GENETIC ANALYSIS OF EARLINESS, YIELD, ANDITS ATTRIBUTES IN DURUM WHEAT(TRITICUM DURUM L.) CROSSES

GENETIC ANALYSIS OF EARLINESS, YIELD, AND
ITS ATTRIBUTES IN DURUM WHEAT
(TRITICUM DURUM L.) CROSSES.
El-Masry, M. Y.
Wheat Res. Dep., Field Crop Research Institute, Agr. Res. Center, Egypt
Key Words: Durum wheat, general and specific combining ability (GCA
&SCA), gen action (addive, dominance and epitasis),
heritability, heterosis, seed yield and its components.
ABSTRACT
This research was conducted with the aim of estimating the
effects of general and specific ability and some other genetic parameters
for the characteristic of the crop and its components and some
agricultural characteristics of some durum wheat hybrids. To achieve this
purpose, a half-diallel crosses set among six durum wheat (Triticum
turgidum var. durum L.) genotypes namely; P1 (line1), P2 (line 2) , P3
(Sohag 1), P4 (Sohag 3), P5 (Bani Sweef 5) and P6 (Bani Sweef 6( was
carried out in 2017-2018 growing seasons. The fifteen crosses and their
respective six parents were grown in 2018-2019 season in experimental
field at Sids agricultural Research Station. A Randomized complete
block design (RCBD) with three replications was used in this
Experimental field. From the results of crosses and their parents, mean
square of general combining ability (GCA) and specific combining
ability (SCA) were for all studied traits. The ratio between GCA and
SCA exceeded than unity for most studied traits revealing that additive
and additive x additive type gene actions are more important than nonadditive
gene action in controlling these traits. General and specific
combining ability effects were estimated by the method II of the
Griffing's model I. P1 (line 1) and P6 (Bani Sweef 6) were negative and
significant GCA effects for days to heading and P5 (Bani sweef 5) for
days to maturity as well as positive and significant in P2 ( line 2) and P6
(Bani Sweef 6) for grain yield/plant, so these two parents were good
combiners for grain yield/plant. Cross combination P1xP2 give desirable
heterotic effects for days to heading The most desirable crosses for SCA
in earliness were P1xP2 for days to heading and P5xP6 for days to
maturity. Furthermore, seven crosses were excellent in grain yield/plant.
Concerning grain yield/plant, eight and six crosses showed significant
positive heterotic effect relative to mid and better parent values,
respectively. Based on the Hayman method, the results indicated that
Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (7) 2020 116-131
additive and non-additive gene effects were involved in the control of
most studied traits. The additive component of genetic variance effect
(D) was significant for all characters except days to heading and spike
length whereas dominance genetic components (H1 and H2) were
significant for all traits. The average degree of dominance (H1/D)0.5
indicated that all studied traits might be controlled by over dominance
effects. . Broad sense heritability ranged from 18.019 % for 100-kernel
weight to 97.025 % for grain yield/plant On the other hand, heritability in
narrow sense was moderate (30 - < 50%) for plant height, days to
heading, no. of kernels/spike and grain yield/plant and low (< 30%) for
the remaining characters. These results agree with those obtained by El-
Sayed et al. (2000), Awaad (2002), El-Sayed and Moshref (2005),
Qabil (2017), Ljubičić et al. (2017) and Afridi et al. (2017).
INTRODUCTION
Durum wheat (Triticum durum L.) is very important crop in the
world. The nutritional value of durum is much higher than that of bread
wheat. Assessment of genetic parameters is very important from the
point of view plant breeders, in order to identify the appropriate breeding
method for improving earliness and grain yield. It is preferred for the
production of pasta or macaroni products, mainly because of its elevated
level of yellow pigments and appropriate protein and gluten
characteristics (Troccoli et al.. 2000; Zencirci et al.., 2005 Abdulvahit
et al.., 2012). Wheat landraces are locally adapted diverse populations
evolved through natural selection and are invaluable genetic resources for
breeding programs. The search for new genetic resources all around the
world has been underway to develop high-quality durum wheats through
its genetic resources (Bharat et al.., 2013). So, the genetic resources
evaluation for the agronomic characters via yield and yield components
in generations with their parents of durum wheat, it must be taken into
consider. Moreover, the improvement of yield in this crop requires more
information on the genetic of yield and yield components. Meanwhile, in
order to fulfill this target we must follow some of genetic parameters
such as heritability estimates as well as general GCA and specific SCA
combining ability, which may help to detect the tape of gene action
controlling characters under investigation work. However, Shamsabadi
et al. (2019) found that the analysis of variance and SCA effect were
significant for yield, yield components and agronomic characters. GCA
was significant for all traits except days to maturity and the mean square
ratio of GCA/SCA showed that non-additive genetic variance played a
predominant role in the inheritance of most traits wheat crop. Meanwhile
117 Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (7) 2020
Kumar et al. (2015), Ljubičić et al.. (2017) and Qabil (2017) found that
GCA and SCA were important in the inheritance of grain weight/spike,
plant height, spike length, no. of grains/spike, no. of spikes/plant, days to
heading and grain yield/plant in durum wheat crop. Al-Nagar et al.
(2015) studied the mode of inheritance in F2 diallel of durum wheat
crosses and found that GCA and SCA were significant for grain
yield/plant. On the other hand Khan (2016) and Afridi (2017) found
significant GCA and SCA variances in controlling days to maturity,
tillers/plant, spike length, no. of grains/spike and grain yield/plant. The
magnitude of SCA variance were higher than GCA indicating
predominance of non-additive gene effect for spike length, grains/spike
and grain yield/plant while GCA variance was greater for days to
maturity and tillers/plant. El Saadoown et al.. (2017) they were found
that mean square for both general (GCA) and specific (SCA) combining
ability estimates were highly significant for plant height, spike length, no.
of spikes/plant, 100-kernel weight and grain yield /plant. The ratio
between GCA and SCA exceeded the unity for all studied traits revealing
that additive and additive x additive type gene action are more important
than non-additive gene action in controlling these traits.
However, highest estimated of heritability was sowed for the
most traits in wheat (Bharat et al.., 2012), while, Kumar et al.. (2015)
reported high to low value heterosis in characters in wheat crop.
Based on the above, it can be said that, this information will help
to formulate the most efficient breeding procedure for achievement
maximum genetic improvement among a particular set of the durum
wheat varieties.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The present study was carried out at Sids Agricultural Research
Station, Agricultural Research Center (ARC) during the two consecutive
seasons of 2017/2018 and 2018/2019. Name, pedigree and origin of four
local durum wheat cultivars and two lines selected from exotic materials
allocated for this study are presented in Table 1.
All possible combinations of crosses without reciprocals among
the six parents were made in 2017/2018 season. In 2018/2019 season the
15 obtained crosses and there six parents were sown in a randomized
complete block design (RCBD) with three replications. Analysis of
variance was done according to Steel et al. (1997). Each plot consisted of
four rows for parents and F1. Each row was 2 meters long and 30 cm and
plants within row 20 cm apart. Data were recorded on 20 individual
guarded plants chosen at random from each plant for parents and F1
crosses.
Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (7) 2020 118
Table (1) Names, pedigree and selection history of the six studied
durum wheat genotypes
No. Parents Pedigree and selection history Origin
1 Line 1(p1)
Taler-1/Tarro-1
CD 9243119-5y-030M-oy-oM-osh
Mexico
2 Line2 (p2)
Snturk Mi83-84375/Nigris5//tantol-1
CD94483-A-3y040M-030y-Ap-0y-oSD
Mexico
3 Sohag 1 (p3) Godovz469131J"s"//61-13-Lds=stork"s" Egypt
4 Sohag 3 (p4)
Mexi/Mgha/51792//Durum6
CD21831-2sh-1sh-oSH
Egypt
5 Bani sweef 5 (p5)
Dipper-z/Bus Ren-3
CDss92B128-1M-o4-oM-oy-3B-oy-oSD
Egypt
6 Bani sweef 6 (p6)
BooAger-21/BusCa-3
CDss95yoo118s-8y-oM-oy-oB-1y-oB-oSD
Egypt
The recorded data involved days to days to heading (DH), days to
maturity (DM), plant height (pl.H) cm, spike length (cm), no.
spikelets/spike (spt/sp), no. spikes/plant (sp/pl), no. kernels/spike (k/s),
100-kernel weight gm (100-kwt) and grain yield/plant gm(Gy/pl).
General and specific combining ability were computed by
employing Griffing (1956) diallel analysis method Π model Ι. Heterosis
was computed as the percentage of F1 mean performance from mid and
better parent values according to Fonsecca and Patterson (1968) and
Wynne et al. (1970). Diallel analysis procedure, as outlined by Hayman
(1954 a and b) were used to estimate the relative magnitude of genetic
components of variance to obtain information on the genetic mechanisms
of the studied characters. Heritability in broad (h2.bs), and narrow (h2.ns),
sense were calculated according to Mather and Jinks (1982).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
1-Genetic variability:-
The mean performance of the six durum wheat parental genotypes
and their respective F1s' are presented in Table (2). The results showed
that there were significant differences among parents and their F1 crosses
of wheat durum. The most desirable genotypes for earliness, grain
yield/plant and most relevant traits were P3, P6 and the F1 crosses P2xP4,
P2xP5, P2xP6 and P4xP6.
Analysis of variance for all studied characters (days to heading,
days to days to maturity, plant height, spike length, no. spikelets/spike,
no. spikes/plant, no. kernels/spike, 100-kernel weight gm (100 kwt) and
grain yield/plant are presented in Table (3).
Genotype mean squares were significant for the all studied characters
indicating the wide diversity among the parental materials, which used in this
study. Results also were showed that the mean square due to parents were
significant for all studied characters. The hybrids in the F1 crosses were also
significant for all studied characters revealing overall differences between
hybrids. Mean squares due to parents vs. crosses were significant for all studied
characters indicating the presence of average heterosis.
119 Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (7) 2020
Table (2) : Mean performance of the studied characters for the six parents and their 15 F1 crosses
Entries DH DM PL.H SP.L. N.SP/PL N.SPT/SP N.K/SP 100KW GY/PL
P1 102.00 134.67 107.30 9.20 22.63 19.53 47.13 5.80 61.78
1X2 100.67 140.00 99.30 8.40 25.93 20.80 56.10 5.21 69.38
1X3 102.33 141.33 105.00 9.00 24.27 22.20 41.33 5.70 54.93
1X4 101.67 140.00 104.00 9.20 23.40 23.03 42.73 5.51 54.81
1X5 102.00 140.00 107.30 8.50 28.23 20.70 46.47 5.25 65.10
1X6 102.33 140.00 102.30 9.60 22.53 21.63 51.70 5.54 62.03
P2 102.33 136.00 104.00 9.20 22.17 20.00 60.03 5.27 65.06
2X3 102.67 138.00 101.70 8.40 19.93 21.20 47.90 5.61 55.24
2X4 102.67 135.33 103.00 8.90 25.33 21.73 55.87 5.32 73.24
2X5 104.00 134.67 102.30 8.60 21.33 21.40 58.13 5.15 68.16
2X6 102.67 137.33 100.00 9.00 21.97 20.30 38.00 5.49 65.53
P3 102.33 137.33 103.30 9.00 21.40 21.53 61.27 5.48 59.67
3X4 102.67 138.67 106.00 9.30 19.83 21.97 55.40 5.54 61.14
3X5 104.33 137.00 104.30 9.40 23.63 23.13 52.57 5.60 65.58
3X6 102.00 137.00 103.10 8.70 24.73 20.47 44.53 5.63 63.07
P4 103.33 136.67 107.00 9.00 18.30 20.27 49.37 5.39 52.44
4X5 103.33 134.33 104.30 9.00 25.03 21.57 47.60 5.03 58.96
4X6 102.33 137.00 105.70 8.90 25.50 19.40 52.60 5.30 68.07
P5 102.00 136.67 105.30 8.70 20.63 21.77 50.80 5.38 59.66
5X6 103.33 136.67 102.00 8.60 22.00 20.20 46.77 5.55 59.62
P6 101.33 136.33 106.3 8.60 24.57 21.07 52.00 5.21 71.34
Mean 102.49 127.43 104.00 8.90 23.01 21.14 51.35 5.42 52.61
LSD 5% 0.82 1.01 1.20 0.10 2.08 1.49 1.41 0.01 2.06
DH: days to heading, DM:days to maturity, Pl.H: plant height, SP.L.: spike length, N.SP/PL: no. of spike /plant,
N.SPT/SP: no. of spikelets/spike, N.K/SP: no. of kernel/spike, 100KW: 100 kernel weight, GY/PL: grain yield/plant
Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (7) 2020 120
Table (3): Observed mean squares from ordinary and combining ability analysis in the diallel crosses.
S. o. v. d.f DH DM PL.H SP.L. N.SP/PL N.SPT/SP N.K/SP 100KW GY/PL
Rep 2
Genotypes (g) 20 2.154* 1.210* 15.065* 0.355* 17.252* 3.118* 96.122* 0.102 96.886*
Parents (p) 5 1.289* 1.433* 8.258* 0.203* 13.232* 2.403* 102.083* 0.060 119.029*
Crosses (F1) 14 2.486* 1.191* 14.407* 0.432* 16.388* 3.242* 93.029* 0.123 99.268*
P vs F1 1 1.835* 0.357 58.337* 0.043* 49.448* 4.960* 109.625* 0.022 22.838*
GCA 5 3.144* 1.550* 22.851* 0.233* 12.36* 3.345* 162.801* 0.178* 134.499*
SCA 15 1.824* 1.096* 12.47* 0.396* 18.883* 3.043* 73.895* 0.077* 84.349*
Error 40 0.256 0.421 0.545 0.003 1.578 0.806 0.726 0.0001 1.544
δ 1.724 1.414 1.832 0.588 0.655 1.099 2.203 2.312 1.595 2GCA/δ2SCA
DH: days to heading, DM:days to maturity, Pl.H: plant height, SP.L.: spike length, N.SP/PL: no. of spike /plant,
N.SPT/SP: no. of spikelets/spike, N.K/SP: no. of kernel/spike, 100KW: 100 kernel weight, GY/PL: grain yield/plant
121 Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (7) 2020
Moreover, the variance associated with GCA and SCA was significant
in all studied characters of the F1 hybrids, Table (3). Thus, both GCA and
SCA revealed the presence of both additive and dominance types of gene
effects for all studied characters. These findings were in harmony with the
results reported by Morgan et al.. (2018) and Ayoob (2020). From Table
(3) it could notice that GCA was relatively higher than SCA for the studied
characters except for spike length and no. of spikes/plant. The ratios of
GCA/SCA were more than unity for most studied characters, suggesting that
additive gene action was more important than non-additive ones in the
expression of these characters. However, lower ratios GCA/SCA than unity
effects play an important role in the inheritance of spike length and no. of
spikes/plant (Table3). These results are in line with those obtained by Abd
El-Magied et al. (2004), El-Sayed and Moshref (2005), El-Sayed et al.
(2007), Fellahi, et al. (2015), Qabil (2017), Morgan et al. (2018), Ahmed
and Mohamed (2019), and Ayoob (2020).
2-General combining ability (GCA) effects:-
Estimates of GCA effects for parents are presented in Table (4).
Significant positive values for the studied yield characters would be of
interest except for days to heading at 50% and days to maturity where
significant negative effects would be useful. For days to heading, P1 (line1)
and P6 (Bani Sweef 6) were the best combiner for days to headings and P5
(Bani Sweef 5) was good combiner for days to maturity. The parental
genotypes P1, P4 and P5 were good combiners for plant height, P1, P3 and P4
for spike length, P1and P2 for no. of spikelets/spike, P3 (Sohag 1) for no. of
spikes/plant. P2 (line 2) and P3 (sohag 1) were good combiner for no. of
kernels/spike, P1 (line1), P3 (sohag 1) and P6 (Bani Sweef 6) were good
combiners for 100-kernel weight. Moreover, P2 (line 2) and P6 (Bani Sweef
6) attained positive and significant GCA effects, so these parents were good
combiners for grain yield/plant and could be used in future breeding for
improving durum wheat through it characters.
3- Specific Combining Ability (SCA) effects:-
Specific combining ability of cross combinations for the studied
characters are presented in Table (5). For days to heading P1xP2 showed
negative and significant SCA effects for earliness indicating the presence of
considerable non-allelic gene effects in these combinations. Regard to days
to maturity on cross, P5xP6 showed negative and significant SCA effects. So,
segregating lines may have earliness for maturity. Crosses P1xP5, P3xP4 and
P4xP6 were positive and significant SCA effects for plant height as well as
crosses P1xP4, P1xP6, P2xP6, P3xP4, P3xP5 and P4xP5 for spike length. In
respect to, no. of spikelets/spike, 3 crosses, P1xP4, P1xP6 and P3xP5 and for
no. of spikes/plant 7 crosses, P1xP2, P1xP5, P2xP4, P3xP5, P3xP6, P4xP5 and
P4xP6 showed positive and significant SCA effects, indicating that, they had
Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (7) 2020 122
considerable non-allelic gene effects in these combinations. In concerning,
no. of kernels/spike, 7 crosses (P1xP2, P1xP6, P2xP5, P2xP6, P3xP4, P3xP5 and
P4xP6) showed positive and significant SCA effects, so segregating lines
may had high no. of kernels/spike. The crosses P1xP3, P1xP4, P1xP6, P2xP3,
P2xP4, P2xP6, P3xP4 P3xP5, P3xP6 and P5xP6 showed positive and significant
SCA for 100-kernel weight indicating that these crosses contained an
epistatic effect in the inheritance of this trait. Finally , for grain yield/plant,
the crosses P1xP2, P1xP5, P2xP4, P2xP5, P3xP4, P3xP5 and P4xP6 exhibited
positive and significant SCA effects, these results suggesting that these
crosses had high increasing alleles for grain yield/plant and could be used in
the generations to select lines that produce high grain yield/plant. Similar
results were obtained by El-Sayed and Moshref (2005), El-Sayed (2006),
El-Sayed et al. (2007), Fellahi et al. (2015) and Qabil (2017).
4- Heterosis:-
Differences in significance for parents vs crosses mean squares were
detected for all the studied characters except days to maturity as showed in
Table (3). Heterosis expressed as percentage deviation of F1 performance
from its mid and better parents average value for all studied traits are
presented in Table (6).
For days to heading at 50%, two crosses named (P1xP2) and (P1xP4)
and one crosse named (P1xP2) expressed desirable significantly negative
heterotic effect from the mid and better parents, respectively. However, for
plant height one cross only, P3xP4, was positive and significant relative to
better parents. Concerning spike length, P1xP6 and P3xP4 significantly
exceeded mid-parent value, also P1xP6, P3xP4 and P3xP5 had significant
positive heterotic effects relative to better parent value. Spike length in fact
may be lead to erratic Judgment as the long of the spike could be lax or
dense and therefor, no. of spikelets/spike and number of kernels/spike could
be resulted in better criteria for spike density than spike length. These results
are in agreement with these findings by El-Sayed et al. (2000) and El-
Beially and El-Sayed (2002). Conferencing no. of spikelets/spike, ten and
seven crosses recorded positive and significant heterosis for mid and better
parents, respectively. Regarding no. of spikes/plant, nine and eight crosses
exhibited significant positive heterotic effect relative to mid and better
parents, respectively. In this respect positive heterosis for no. of spikes/plant
was obtained by El-Sayed et al. (2000) and El-Beially and El-Sayed
(2002). In respect to no. of kernels/spike, five crosses exhibited significantly
positive heterotic effect relative to better parents. Also for 100-kernel
weight, five crosses showed positive and significant heterotic effect over
mid and five crosses over better parents, respectively. Concerning grain
yield/plant, eight and six crosses showed significantly positive heterotic
effect relative to mid and better parent values, respectively. These hybrids
123 Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (7) 2020
exhibited heterosis for one or more traits contributed to grain yield. These
findings agreed with the general trend where the expression of heterosis for
a complex trait is always a function of its components. It could be concluded
that these crosses would be significant and positive in wheat breeding
program for improving grain yield/plant. Significant positive heterotic
effects relative to the better yielding parent were also determind by El-
Sayed et al. (2000) and El-Beially and El-Sayed (2002), Morgan et al.
(2018) and Ayoob (2020).
5-Genetic components:-
The estimates of the genetic components of variation D, H1, H2, and
F obtained according to Hayman (1954 a and b) and F1 hybrids data are
presented in Table (7). The additive components of genetic variance effect
(D) was significant for all characters except days to heading, plant height,
spike length and no. of spikelets/spike, on the other hand the dominant
components (H1) were significant for all studied characters. Moreover,
values of H1 for all studied characters were larger than the receptive (D),
indicating the importance of dominance gene action in the inheritance of
these characters. The components of variation due to the dominance effects
associated with gene distribution (H2) was significant for all studied
characters. All (H2) values were smaller than (H1) values for studied
characters, indicating unequal allelic frequency. The over dominance effect
of heterozygous loci was significant for no. of spikelets/spike only, these
results indicating that the effect of dominance is due to heterozygousity. The
covariance of additive and dominance effect (F) was not significant for all
studied characters indicating that an excess of recessive over dominance
alleles.
The degree of dominance (H1/D) 0.5 was higher than unity for all
studied characters indicating over dominance effect. The values of (H2/4H1)
were less than 0.25 for all studied characters revealing asymmetric
distribution of positive and negative genes among parents. The proportion of
dominant and recessive genes in parents KD/KR for all studied characters
revealed that dominant alleles were more frequent than recessive ones.
These results are in agreement with those obtained by El-Sayed et al.
(2007), Afridi et al. (2017), Ljubičić et al. (2017) and Qabil (2017).
6- Heritability:
Broad sense heritability ranged from 18.019 % for 100-kernel
weight to 97.025 % for grain yield/plant. On the other hand, heritability in
narrow sense was moderate (30- < 50%) for plant height, days to heading,
no. of kernels/spike and grain yield/plant and low (< 30%) for the remaining
characters. These results agree with those obtained by El-Sayed et al.
(2000), Awaad (2002), El-Sayed and Moshref (2005), Qabil (2017),
Ljubičić et al. (2017) and Afridi et al. (2017).
Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (7) 2020 124
Table (4): General combining ability effects for the studied characters in the diallel crosses
Entries DH DM PL.H SP.L. N.SP/PL N.SPT/SP N.K/SP 100KW GY/PL
P1 -0.556* 0.083 0.542* 0.078* 1.064* -0.067 -3.354* 0.060* -1.057*
P2 -0.014 0.167 -1.729* -0.093* -0.286 -0.317 4.579* -0.074* 2.926*
P3 0.153 -0.208 -0.117 0.065* -0.740* 0.508* 0.604* 0.140* -2.37*
P4 0.236* 0.208 1.146* 0.119* -0.678* 0.033 -0.813* -0.055* -2.148*
P5 0.444* -0.417* 0.342* -0.106* 0.047 0.321 -0.788* -0.075* -0.192
P6 -0.264* 0.167 -0.183 -0.064* 0.593* -0.479* -0.229 0.003* 2.842*
LSD5% Gi 0.192 0.245 0.279 0.020 0.475 0.340 0.322 0.0001 0.470
GI-GJ 0.593 0.380 0.433 0.029 0.736 0.526 0.499 0.0001 0.728
DH: days to heading, DM:days to maturity, Pl.H: plant height, SP.L.: spike length, N.SP/PL: no. of spike /plant,
N.SPT/SP: no. of spikelets/spike, N.K/SP: no. of kernel/spike, 100KW: 100 kernel weight, GY/PL: grain yield/plant
Table (5): Specific combining ability effects for the studied characters in the F1 crosses
Entries DH DM PL.H SP.L. N.SP/PL N.SPT/SP N.K/SP 100KW GY/PL
1X2 -1.256* -0.536 -3.541* -0.510* 2.138* 0.045 3.527* -0.191* 4.903*
1X3 0.244 -0.161 0.513 -0.068* 0.926 0.62 -7.264* 0.079* -4.251*
1X4 -0.506 -0.577 -1.749* 0.077* -0.004 1.929* -4.448* 0.084* -4.596*
1X5 -0.381 -0.286 2.388* -0.431* 4.105* -0.692 -0.739 -0.157* 3.741*
1X6 0.661* 1.131* -1.987* 0.694* -2.141* 1.041* 3.936* 0.062* -2.363*
2X3 0.036 0.089 -0.549 -0.498* -2.058* -0.130 -8.631* 0.127* -7.927*
2X4 -0.048 0.673* -0.479 -0.018 3.280* 0.879 0.752 0.034* 9.851*
2X5 1.077* -0.036 -0.341 -0.129* -1.445* 0.258 2.994* -0.119* 2.818*
2X6 0.452 -0.286 -1.883* 0.232* -1.358* -0.042 2.302* 0.150* -2.846*
3X4 -0.214 0.381 0.909* 0.190* -1.766* 0.287 4.261* 0.034* 3.047*
3X5 1.244* 1.006* 0.213 0.548* 1.309* 1.166* 1.402* 0.117* 5.531*
3X6 -0.381 0.423 -0.095 -0.193* 1.863* -0.701 -7.189* 0.076* -0.010
4X5 0.161 -0.411 -1.216* 0.127* 2.646* 0.074 -2.148* -0.261* -1.308*
4X6 -0.131 0.006 0.909* -0.114* 2.567* -1.292* 2.294* -0.062* 4.762*
5X6 0.661* -0.702* -2.22* -0.156* -1.658* -0.780 -3.564* 0.207* -5.641*
LSD5% Sij 0.526 0.674 0.767 0.054 1.305 0.933 0.885 0.001 1.291
SIJ-SIK 0.663 1.006 1.144 0.081 1.948 1.392 1.32 0.001 1.926
SIJ-SKL 0.727 0.932 1.06 0.076 1.804 1.289 0.122 0.001 1.783
DH: days to heading, DM:days to maturity, Pl.H: plant height, SP.L.: spike length, N.SP/PL: no. of spike /plant,
N.SPT/SP: no. of spikelets/spike, N.K/SP: no. of kernel/spike, 100KW: 100 kernel weight, GY/PL: grain yield/plant.
125 Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (7) 2020
Table (6): Percentage of heterosis over both mid parents and better parent values for the studied
characters in the F1 diallel crosses.
DH DM PL.H SP.L. N.SP/PL N.SPT/SP N.K/SP 100KW GY/PL
Entries
MP BP MP BP MP BP MP BP MP BP MP BP MP BP MP BP MP BP
1X2 -1.46* -1.30* 3.45* 3.96* -6.01* -4.52* -8.70* -8.7* 15.76* 14.6* 5.24* 4.00* 4.70* -6.55* -5.87* -10.2* 9.40* 6.64*
1X3 0.16 0.32 3.92* 4.94* -0.285 1.65 -1.10 -2.2* 10.24* 7.25* 8.13* 3.11* -23.8* -32.5* 1.06 -1.72 -9.54* -11.1*
1X4 -0.97* -0.32 3.19* 3.95* -2.94* -2.80* 1.10 0.00 14.34* 3.40* 15.7* 13.6* -11.4* -13.4* -1.52 -5.00* -4.03* -11.3*
1X5 0.00 0.00 3.19* 3.95* 0.941 1.890 -5.03* -7.6* 30.51* 24.8* 0.242 -4.92* -5.10* -8.52* -6.08* -9.48* 7.21* 5.37*
1X6 0.65 0.99* 3.32* 3.95* -4.21* -3.76* 7.87* 4.35* -4.53* -8.30* 6.55* 2.66* 4.31* -0.57 0.64 -4.48* -6.81* -13.1*
2X3 0.33 0.33 0.98 0.488 -1.88 -1.550 -7.69* -8.7* -8.52* -10.1* 2.09* -1.53* -21.0* -21.8* 4.37* 2.37* -11.4* -15.1*
2X4 -0.16 0.33 -0.74 -0.49 -2.37* -0.962 -2.20* -3.3* 25.18* 14.3* 7.92* 7.20* 2.14* -6.92* -0.19 -1.30 24.7* 12.6*
2X5 1.80* 1.96* -1.22 -0.98 -2.25* -1.630 -3.91* -6.5* -0.33 -3.78* 2.47* -1.70* 4.90* -3.17* -3.29* -4.27* 9.30* 4.76*
2X6 0.82 1.32* 0.86 0.98 -4.89* -3.85* 1.12 -2.2* -5.99* -10.6* -1.14 -3.65* -32.2* -36.7* 4.77* 4.17* -3.91* -8.14*
3X4 -0.16 0.33 1.22 1.46 0.808 2.61* 3.33* 3.33* -0.101 -7.34* 5.12* 2.04* 0.14 -9.58* 1.93 1.09 9.07* 2.46*
3X5 2.12* 2.28* 0.00 0.24 0.000 0.68 6.21* 4.44* 12.44* 10.4* 6.84* 6.25* -6.18* -14.2* 3.13* 2.19* 9.91* 9.90*
3X6 0.17 0.66 0.124 0.49 -1.62 -0.194 -1.14 -3.3* 7.59* 0.651 -3.90* -4.92* -21.4* -27.3* 5.33* 2.74* -3.72* -11.6*
4X5 0.65 1.30* -1.71 -1.71* -1.74 -0.949 1.69* 0.00 28.59* 21.3* 2.62* -0.92 -4.96* -6.29* -6.59* -6.68* 5.19* -1.17
4X6 0.00 0.99* 0.366 0.49 -0.89* 0.564 1.14 -1.1* 18.96* 3.78* -6.14* -4.29* 3.78* 1.15 0.000 -1.67 9.99* -4.58*
5X6 1.64* 1.97* 0.125 0.249 -3.59* -3.13* -0.58 -1.2* -2.66* -10.5* -5.70* -7.21* -9.01* -10.1* 4.82* 3.16* -8.98* -16.4*
0.84 0.726 1.971 1.707 2.243 1.943 1.271 1.101 1.341 1.162 1.738 1.505 2.460 2.131 2.520 2.183 2.093 1.813
LSD 5%
Sij
DH: days to heading, DM:days to maturity, Pl.H: plant height, SP.L.: spike length, N.SP/PL: no. of spike /plant,
N.SPT/SP: no. of spikelets/spike, N.K/SP: no. of kernel/spike, 100KW: 100 kernel weight, GY/PL: grain yield/plant
Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (7) 2020 126
Table (7): Estimates of genetic components and ratios for the studied characters from Haymen s' analysis
Components DH DM PL.H SP.L No. spt/sp No. sp/pl No. k/sp 100 kwt Gy/pl
D 0.345 0.298* 2.568 0.066 0.516 3.879* 33.788* 0.029* 39.160*
H1 2.604* 1.119* 15.867* 0.575* 3.697* 24.099* 104.252* 0.122* 122.168*
H2 1.729* 0.938* 12.205* 0.474* 2.717* 20.112* 83.563* 0.081* 99.653*
F 0.459 0.279 1.185 0.114 0.822 5.681 24.508 0.017 38.717
E 0.085 0.180 0.185 0.001 0.286 0.531 0.240 0.00003 0.516
h2 0.349 0.023 12.500 0.009 0.913 10.388 23.551 0.005 4.647
(H1/D) 0.5 2.747 1.938 2.486 2.952 2.676 2.493 1.757 2.051 1.766
H2/4H1 0.166 0.166 0.210 0.206 0.184 0.209 0.200 0.166 0.204
KD/KR 1.639 1.637 1.204 1.827 1.847 1.604 1.520 1.333 1.779
h2.bs 90.537 65.015 96.679 99.316 78.038 92.017 99.335 18.019 97.025
h2.ns 42.261 19.436 43.803 18.151 25.878 16.425 41.491 11.927 31.101
DH: days to heading, DM:days to maturity, Pl.H: plant height, SP.L.: spike length, N.SP/PL: no. of spike /plant,
N.SPT/SP: no. of spikelets/spike, N.K/SP: no. of kernel/spike, 100KW: 100 kernel weight, GY/PL: grain yield/plant.
127 Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (7) 2020
REFERENCES
Abd El-Magied, S.A.; A. M. M. Mousa and A. A. Abd El-Karim
(2004). Combimimg ability for yield and its components in
bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) crosses. Egypt J. Appl. Sci.,
19(7A): 132-142.
Abdulvahit, S. ; K. Mehmet ; Y. Ahmet ; Tuğba E. Gulec ; A. Ozlem
and K. Nejdet (2012). Some quality characteristics of selected
durum wheat (Triticum durum) landraces Turk J Agric For., 36:
749-756.
Afridi, K. ; N. U. Khan ; F. Mohammad ; S. J. A. Shah; S. Gul; I. A.
Khalil; M. Sajjad; S. Ali; I. Ali and S. M. Khan (2017).
Inheritance pattern of earliness and yield traits in half-Diallel
crosses of spring wheat. Can. J. Plant Sci., 97: 865–880.
Ahmed, M.S.H. and S.M.S. Mohamed (2019). Diallel crosses of bread
wheat under two sowing dates. i. genetic analysis of yield and its
components. Article (PDF Available) · April 2019 with 109
Reads.
Al-Nagar, A.M.M. ; R. Shabana ; M. M. Abd El-Aleem and Zainab
El-Rashidy (2015). Mode of inheritance of nitrogen efficiency
traits in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) F2 Diallel crosses under
contrasting nitrogen environments. Annual Research & Review
in Biology, 8(6): 1-16.
Awaad, H.A. (2002). Genetic analysis, resfonse to selection and
prediction of new recombinant lines in bread wheat (Triticum
aestivum L.). Zagazig J. Agric. Res. 29(5):1343-1365.
Ayoob M.H. (2020). Combining ability analysis , estimation of heterosis
and some genetic parameters using half diallel cross in bread
wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Journal of Education and
Science., 29 (1): 93-106.
Bharat Bhushan ; S. S. Gaurav ; Ravindra Kumar ; Rishi Pal;
Manoj Panday ; Anant Kumar ; Sonu Bharti ; S. S. Nagar
and V.P. Rahul (2013). Genetic Variability, Heritability and
Genetic Advance in Bread Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.).
Environment & Ecology., 31 (2) : 405—407.
El-Beially, I.E.M.A. and E.A.M. El-Sayed (2002). Heterosis and
combining ability for some bread wheat crosses. J. Agric.
Monsoura Univ., 27(9):5735-5744.
El Saadoown, A.W. EL ; A. A. EL Hosary ; S. A. Sedhom ;
M.EL.M. EL-Badawy and A.A.A. El Hosary. (2017). Genetic
Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (7) 2020 128
analysis of diallel crosses in wheat under stress and normal
irrigation treatments. Egypt. J. Plant Breed., 21 (5): 279 – 292.
El- Sayed, E.A.M. (2006). Genetic studies on some crosses of Durum
wheat. Egypt, J. Agric. Res., 84(5):1493-1504.
El- Sayed, E.A.M. and M.Kh. Moshref (2005). Breeding for yield,
yield components and some agronomic characters in bread
wheat. Egypt, J. Agric. Res., 83(2): 665-679.
EL- Sayed, E.A.M. ; A.M. Tammam and S.A. Ali (2000). Genetical
studies on some bread wheat crosses (Triticum aestivum ,L.)
Menofiya J. Agric., Res., 25 (2): 389-401.
El- Sayed, E.A.M.; A.K. Mostafa and E.M.A. El-Beially. (2007).
Genetic studied in some bread wheat crosses. Egypt, J. Agric.
Res., 85(3):925-939.
Fellahi, Z.E.A. ; A. Hannachi and H. Bouzerzour (2015). Partial
Diallel Analysis of Genetic Behavior for Several polygenic
Traits in Bread Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Int J Plant Biol
Res., 3(3): 1042.
Fonsecca, S. and F.L. Patterson (1968). Hybrid vigour in seven-parent
diallel cross in common wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Crop Sci.
2: 85-88.
Griffing, B. (1956). Concept of general and specific combining ability in
relation to diallel crossing systems. Aust J Biol Sci 9:463-493.
Hayman B.I. (1954a). The theory and analysis of diallel crosses. Genet
39:789-809.
Hayman, B.I. (1954b). The analysis of variance of diallel cross.
Biometrics 10:235-245.
Khan, A. (2016). Performance of different bread wheat varieties For
yield and yield attributes under diallel combinations. Annals of
Agrarian Science., 14: 25-34.
Kumar, P. ; G. Singh ; Y. P. Singh ; D. Abhishek and S. S. Nagar
(2015). Study of combining ability analysis in half diallel
crosses of spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). International
Journal of Advanced Research., 3(9): 1363- 1370.
Ljubičić, N. ; S. Petrović ; M. Kostić ; M. Dimitrijević ; N. Hristov ;
A. Kondić-Spika and R. Jevtić (2017). Dialle analysis of some
important grain yield traits in bread wheat crosses. Turk J Field
Crops., 22(1):1-7.
Mather, K. and J.L. Jinks (1982). Biometrical Genet. 3rd. Chapman &
Hall Ltd., London.
129 Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (7) 2020
Morgan, E.F. ; Fawazia I. Moursy ; M.S. Abbas ; Iman M. Sadek ;
A.K. Mostafa and M.A. Mohamed (2018). Heterosis and
combining ability estimates in 8x8 half diallel crosses of bread
wheat under two sowing dates. Egypt J. Plant Breeding., 22(2):
291-310.
Qabil, N. (2017). Genetic analysis of yield and its attributes in Wheat
(Triticum aestivum L.) under normal irrigation and drought
stress conditions. Egypt.J.Agron., 39(3): 337 - 356.
Shamsabadi, Es’h. ; H. Sabouri ; H. Soughi and S.J. Sajadi (2019).
Diallel analysis of some important morpho-phenological traits in
bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) crosses. Iranian Journal of
Genetics and Plant Breeding., 8(1):45-54.
Steel, R.G.D. and D. A. Dickey (1997). A Biometrical Approach 3rd Ed.
Troccoli, A. ; G.M. Borrelli; P. DeVita; C. Fares and N. Di Fonzo
(2000). Durum wheat quality: a multidisciplinary concept. J
Cereal Sci., 32: 99-113.
Wynne, J.C. ; D.A. Emery and P.M. Rice (1970). Combining ability
analysis over environments in spring wheat. Wheat Infor. Serv.
Japan, 67:21-24.
Zencirci, N. and A. Karagoz (2005) Effect of developmental stages
length on yield and some quality traits of Turkish durum wheat
(Triticum turgidum L. convar. durum (Desf.) Mackey)
landraces: influence of developmental stages length on yield and
quality of durum wheat. Genet Resour Crop Ev., 52: 765-774.
التحمیل الو ا رثی لمتبکیر والمحصول ومساهماته فى هجن قمح الدیورم
محمد یوسف المصرى
قسم بحوث القمح – معید بحوث المحاصیل الحقمیو – مرکز البحوث الز ا رعیو، مصر.
أجرى ىذا البحث بیدف تقدیر تأثی ا رت القدرة العامة والخاصة عمى التآلف وبعض
الثوابت الو ا رثیة الاخرى لصفة المحصول ومکوناتو وبعض الصفات الز ا رعیو لبعض ىجن قمح
الدیورم ، ولتحقیق ىذا الیدف تم اج ا رء تیجین النصف دائرى بین ستة ت ا رکیب و ا رثیة من قمح
بنی ( P5 ، ) سوىاج 3 ( P4 ، ) سوىاج 1 ( P3 ، ) سلالو 2 ( P2 ، ) سلالو 1 ( P الدیورم وىی ؛ 1
.2018- بنی سویف 6( ، حیث تم تنفیذ التجربو فی موسم النمو 2017 ( P سویف 5( و 6
الخمسة عشر ىجینًا الناتجو مع آبائیم الستة فی تجربة حقمیو بمحطة F وتمت ز ا رعو نباتات 1
2019 فى تصمیم القطاعات الکاممة العشوائیة ذات الثلاث - بحوث سدس فی موسم 2018
)GCA( مک ا ر ا رت. أسفرت نتائج التجربة المتحصل عمییا الى ان تباین القدره العامو عمى التآلف
والقدره الخاصو عمى التالف کانت معنویو لجمیع الصفات المدروسو.
Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (7) 2020 130
کما لعب التباین الو ا رثی الإضافی دو اً ر سائدًا فی و ا رثة معظم الصفات انطلاقا من
کذلک وجد أن الجزء غیر الإضافی لمفعل الجینی لو أىمیة ، GCA / SCA معنویة نسبة
کبیرة عن التأثیر الإضافی فی و ا رثة جمیع الصفات المدروسة. ایضا اظیرت النتائج تجاوزت
الوحدة لمعظم الصفات المدروسة مما یدل عمى أن النوع الإضافی SCA و GCA النسبة بین
الاضافى لو أىمیة أکثر من تأثیر الجین غیر الإضافی فی التحکم فی ىذه x والإضافی
P6 ، P ان افضل الاباء کان 1 )GCA( الصفات. اظیرت تاثی ا رت القدره العامو عمى التآلف
لمتبکیر فى النضج وبالنسبو لصفو محصول الحبوب / نبات P بالنسبو لمتبکیر فى الطرد و 5
)SCA( ىما الافضل، کما کانت تأثی ا رت القدره الخاصو عمى التآلف P و 6 P کان الابوین 2
المرغوبة لصفات طول النبات، طول السنبمة، عددالسنابل / نبات، وزن 100 حبة، ومحصول
الحبوب/نبات معنویة جدا.
لمنضج P5xP لمطرد و 6 P1xP وکان اکثر الیجن المرغوبو فى التبکیر ىما 2
واظیرت 7 ىجن تفوقا فى القدره الخاصو عمى الائتلاف لممحصول. وباستخدام طریقة ىایمان،
أوضحت النتائج أن تأثی ا رت الفعل الجینى المضیف وغیر المضیف کان لیا الدو ا رلاکبر فی
التحکم فى و ا رثو جمیع الصفات المدروسة. وقد أظیرت نتائج قوة الیجین لصفو محصول/النبات
ان عدد 8 وعدد 6 ىجینا کان لیا تأثی ا رً معنویاً اویجابیاً بالنسبة لقیم کل من متوسط الابوین
اولاب الأفضل عمى التوالی.
معنویا لجمیع الصفات المدروسو )D( جاء المکون الإضافی لتأثیر التباین الو ا رثی
باستثناء عدد الأیام الى التزىیر وطول السنبمة وعدد السنیبلات بالسنبمو. بالإضافة إلى ذلک ،
یُعزى معظم التباین یرجع إلى تأثی ا رت الجینات غیر المضیفو. بمغت متوسط درجة السیادة
أعمى من الوحدة لجمیع الصفات المدروسة مما یشیر إلى وجود سیاده فائقو. (H1/D) 0.5
ت ا روحت قیم معامل التوریث بالمعنى الواسع من 18.019 % لصفو وزن 100
حبو إلى 97.025 % لصفو محصول الحبوب / نبات. من ناحیة أخرى ، کان التوریث
50 ٪( لطول النبات ، عدد الأیام حتى التزىیر ،عدد حبوب / < - بالمعنى الضیق معتدلاً ) 30
السنبمة ومحصول الحبوب / نبات ومنخفض )> 30 ٪( لمصفات المتبقیة الاخرى عمى التوالی.
131 Egypt. J. of Appl. Sci., 35 (7) 2020