Evaluation of tuberose (Polianthes tuberosa L.) genotypes under coastal ecosystem of Tamil Nadu

Abstract

Genetic variability existing among genotypes is the prime and basic factor for the improvementof any character in a successful breeding programme of tuberose (Polianthes tuberosa L.).Though the attempts made so far to exploit the available variability have culminated in therelease of a few improved region specific selections as varieties from different centers inIndia, still, varieties suited to coastal eco-system are yet to be identified. Hence, an experimentwas laid out to study the performance of 21 genotypes of Polianthes tuberosa L. collected fromvaried geographical locations. The trial was conducted in the floriculture unit of the Departmentof Horticulture, Faculty of Agriculture, Annamalai University under randomized block designreplicated thrice to assess the genetic variability for eleven economic characters. The resultsshowed that the genotype PT-15 recorded relatively superior mean performance with respectto all characters. High PCV and GCV were observed for number of leaves per plant, plantheight and rachis length. Low variability in terms of PCV and GCV was observed for length ofthe flower and time taken for flowering. High PCV and GCV values of more than 60 per centwas observed for bulb volume followed by yield of flowers per plant, rachis length and durationof flowering. The genotypes viz., PT-15 (Kuzhumani, Thiruchirappalli District), PT-3(Ravanthavadi, Dharmapuri District) and PT-10(Perumalpatti, Dindugul District) were identifiedas superior genotypes which are suitable for the coastal region based on per se values and canbe utilized for future breeding programmes.

Genetic Variability and Heritability Studies of Single Tuberose (Polianthes tuberosa L.) Genotypes

“…For all the traits studied shown higher phenotypic variance than genotypic variance. The maximum PCV and GCV was observed in case of weight of flower (40.99%, 40.47%) followed by number of leaves (32.8%, 32.59%) and weight of spike (29.61%, 29.44%) that indicates the presence of considerable variability in these traits and scope of selection and improvement (Rachana et al, 2013, Vanlalruati et al, 2013, Sathappan et al, 2018. Panse (1957), Sheikh et al, (1995), Gangadharappa et al, (2008) Gaidhani et al, (2016 and Chaudhary et al, (2018).In this context, a general interpretation can be drawn as GCV alone is not sufficient for determination of extent of variation that perpetuate from one generation to the next.…”