3.8 Article

Genotypic variation for seed yield components in white clover (Trifolium repens L.)

期刊

AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH
卷 51, 期 6, 页码 657-663

出版社

C S I R O PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1071/AR99135

关键词

germplasm; correlation; breeding; inflorescence

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Seed yield is an important criterion that determines the commercial acceptability of new cultivars. Often, the seed yielding capacity of a forage cultivar is tested only in the final stages of its development. A more efficient strategy would be to screen and select plants for seed yield at an early stage of breeding. An important objective of the National White Clover Breeding Program based at the Agriculture Victoria Pastoral and Veterinary Institute, Hamilton, is to assess the genetic diversity for important morphological attributes among germplasm accessions. A set of 53 accessions, which included germplasm collected from Morocco and Tunisia and a range of commercial cultivars, was characterised for seed yield components. The seed yield components were number of ripe inflorescences, number of florets per ripe inflorescence, number of seeds per pod, floret size, and inflorescence height. Potential seed yield was estimated. The magnitude of genotypic variation, together with the accession mean repeatability estimates, indicated the presence of genetic variation among the 53 accessions for all attributes. Both phenotypic and genotypic correlation coefficients indicated a strong positive association between total number of ripe inflorescences and seed yield. There was also a positive phenotypic and genotypic correlation between seed yield and number of florets per inflorescence. Cluster analysis of the 53 accessions based on seed yield components resulted in the generation of 6 groups. Principal component analysis helped to identify 5 accessions that could be potentially useful in improving the seed yield of white clover germplasm selected for superior agronomic and herbage yield attributes.

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

3.8
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