Variability of morphological and yield-contributing traits of grasspea (Lathyrus sativus L.) mutants

Wojciech Rybiński

office@igr.poznan.pl
Instytut Genetyki Roślin PAN, Poznań (Poland)

Jan Bocianowski


Katedra Metod Matematycznych i Statystycznych, Uniwersytet Przyrodniczy w Poznaniu (Poland)

Katarzyna Pankiewicz


Instytut Genetyki Roślin PAN, Poznań (Poland)

Abstract

Apart from many advantageous features, such as high tolerance to abiotic stresses, grasspea is characterized by a few undesirable traits that limit its broader use in Polish agriculture. Genetic improvement of this crop with mutation breeding can be a valuable supplement to conventional plant breeding methods to create additional genetic variability that may be utilized by plant breeders. The present studies deal with grasspea mutants obtained from seeds of two Polish cultivars Derek and Krab treated with different doses of chemomutagens. Nineteen mutants derived from the cultivar Krab and nine mutants from the cultivar Derek were studied in a field trial conducted in 2004-2006 at the Experiment Station of Polish Academy of Sciences in Cerekwica. The variability of morphological and yield-contributing traits of the mutants and the initial cultivars were estimated for each year, and the results obtained were analyzed with multivariate statistics. The results indicate that the mutants’ traits differed from their initial cultivars. In 2005 and 2006 drought occurred, which might have influenced the results. Among the traits studied for three years the highest coefficient of variation was observed for time to flowering, plant height, pod number per plant, seed number per plant, seed weight per plant; the lowest for pod length and width and seed number per pod. The values of the contrasts for the comparisons of the cultivars with their mutants for particular traits were generally positive. This indicates that for three years studied together, the cultivars had higher values of the corresponding traits than their mutants. In spite of this negative trend, a few mutants exceeded their initial cultivars for yield-contributing traits, which was particularly visible in both dry years 2005 and 2006. Canonical variety analysis was a useful statistical tool for clear identification of multivariate genetic variation of grasspea mutants. The analyses performed allowed to distinguish these mutants that highly differed from their initial cultivars and the other mutants. Such mutants, particularly those with a broad reaction to water stress, could constitute an interesting initial material for further breeding.


Keywords:

field trials, genetic variation, grasspea, mutants, yield-contributing traits

Allkin R., Macfarlane T. D., White F. A., Bisby F. A., Adey M. E. 1983. Names and synonyms of species and subspecies in Vicieae. Issue 2, Vicieae Database Project Publication No. 2, Southampton, UK.
Google Scholar

Benkova M., Żakova M. 2001. Evaluation of selected traits in grasspea (Lathyrus sativus L.) genetic resources. Lathyrus Lathyrism Newsletter 2: 27 — 30.
Google Scholar

Campbell C. G., Mehra R. B., Agrawal S. K., Chen, Y. Z., Abd El Moneim, A. M., Khawaja
Google Scholar

H. I. T., Yadow, C. R., Tay, J. U., Araya, W. A. 1994. Current status and future strategy in breeding grasspea (Lathyrus sativus L.). Euphytica 73: 167 — 175.
Google Scholar

Campbell C. G. 1997. Promoting the conservation and use of underutilized and neglected crops. 18. Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research. Gatersleben/International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, Rome, Italy.
Google Scholar

Camussi A., Ottaviano E., Caliński T., Kaczmarek Z. 1985. Genetic distance based on quantitative traits. Genetics 111: 945 — 962.
Google Scholar

Cichy H., Rybiński W. 2007. Ocena zdolności plonowania wybranych mutantów lędźwianu siewnego (Lathyrus sativus L.) w doświadczeniach polowych. Zeszyty Problemowe Postępu Nauk Rolniczych 522: 177 — 185.
Google Scholar

De La Rosa L., Martin I. 2001. Morphological characterization of Spanish genetic resources of Lathyrus sativus L. Lathyrus Lathyrism Newsletter 2: 31 — 34.
Google Scholar

Dziamba S. 1997. Biologia i agrotechnika lędźwianu siewnego. Międzynarodowe Sympozjum Naukowe „Lędźwian siewny – agrotechnika i wykorzystanie w żywieniu zwierząt i ludzi”, Radom, 9-10 czerwca 1997: 27 — 33.
Google Scholar

Grela E. R., Skórnicki H. 1997. Skład chemiczny nasion lędźwianu siewnego (Lathyrus sativus L.) z terenu województwa radomskiego. Międzynarodowe Sympozjum Naukowe „Lędźwian siewny – agrotechnika i wykorzystanie w żywieniu zwierząt i ludzi”, Radom, czerwiec 9 — 10, 1997: 59 — 70.
Google Scholar

Hammer K. G., Laghetti G. Perrino, P. 1989. Collection of plant genetic resources in South Italy, 1988. Kulturpflanze 37: 401 — 414.
Google Scholar

Hanbury C. D., White C. L., Mullan B. P., Siddique, K. H. M. 2000. A review of the potential of Lathyrus sativus L. and L. cicera L. grain for use an animal feed. Animal Feed Science and Technology 87: 1 — 27.
Google Scholar

Kozak M., Bocianowski, J., Rybiński, W. 2008 Selection of promising genotypes based on path and cluster analyses. Journal of Agricultural Science 146: 85 — 92.
Google Scholar

Mehra R. B, Raju D. B., Himabindu K. 1995. Evaluation and utilization of Lathyrus sativus collection in India. In: Lathyrus Genetic Resources in Asia. Proceedings of a Regional Workshop, 27 — 29 December 1995, Indira Gandhi Agricultural University, Raipur, India: 37 — 43.
Google Scholar

Milczak M., Pędziński M., Mnichowska H., Szwed-Urbaś K., Rybiński W. 2001. Creative breeding of grasspea (Lathyrus sativus L.) in Poland. Lathyrus Lathyrism Newsletter 2: 18 — 23.
Google Scholar

Payne R., Murrey D., Harding S., Baird D., Soutou D., Lane P. 2003. GenStat for Windows (7th edition) – Introduction. VSN International, Oxford, England.
Google Scholar

Rencher A. C. 1992. Interpretation of canonical discriminant functions, canonical variates, and principal components. Am. Stat. 46: 217–225.
Google Scholar

Robertson L. D., Abd El Moneim A. M. 1995. Lathyrus germplasm collection, conservation and utilization. In: Lathyrus Genetic Resources in Asia. Proceedings of a Regional Workshop, 27-29 December 1995, Indira Gandhi Agricultural University, Raipur, India, 97 — 111.
Google Scholar

Rybiński W. 2003. Mutagenesis as a tool for improvement of traits in grasspea (Lathyrus sativus L.). Lathyrus Lathyrism Newsletter 3: 27 — 31.
Google Scholar

Rybiński W., Starzycki M. 2004. Ocena zmienności genetycznej cech mutantów lędźwianu siewnego. Zeszyty Problemowe Postępów Nauk Rolniczych 497: 539 — 550.
Google Scholar

Rybiński W., Szot B., Pokora L. 2004. Estimation of genetic variation and physical properties of seeds for grass pea mutants (Lathyrus sativus L.). Int. Agrophysics 18: 339 — 346.
Google Scholar

Rybiński W., Bocianowski J. 2006. Zmienność cech morfologicznych i struktury plonu nasion mutantów lędźwianu siewnego (Lathyrus sativus L.). Biuletyn IHAR 240/241: 291 — 297.
Google Scholar

Rybiński W., Grela E. R. 2007. Zróżnicowanie genetyczne cech i składu chemicznego nasion mutantów lędźwianu siewnego (Lathyrus sativus L.). Zeszyty Problemowe Postępów Nauk Rolniczych 517: 613 — 627.
Google Scholar

Sarwar C. D. M., Sarkar A., Murshed A. N. M. M, Malik M. A. 1995. Variation in natural population of grass pea. pp. 161 — 164 in Yusuf, H.K.M., Lambein, F. (Eds) Lathyrus sativus and Human Lathyrism: Progress and Prospects. Proc. 2nd Int. Colloq. Lathyrus/Lathyrism, Dhaka, 10–12 December 1993. University of Dhaka.
Google Scholar

Siddique K. H. M., Loss S. P., Herwig S. P., Wilson J. M. 1996. Growth, yield and neurotoxin (ODAP) concentration of three Lathyrus species in Mediterranean-type environments of Western Australia. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 36: 209 — 218.
Google Scholar

Smartt J. 1984. Evolution of grain legumes. I. Mediterranean Pulses. Experimental Agriculture 20: 275 — 296.
Google Scholar

Smulikowska S., Rybiński W., Czerwiński M., Taciak M., Mieczkowska A. 2008. Evaluation of selected mutants of grass pea (Lathyrus sativus L.) cv. Krab as an ingredient in broiler chicken diet. Journal of Animal and Feed Sciences 17: 75 — 87.
Google Scholar

Tiwari K. R., Campbell C. G. 1996. Inheritance of neurotoxin (ODAP) content, flower and seed coat colour in grass pea (Lathyrus sativus L.). Euphytica 91: 195 — 203.
Google Scholar

Vaz Patto M. C., Skiba B., Pang E. C. K., Ochatt S. J., Lambein F. Rubiales, D. 2006. Lathyrus improvement for resistance against biotic and abiotic stresses: From classical breeding to marker assisted selection. Euphytica 147: 133 — 147.
Google Scholar

Yadov C. R. 1995. Genetic evaluation and varietal improvement of grasspea in Nepal. In: Lathyrus Genetic Resources in Asia. Proceedings of a Regional Workshop, 27-29 December 1995, Indira Gandhi Agricultural University, Raipur, India, 21 — 27.
Google Scholar

Yunus A. G., Jackson M. T. 1991. The gene pools of the grasspea (Lathyrus sativus L.) Plant Breeding 106: 319 — 328.
Google Scholar


Published
2008-09-30

Cited by

Rybiński, W., Bocianowski, J. and Pankiewicz, K. (2008) “Variability of morphological and yield-contributing traits of grasspea (Lathyrus sativus L.) mutants ”, Bulletin of Plant Breeding and Acclimatization Institute, (249), pp. 217–231. doi: 10.37317/biul-2008-0049.

Authors

Wojciech Rybiński 
office@igr.poznan.pl
Instytut Genetyki Roślin PAN, Poznań Poland

Authors

Jan Bocianowski 

Katedra Metod Matematycznych i Statystycznych, Uniwersytet Przyrodniczy w Poznaniu Poland

Authors

Katarzyna Pankiewicz 

Instytut Genetyki Roślin PAN, Poznań Poland

Statistics

Abstract views: 391
PDF downloads: 16


License

Copyright (c) 2008 Wojciech Rybiński, Jan Bocianowski, Katarzyna Pankiewicz

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Upon submitting the article, the Authors grant the Publisher a non-exclusive and free license to use the article for an indefinite period of time throughout the world in the following fields of use:

  1. Production and reproduction of copies of the article using a specific technique, including printing and digital technology.
  2. Placing on the market, lending or renting the original or copies of the article.
  3. Public performance, exhibition, display, reproduction, broadcasting and re-broadcasting, as well as making the article publicly available in such a way that everyone can access it at a place and time of their choice.
  4. Including the article in a collective work.
  5. Uploading an article in electronic form to electronic platforms or otherwise introducing an article in electronic form to the Internet or other network.
  6. Dissemination of the article in electronic form on the Internet or other network, in collective work as well as independently.
  7. Making the article available in an electronic version in such a way that everyone can access it at a place and time of their choice, in particular via the Internet.

Authors by sending a request for publication:

  1. They consent to the publication of the article in the journal,
  2. They agree to give the publication a DOI (Digital Object Identifier),
  3. They undertake to comply with the publishing house's code of ethics in accordance with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), (http://ihar.edu.pl/biblioteka_i_wydawnictwa.php),
  4. They consent to the articles being made available in electronic form under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license, in open access,
  5. They agree to send article metadata to commercial and non-commercial journal indexing databases.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

<< < 1 2 3 4 5 > >>