دوره 9، شماره 22 - ( تابستان 1396 )                   جلد 9 شماره 22 صفحات 53-62 | برگشت به فهرست نسخه ها

XML English Abstract Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Identification of Effective Traits on the Yield in bean Genotypes using Multivariate Statistical Methods. jcb. 2017; 9 (22) :53-62
URL: http://jcb.sanru.ac.ir/article-1-842-fa.html
قنبری علی اصغر، مظفری حمید، حسین پور درویشی حسین. شناسایی صفات مؤثر بر عملکرد ژنوتیپ‌های لوبیا با استفاده از روش‌های آماری چند متغیره. پژوهشنامه اصلاح گیاهان زراعی. 1396; 9 (22) :53-62

URL: http://jcb.sanru.ac.ir/article-1-842-fa.html

گروه زراعت
چکیده:   (843 مشاهده)
به­منظور بررسی صفات کمی و کیفی 138 ژنوتیپ لوبیا، آزمایشی با چهار شاهد (صدری، کوشا، KS21676 و KS21682) و به
­صورت آگمنت اجرا شد.
مهم­ترین صفات رویشی، زراعی و عملکرد و اجزای عملکرد بررسی شد. بررسی پارامترهای آماری شامل دامنه، کمترین، بیشترین، میانگین، انحراف معیار و واریانس نشان داد که صفت تعداد دانه در بوته بیشترین تغییرات فنوتیپی را داشت و پس از آن صفت ارتفاع بوته قرار گرفت. ژنوتیپ‌ها از نظر کلیه مراحل رشدی، عملکرد و اجزای عملکرد تفاوت­های زیادی نشان دادند. نتایج تجزیه همبستگی نشان داد که صفات تعداد روز تا ظهور سه برگچه اول، ارتفاع بوته و بازارپسندی دانه در سطح احتمال پنج درصد و تیپ بوته و تعداد دانه در غلاف در سطح احتمال یک درصد با عملکرد دانه همبستگی معنی‌دار داشتند. در تجزیه رگرسیون گام­به­گام، بهترتیب صفات تیپ بوته، تعداد دانه در غلاف، دوره پرشدن دانه، تعداد روز از کاشت تا ظهور سه برگچه اول و بازارپسندی دانه وارد مدل شدند. با توجه به اثرات مستقیم موجود، می­توان صفات تعداد دانه در غلاف، دوره پرشدن دانه، تعداد روز تا ظهور سه برگچه اول و بازارپسندی دانه را جهت برنامه­های اصلاحی پیشنهاد داد. به­طور­کلی، طبق نتایج تجزیه علیت می­توان عنوان کرد صفات تیپ بوته، تعداد دانه در غلاف و دوره پرشدن دانه مؤثرترین عوامل مستقیم تغییرات عملکرد دانه می­باشند. نتایج تجزیه به عامل­ها به روش تجزیه به مؤلفه­های اصلی، صفات را به هفت عامل اصلی تقسیم کرد که بیش از 76 درصد تغییرات کل داده­ها را توجیه کردند. با توجه به نتایج، می­توان از تنوع موجود در برنامه­های اصلاحی لوبیا
بهره­برداری کرد و برای افزایش عملکرد از صفاتی مانند تعداد دانه در غلاف و دوره پرشدن دانه استفاده کرد.
متن کامل [PDF 502 kb]   (374 دریافت)    
نوع مطالعه: پژوهشي | موضوع مقاله: اصلاح نباتات، بیومتری

فهرست منابع
1. Abebe, A., M.A. Brick and R.A. Kirkby. 1998. Comparison of selection indices to identify productive dry bean lines under diverse environmental conditions. Field Crops Research, 58: 15-23. [DOI:10.1016/S0378-4290(98)00082-3]
2. Acosta-Diaz, E., J.A. Acosta-Gallegos, C. Trejo-Lopez, J.S. Padilla-Ramirez and D. Amador-Ramirez. 2009. Adaptation traits in dry bean cultivars grown under drought stress. AgricultureaTecnicaMexica, 35: 419-428.
3. Acosta-Gallegos, J.A. and J.W. White. 1995. Phenological plasticity as an adaptation by common bean to rainfed environments. Crop Science, 35: 199-204. [DOI:10.2135/cropsci1995.0011183X003500010037x]
4. Acquach, G.M., W. Adams and J.D. Kelly. 1992. A factor analysis of plantvariables associated with architecture and seed size in dry bean. Euphytica, 60: 171-177.
5. Amini, A., M.R. Ghannadha and S. Abdemishani. 2000. Factor analysis for morphological and phenological traits in common bean. Seed and Plant Journal, 16: 210-225 (In Persian).
6. Arya, P.S., A. Rana and A. Rana. 1999. Study of direct and indirect influence of some yield traits on green pod yield in French bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Advanced Horticulture and Forestry, 6: 99-106.
7. Asadi, B., H.R. Dorri, and S. Vaezi. 2005. Study of genetic diversity of bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) genotypes by multivariate analysis methods. 1th Iranian Pulse Crops Symposium, 20-21 pp.
8. Austin, R.B. 1994. Plant breeding opportunities. In: Physiology and determination of crop yield. American Society of Agronomy, 567-586 pp.
9. Awan, F.K., M.Y. Khurshid, O. Afzal, M. Ahmed and A.N. Chaudhry. 2014. Agro-morphological evaluation of some exotic common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) genotypes under rainfed conditions of Islamabad, Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Botany, 46: 259-264.
10. Azizi, F., A. Rezaei and S.A.M. MirmohammadiMaybodi. 2001. Genetic and phenotypic variability and factor analysis for morphological traits in genotypes of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Journal of Science and Technology of Agriculture and Natural Resources-Water and Soil Science, 5: 127-141 (In Persian).
11. Board, J.E. and B.G. Harville. 1998. Late-planted soybean yield response to reproductive source/sink stress. Crop Science, 38: 763-771. [DOI:10.2135/cropsci1998.0011183X003800030024x]
12. Chiorato, A.F., S.A.M. Carbonell, L.L. Benchimo, M.B. Chiavegato, L.A. dos Santos Dias and C.A. Colombo. 2007. Genetic diversity in common bean accessions evaluated by means of morpho-agronomical and RAPD data. ScienciaAgricultura, 64: 256-262. [DOI:10.1590/S0103-90162007000300007]
13. Chiorato, A.F., S.A.M. Carbonell, C.A. Colombo, L.A.S. Dias and M.F. Ito. 2005. Genetic diversity of common beans accessions in the germplasm bank of the InstitutoAgronômico– IAC. Crop Breeding Applied Biotechnology, 5: 1-9. [DOI:10.12702/1984-7033.v05n01a01]
14. Dargahi, H.R., S. Vaezi, M. Omidi and M.J. Aghaei. 2008. An evaluation of the diversity in morphological traits and an identification of the relationships among these traits of white common bean collected in national plant gene bank of Iran. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Science, 39: 155-162 (In Persian).
15. de Albuquerque, A.N., M.A. AparecidoBarelli, L.G. Neves, V.R. Arantes and K.L.M. da Silva. 2011. Evaluation of common bean accesses with multi-category variables. Maringá, Brazilian Acta Scientific Agronomy, 33: 627-632. [DOI:10.4025/actasciagron.v33i4.6944]
16. Denis, J.C. and M.W. Adams. 1978. A factor analysis of plant variables related to yield in dry beans. I: morphological traits. Crop Science, 18: 74-78. [DOI:10.2135/cropsci1978.0011183X001800010020x]
17. Dimova, D. and D. Svetleva. 1992. Inheritance and correlation of some quantitative characters of bean in relation with the enhancement of selection effectiveness. Genetika, 25: 117-123.
18. Egli, D.B. 1998. Seed biology and the yield of grain crops. CAB International, 178 pp.
19. Fageria, N.K. and A.B. Santos. 2008. Yield physiology of dry bean. Journal of Plant Nutrition, 31: 983-1004. [DOI:10.1080/01904160802096815]
20. Farshadfar, E. 1997. Breeding methodology. University of Kermanshah, 616 pp.
21. Ghanbari, A.A. 2012. Physiological responses of common bean genotypes under contrasting moisture regimes. PhD Thesis, University of Tabriz, 133 pp.
22. GoncalvesCeolin, A.C., M.C. Goncalves-Vidigal, P. SoaresVidigalFilho, M. ViniciusKvitschalm, A. Gonela and C. Alberto Scapim. 2007. Genetic divergence of the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) group Carioca using morpho-agronomic traits by multivariate analysis. Hereditas, 144: 1-9. [DOI:10.1111/j.2006.0018-0661.01943.x]
23. Keshavarznia, R., B. MohammadiNargesi and A. Abbasi. 2013. The study of genetic variation of bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) based on morphological traits under normal and stress conditions. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Science, 44: 305-315 (In Persian).
24. Khandani S., G. Mohammadinejad and B. Nakhoda. 2017. Relationships between important agronomic and phonological traits in inbred lines from the crosses Roshan × Sabalan in bread wheat. Journal of Crop Breading, 9: 10-17 (In Persian).
25. Krause, W., R. Rodrigues, L.S.A. Gonçalves, F.V.B. Neto and N.R. Leal. 2009. Genetic divergence in snap bean based on agronomic traits and resistance to bacterial wilt. Crop Breeding and Applied Biotechnology, 9: 246-252. [DOI:10.12702/1984-7033.v09n03a06]
26. Mavromatis, A.G., I.S. Arvanitoyannis, A.E. Korkovelos, A. Giakountis, V.A. Chatzitheodorou and C.K. Goulas. 2010. Genetic diversity among common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Greek landraces and commercial cultivars: nutritional components, RAPD and morphological markers. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Ressearch, 8: 986-994. [DOI:10.5424/sjar/2010084-1245]
27. Molaei, A., H. GhaffariKhaligh and H. Bagheri. 2005. A correlation and path coefficient analysis between seed yield and its components in common bean. 1th Iranian Pulse Crops Symposium, November 20-21. Ferdowsi University, Mashhad,704 pp.
28. Nunez Barrios, A., G. Hoogenboom and D.S. Nesmith. 2005. Drought stress and distribution of vegetative and reproductive traits of a bean cultivar. Scientific Agriculture, 62: 18-22. [DOI:10.1590/S0103-90162005000100004]
29. Papa, R., J. Acosta, A. Delgado-Salinas and P. Gepts. 2005. A genome-wide analysis of differentiation between wild and domesticated Phaseolus vulgaris from Mesoamerica. Theoretical Applied Genetics, 111: 1147-1158. [DOI:10.1007/s00122-005-0045-9]
30. Prasad, P.V.V., S.A. Staggenborg and Z. Ristic. 2008. Impacts of drought and/or heat stress on physiological, developmental, growth, and yield processes of crop plants. In: Segoe, S. (ed.). Response of crops to limited water: Understanding and modeling water stress effects on plant growth processes, 301-355 pp.
31. RahimiChegeni, A., M.R. Bihamta and M. Khodarahmi. 2017. Evaluation of different characteristics of wheat genotypes under drought stress using multivariate statistical. Journal of Crop Breading, 9: 147-155 (In Persian).
32. RahnamaieTak, A., S. Vaezi, J. Mozafari and A.A. ShahnejatBushehri. 2007. Study on correlation and path analysis for seed yield per plant and its dependent traits in red bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Pajouhesh&Sazandegi, 76: 80-88 (In Persian).
33. Rosales-Serna, R., J. Kohashi-Shibata, J.A. Acosta-Gallegos, C. Trejo-Lopez, J. Ortiz-Cereceres and J.D. Kelly. 2004. Biomass distribution, maturity acceleration and yield in drought-stressed common bean cultivars. Field Crops Ressearch, 85: 203-211. [DOI:10.1016/S0378-4290(03)00161-8]
34. Safapour, M., S. Khagani, M. Amirabadi, M. Teymouri and M.K. Bazyan. 2009. Statistical analysis of the effect of water stress on phenological and agronomical traits of white bean genotypes. The New Agicultural Findings, 4: 367-378 (In Persian).
35. SanjeevDeshpand, K., B.R. Patil, P.M. Salimath, J.M. Nidagundi and S. Karthigeyan. 2010. Evaluation of native and collected germplasm for earliness seed traits and resistance to rust, CMV and leaf spot in cowpea [Vignaunguiculata (L.) Walp]. Electronic Journal of Plant Breeding, 1: 384-392.
36. Scully, B.T. and D.H. Wallace. 1990. Variation in and relationship of biomass, growth rate, harvest index, and phenology to yield of common bean. Journal of American Society and Horticultural Science, 115: 218-225.
37. Soghani, M., S. Vaezi and S.H. Sabbaghpour. 2010. Study on correlation and path analysis for seed yield and its dependent traits in white bean genotypes (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Agronomy and Plant Breeding Journal, 6: 27-36 (In Persian).
38. Teran, H. and S.P. Singh. 2002. Comparison of sources and lines selected for drought resistance in common bean. Crop Science, 42: 64-70. [DOI:10.2135/cropsci2002.6400]
39. Van Schoonhoven, A. and O. Voysest. 1991. Common beans: Research for crop improvement. CAB International, Wallingford, 980 pp.
40. Vasi, M., J. Gvozdanovi-Varga and J. Ervenski. 2008. Divergence in the dry bean collection by principal component analysis (PCA). Genetika, 40: 23 -30. [DOI:10.2298/GENSR0801023V]
41. Xia, M.Z. 1997. Effect of soil drought during the generative development phase on seed yield and nutrient uptake of faba bean (ViciafabaL.). Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 48: 447-451. [DOI:10.1071/A96003]

ارسال نظر درباره این مقاله : نام کاربری یا پست الکترونیک شما:

کلیه حقوق این وب سایت متعلق به پژوهشنامه اصلاح گیاهان زراعی می باشد.

طراحی و برنامه نویسی : یکتاوب افزار شرق

© 2018 All Rights Reserved | Journal of Crop Breeding

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb