Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T10:29:27.508Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetic variability and interrelationships of phenological, physicochemical and cooking quality traits in chickpea

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 October 2012

Shailesh Tripathi ,
Vindla Sridhar ,
Aravind K. Jukanti ,
Kamatam Suresh ,
B. V. Rao ,
C. L. L. Gowda  and
Pooran M. Gaur
Shailesh Tripathi
Affiliation:
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru, Hyderabad502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India
Vindla Sridhar
Affiliation:
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru, Hyderabad502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India
Aravind K. Jukanti
Affiliation:
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru, Hyderabad502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India
Kamatam Suresh
Affiliation:
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru, Hyderabad502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India
B. V. Rao
Affiliation:
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru, Hyderabad502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India
C. L. L. Gowda
Affiliation:
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru, Hyderabad502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India
Pooran M. Gaur*
Affiliation:
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru, Hyderabad502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: p.gaur@cgiar.org
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Eighty-six chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) genotypes, including 44 Kabuli type and 42 Desi type, were evaluated for their phenological, physicochemical and cooking quality traits. There were significant differences among the genotypes for days to 50% flowering (34–81 d), days to maturity (85–122 d), number of pods per plant (13–66), number of seeds per plant (15–85), 100-seed weight (10.5–58.6 g), seed yield (561–1852 kg/ha), hydration capacity (0.11–0.68 g water/seed), hydration index (0.80–1.21), swelling capacity (0.11–0.7 ml/seed), seed volume (0.1–0.52 ml/seed) and cooking time (38–125 min). The Desi and Kabuli types of chickpea differed significantly from each other for all the traits except for hydration index, swelling index and cooking time. High heritability coupled with high genetic advance was recorded for 100-seed weight, hydration capacity, swelling capacity and seed volume in both Desi and Kabuli genotypes. Seed size (100-seed weight and seed volume) showed significant positive correlations with hydration capacity and swelling capacity. Cooking time did not show any significant positive or negative correlation with any of the traits studied, including seed size, indicating that other additional factors may be involved in controlling cooking time. The results of this study indicate that it is possible to develop cultivars with faster cooking time in both Kabuli and Desi types and in all seed size categories.

Keywords

chickpeaCicer arietinumcooking characteristicscorrelation coefficientsphenologyphysicochemical traits
Type
Research Article
Information
Plant Genetic Resources , Volume 10 , Issue 3 , December 2012 , pp. 194 - 201
Copyright
Copyright © NIAB 2012

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

Ali, S, Maher, AB, Anwar, M and Haqquani, AM (2002) Exploitation of genetic variability for grain yield improvement in chickpea. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology 4: 148–149.Google Scholar
Allard, RW (1999) Principles of Plant Breeding. 2nd edn.New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Cochran, WG and Cox, GM (1992) Experimental Designs. 2nd edn.New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
FAOSTAT (2009) http://faostat.fao.org/site/567/DesktopDefault.aspx (accessed 11 June 2012).Google Scholar
Gaur, PM, Pande, S, Upadhyaya, HD and Rao, BV (2006) Extra-large Kabuli chickpea with high resistance to Fusarium wilt. Journal of SAT Agricultural Research . Available athttp://www.icrisat.org/journal/.Google Scholar
Gaur, PM, Gowda, CLL, Knights, EJ, Warkentin, TD, Acikgoz, N, Yadav, SS and Kumar, J (2007) Chapter 19: breeding achievements. In: (eds) Chickpea Breeding and Management. Wallingford: CABI, pp. 391–416.Google Scholar
Gil, J, Nadal, S, Luna, D, Moreno, MT and De Haro, A (1996) Variability of some physico-chemical characters in desi and kabuli chickpea types. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 71: 179–184.Google Scholar
Iqbal, A, Khalil, IA, Ateeq, N and Khan, MS (2006) Nutritional quality of important food legumes. Food Chemistry 97: 331–335.Google Scholar
Johanson, HW, Robinson, HF and Comstock, RE (1955) Estimates of genetic and environmental variability in soybeans. Agronomy Journal 47: 314–318.Google Scholar
Jood, S, Bishnoi, S and Sharma, A (1998) Chemical analysis and physico-chemical properties of chickpea and lentil cultivars. Nahrung 42: 71–74.3.3.CO;2-U>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jukanti, AK, Gaur, PM, Gowda, CLL and Chibbar, RN (2012) Nutritional quality and health benefits of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.): a review. British Journal of Nutrition 108: S11–S26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaur, M, Singh, N and Sodhi, NS (2005) Physicochemical, cooking, textural and roasting characteristics of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) cultivars. Journal of Food Engineering 69: 511–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khattak, AB, Khattak, GSS, Mahmood, Z, Bibi, N and Ihsanullah, I (2006) Study of selected quality and agronomic characteristics and their interrelationship in Kabuli-type chickpea genotypes (Cicer arietinum L.). International Journal of Food Science and Technology 41: 1–5.Google Scholar
Krouma, A (2009) Physiological and nutritional response of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to salinity. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry 33: 503–512.Google Scholar
Lokare, YA, Patil, JV and Chavan, UD (2007) Genetic analysis of yield and quality traits in kabuli chickpea. Journal of Food Legumes 2: 147–149.Google Scholar
Malik, SR, Maher, AB, Asif, MA, Iqbal, V and Iqbal, SM (2010) Assessment of genetic variability and interrelationship among some agronomic traits in chickpea. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology 12: 81–85.Google Scholar
Malik, SR, Saleem, M, Iqbal, U, Zahid, MA, Bakhsh, A and Iqbal, SM (2011) Genetic analysis of physiochemical traits in chickpea (Cicer arietinum) seeds. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology 13: 1033–1036.Google Scholar
Muller, FM (1967) Cooking quality of pulses. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 18: 292–295.Google Scholar
Nizakat, B, Khattak, AB, Khattak, GSS, Mehmood, Z and Ihsanullah, I (2006) Quality and consumers acceptability studies and their interrelationship of newly evolved desi type chickpea genotypes (Cicer arietinum L.). International Journal of Food Science and Technology 41: 1–5.Google Scholar
Özer, S, Karaköy, T, Toklu, F, Baloch, FS, Kilian, B and Özkan, H (2010) Nutritional and physicochemical variation in Turkish kabuli chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) landraces. Euphytica 175: 237–249.Google Scholar
Pandey, RL, Rastogi, NK and Geda, AK (2007) Genetic analysis of quality traits in chickpea. Journal of Food Legumes 1: 25–28.Google Scholar
Patanè, C, Iacoponi, E and Raccuia, SA (2004) Physico-chemical characteristics, water absorption, soaking and cooking properties of some Sicilian populations of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). International Journal of Food Sciences and Nutrition 55: 547–554.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rajput, MA, Sarwar, G and Tahir, KH (1987) Variability for some quantitative traits in soybean. Soybean Genetics Newsletter 14: 113–116.Google Scholar
Sadiq, MS, Sarwar, G and Abbas, G (2000) Selection criteria for seed yield in mung bean. Journal of Agricultural Research 38: 7–12.Google Scholar
Singh, U, Subrahmanyam, N and Kumar, J (1991) Cooking quality and nutritional attributes of some newly developed cultivars of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 55: 37–46.Google Scholar
Singh, N, Sekhon, KS, Bajwa, U and Goyal, S (1992) Cooking and parching characteristics of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Journal of Food Science and Technology 29: 347–350.Google Scholar
Singh, OP, Yadava, HS and Agarwal, SC (2003) Divergence analysis for quality traits in chickpea. Indian Journal of Pulses Research 1: 12–13.Google Scholar
Williams, PC and Singh, U (1987) Nutritional quality and the evaluation of quality in breeding programmes. In: (eds) The Chickpea. Wallingford: CAB International, pp. 329–356.Google Scholar
Williams, PC, Nakoul, H and Singh, KB (1983) Relationship between cooking time and some physical characteristics in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 34: 492–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zia-Ul-Haq, M, Ahmad, M, Iqbal, S, Ahmad, S and Hakoomat, A (2007) Characterization and compositional study of oil from seeds of desi chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) cultivars grown in Pakistan. Journal of the American Oil Chemists' Society 84: 1143–1148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar