(go
to KOMUGI Home) (go
to WIS List) (go
to NO.74 Contents)
Results and
Discussion
Days to heading in wheat seems to be a quantitative character.
Such characters are controlled by a number of major and minor genes
separately and collectively. These genes are different in their
nature and action. Observations recorded on days to heading revealed
the involvement of monosomics 2B, 3B, 5B, 3D and 6D. Of these,
monosomics 2B, 3B, and 6D were late while 5B was early as compared to
the disomic at the p<0.01. Monosomic 3D, when compared to the
disomics, was late at the p<0.05 (Table
1). All of these
chromosomes except 5B have been reported by previous workers to be
involved in influencing heading time. According to Yoshida and
Kawaguchi (1984), who worked on the monosomics of "Chinese Spring",
monosomics 2B, 3B, 6B, 7B, 3D and 6D were involved in days to
heading. Of these only 3D was early while the rest were late. Bhat
and Goud (1979) worked on the monosomic lines of cv. "Pb. C591" and
"UP. 301" and found the effect of chromosomes 5A, 7A, 3D and 7D on
heading time. Of these monosomics 7A, 3D and 7D were early while 5A
was late. Results reported by Goud and Sridevi (1988) showed that
monosomics 1A, 4A, 5A, 6A, 3B, 2D and 7D carry the genes for days to
heading in the cultivar "DWR. 39". Of these 6A and 7D were early
while the others were late. They, in another report, (Sridevi and
Goud, 1988) found the influence of chromosomes 4A, 5A, 2B and 6B in
the trisomics of Triticum durum cv. HD. 4502. All of these
trisomics were late. Thus the results reported by us are in
confirmation with those reported by earlier workers except for
monosomic 5B which is being reported here to be involved in heading
time.
The mean flag leaf lengths of the monosomics were compared to that of
disomics. In the monosomics 1A, 2A, 5A, 6A, 2B, 3B, 4B, 5B, and 6D,
the deviations were found to be statistically different as compared
to the disomics. Monosomics 5A, 3B and 5B were different at p<0.05
as compared to the disomic while the rest were different at
p<0.01. The length of the flag leaf was increased in monosomics
1A, 2A, 5A, 6A, 2B, 3B and 4B while in the remaining two monosomics,
i. e., 5B and 6D, it was reduced. Out of the above reported
chromosomes, 2A, 2B, 3B and 5B have also been reported to influence
the length of flag leaf by Sridevi et al (1989).
As far as the width of flag leaf is concerned, monosomics 1A, 2A, 3A,
3B, 4B, 6D, and 7D were found to affect this character. Of these the
width of the flag leaf was decreased in monosomics 6D and 7D while in
the others it was increased (Table
1). The
involvement of monosomics 2A and 3A was also reported by Sridevi et
al (1989). Besides these two chromosomes, they found the effect of
6A, 1B, 2B, 7B, ID, and 5D on the width of flag leaf. According to
them, the flag leaf width was decreased in 5D while in the others it
was increased. Chromosomes 1A, 2A, 3B, 4B, and 6D were involved both
in flag leaf length and width and thus show greater contribution to
flag leaf size. Some differences have thus been observed between our
results and those of Sridevi et al (1989) as far as flag leaf size is
concerned. Out of the eleven chromosomes shown by us to effect this
chracter, six, viz., 1A, 5A, 6A, 4B, 6D and 7D have not been reported
by them, although the homoelogues of 1A (1B and ID), 5A (5B and 5D)
and 7D (7B) have been shown by them to influence this character. The
reason for this discrepancy could be due to the different cultivars
used.
<--Back |-->Next
(go
to KOMUGI Home) (go
to WIS List) (go
to NO.74 Contents)