4.7 Article

Combining Ability on Yields, Capsinoids and Capsaicinoids in Pepper Varieties (Capsicum annuum L.)

期刊

HORTICULTURAE
卷 9, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/horticulturae9091043

关键词

Chili; capsiate; capsaicin; F-1 hybrids; gene action; breeding

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to evaluate the general and specific combining ability for CATs and CAPs contents in pepper. The results showed that the environment significantly affected the yield and phytochemical contents of pepper. Additive gene action played an important role in CAT, Sum CATs, CAT yield, and Sum CAPs traits, while non-additive gene action was crucial for the accumulation of DI-CAT. The parental lines 203, 201, 101, and 202 were identified as the best parents for fruit yield, sum CAPs, sum CATs, and CAT yield, respectively.
The requirement for good parental lines of pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) with high phytochemicals, especially for capsinoids (CATs) and capsaicinoids (CAPs), is rapidly increasing, and plant breeders are encouraged to develop new pepper varieties. The objective of this study was to estimate the general combining ability (GCA) and specific combining ability (SCA) for the contents of CATs and CAPs in pepper in two different environments. The mean performances for fresh yield, dry yield and phytochemical contents in C. annuum L. were significantly affected by the environment. The effect of additive gene action was significant in determining the traits of CAT, Sum CATs, CAT yield and Sum CAPs. Conversely, non-additive gene action played a crucial role in the accumulation of DI-CAT in this population. The parental lines 203, 201, 101 and 202 were identified as the best parents for fruit yield, sum CAPs, sum CATs and CAT yield, respectively, based on their high positive GCA values and mean actual values. The SCA estimates for fruit yield, sum CAPs and sum CATs were positive and high for the hybrids 102/203, 101/201 and 102/202, indicating that they hold promise for use in commercial hybrids.

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

4.7
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