Heterosis and combining ability in diallel crosses involving maize (Zea mays) S1 linesM. M. Muraya A B , C. M. Ndirangu A and E. O. Omolo A
A Department of Agronomy, Egerton University, P.O. Box 536, Njoro, Kenya.
B Corresponding author. Email: email@example.com
Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 46(3) 387-394 https://doi.org/10.1071/EA03278
Submitted: 26 December 2003 Accepted: 9 September 2005 Published: 28 March 2006
This study was conducted at Egerton University, Njoro, Kenya for 2 growing seasons, 2001 and 2002. A diallel cross, without reciprocal crossings, involving 7 maize S1 lines: KSTP001, KSTP003, KSTP004, KSTP005, KSTP008, E2 and E3 was used to study the heterosis and inheritance of days to 50% flowering, plant height, ear height, leaf angle, number of leaves per plant, leaf area index, cob length, cob diameter, number of lines per cob, number of seeds per line, 100-grain weight and grain yield. A randomised complete block design with 3 replicates was used. Analysis of variance was conducted on the data generated at 0.05 significant level using MSTAT. The results showed that general combining ability (GCA) and specific combining ability (SCA) was significant (P<0.05) for all traits under study, suggesting existence of both additive and non-additive gene effects for the traits. However, GCA : SCA ratio was >1 for all traits except cob diameter and 100 seed weight, indicating preponderance of additive gene effects for inheritance of these traits. The study identified KSTP003 as the best combiner for most of the traits, while KSTP001 and E3 was the best combination for most traits. KSTP004 and E3 was good combiner for grain yield. Hybrid KSTP005 × E3 was the best cross for grain yield. KSTP003 × E2 was the best cross for reduction of leaf angle thus good source for erectophile canopies in a hybridisation program. Heterosis estimates showed that heterosis was more important in grain yield, yield components, plant height, number of leaves per plant and, leaf area index than other traits studied. Most of traits studied had a positive and significant (P≤0.01), while all traits studied except days to 50% flowering had a positive and significant (P≤0.01) genotypic correlations. It is recommended that based on their combining ability the lines be recombined to form synthetic maize varieties which can be released both as a variety or used for further improvement using recurrent selection. The lines which combine well for reduction in leaf angle from vertical should be utilised to develop erective maize varieties.
Additional keyword: inheritance.
Ayiecho PO (1990) A diallel anaylsis of yield related traits in crosses involving two-row and six-row barleys. East African Agricultural and Forestry Journal 54, 239–246.
Darrah LL, Hallauer AR (1972) Gene effects estimated from generation means in four diallel sets of maize inbreds. Crop Science 12, 615–621.
Dhabholkar AR, Lal GS, Mishra RC, Barche NB (1989) Combining ability analysis of resistance of sorghum to shootfly. Indian Journal of Genetics 49, 325–330.
Gamble EE (1962) Gene effects in corn (Zea mays L.). I. Separation and relative importance of gene effects for yield. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 12, 339–348.
Garay G, Igartua E, Alvarez A (1996) Response to S1 selection in flint and synthetic maize populations. Crop Science 36, 1129–1134.
Gevers HO, Lake JK (1994) Diallel analysis of resistance to gray leaf spot in maize. Plant Disease 78, 379–382.
Grafius JE (1960) Does over-dominance exist for yield in corn? Agronomy Journal 52, 361–365.
Griffing B (1956a) Concept of general and specific combining ability in relation to diallel crossing systems. Australian Journal of Biological Sciences 9, 463–493.
Griffing B (1956b) A generalised treatment of the use of diallel cross in quantitative inheritance. Heredity 10, 31–54.
Hébert D, Fauré S, Olivieri I (1994) Genetic, phenotypic and environmental correlations in black medic, Medicago lupulina L., grown in three different environments. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 88, 604–613.
| CrossRef |
Jatasra DS (1980) Combining ability for grain weight in cowpea. Indian Journal of Genetics and Plant Breeding 40, 330–333.
Kang MS, Zhang Y, Magari R (1995) Combining ability for maize weevil preference of maize grain. Crop Science 35, 1556–1559.
Lonnquist JM, Gardner CO (1961) Heterosis in inter-varietal crosses in maize and it implication in breeding procedures. Crop Science 1, 179–183.
Mason L, Zuber SM (1976) Diallel analysis of maize for leaf angle, leaf area, yield and yield components. Crop Science 21, 78–79.
Moll RH, Kojima K, Robinson HF (1962) Components of yield and over-dominance in corn. Crop Science 21, 78–79.
Nienhuis J, Singh SP (1986) Combining ability analysis and relationship among yield, yield components and architectural traits in dry bean. Crop Science 26, 21–27.
Nigussie M, Zelleke H (2001) Heterosis and combining ability in a diallel among 8 elite maize population. African Crop Science Journal 9, 471–479.
Pendleton JW, Smith GE, Winter SR, Johnson TJ (1968) Field investigations of the relationship of leaf angle in corn (Zea mays L.) to grain yield and apparent photosynthesis. Agronomy Journal 60, 422–424.
Robinson HF, Comstock RE, Harvey PH (1949) Estimates of heritability and the degree of dominance in corn. Agronomy Journal 41, 353–359.
Rojas BA, Sprague GF (1952) A comparison of variance components in corn yield trials. III. General and specific combining ability and their interactions with locations and years. Agronomy Journal 44, 462–466.
Spaner D, Brathwaite RAI, Mather DE (1996) Diallel study of open-pollinated maize varieties in Trinidad. Euphytica 90, 65–72.
Sprague GF, Tatum LA (1942) General versus specific combining ability in single crosses of corn. Journal of American Society of Agronomy 34, 923–932.
Stangland GT, Rusell WA, Smith OA (1983) Evaluation of the performance and combining ability of selected lines derived from improved maize populations. Crop Science 18, 224–226.
Zambezi BT, Harner ES, Martin FG (1986) Inbred lines as testers for general combining ability in maize. Crop Science Journal 26, 908–910.