Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x24gv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-18T16:55:12.728Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of indigenous and exotic fodder sorghum accessions for fodder-related traits and host resistance to zonate leaf spot disease

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 March 2024

Indu I. ,
Maneet Rana ,
Mahesha H. S. ,
Nilamani Dikshit ,
Rajesh Kumar Singhal Open the ORCID record for Rajesh Kumar Singhal [Opens in a new window] ,
Bhargavi H. A. ,
Keerthi M. C. ,
Sultan Singh ,
Dinesh Joshi  and
Shahid Ahmed
Indu I.
Affiliation:
ICAR-Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute, Jhansi, UP 284003, India
Maneet Rana
Affiliation:
ICAR-Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute, Jhansi, UP 284003, India
Mahesha H. S.
Affiliation:
ICAR-Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute, Jhansi, UP 284003, India
Nilamani Dikshit
Affiliation:
ICAR-Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute, Jhansi, UP 284003, India
Rajesh Kumar Singhal*
Affiliation:
ICAR-Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute, Jhansi, UP 284003, India
Bhargavi H. A.
Affiliation:
ICAR-Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute, Jhansi, UP 284003, India
Keerthi M. C.
Affiliation:
ICAR-Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute, Jhansi, UP 284003, India
Sultan Singh*
Affiliation:
ICAR-Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute, Jhansi, UP 284003, India
Dinesh Joshi
Affiliation:
ICAR-Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute, Jhansi, UP 284003, India
Shahid Ahmed
Affiliation:
ICAR-Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute, Jhansi, UP 284003, India
*
Corresponding author: Rajesh Kumar Singhal; Email: rajasinghal151@gmail.com
Corresponding author: Rajesh Kumar Singhal; Email: rajasinghal151@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A total of 108 diverse sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) accessions were characterized for quantitative and qualitative fodder-related traits and zonate leaf spot (ZLS) (Gloeocercospora sorghi) disease during two successive wet seasons of 2019 and 2020 in augmented randomized block design. The Shannon's diversity index and analysis of variance showed the existence of significant variability among qualitative and quantitative traits. K-mean clustering showed strong relationship between green fodder yield (GFY) and other yield-contributing traits. The dendrogram constructed based on morphological traits classified accessions into four diverse groups and most of genotype fall under cluster II. The principal component analysis bi-plot analysis showed a total variation of 68.96%, where GFY, stem weight per plant, panicle length and dry matter yield (DMY) contributed significantly. From the experimental results, three sorghum genotypes viz., IG-03-424, IG-01-436 and IG-03-438 were identified as promising for higher GFY (808.66 g/plant) and DMY (238.0 g/plant), respectively. Further, based on disease reactions under natural condition, five genotypes viz., EC-512397, EC512393, EC512394, EC512399 and IG-02-437 were identified as potential donor for resistance to ZLS disease. These selected lines could be used as promising sources for high biomass and disease resistance in forage sorghum breeding programme.

Keywords

cluster analysisdisease resistanceforage improvementgenetic variabilityprincipal components
Type
Research Article
Information
Plant Genetic Resources , Volume 22 , Issue 3 , June 2024 , pp. 165 - 172
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of National Institute of Agricultural Botany

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Akatwijuka, R, Rubaihayo, PR and Odong, TL (2016) Genetic diversity among sorghum landraces of southwestern highlands of Uganda. African Crop Science Journal 24, 179–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bibi, A, Zahid, MI, Sadaqat, HA and Fatima, B (2016) Correlation analysis among forage yield and quality components in sorghum sudangrass hybrids under water stress conditions. GJBB 5, 444–448.Google Scholar
Chand, D, Dikshit, N, Gomashe, SS, Elangovan, M and Samdur, MY (2017) Assessment of morphological diversity among the dual purpose sorghum landraces collected from tribal districts of Northern Maharashtra. Range Management and Agroforestry 38, 199–207.Google Scholar
Dhaliwal, SS, Sandhu, AS, Shukla, AK, Sharma, V, Kumar, B and Singh, R (2020) Bio-fortification of oats fodder through zinc enrichment to reduce animal malnutrition. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology 10, 98–108.Google Scholar
Dikshit, AK and Birthal, PS (2010) India's livestock feed demand: estimates and projections. Agricultural Economics Research Review 23, 15–28.Google Scholar
Doggett, H (1988) Sorghum, 2nd Edn. Singapore: Longman.Google Scholar
Federer, W (1956) Augmented (or hoonuiaku) designs. Hawaiian Planters Record, 191–208.Google Scholar
Harlan, JR and de Wet, JMJ (1972) A simplified classification of cultivated sorghum. Crop Science 12, 172–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jain, SK, Elangovan, M and Patel, NV (2010) Correlation and path coefficient analysis for agronomical traits in forage sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.)Moench). Indian Journal of Plant Genetic Resource 23, 15–18.Google Scholar
Karthikeyan, BJ, Babu, C and Amalraj, JJ (2017) Nutritive value and fodder potential of different sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench) cultivars. International Journal of Current Microbiology Applied Science 6, 898–911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khurd, GN, Kadam, VK, Chavan, BH and Dahat, DV (2018) Study on variability, correlation and path coefficient analysis in Sudan grass (Sorghum sudanense L.). International Journal of Chemical Studies 6, 08–11.Google Scholar
Mengistu, G, Shimelis, H, Laing, M and Lule, D (2019) Assessment of sorghum genetic resources of Ethiopia for anthracnose (Colletotrichumsublineolum Henn.) resistance and agronomic traits. Journal of Phytopathology 167, 667–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palakshappa, MG and Hiremath, RV (2003) Symptomotology of zonate leaf spot of sorghum caused by Gloeocercospora sorghi. Karnataka Journal of Agriculture Science 16, 408–412.Google Scholar
Panday, KC and Roy, AK (2011) Forage Crop Varieties. Jhansi, UP: ICAR-IGFRI. http://www.igfri.res.in/cms/Publication/Miscellaneous/Forage_Crop_Varieties.pdfGoogle Scholar
Panse, VC and Sukhatme, PV (1961) Statistical Methods for Agricultural Workers. New Delhi: Indian Council of Agricultural Research, Publication, p. 359.Google Scholar
Patil, RC, Kalpande, VV and Thawari, SB (2022) Correlation studies in land races of kharif sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench). The Pharma Innovation Journal 11, 562–564.Google Scholar
Prom, LK, Isakeit, T, Cuevas, H, Rooney, WL, Perumal, R and Magill, C (2015) Reaction of sorghum lines to zonate leaf spot and rough leaf spot. Plant Health Progress 16, 230–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Purohit, J, Singh, Y, Bisht, S and Srinivasaraghavan, A (2013) Evaluation of antagonistic potential of Trichoderma harzianum and Pseudomonas fluorescens isolates against Gloeocercospora sorghi causing zonate leaf spot of sorghum. The Bioscan 8, 1327–1330.Google Scholar
Rao, PS, Reddy, BVS, Nagaraj, N and Upadhyaya, HD (2015) Sorghum production for diversified end use. In Wang, YH, Upadhyaya, HD and Kole, C (eds), Book Chapter:Genetics, Genomica and Breeding of Sorghum. New York: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, pp. 1–25.Google Scholar
Rohila, N, Arya, S, Kumari, P and Pinki, (2019) Correlation and path coefficient analysis of various sorghum genotypes (Sorghum bicolor (L.)Moench) for quality traits. Electronic Journal of Plant Breeding 11, 306–309.Google Scholar
Shannon, CE and Weaver, W (1949) The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Sinha, S and Kumaravadivel, N (2016) Understanding genetic diversity of sorghum using quantitative traits. Scientifica 2016, 3075023.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Subalakhshmi, VK, Selvi, B, Kavithamani, D and Vadivel, N (2019) Relationship among grain yield and its component traits in sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) germplasm accessions. Electronic Journal of Plant Breeding 10, 446–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suvarna, , Salimath, PM, Upadhya, HD, Lokesha, R, Nidagundi, JM, Patil, JR and Patil, A (2020) Collection and characterization of sorghum landraces from North Karnataka. Journal of Pharmacology and Phytochemistry 9, 704–708.Google Scholar
Tariq, AS, Akram, Z, Shabbir, G, Gulfraz, M, Khan, KS, Iqbal, MS and Mahmood, T (2012) Character association and inheritance studies of different sorghum genotypes for fodder yield and quality under irrigated and rainfed conditions. African Journal of Biotechnology 11, 9189–9195.Google Scholar
Thakur, RP, Reddy, BVS and Mathur, K (2007) Screening techniques for sorghum diseases. Inf. Bull. No. 76. International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics, Patancheru 502324, Andhra Pradesh, India.Google Scholar
Undersander, DJ, Smith, LH, Kaminski, AR, Kelling, KA and Doll, JD (1990) Chapter: sorghum-forage, alternative field crops manual. University of Wisconsin, Cooperative or Extension Service, Department of Agronomy-Madison and University of Minnesota Extension Service and the Center for Alternative Plant and Animal Products. https://hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/afcm/forage.htmlGoogle Scholar
USDA (2021) Foreign Agriculture Services. USA: U.S. Department of Agriculture. https://ipad.fas.usda.gov/cropexplorer/util/new_get_psd_data.aspx?regionid=sasia-2021Google Scholar
Vavilov, NI (1926) Studies on the origin of cultivated plants. Bulletin of Applied Botany and Plant Breeding 16, 1–245.Google Scholar
Verma, LKVK and Biradar, BD (2022) Pattern of genetic inheritance of grain yield and grain related traits in rabi sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench). Pre-print, Research Square.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verma, R, Ranwah, BR, Bharti, B, Kumar, R, Kunwar, R, Diwaker, A and Meena, M (2017) Characterization of sorghum germplasm for various qualitative traits. Journal of Applied and Natural Science 9, 1002–1007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

I. et al. supplementary material 1

I. et al. supplementary material
Download I. et al. supplementary material 1(File)
File 830.5 KB
Supplementary material: File

I. et al. supplementary material 2

I. et al. supplementary material
Download I. et al. supplementary material 2(File)
File 33.3 KB