GENETICS GRAIN QUALITY PARAMETERS IN SORGHUM

Views:
 
Category: Education
     
 

Presentation Description

No description available.

Comments

Presentation Transcript

PowerPoint Presentation:

GENETICS OF IMPORTANT GRAIN QUALITY PARAMETERS IN SORGHUM

PowerPoint Presentation:

Introduction Introduction

PowerPoint Presentation:

Sorghum [ Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench] is grown in different climates around the world on approximately 48 million ha annually. In India, the area under cultivation for rainy season sorghum is declining rapidly due to a significant reduction in consumption of the rainy season produce. Important factors causing the decline in consumption are changes in food preference due to improved access to fine cereals, and inferior grain quality characteristics of the available rainy season sorghum hybrids and varieties. Post rainy season sorghum grain has higher consumer preference and the market price in almost double that of rainy season grain. Grain size, shape, luster, colour, protein and lysine contents are some of the important grain quality traits that contribute to consumer preference. As evident from the consumer preference for good quality and nutritionally superior grain sorghum, it would be desirable to undertake a detailed study of genetics of important grain quality parameters. This would help in developing superior sorghum varieties with high yield and acceptable level of grain quality.

PowerPoint Presentation:

Sorghum Area in the World NRCS, Hyderabad

PowerPoint Presentation:

Sorghum Production in World NRCS, Hyderabad

PowerPoint Presentation:

Country Area(000 ha) Production(000 MT) Yield(kg/ha) China 784 3107 3966 India 9200 6500 706 Pakistan 400 230 575 Saudi Arabia 180 200 1111 Thailand 88 200 2272 Yemen 320 260 812 Country-wise Area and Production of Sorghum

PowerPoint Presentation:

State Area(000 ha) Production(ooo MT) Yield(kg/ha) Andhra Pradesh 722 559 779 Gujarat 206 190 897 Karnataka 1885 1708 906 Madhya Pradesh 691 576 820 Maharashtra 5020 4388 875 Rajasthan 588 154 364 Tamil Nadu 403 404 1002 State-wise Area and Production of Sorghum (2004)

PowerPoint Presentation:

Quality parameters in sorghum could be broadly divided into three parts as under Physical characteristics Biochemical characteristics Qualitative characteristics

PowerPoint Presentation:

Preferred Characteristics in Sorghum Colour White/yellow Size Large/bold Hardness Hard/corneous Nutritional qualities High-protein, high-lysine, low-tannin, high feeding value Other characteristics More dough elasticity, good injera, couscous, chapati, sweet, to blend with wheat

PowerPoint Presentation:

Diagram of sorghum caryopsis showing the pericarp [cutin, epicarp, mesocarp, tube cells, cross cells, testa, pedicel, and stylar area (SA)], endosperm (E) (aleurone layer, corneous, and floury), and germ [scutellum (5) and embryonic axis (EA)]

PowerPoint Presentation:

Grain shape in dorsal view Grain shape in profile view Narrow elliptic Elliptic Circular Narrow elliptic Elliptic Circular

PowerPoint Presentation:

Diagrammatic representation of sorghum grain depicting the cells of the outer corneous endosperm and those of the inner floury endosperm. [Note: The cells of the corneous endosperm (CE) are elongated with polygonal starch granules and are filled with protein bodies (PB) and are rich in antifungal proteins (AFPs). Cells of the floury endosperm (FE) are round with round starch granules. These cells contain lower amount of proteins than do cells of the outer endosperm.]

PowerPoint Presentation:

a = Nearly empty, elongated and irregular cells of aleurone layer at 15 days stage. Cell wall (CW) X 3546 b = Starch granules, both large (l) and small (s) at 15 days stage having an electron dense boundary (EDB). X 11004 c = Cells at 15 days stage showing starch granules filling up the whole volume of amyloplast (A). X 11781 d = Multiple starch granules being released from amyloplast (15 days stage). X 14229 e = Lipid droplets (L) in close vicinity of starch granules within the amyloplast. X 16873 f = Small sized starch granules located close to RER and lipid droplets. X 25110.

PowerPoint Presentation:

Screening

PowerPoint Presentation:

Table 1:- Proximate composition and protein fractions of thirteen sorghum cultivars Cultivar Grain yield (Q/ha) Moisture (%) Protein (% x 6.25) (%) Fat (%) Fiber (%) Carbo- hydrate (%) Albumin (%) Globulin (%) Prolamin (%) Glutalin (%) (% N of protein x 6.25) Swarna 39.21 7.12 12.31 3.17 1.62 73.66 6.37 11.40 44.79 36.36 CS-3541 37.00 8.14 12.38 4.32 1.92 71.49 11.20 12.76 41.77 34.49 SPV-115 35.72 7.34 8.94 3.62 1.01 76.27 13.80 19.11 40.22 27.36 CSH-1 44.32 7.52 10.89 3.89 1.66 73.72 8.81 16.28 49.12 27.35 CSH-5 54.91 6.32 11.65 3.48 1.98 74.57 8.39 13.03 47.49 31.78 CSH-6 45.01 8.15 11.38 4.12 1.13 72.40 9.86 8.60 48.96 34.32 CSH-7R 43.06 7.52 10.25 3.45 0.99 76.05 7.69 7.56 53.73 30.33 CSH-8R 46.88 6.39 11.37 3.91 1.82 74.38 15.45 13.25 39.54 30.92 M 35-1 23.38 7.00 10.47 2.92 1.38 75.40 6.96 12.17 43.83 34.15 SPH-61 50.01 6.16 9.95 4.21 1.52 75.02 14.76 16.56 43.24 29.25 NO.168 31.90 6.50 9.50 3.05 1.48 76.66 17.79 10.66 37.43 31.07 2077A x HD-8 46.82 7.93 10.11 3.82 1.82 73.02 7.83 13.96 39.50 39.04 SPV-107 36.53 5.54 8.94 3.11 1.37 78.70 17.60 9.27 42.19 31.12 S.E ± 0.07 0.13 0.20 0.11 0.09 0.05 0.16 0.18 0.09 0.11 C.D at 5% 0.12 0.21 0.37 0.19 0.15 0.08 0.29 0.35 0.18 0.21 MPKV, Rahuri. Desai et al . (1992)

PowerPoint Presentation:

Table 2:- Summary of nutritional analysis over generations Generation Protein (g %) Lysine (g/100g protein) Leucine (g/100g protein) Leucine/ Lysine ratio Plump Shrivelled Plump Shrivelled Plump Shrivelled Plump Shrivelled F­1 11.59 13.84 2.05 2.86 11.93 10.13 6.03 3.57 F­2 11.40 - 1.82 - 12.97 - 7.29 - F­3 - - - - - - - - F­4 10.48 14.24 2.27 2.79 10.70 10.89 4.88 4.10 F­5 10.94 15.49 2.15 2.97 12.23 11.50 5.84 4.58 F­6 9.22 15.95 9.21 3.60 10.77 10.35 4.80 2.91 F­7 11.36 14.34 2.18 2.66 11.51 9.38 5.41 3.74 F­8 10.27 14.63 2.21 2.80 11.27 11.97 5.16 4.35 Mean 10.75 14.75 2.13 2.95 11.63 10.70 5.63 3.88 S. E. ± 0.32 0.33 0.06 0.84 0.31 0.39 0.33 0.25 NRCS, Hyderabad. Rao et al. (1983)

PowerPoint Presentation:

Genetic Variability

PowerPoint Presentation:

Table 3:- Heritability (Broad sense and narrow sense) and genetic advance for seed size in two crosses of sorghum M 35-1 x YAR 179 M 35-1 x AGP 344 h 2 bs 81.56 84.66 h 2 ns 78.40 77.39 GA 5.40 6.46 GA over mean 22.32 27.76 UAS, Dharwad. Biradar et al., (1996)

PowerPoint Presentation:

Correlation coefficient

PowerPoint Presentation:

Table 4:- Character association and regression analysis of variance in advanced generation Character Protein (g %) Absolute lysine (g/100g food) Leucine (g/100g protein) Absolute leucine (g/100g food) Leucine/ lysine ratio 100 grain weight (g) Grain hardness (kg) Yield/plant (g) Lysine (g/100g protein) - 0.0759 0.8723** 0.0297 - 0.0173 - 0.7687** - 0.2099* 0.0710 - 0.0898 Protein (g %) 0.4175** -0.5242** 0.1935 - 0.2560** - 0.0174 0.1044 0.0868 Absolute lysine (g/100g food) - 0.2283* 0.0781 - 0.8254** 0.1963* 0.1074 - 0.0419 Leucine (g/100g protein) 0.7306** 0.5958** 0.0995 - 0.1208 0.0178 Absolute leucine (g/100g food) 0.4746** 0.0923 - 0.0358 0.0464 Leucine/ lysine Ratio 0.2064* 0.1473 0.0583 100 grain weight (g) 0.1998* 0.3096** Grain hardness (kg) 0.2694** a Ŷ= 1.9009 b 1 0.1679 x 1 * b 2 6.6228 x 2 * b 3 2.1382 x 3 b 4 - 0.0224 x 4 b 5 -0.0482 x 5 * b 6 0.0064 x 6 b 7 0.0067 x 7 b 8 0.00005 x 8 SE b = 0.0181 0.1916 0.0215 0.1467 0.0174 0.0042 0.0047 0.00013 NRCS, Hyderabad. Rao et al. (1983) *significant at 5 % level, ** significant at 1 % level

PowerPoint Presentation:

Table 5:- Estimates of phenotypic (P) and genetic (G) Correlation coefficients between Different pairs of characters Character Protein Lysine 100 seed weight Seed size Days to flower Plant height Sucrose P - 0.245 0.501** 0.583** 0.076 - 0.143 - 0.393* G - 0.156 0.553** 0.702** 0.086 - 0.165 - 0.594** Protein P - 0.528** - 0.001 - 0.507** - 0.128 - 0.163 G - 0.567** - 0.036 - 0.583** - 0.124 - 0.042 Lysine P 0.124 0.196 0.007 0.164 G 0.108 0.276 0.026 0.183 100 seed weight P 0.708** 0.864** - 0.267 G 0.746** 0.871** - 0.356* Seed size P 0.623** - 0.383* G 0.782** - 0.428** Days to flower P 0.254 G 0.406** IARI, New Delhi. Govil (1979) * and ** indicate significance at probability levels 5% and 1%, respectively.

PowerPoint Presentation:

Gene action

PowerPoint Presentation:

Table 6:- Gene effects estimated from generation means of crosses M 35-1 x YAR 179 and M 35-1 x AGP 344 for seed size Cross M 35-1 x YAR 179 (I) M 35-1 x AGP 344 (II) m 13.20 ** ± 1.26 20.17 ** ± 1.37 d (a) - 7.50 ** ± 0.20 - 7.06 ** ± 0.60 h (d) 28.89 ** ± 3.05 1.67 ± 3.10 i (a x a) 11.84 ** ± 1.24 4.43 ** ± 1.35 j (a x d) 2.65 ** ± 0.69 - 0.12 ± 0.74 l (d x d) - 13.90 ** ± 1.88 1.79 ± 1.83 UAS, Dharwad. Biradar et al., (1996) ** Indicates significance at 1 % level.

PowerPoint Presentation:

Table 7:- Estimates of gene effect for 100 grain weight in two crosses of sorghum Gene effect Cross 463B x IS 17600 (I) AKMS 14B x IS 17600 (II) m 3.07 ± 0.04 3.38 ± 0.04 d (a) - 0.80 ± 0.04 h (d) 1.01 ± 0.05 0.62 ± 0.08 i (a x a) - - j (a x d) 0.97 ± 0.22 1.98 ± 0.28 l (d x d) - 0.64 ± 0.18 - R 2 0.96 0.99 NRCS, Hyderabad. Adulakshmi and Aruna (2005) All estimates significance at 1 % level

PowerPoint Presentation:

Table 29:- Means of families for 100-grain weight in two crosses of sorghum Family Family means ± for the cross 463B x IS 17600 AKMS 14B x IS 17600 P 1 2.06 ± 0.084 2.58 ± 0.054 P 2 4.08 ± 0.059 4.10 ± 0.068 F 1 3.70 ± 0.202 3.90 ± 0.071 F 2 3.07 ± 0.072 3.68 ± 0.063 BC 1 2.99 ± 0.044 2.87 ± 0.093 BC 2 3.67 ± 0.112 3.69 ± 0.102 MP 3.07 3.34 NRCS, Hyderabad. Adulakshmi and Aruna (2005) P1 = Parental line 1 (463B or AKMS 14B), P2 = Parental line 2 (IS 17600), F1 = First filial generation of the cross, F2 ­= Second filial generation of the cross, BC1 = First back cross generation with parental line 1 , BC2 = First back cross generation with parental line 2, MP = Mid-parent value.

PowerPoint Presentation:

Combining Ability

PowerPoint Presentation:

Table 8:- Estimation of general combining ability effect of parents for protein content and grain yield per plant Females / Parent Protein content (%) Grain yield per plant 27 A 0.05 - 490 ** 104 A - 1.01 ** 2.24 * AKMS 14 A 1.10 ** 8.72 ** S.E. (gi-gj) - 0.14 * - 6.06 ** Males : 0.09 1.42 M 35-1 - 1.35 ** - 15.79 ** SPV 1155 - 0.50 ** - 10.32 ** CSV 216 R 0.85 ** - 5.11 ** SR 833 1.36 ** 14.92 ** GJ 38 0.49 ** 11.02 ** GJ 39 - 0.65 ** - 13.54 ** GJ 40 - 0.66 ** 6.24 ** GJ 41 0.47 ** 12.59 ** S.E. (gi-gj) 0.13 2.01 NAU, Navsari. Desai et al., (2005)

PowerPoint Presentation:

Table 9:- Estimation of specific combining ability effect of parents for protein content and grain yield per plant Crosses Protein content (%) Grain yield per plant 27 A x CSV 216R2 - 0.28 4.23 27 A x GJ 40 0.56 ** 1.80 27 A x GJ 41 - 0.80 ** 2.77 104 A x GJ 40 0.74 ** - 2.19 104 A x GJ 41 0.42 * 4.48 AKMS 14 A x SPV 1155 1.36 ** - 8.56 ** AKMS 14 A x GJ 38 - 0.45 * 7.55 ** AKMS 14 A x GJ 41 0.48 * 7.55 ** 296 A x M 35-1 - 0.77 ** 15.96 ** 296 A x SPV 1155 - 0.21 7.44 ** 296 A x GJ 40 - 0.58 5.33 SE 5 ij 0.19 2.84 SE (5 ij - Ski) 0.27 4.01 NAU, Navsari. Desai et al., (2005)

PowerPoint Presentation:

Table 10:- Estimates of variances for general and specific combining ability Variances Grain yield 250 grain weight Fodder yield Protein % Lysine % in 100 gm Sugar content 6 2 gca 10.004** 0.245** 5144.461** 1.636* 0.003* 0.020** 6 2 sca 67.273** 0.138** 838.514** 1.222* 0.006* 0.025** 6 2 gca / 6 2 sca 0.144 1.775 5.992 1.338 0.500 0.800 6 2 gca 1 23.341** 0.006** 89.620** 0.072** 0.004** 0.006** 6 2 sca 1 5.131** 0.052** 147.154** 1.303* 0.002* 0.0002** 6 2 gca 1 / 6 2 sca 1 4.557 0.115 0.609** 0.055 2.105 30.000 MAU, Parbhani. Nayeem and Bapat (1984) *significant at 5 % level, ** significant at 1 % level

PowerPoint Presentation:

Table 11:- Sorghum parents with significant general combining ability GCA) effect for protein content and other important chemical constituent and grain yield Parents Protein (%) Starch (%) Soluble/free sugars (%) Grain yield (%) Barshi Joot 1.166 ** - 0.099 ** 0.045 2.090 ** Dagdi Solapuri 1.132 ** - 1.591 ** 0.095 ** 6.870 ** Yenniger Jola 0.482 ** 0.493 ** 0.079 ** 5.810 ** Ramkhe 0.446 ** - 0.059 0.278 ** 3.753 ** SPV 1457 0.279 ** 0.377 ** 0.113 - 0.880 ** MAU, Parbhani. Deshpande et al . , (2003) ** = Significant at 1 % level.

PowerPoint Presentation:

Table 12:- Superior crosses and relationship with per se performance and gca effects of the parents in a 6 x 6 diallel cross of Sorghum Character Generation Desirable cross Chemical content gca effect of parents F1 / F2 best parent Protein % F1 CSV 4 x IS 165* 12.1 12.4 L x H F2 MAUT-1 x 5742-1 A 12.1 12.2 H x H CSV 4 x IS 165 11.4 12.4 L x H 5742-1 A x IS 165 12.0 12.4 H x H Tryptophan (g / 16 g protein) F1 Moti x MAUT-1 0.186 0.189 L x L Moti x CSV 6 0.185 0.178 L x L Moti x IS 165 0.193 0.199 L x H CSV 4 x IS 165* 0.194 0199 L x H 5742-1 A x CSV 6* 0.190 0.200 H x L 5742-1 A x IS 165 0.200 0.200 H x H F2 CSV 4 x IS 165 0.193 0.198 A x H 5742-1 A x IS 165 0.189 0.200 H x L Methionine (g / 16 g protein) F1 CSV 4 x CSV 6 0.363 0.375 H x H F2 CSV 4 x 5742-1 A 0.356 0.363 H x L MAUT-1 x CSV 6 0.362 0.375 L x H Fat % F1 CSV 4 x CSV 6 3.975 4.126 H x H F2 CSV 4 x CSV 6 4.006 4.126 H x H Ash % F1 Moti x IS 165* 1.726 1.794 L x H CSV 4 x IS 165 1.698 1.794 L x H 5742-1 A x IS 165 1.702 1.794 H x H F2 MAUT-1 x IS 165 1.704 1.794 H x H 5742-1 A x IS 165 1.693 1.794 H x H CSAU, Kanpur. Mallick et al . (1988) H – High, A – Average and L – Low. * Cross combination common in both F­1 and F2 generations

PowerPoint Presentation:

Table 13:- The gca, sca and reciprocal effects of a few crosses found superior in protein and lysine content Cross Protein content Lysine content gca sca reciprocal gca sca reciprocal M F M F CSV 3 x IS 11758 2.30 - 0.37 0.70 - 0.20 0.42 - 0.28 0.32 - 0.18 CSV 3 x IS 11167 1.67 - 0.37 0.80 - 0.29 0.48 - 0.28 0.29 - 0.64 CSV 4 x W 5 0.41 - 0.26 0.35 - 0.46 - 0.10 - 0.16 0.21 - 0.03* OSW 5 x IS 11758 2.30 - 0.88 0.76 - 0.69 0.42 0.10 0.17 - 0.23 IS 11758 x IS 11167 1.67 2.30 - 1.69 1.03 0.48 0.42 0.23 0.48 MAU, Parbhani. Nayeem and Bapat (1988) M- male, F- female; All values except * significant at 1% level

PowerPoint Presentation:

Heterosis

PowerPoint Presentation:

Table 14:- Main features of promising heterotic sorghum hybrids Hybrids Grain yield Plant -1 (g) Grain size Grain shape Grain color Grain luster PMS 8A x RS 29 82.95 Medium Sublenticular White- chalky Non- lustrous 116A x RS 585 66.70 Medium bold Spherical Creamy Lustrous PMS 7A x SPV 727 63.00 Medium bold Spherical Creamy Lustrous PMS 19A x SPV 727 62.65 Medium bold Spherical White- pearly Lustrous PMS 19A x SPV 492 61.90 Medium bold Spherical Creamy Lustrous PMS 19A x RS 29 61.45 Medium bold Sublenticular White- chalky Non- lustrous 116A x SPV 727 60.95 Medium bold Spherical White- pearly Lustrous 104A x SPV 492 60.05 Bold Spherical White- pearly Lustrous 116A x KR 191 58.45 Medium bold Spherical Creamy Lustrous PMS 8A x SPV 492 58.15 Medium Sublenticular White- pearly Lustrous CSH 15 (control) 42.50 Medium Spherical White- pearly Lustrous 1. Compared to CSH 15 2. Compared to CSH 15 and M 35-1 MAU, Parbhani. Jahagirdar and Borikar (2002)

PowerPoint Presentation:

Table 15:- Main features of sorghum hybrids with higher standard heterosis for grain/ fodder yield and protein. Cross Grain yield (g plant ‑1 ) Standard heterosis (%) Panicle Shape 1 Glume Coverage (% grain covered) Grain size Grain Shape Grain Color (visual score) Grain yield (g plant ‑1 ) Protein (%) Fodder yield (g plant ‑1 ) SPV 1155 x Barshi Joot 80.0 98.8 23.5 56.6 Sce 50 Bold Sublenticular Creamy SPV 1155 x Yennigar Jola 79.6 82.1 28.1 75.0 Sce 25 Medium Oval Creamy SPV 1380 x Ramkhe 73.2 67.3 14.6 34.1 Sce 25 Medium Round Yellow SPV 1413 x Ramkhe 63.8 45.8 23.3 14.9 Ce 50 Medium Flat Creamy SPV 1413 x Dood Mogara 62.5 42.8 15.0 23.3 Sce 25 Medium Sublenticular Chalky-white SPV 1413 x Barshi Joot 57.8 32.1 31.1 13.3 Co 25 Medium Sublenticular Creamy SPV 1411 x Barshi Joot 57.3 31.0 21.6 16.6 Sce 25 Bold Spherical Yellow SPV 1411 x Ramkhe 56.6 26.0 16.0 27.0 Sce 50 Medium Globular Creamy SPV 1457 x Giddi Maldandi 53.2 21.7 7.7 1.1 Sce 50 Small Sublenticular Yellow M 35-1 (Check) (Mean value) 43.7 11.3 42.7 Sce 50 Medium Globular Creamy MAU, Parbhani. Deshpande et al . , (2003) Ce = Compact elliptical, Co = Compact, Sce = Semi compact elliptical

PowerPoint Presentation:

Stability of quality characters

PowerPoint Presentation:

Table 16:- Stability parameters for grain protein content in Rabi sorghum Varieties Mean S 2 d b AGP 289 13.99 0.291 1.183 AGP 436 13.40 7.403 * 0.912 M 35-1 11.76 1.468 1.025 E 36-1 14.18 - 0.387 0.940 SPV 488 13.74 0.925 1.442 Afzalpur local 13.75 0.181 1.106 Devadurga local 12.28 5.590 1.028 Bhogapur local 13.45 0.134 1.351 RJ 16 13.84 - 0.132 1.468 CSH-12R 13.12 0.230 1.215 UAS, Dharwad Khanure (1999) * Significance at 5% level

PowerPoint Presentation:

Table 17:- G x E for grain protein content Source df F-value Significance Genotype 30 2.242 ** Env. (joint interaction) 2 331.212 ** Env. x Genotype 60 1.270 ** Heterogeneity from regression 30 1.150 ** Remainder 30 1.386 ** Error 180 0.898 * UAS, Dharwad. Khanure (1999) * and ** Significance at 5% and 1% level, respectively

PowerPoint Presentation:

Table 18:- Performance of selected genotypes which were stable for 2 or more characters Variety/ hybrid Protein (%) Lysine (% of protein) Tryptophan (% of protein) Total Sugar Mean b­1 S 2 di­ Mean S 2 di­ Mean S 2 di­ Mean S 2 di­ D 71196 11.3 0.83 0.277 1.7 0.001 0.7 0.0008 1.4 - 0.001 CSH 9 1.0 0.72 0.218 1.9 0.003 0.7 0.0002 1.6 0.001 CSH 5 8.6 0.57 0.192 1.8 0.001 0.8 0.0015* 1.7 0.002 SPV 225 7.6 1.03 - 0.094 2.0 0.005* 0.9 0.0007 1.5 0.000 SPV 104 10.9 1.25 0.229 1.7 0.002 0.8 0.006* 1.8 0.028* SPV 101 8.5 0.72 0.587* 2.0 0.003 0.9 0.002* 1.6 0.008 SPV 270 7.9 0.89 0.039 2.0 0.007* 0.8 0.0003 1.3 0.026* SE 0.5 0.90 0.04 0.03 0.04 PAU, Ludhiyana. Chhina and Phul (1988) * significant at 1 % level

PowerPoint Presentation:

Mode of inheritance Traits associated Source** Additive gene action and additive x additive interaction Grain hardness, grain density Ghorade and Shekar, 1996 Additive gene action and additive x additive interaction Tannin content Kataria et al .,1989;Rodrigues et al .,1998;Dabolkar and Baghel,1982;Chang et al .,1987 Dominant gene action Red grain color, Grain hardness Reddy et al .,1992 Additive gene action Grain weight Rao et al.,1980;Nguyen et al .,1998 Additive gene action Bolder grain Boikar and Bhale., 1982; Dominance gene action Bolder grain Chandak and Nandanwankar, 1983 Biparental mating Homozygous bold grain Adulaxmi and Aruna, 2005 Single dominant gene Round grain shape Adulaxmi and Aruna, 2005 Two complementry recessive gene Grain lustre Adulaxmi and Aruna, 2005 Table 20 :- Brief review of mode of inheritance governed for grain quality reported in sorghum Source: Reddy et al., 2000; Bandyopadhyay et al., 2000; Veerabadhiran and Deepalakshmi, 2003 ** The references of these sources are not included in the Gist

PowerPoint Presentation:

Improved quality should not be at the cost of yield Breeding for quality should be safeguard the economic interest of both the consumers and the farmers. Improved quality traits must be present in the variety having high and stable yield with good agronomic features. Otherwise, the variety may never be grown by the farmer. A plant breeder must be provided with clear-cut objectives for quality breeding. In case of nutritional quality, human nutritionist must specify the objectives a breeder is expected to achieve. In order to breed for improved nutritional quality, plant breeders must also become familiar with the problems of human nutrition. Incorporation of quality characters should be integrated with the normal breeding procedure for the yield. However, traditionally, new lines are developed for enhanced yields and then they are evaluated for quality traits. Increased protein content is usually associated with lower yields. Considerable breeding efforts will be required to break the negative association. Often higher protein content mutants show poor grain filling. Therefore, protein content should not be considered as per cent; it should be evaluated as total protein yield per seed per plant per unit area. A close interaction between nutritionists and breeders will increase the rate of progress in breeding for nutritional quality. IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION FOR IMPROVED QUALITY

PowerPoint Presentation:

LIMITATIONS OF BREEDING FOR QUALITY Most quality traits are polygenic. Therefore, selection for quality traits during the segregating generations is difficult. Quality traits further enhance the long list of traits a breeder has to select for in order to develop an acceptable variety. Many quality traits are difficult to estimate and evaluate. Therefore, quality breeding imposes considerable demand on resources, including money. Many quality traits have high heritability and are markedly affected by the environment. This retards the progress under study. Quality is not a single trait; in fact, it is conglomerate of traits. Therefore, unlike yield, it does not have a single estimate. The various quality traits have to be assayed and then interpreted to define the produce quality. Most high lysine and/or high protein lines show poor grain filling and lower yields. Even if breeders are able to improve yields of such lines, they will need ~ 11 % more nitrogen for every increase of 1 % of protein content. But nutritional quality is not a basis for pricing of food grains. Therefore, high protein/lysine cultivars are not likely to be popular with farmers unless quality is taken into consideration for pricing of the produce.

PowerPoint Presentation:

Conclusion

PowerPoint Presentation:

Table 19:- Chemical Composition and Seed Characteristics of Whole Grain Sample of High-Lysine and Normal Sorghum Lines Character High-lysine lines Normal sorghum IS 11167 IS 11758 Protein composition protein % 15.70 17.20 12.70 lysine, g/100 g protein 3.33 3.13 2.05 lysine, %of sample 0.52 0.54 0.26 Chemical composition oil % 5.81 6.61 3.32 Seed characteristics % germ 14.60 16.30 10.10 seed weight, g/100 seeds 2.78 2.45 2.75 Carbohydrate composition sucrose, % of sample 3.08 2.61 1.03 starch, % of sample 58.90 57.80 60.80 R. Singh and J.D. Axtell (1973)

PowerPoint Presentation:

Protein content 6 2 gca male 6 2 gca female 6 2 gca average 6 2 gca sca 6 2 gca / 6 2 sca Khanpora M.D. (1980) 0.15 - 0.05 - 0.02 0.56 - 0.03 Warudkar H.V. (2006) 2.27** 0.27** 0.76 1.80 0.42

Any question?:

Any question?

PowerPoint Presentation:

Thank you

authorStream Live Help