Response to Selection for Earliness and Grain Yield in Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) Under Normal and Water Stress Conditions.* | ||||
Assiut Journal of Agricultural Sciences | ||||
Article 1, Volume 41, Issue 2, May 2010, Page 1-23 PDF (685.42 K) | ||||
Document Type: Original Article | ||||
DOI: 10.21608/ajas.2010.267869 | ||||
View on SCiNiTO | ||||
Authors | ||||
Mohamed A. El-Morshidy1; Kamal Abdu Abdel-Ghani Khair Allah1; Mohamed A. Ali2; Alaa A. Said3 | ||||
1Dept. Agron., Fac. of Agric., Assiut Univ | ||||
2Dept. Agron., Fac. of Agric., South valley Univ | ||||
3Dept. Agron., Fac. of Agric., Sohag Univ | ||||
Abstract | ||||
This study was carried out during the period from 2004/05 to 2006/07 growing seasons, at Faculty of Agriculture, Sohag University, Egypt to estimate observed and expected response to selection and other genetic parameters and calculate drought susceptibility index. Results revealed highly significant differences between F3 and F4 families under normal and drought conditions for days to heading, spike length, no. of spikes/plant, no. of kernels/spike, 100-kernel weight and grain yield/plant. Observed direct response to selection for days to heading was negative and highly significant compared with bulk and the check cultivar in F4 with values of -5.58 and - 13.88 % and -6.13 and -13.88 % under normal and drought conditions, respectively. The expected response to selection was 3.15 and 3.68% under normal and drought conditions, respectively. Observed direct response to selection for grain yield/plant was positive and highly significant compared with bulk, better parent and the check in F4 with values of 28.19, 18.59 and 26.09 % and 27.49, 16.67 and 21.20 % under normal and water stress conditions, respectively. On the other hand, the expected response to selection was 11.98 and 9.06% under normal and drought conditions, respectively. | ||||
Keywords | ||||
Genetic parameters; drought susceptibility index earliness; narrow some heritability | ||||
Supplementary Files
|
||||
Statistics Article View: 83 PDF Download: 55 |
||||