Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T21:03:13.631Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Combining Ability for Stem Borer, Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) Resistance in Sorghum*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2011

S. P. Singh  and
A. N. Verma
S. P. Singh
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125004, India
A. N. Verma
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125004, India
Get access

Abstract

Combining ability analysis for three stem borer resistance parameters, i.e. “dead hearts”, leaf injury and stem tunnelling, revealed that both additive and non-additive types of gene effects were involved in the inheritance of these attributes. The specific combining ability (sca)/general combining ability (gca) variance ratios further indicated predominance of additive gene effects for stem tunnelling and non-additive effects for “dead hearts” and leaf injury. The genotypes, IS 2123 and IS 5469 are good general combiners for all the three parameters. Among F1 hybrids, IS 1054 × IS 5469 and IS 18551 × IS 2123 expressed good sca for all the parameters of stem borer resistance. The use of IS 2123 and IS 5469 parental genotypes in the future breeding programmes is suggested.

Résumé

Les analyses d'aptitude à la combinaison ont été effectuées pour trois paramètres de résistance au foreur des tiges, à savoir les coeurs morts, le dégât foliaire, les tiges évidées. Ces analyses ont mis en évidence le rôle tant des effets génétiques additifs que des effets génétiques non-additifs dans l'hérédité de ces attributs. Par ailleurs, les rapports d'aptitude spécifique à la combinaison (asc)/aptitude générale à la combinaison (age) ont indiqué la prédominance de l'action génétique additive pour les tiges évidées, alors que l'action génétique non-additive a été plus marquée dans le cas des coeurs morts et le dégât foliaire. Une bonne aptitude générale à la combinaison pour tous les trois paramètres a été constatée chez les deux génotypes IS 2123 et IS 5469. Au niveau des hybrides F1, les meilleures combinaisons pour la résistance au foreur des tiges sont IS 1054 × IS 5469 et IS 18551 × IS 2123. L'exploitation de ces génotypes ainsi que de leurs hybrides dans les futurs programmes de sélection est proposée.

Keywords

Additivecombining ability“dead hearts”inheritanceleaf injurynon-additiveresistancesorghumstem borerstem tunnellingsusceptibilityAdditifsaptitude à la combinaisoncoeurs mortshéréditédégât foliairenon-additifrésistancesorghoforeur des tigestiges évidéessensibilité
Type
Research Article
Information
International Journal of Tropical Insect Science , Volume 9 , Issue 5 , October 1988 , pp. 665 - 668
Copyright
Copyright © ICIPE 1988

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

REFERENCES

Anonymous (1984) Package and Practices (Kharif Crops), Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar, India.Google Scholar
Griffing, B. (1956) Concept of general and specific combining ability in relation to diallel crossing system. Australian J. Biol. Sci. 9, 463–493.Google Scholar
Ram, Het (1986) Genetics, stability and biochemical basis of stem borer resistance in forage sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench). Ph.D. thesis submitted to Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar, India.Google Scholar
Ingram, W. R. (1958) The lepidoptera stalk borers associated with Graminae in Uganda. Bull. Ent. Res. 49, 367–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jatasra, D. S. (1979) Combining ability analysis for green and dry matter yields in cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.). Forage Res. 5, 165–168.Google Scholar
Jotwani, M. G. and Young, W. R. (1972) Recent developments in chemical control of insect pests of sorghum. In Sorghum in Seventies (Edited by Rao, N. G. P. and House, L. R.), pp. 377–398. New Delhi, India: Oxford and IBH.Google Scholar
Kulkarni, N. and Murty, K. N. (1981) Stem borer resistance in sorghum. Indian J. Genet, and Plant Breed. 41, 167–169.Google Scholar
Pathak, R. S. (1985) Genetic variation of stem borer resistance and tolerance in three sorghum crosses. Insect Sci. Applic. 6, 359–364.Google Scholar
Pathak, R. S. and Olela, J. C. (1983) Genetics or plant resistance in food crop with special reference to sorghum stem borer. Insect Sci. Applic. 4, 127–134.Google Scholar
Rana, B. S. and Murty, B. R. (1971) Genetic analysis of resistance to stem borer in sorghum. Indian J. Genet. Plant Breed. 35, 350–355.Google Scholar
Rana, B. S., Singh, B. U. and Rao, N. G. P. (1985) Breeding for shootfly and stem borer resistance in sorghum. Proc. International Sorghum Entomology Workshop, 15–21 July, 1984, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, U.S.A., pp. 347–360.Google Scholar
Rana, B. S., Singh, B. U., Rao, V. J. M., Reddy, B. B. and Rao, N. G. P. (1984) Inheritance of stem borer (Chilo partellus Swin.) resistance in sorghum. Indian J. Genet. Plant Breed. 44, 7–14.Google Scholar
Sharma, H. C., Taneja, S. L. and Leuschner, K. (1984) Screening for resistance to insect pests in sorghum at ICRISAT Centre and its relevance to pest control in West Africa. Paper presented at conference on Sorghum Improvement in West Africa, held at Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso (Upper Volta), November 27–30, 1984.Google Scholar
Singh, S. P. (1986) Screening of forage sorghum genotypes for resistance to shoot fly, Atherigona soccata (Rondani) and stem borer, Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) and estimation of avoidable losses. Ph.D. thesis submitted to Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar, India.Google Scholar