COMPARISON AMONG SEVEN DIFFERENT TESTERS FOR THE EVALUATION OF NEW PEARL MILLET INBRED LINES (Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.)

M.V. BORATKAR¹*, S.W. BHIVGADE^2
1Department of Botany, Yogeshwari Mahavidyalaya, Ambajogai, 431517, Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University, Aurangabad, 431004, Maharashtra, India
²Department of Botany, Yogeshwari Mahavidyalaya, Ambajogai, 431517, Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University, Aurangabad, 431004, Maharashtra, India
* Corresponding Author : mb.cotbreeder@gmail.com

Received : 12-05-2023     Accepted : 28-06-2023     Published : 30-06-2023
Volume : 15     Issue : 6       Pages : 12440 - 12444
Int J Agr Sci 15.6 (2023):12440-12444

Keywords : Pennisetum glaucum, Line × Tester, Tester type, Combining ability, Broad genetic base
Academic Editor : R K Tiwari, Rajkumar Ramteke
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Authors are thankful to International Crops Research Institute for The Semi-Arid Tropics, Patancheru, Hyderabad, Telangana; and Super Seeds (P) Ltd., Hisar, Haryana India for trial conductance and data analysis and Department of Botany, Yogeshwari Mahavidyalaya, Ambajogai, 431517, Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University, Aurangabad, 431004, Maharashtra, India
Author Contribution : All authors equally contributed

This study aimed to evaluate twenty-six elite pearl millet inbred lines as well as the suitable tester among seven different. The elite inbred lines were crossed as female parents with seven testers (3 narrow base testers and 4 broad base testers) as male parents, i.e., MIT-27, MIT-28, MIT-29 (Narrow base testers), MOPT-30, MOPT-31, MOPT-32 and MOPT-33 (Broad base testers) at the International Crops Research Institute for The Semi-Arid Tropics, Patancheru, India during 2018 growing summer season. The resulting 182 crosses with five commercial check hybrids i.e., 86M86, 9444, ICMH 1301, ICMH 356 and HHB 67 Imp were evaluated in a yield trial during 2018 growing rainy season. Each experiment was laid out in randomized complete block design with two replications. The morphological and agronomical evaluated traits included days to 50% flowering, No. of Productive tillers, panicle length (cm), panicle girth (cm) and grain yield (kg/ha). Results revealed that variance due to locations were highly significant for all the studied traits except for number of productive tillers. The parental inbred lines (MBL-4 and MBL-9 were the best combiners) possessed high GCA effects for grain yield. The inbred tester T-2 was the best combiner among the testers and expressed the best SCA effect over all crosses. In comparison, among broad base tester and narrow base testers, both type of testers ranked 7 to 8 hybrids among top ten hybrids. This result reveals that we can use any type of tester to identify the best combiner. Heterosis results revealed that only single cross hybrids resulted positive heterosis

[1] A.R., Russel W.A. and Lamkey K.R. (1988) Corn breeding. In: G.F. Sprague, editor, Corn and corn improvement. 3rd ed. ASA, CSSA, and SSSA, Madison, WI, 469-564. [2] G.F. and Tatum L.A. (1942) J. Amer. Soc. Agron., 34, [3] O. (1957) John Wiley and Sons Inc., NY, [4] M.A.M. (2015) Egypt Journal of Plant Breeding, 19 (3), [5] H.A.A. (2015) Egypt Journal Agricultural Research, 93(2), [6] M.A.A., El-Shenawy A.A., Abo El-Haress S.M., Khalil M.A.G. (2016) Egypt Journal of Plant Breeding, 20(2), 353 [7] M.R., Abd El-Latif M.S., Abd-Elaziz M.A.A. (2018) Egypt Journal of Plant Breeding, 22(5), [8] M., Nirmalakumari A., and Ganapathy S. (2008) World Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 4(5), [9] J.M., Dangaria C.J., and Dhedhi K. K. (2009) Int. J Agric. Sci., 5(2), [10] B.K., Dhedhi K.K., and Dangaria C.J. (2012) Int. J Plant Sci., 7(1), [11] K. S., Gupta S. K., Marathi B., Danam S., Thatikunta R., Rathore A., and Yadav O. P. (2020) Crop Science, 60(6), [12] A.S., Lata R., Madariya R.B., Mehta D.R., and Chetana M. (2012) Electronic J. Plant Breed, 3(3), [13] M.N., Jadhav P.A., and Wadekar P.B. (2013) Bioinfolet, 103(3), [14] A. A. (2021) Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci., 10(09), [15] B. (2021) The Pharma Innovation Journal, 10(12), [16] M. (2022) Pak. J. Biotechnol, 19(2), 84-88.