj, VA, Thomas, TA and Soudhamini, P (1989) Studies on the morphotypic variability, distribution and genetic divergence in a indigenous collection of greater yam (Dioscorea alata L.). Journal of Root Crops 15(2): 7989.Google Scholar