4.6 Article

Agro-morphological and molecular diversity in different maturity groups of Indian cauliflower (Brassica oleracea var. botrytis L.)

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 16, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0260246

关键词

-

资金

  1. PG School, IARI for fellowship, NAPEH-CAAST
  2. CRP Hybrid Technology (Cauliflower) project

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study analyzed the molecular and agro-morphological diversity in 92 diverse cauliflower genotypes, along with cabbage and broccoli genotypes. Differences in traits and genetic diversity were observed, indicating potential for genetic improvement and heterosis breeding in cauliflower.
The present study analysed the molecular and agro-morphological diversity in a set of 92 diverse cauliflower genotypes and two each of cabbage and broccoli. Field evaluation of the genotypes was done in randomized block design (RBD) at two locations (i.e. IARI, New Delhi and ICAR-RC-NEH Region, Barapani) during Rabi2019-20. Genotypes showed variation for all the eight observed traits at both locations and, the differences in early and snowball groups were distinct. Pusa Meghna, DC-33-8, Pusa Kartiki and CC-14 were earliest for curd initiation. Genotypes showed higher values for curd traits at Delhi. Molecular diversity was detected with 90 polymorphic simple sequence repeats (SSR). Number of alleles ranged from 1 to 9 with mean value of 2.16 and the highest polymorphic information content (PIC) value was observed for primer BoGMS0742 (0.68) with a mean value of 0.18. Cluster analysis using agro-morphological traits substantiated classification of the genotypes for maturity groups. However, SSR analysis revealed four clusters and with a composite pattern of genotype distribution. STRUCTURE analysis also supported the admixture and four subpopulations. The studyindicates for introgression of genetic fragments across the maturity groups, thereby, potential for use in further genetic improvement and heterosis breeding.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据