HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Nigam, S. N. Articles by Chandra, S. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Nigam, S. N. Articles by Chandra, S. Agricola Articles by Nigam, S. N. Articles by Chandra, S.

Combining Ability of Response to Photoperiod in Peanut

International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), ICRISAT Asia Center (IAC), Patancheru, Andhra Pradesh, 502324, India
Research Centre, Godrej Soaps Limited, Vikhroli (E), Bombay, 400079, India

^* Corresponding author (IN%" S.DWIVEDI{at}CGNET.COM").

Photoperiod insensitivity plays an important role in the adaptation of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) genotypes across environments. However, little is known of its genetic control. The objective of this study was to determine the combining ability of response to photoperiod in peanut. The F₁ progenies from a six-parent diallel cross excluding reciprocals were studied together with their parents for response to photoperiod under short and long day conditions in the field for three seasons. The experiment was conducted in a split plot design with photoperiod as main plots and genotype as subplots. The response to photoperiod (D_SL) was computed as the difference in harvest index (adjusted pod weight/adjusted biomass) between short and long day treatments. The mean square for response to photoperiod was highly significant for parents and their crosses. Season by cross interaction was the only significant interaction effect. The response to photoperiod was mainly associated with general combining ability variance. ICG 2405 and ICGV 86031 were good general combiners for insensitivity to photoperiod. All crosses of sensitive x sensitive and sensitive x insensitive parents were sensitive to photoperiod. However, in several cases, this response was not consistent across seasons and resulted in a significant season x cross interaction. The F₁ between insensitive parents was insensitive to photoperiod in the three seasons tested. A comparison of F₁ response with parents and midparent value of crosses between photoperiod sensitive and insensitive parents suggested additive gene action in some crosses and partial dominance to dominance in others.

Received for publication August 16, 1996.