2013
DOI: 10.1080/19315260.2012.719598
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Estimates of Heterosis for Morphological and Flavor Attributes in Tomato

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 5 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For TSS 7 combinations produced significant positive heterosis over the better parent, maximum being in BWR-5 x Arka Meghali (15.04 %) (Table 5), on the contrary, only one combination (CLN 2116 x Solan Lalima (15.00 %) developed and evaluated significantly surpassed in positive heterotic effect over the standard check. Gul et al, (2013) reported similar results over better parent. An insight into the (Table 5) revealed that heterosis over better parent was found significant positive in EC-526146 x FT-5 (10.65 %) followed by 4 more crosses for ascorbic acid content whereas, 6 cross combinations showed significant positive heterosis over the standard check, maximum being in EC-5863 x Solan Vajr (15.56 %) the results are in line with Anita et al, (2005).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 54%
“…For TSS 7 combinations produced significant positive heterosis over the better parent, maximum being in BWR-5 x Arka Meghali (15.04 %) (Table 5), on the contrary, only one combination (CLN 2116 x Solan Lalima (15.00 %) developed and evaluated significantly surpassed in positive heterotic effect over the standard check. Gul et al, (2013) reported similar results over better parent. An insight into the (Table 5) revealed that heterosis over better parent was found significant positive in EC-526146 x FT-5 (10.65 %) followed by 4 more crosses for ascorbic acid content whereas, 6 cross combinations showed significant positive heterosis over the standard check, maximum being in EC-5863 x Solan Vajr (15.56 %) the results are in line with Anita et al, (2005).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 54%