Heterosis Performance of Seed Cotton Yield and Physiological Parameters in F1 Inter Specific Hybrids in Cotton  

Yanal Alkuddsi , S.S. Patil , S.M. Manjula , B.C. Patil , H.L. Nadaf , B.S. Nandihali
Agricultural Research Station, Dharwad Farm, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad, Karnataka, India 580005
Author    Correspondence author
Cotton Genomics and Genetics, 2013, Vol. 4, No. 5   doi: 10.5376/cgg.2013.04.0005
Received: 26 Jul., 2013    Accepted: 31 Jul., 2013    Published: 20 Nov., 2013
© 2013 BioPublisher Publishing Platform
This is an open access article published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Preferred citation for this article:

Yanal Alkuddsi et al., 2013, Heterosis Performance of Seed Cotton Yield and Physiological Parameters in F1 Inter Specific Hybrids in Cotton, Cotton Genomics and Genetics,Vol.4, No.5 60-72 (doi: 10.5376/cgg.2013.04.0005)

Abstract

In order to known better the heterosis performance, yield and physiological parameters in 112 hybrids (F1) and their parents the study initiated to create recombinational variability for combining ability, the elite barbadense lines DB 533 and DB 534 were crossed during 2007~2008. During two seasons 2008~2009 and 2009~2010 these barbadense crosses were advanced to F2 and F3 generations, respectively. The F3 lines were evaluated for productivity and fiber quality parameters realizing the emphasis laid on developing ELS (Extra Long Stable) cotton hybrids out of 171 F3 lines, only those F3 lines with acceptable fiber strength were utilized in the study on recombinational variability of combining ability. During 2010~2011 those twenty eight F4 lines of barbadense cross DB 533 × DB 534 depending on the higher value of fiber tenacity, were crossed with the selected four hirsutum testers viz., DH 98-27 (T1), ZCH 8 (T2), 178-24 (T3) and DH 18-31 (T4) selected based on earlier study. The derived F1 crosses (28 barbadense lines x 4 hirsutum testers) were compared with the bench mark crosses (two barbadense lines x 4 hirsutum testers) of the heterotic box, best Bt check hybrid (MRC 6918) and non Bt check (DCH 32). Many derived F1 crosses were found to be more productive than non Bt check DCH 32 (48 hybrids) and the Bt check MRC 6918 (35 hybrids). The potential crosses like DH 98-27 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 49), DH 98-27 X (DB 534 x DB 533 F4 IPS 22) and DH 98-27 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 52) recorded highest per se performance for seed cotton yield. These potential crosses recorded highly significant heterosis over mid parent for seed cotton yield. They also recorded significant heterosis for other physiological parameters. Apart from showing high productivity the potential cross DH 98-27 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 49 showed higher value of photosynthetic rate and stomatal conductance. This potential cross is example for blending of yield characters and physiological parameters.

Keywords
Heterosis; Per se performance; Seed cotton yield; Physiological parameters

Introduction
Using heterosis (hybrid vigour) to raise yield and fibre quality of cotton has long been an objective for researchers and producers (Meredith and Brown, 1998). Heterosis in cotton was reported as early as in 1894 by Mell (cited indirectly from Randhawa and Singh, 1994), and the foundation of the modern concept of heterosis was laid in 1908 by Shull (Randhawa and Singh, 1994). Since then, interspecific, intraspecific as well as intervarietal heterosis in cotton has been reported by a number of researchers who depicted mid-parent heterosis (MPH) from 0.19% to 122.7% and better-parent heterosis from 0.02% to 93.83% in lint yield (Turner, 1953, Davis 1978, Patil and Chopde, 1985, Gupta and Singh 1987). Many further reports have described heterosis in fibre quality, vegetative and reproductive growth, and photosynthetic production in cotton (Bhatt and Rao, 1981; Whisler et al., 1986; Khan, 2002; Chen et al., 2005). Heterosis studies have driven the release of many advanced cotton hybrids and large-scale heterosis utilization, particularly in India and China (Basu and Paroda, 1995; Wu et al., 2004).

It is reported that the genetic basis for yield heterosis in cotton is mainly due to additive and dominance effects (White and Kohel, 1964; White, 1966; Marani, 1968), while the physiological basis of heterosis for lint yield in cotton is probably attributed to the enhanced photosynthetic capacity, increased dry weight accumulation and more partitioning of assimilates to reproductive sinks (Whisler et al., 1986; Wells et al., 1988; Li and Jiang, 1992). The photosynthetic rates of cotton leaves under a given environmental conditions is a function of the various biophysical and biochemical processes involved during the diffusion of CO2 from atmosphere to chloroplast and the subsequent enzymatic reactions. The leaf transpiration and stomatal resistance are directly related to number of stomatal present per unit leaf area (Van de Roovart and Fuller, 1935). It has been suggested that a reduced stomatal frequency would be expected to reduce stomatal conductance (Penman and Schofield, 1951) which in turn reduce rate of water loss and increase the ratio of photosynthesis to transpiration in wheat (Jones, 1977). Similary Austin (1977) reported that low stomatal frequency increased stomatal resistance and decreased the transpiration in barley which inturn increased the yield due to increased water use efficiency under rainfed conditions.

Shimshi and Ephrat (1975) were of the opinion that wheat cultivars with a wide stomatal aperture produce higher yields without consuming more water. However, they also stated that permeability was significantly correlated with short term transpiration, short term photosynthesis and yield.

Wong et al. (1979) reported that stomatal conductance was correlated with photosynthetic rate and stomatal aperture is determined by the capacity of mesophyll to fix carbon. Further, Hutmacher and Kreig (1983) noticed that photosynthetic rate of leaves had a curvilinear relationship with leaf conductance.

Gopinath and Madalageri (1985) reported heterosis for stomatal frequency and leaf area over mid parent values in F1 hybrids of egg plant. In a similar observation Hazra et al. (1989) noticed marked heterosis for length, breadth and number of stomata on upper and lower surface in F1s from ten genotypes of vigna unguiculata.

Dhopte et al. (1988) reported that boll number and transpiration rate had direct positive effect on yield, while stomatal conductance had a direct negative effect.

Heterosis is defined as the increased vigour of the F1 generation over the mean of the parents or over the better parent (Hayes et al., 1955). Shull (1914) first coined the term heterosis. Heterosis has been observed for yield and other characters in cotton by many workers. Commercial exploitation of hybrid vigour in cotton has been successful in India with release of Hybrid 4 in 1969.

Heterosis produced by the joint effects of all the loci as the sum of their separate contributions can be represented by the formula (Falconer, 1981).

HF1 = dy²

Where,
d = Magnitude of dominance
y = Allelic frequency differences at a locus in the parental populations

The genetic causes involved in the expression of heterosis are dominance and non-allelic interactions (Hayes and Foster, 1976). The magnitude of heterosis can be maximized if the parents are genetically diverse from each other. Parents should differ for maximum number of yield influencing loci so that F1 exhibits the dominance effect at as many of the yield influencing loci as possible.

Heterosis works as a basic tool for improvement of crops in form of F1 and F2 populations, and economic heterosis (over standard cultivar). It also contributes to choose genotypes with desired genetic variance, vigor and maternal effects. Therefore, it is essential to have detailed information about desirable parental combiners in any breeding program, which can reflect a high degree heterotic response. In intra- and inter-specific heterosis, yield increase over better parent or greater than best commercial cultivar (useful heterosis) has been documented (Baloch et al., 1993b; Galanopoulou- Sendouca and Roupakias, 1999; Wei et al., 2002; Yuan et al., 2001 & 2002; Khan et al., 2007; Khan, 2011). Both positive and negative heterotic values have been detected, demonstrating potential of hybrid combinations for traits improvement in breeding programs (Hassan et al., 1999; Khan et al., 2009). F1 hybrids with high heterosis were also associated with higher inbreeding depression; therefore, moderate type of heterosis has some stability in segregating populations (Tang et al., 1993; Soomro, 2000; Soomro and Kalhoro, 2000). Therefore, heterotic studies can provide basis for exploitation of valuable hybrid combinations in future breeding program.

The main objective of this study to study the heterosis and mean per se performance of seed cotton yield and physiological parameters in inter specific crosses.

1 Results and Discussion
Heterosis is the superiority of F1 over the mean of the parents or over the better parent or over the standard check (Hays et al., 1956), with respect to agriculturally useful traits. The primary objective of heterosis breeding is to achieve a quantum jump in yield and quality of crop plants.

Cotton improvement programmes primarily lay emphasis on development of hybrids, which have contributed in improving the productivity of cotton. Hybridization is the most potent technique for breaking yield barriers. Selection of parents on the basis of phenotypic performance alone is not a sound procedure, since phenotypically superior lines may yield poor combinations. It is therefore essential that parents should be chosen on the basis of their combining ability. Combining ability analysis is the most widely used biometrical tool for identifying prospective parents and for formulating breeding procedures most likely to succeed.

The two barbadense lines DB 533 and DB 534 were selected for creating recombinational variability for combining ability. Twenty eight F4 lines derived from this cross were utilized to assess recombinational variability for combining ability by crossing them with 4 hirsutum testers. These results are presented below.

1.1 Analysis of variance (RBD)

The preliminary RBD analysis was carried out for four characters under study for all genotypes involved in the present investigation viz., 112 crosses (Line x Tester), 28 lines, 4 testers , two commercial checks (MRC 6918 Bt check and DCH 32 non Bt check) and eight bench mark crosses. Mean sum of squares for four characters are presented in Table 1. ‘F’ test indicated highly significant variation among the genotypes for all the characters.

 

 

Table 1 Analysis of variance for seed cotton yield and physiological parameters

 
1.2 Mean per se performance and estimation of heterosis
Mean per se performance of four hirsutum females and 28 barbadense males (Table 2) and derived F1 crosses and commercial checks (Table 3). Further, results of heterosis values over mid parent and commercial checks for various characters were studied to assess the variability for combining ability were given in Table 4.

 

 

Table 2 Per se performance of 28 barbadense lines and 4 hirsutum testers for seed cotton yield and physiological parameters

 

 

Table 3 Per se performance of derived F1 crosses for seed cotton yield and physiological parameters

 

 

Table 4 Heterosis over mid parent and commercial checks for lint index, seed cotton yield, photosynthesis rate, stomatal conductance and transpiration rate in derived F1 crosses

 
1.3 Seed cotton yield (kg·ha-1)
Seed cotton yield values ranged from 1368.15 [DB 533 x DB 534 F5 IPS 49] to 441.81 [DB 533 x DB 534 F5 IPS 33] among males/ lines, 2503.93 [DH 98-27] to 1870.91 [178-24] among females/testers and 2884.26 [DH 98-27 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 49)] to 1146.20 [178-24 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 33)] among derived F1 crosses.

Per cent heterosis of F1 crosses over their respective mid parental values ranged from 108.16 [DH 98-27 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 49)] to -38.94 [178-24 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 33)]. Thirty crosses showed significant positive heterosis and only one cross showed significant negative heterosis over their mid parent. Majority of workers viz., Tuteja et al. (1996), Doss and Kadambavanasundaram (1997), Siruguppa and Parameswarappa (1998), Neelima (2002) and Potdukhe (2002) also reported heterosis over mid parent. The cross DH 98-27 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 49) (39.97) recorded highest significant positive heterosis over commercial check MRC 6918 and the cross 178-24 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 33) (-44.37) exhibited lowest significant negative heterosis over MRC 6918. Two crosses showed significant heterosis in positive direction and two crosses showed significant heterosis in negative direction over MRC 6918. In case of DCH 32 non Bt check, the cross DH 98-27 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 49) (44.31) showed highest significant positive heterosis over this check, but the cross 178-24 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 33) (-42.65) recorded lowest significant negative heterosis value over DCH 32 commercial check. Two crosses exhibited significant positive heterosis over DCH 32 commercial check and only one cross showed significant negative heterosis. Majority of workers viz., Tuteja et al. (1996), Doss and Kadambavanasundaram (1997), Siruguppa and Parameswarappa (1998), Neelima (2002) and Potdukhe (2002) also reported heterosis over mid parent.

1.4 Photosynthetic rate (µmol CO2 m-2·s-1)
The photosynthetic rates of cotton leaves under a given environmental conditions is a function of the various biophysical and biochemical processes involved during the diffusion of CO2 from atmosphere to chloroplast and the subsequent enzymatic reactions. The values of photosynthetic rate ranged from 27.15 [DB 533 x DB 534 F5 IPS 13] to 16.49 [DB 533 x DB 534 F5 IPS 8] among males/ lines, 29.62 [178-24] to 21.20 [DH18-31] among females/testers and 34.25 [ZCH 8 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 52)] to 3.15 [ZCH 8 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 33)] among derived F1 crosses.

Per cent heterosis of F1s over their respective mid parent values ranged from 74.56 [ZCH 8 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 52)] to -84.91 [ZCH 8 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 33)]. Fourty four crosses showed significant positive heterosis and twenty crosses showed significant negative heterosis over their mid parent. The cross ZCH 8 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 52) (18.97) recorded highest significant positive heterosis over commercial check MRC 6918 and the cross ZCH 8 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 33) (-89.07) exhibited lowest significant negative heterosis over MRC 6918. Thirty nine crosses showed significant heterosis in negative direction and only one cross showed significant heterosis in positive direction over MRC 6918. In case of DCH 32 check, the cross ZCH 8 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 52) (41.83) showed highest significant positive heterosis over this check, but the cross ZCH 8 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 33) (-86.97) recorded lowest significant negative heterosis value over DCH 32 commercial check. Thirty crosses exhibited significant positive heterosis over DCH 32 commercial check and eighteen crosses showed significant negative heterosis.

1.5 Stomatal conductance (µmol·m-2·s-1)
The rate of stomatal conductance, or its inverse, stomatal resistance, is directly related to the boundary layer resistance of the leaf and the absolute concentration gradient of water vapor from the leaf to the atmosphere. Stomatal conductance values ranged from 2.38 [DB 533 x DB 534 F5 IPS 55] to 0.55 [DB 533 x DB 534 F5 IPS 15] among males/ lines, 1.22 [178-24] to 0.78 [DH18-31] among females/testers and 1.17 [ZCH 8 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 52)] to 0.09 [178-24 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 15)] among derived F1 crosses.

Per cent heterosis of F1 crosses over their respective mid parental values ranged from 75.94 [ZCH 8 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 52)] to -90.67 [178-24 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 15)]. Sixty three crosses showed significant negative heterosis and eleven crosses showed significant positive heterosis over their mid parent. The cross ZCH 8 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 52) (53.95) recorded highest significant positive heterosis over commercial check MRC 6918 and the cross 178-24 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 15) (-88.16) exhibited lowest significant negative heterosis over MRC 6918. Thirty eight crosses showed significant heterosis in negative direction and nine crosses showed significant heterosis in positive direction over MRC 6918. In case of DCH 32 check, the cross ZCH 8 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 52) (234.29) showed highest significant positive heterosis over this check, but the cross 178-24 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 15) (-74.29) recorded lowest significant negative heterosis value over DCH 32 commercial check. Seventy four crosses exhibited significant positive heterosis over DCH 32 commercial check and six crosses showed significant negative heterosis. The majority of crosses showing significant negative heterosis over mid parent and MRC 6918 for stomatal conductance, while showed significant positive heterosis over DCH 32 check. Gopinath and Madalageri (1985) reported heterosis for stomatal conductance over mid-parent values. Majority of hybrids possessed higher stomatal conductance as compared to parents. This may be attributed to higher stomatal frequency, length and breadth of stomata observed in hybrids. Austin (1977) and Jing and Ma (1990) reported that reduced stomatal frequency would reduce stomatal conductance and increase the yield due to increased water use efficiency under water limiting conditions.

1.6 Transpiration rate (mmol H2O m-2·s-1)
The leaf transpiration and stomatal resistance are directly related to number of stomatal present per unit leaf area (Vande Roovart and Fuller, 1935). Transpiration rate values ranged from 16.66 [DB 533 x DB 534 F5 IPS 105] to 7.92 [DB 533 x DB 534 F5 IPS 14] among males/ lines, 11.77 [178-24] to 10.09 [DH 98-27] among females/testers and 10.04 [DH 98-27 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 1)] to 2.07 [178-24 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 32)] among derived F1 crosses.

Per cent heterosis of F1s over their respective mid parent values ranged from -5.85 [178-24 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 38)] to -79.10 [178-24 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 32)]. Ninety seven crosses showed significant negative heterosis over their mid parent. The cross DH 98-27 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 1) (55.26) recorded highest significant positive heterosis over commercial check MRC 6918 and the cross 178-24 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 32) (-67.93) exhibited lowest significant negative heterosis over MRC 6918. Thirteen crosses showed significant heterosis in negative direction and only one cross showed significant heterosis in positive direction over MRC 6918 Bt check. In case of DCH 32 check, the cross DH 98-27 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 1) (93.92) showed highest significant positive heterosis over this check, but the cross 178-24 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 32) (-59.94) recorded lowest significant negative heterosis value over DCH 32 commercial check. Two crosses exhibited significant negative heterosis over DCH 32 commercial check and seventeen crosses showed significant positive heterosis.

2 Conclusion

In this part of the study nature and magnitude of variability for combining ability was assessed against four hirsutum tester included in the heterotic box.

The derived F1 crosses (28 barbadense lines x 4 hirsutum testers) were compared with the bench mark crosses (two barbadense lines x 4 hirsutum testers) of the heterotic box, best Bt check hybrid (MRC 6918) and non Bt check (DCH 32). Many derived F1 crosses were found to be more productive than non Bt check DCH 32 (48 hybrids) and the Bt check MRC 6918 (35 hybrids). The potential crosses like DH 98-27 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 49), DH 98-27 X (DB 534 x DB 533 F4 IPS 22) and DH 98-27 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 52) recorded highest per se performance for seed cotton yield. These potential crosses recorded highly significant heterosis over mid parent for seed cotton yield. They also recorded significant heterosis for other physiological parameters.

Apart from showing high productivity the potential cross DH 98-27 X (DB 533 x DB 534 F4 IPS 49 showed higher value of photosynthetic rate and stomatal conductance. This potential cross is example for blending of yield characters and physiological parameters.

3 Materials and Method
To create recombinational variability for combining ability, the elite barbadense lines DB 533 and DB 534 were crossed during 2007~2008. During two seasons 2008~2009 and 2009~2010 these barbadense crosses were advanced to F2 and F3 generations, respectively. The F3 lines were evaluated for productivity and fiber quality parameters realizing the emphasis laid on developing ELS (Extra Long Stable) cotton hybrids out of 171 F3 lines, only those F3 lines with acceptable fiber strength were utilized in the study on recombinational variability of combining ability. During 2010~2011 those twenty eight F4 lines of barbadense cross DB 533 × DB 534 depending on the higher value of fiber tenacity, were crossed with the selected four hirsutum testers viz., DH 98-27 (T1), ZCH 8 (T2), 178-24 (T3) and DH 18-31 (T4) selected based on earlier study. Each barbadense F4 line was involved in a set of crosses (112 crosses refer to as derived F1 crosses) were subjected to Line x Tester analysis.

The physiological observations have taken by using portable photosynthesis system of Infra Red Gas Analyzer (IRGA), which measures gas exchange parameters apart from environmental parameters There are several methods of measuring CO2 fixation or exchange in plants but, the modern techniques of determining CO2 fixation using infra red gas analysis (IRGA) of CO2 is most widely employed owing to the precision of detecting very small changes in CO2 concentrations. This method is very sensitive for CO2 uptake by small leaves or even segments of leaves. The IRGA records the change in CO2 concentration in the system and the rate of change with time gives an estimate of the CO2 or water exchange rate. The main advantage of this method is that it can be used at a wide range of CO2 concentrations, light, relative humidity and temperature and for studying the effects of these environmental factors that parameters influencing photosynthesis or gas exchange parameters.

3.1 Photosynthetic rate (µmol CO2 m-2·s-1)
Photosynthesis, the conversion of light energy to chemical energy and the utilization of the chemical energy. The rate of photosynthesis is affected by a number of factors including light levels, temperature, availability of water, and availability of nutrients. If the conditions that the plant needs are improved the rate of photosynthesis increases.

3.2 Stomatal conductance (µmol·m-2·s-1)
Stomatal conductance, measured in µmol m-2 s-1 is the measure of the rate of passage of carbon dioxide CO2 entering, or water vapor exiting through the stomata of a leaf. Stomata are small pores on the top and bottom of a leaf that are responsible for taking in and expelling CO2 and moisture from and to the outside air. The rate of stomatal conductance, or its inverse, stomatal resistance, is directly related to the boundary layer resistance of the leaf and the absolute concentration gradient of water vapor from the leaf to the atmosphere.

3.3 Transpiration rate (mmol H2O m-2·s-1)

Loss of water in the form of water vapour from the internal living tissue of the leaf through the aerial parts such as leaf, green stem, etc., under the influence of sunlight is called as transpiration. The excess amount is transpired through the aerial parts of the plants. Thus, only 5 per cent of the absorbed water is retained in the plants and remaining 95 per cent is lost through aerial parts the leaves are most important for transpiration.

Heterosis of F1 over mid parent (MP) and commercial check (MRC 6918 and DCH 32) were calculated by methods of Turner (1953) and Hayes et al. (1955) as given below.

Per cent heterosis in F1 over mid parent (MP) = (F1-P)/MP × 100
Where, Mid parent (MP) = (P1+P2)/2

Per cent heterosis in F1 over commercial check (CC)= (F1-CC)/CC × 100
Where, MP = Mid parent, CC = Commercial check

Mean sum of squares due to error from RBD analysis was considered to compute standard error (S.E.) of estimated heterosis as follows.

S.E. for heterosis over mid parent

S.E. (Hmp) = [(3/2 × EMS)/r]0.5

S.E. for heterosis over commercial check

S.E. (Hcc) = (2 × EMS / r)0.5

Where, EMS = Error mean sum of squares

The critical difference values in each case were worked out by multiplying their corresponding S.E. values with table ‘t’ value at error degree of freedom at 5 and 1 per cent levels of significance.

References
Austin R.B., 1977, Improvement of barely for dryland forming, In: Proc. symp plant improv for arid zone, Ahwaz, Iran., pp.12-27

Baloch M.J., G.H. Tunio, and A.R. Lakho, 1993b, Performance of F1 hybrids from intra-hirsutum L. crosses of upland cotton. Pak. J. Sci. Ind. Res., 36: 38-40

Basu A.K., and R.S. Paroda, eds., 1995, Hybrid Cotton in India – a Success Story, Asia-Pacific Association of Agricultural Research Institutions, FAO Regional Office for Asia & The Pacific, Bangkok

Bhatt J.G., and M.R.K. Rao, 1981, Heterosis in growth and photosynthetic rate in hybrids of cotton, Euphytica, 30(1): 129-133
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00033668

Dhopte A.M., Mohod V.K., Potkile N.N., and Wankhde S.T., 1988, Influence of leaf morphology on stomatal conductance, transpiration, leaf temperature in isolines of ten cotton varieties under optimum soil moisture and their association with productivity, Ann. plant physiol., 2: 140-148

Chen Z.H., F.B. Wu, X.D. Wang, and G.P. Zhang, 2005, Heterosis in CMS hybrids of cotton for photosynthetic and chlorophyll fluorescence parameters, Euphytica, 144(3): 353-361
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10681-005-8188-y

Davis D.D., 1978, Hybrid cotton: specific problems and potentials, Adv. Agron., 43: 514-516

Doss and Kadambavanasundaram M., 1997, Heterosis in intra and inter specific hybrids in tetraploid cotton, J. Indian Soc. Cotton Improv, 22(2): 110-117

Falconer, D. S., ed., 1981, Introduction of Quantitative Genetics, Longman Inc. Ltd., New York, pp.340

Galanopoulou-Sendouca S., and G. Roupakias, 1999, Performance of cotton F1 hybrids and its relation to the mean yield of advanced bulk generations, Eur. J. Agron., 11: 53-62
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1161-0301(99)00018-0

Gopinath G., and Madalageri B.B., 1985, A note on the heredity of leaf area and stomatal frequency in egg plant (Solanum melongena), Current Res., 14: (4/6):36-37

Gupta S.P., and T.H. Singh, 1987, Heterosis and inbreeding depression for seed cotton yield and some fiber attributes in upland cotton, Crop Improv. 14, 14-17

Hassan G., G. Mahmood, N.U. Khan, and A. Razzaq, 1999, Combining ability and heterobeltiotic estimates in a diallel cross of cotton (G. hirsutum L.), Sarhad J. Agric., 15: 563-568

Hayes J.D., and Foster C.A., 1976, Heterosis in self pollinated crops with particular reference to barley, Heterosis in plant breeding, Proc of 7th Congress EUCARPIA, pp. 239-256

Hayes H.K., Immer F.R. and Smith D.C., eds., 1955, Methods of Plant Breeding, Mc. Graw Hill Book Co. Inc., New York, pp.551

Hayes, H. K., Immer, F. F. and Smith, D. L., eds., 1956, Methods of Plant Breeding, McGraw Hill Book Publishing Company, Inc., New Delhi, pp.21-34

Hazra S., Sathaye S.S., Mascarenhas A.F., 1989, Direct somatic embryogenesis in peanut (Arachis hypogaea L), Bio/Technol., 7: 949-951

Hutmacher R.B., and Krieg D.R., 1983, Photosynthetic rate control in cotton, Stomatal and non-stomatal factors, Plant Physiol., 73: 658-661
http://dx.doi.org/10.1104/pp.73.3.658PMid:16663277 PMCid:PMC1066525

Jing J.H., and Ma S.S., 1990, Response of leaf gas exchange to water stress in maize, upland rice, cowpeas and cotton, Acta Agronomica Silica., 16: 342-348

Jones H.G., 1977, Aspects of water relations of spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in response to induced drought, J. Agri. Sci., 88: 267-282
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0021859600034766

Khan N.U., 2011, Economic heterosis for morpho-yield traits in F1 and F2 diallel crosses of upland cotton, SABRAO J. Breed. Genet., 43(2): 144-164

Khan N.U., G. Hassan, M.B. Kumbhar, K.B. Marwat, M.A. Khan, A. Parveen, U. Aiman and M. Saeed, 2009, Combining ability analysis to identify suitable parents for heterosis in seed cotton yield, its components and lint % in upland cotton, Ind. Crops Prod., 29: 108-115
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2008.04.009

Khan N.U., G. Hassan, M.B. Kumbhar, S. Kang, I. Khan, A. Parveen, U. Aiman, and M. Saeed, 2007, Heterosis and inbreeding depression and mean performance in segregating generations in upland cotton, Eur. J. Scien. Res., 17: 531-546

Khan U.Q., 2002, Study of heterosis in fiber quality traits of upland cotton, Asian J. Plant Sci., 5: 593-595

Li D.Y., and X.Y. Jiang, 1992, A study on the nutrient absorption and characteristic of dry matter production in hybrid cotton (G. hirsutium L.), Acta Agron. Sin., 18: 196-204

Marani A., 1968, Heterosis and F2 performance in intraspecific cross of Gossypium hirsutiom L. and G. barbadense L., Crop Sci., 8: 111-113
http://dx.doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1968.0011183X000800010034x

Meredith M. R. Jr, and S. Brown, 1998, Heterosis and combining ability of cottons originating from different regions of the United States, J. Cotton Sci., 2: 77-84

Neelima S., 2002, Heterosis and combining ability analysis for yield and yield components in cotton (G. hirsutum L.), M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Acharya N. G. Ranga Agric.Univ., Hyderabad

Patil R.A., and P.R. Chopde, 1985, Heterosis for yield and its traits in upland cotton, Md. J. Agric. 55: 402-406

Penman H.L., and Schofield R.K., 1951, Some physical aspects of assimilation and transpiration, Sympo. Soc. Experiment Biol., 5: 115-129

Potdukhe N.R., 2002, Level of heterosis for quantitative traits in upland cotton, J. Indian Soc. Cotton Improv., 27(3): 200-214

Randhawa L.S., and T.H. Singh, 1994, Heterosis breeding for crossing parent yield barriers in cotton, In: G. A. Constable, and N. W. Forester (eds), Proc. World Cotton Res. Conf. 1, Challenging the Future, CSIRO, Brisbane, Australia

Shimshi D., and Ephrat J., 1975, Stomatal behavior of wheat cultivars in relation of their translocation, photosynthesis and yield, Agron. J., 67: 326-331
http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/agronj1975.00021962006700030011x

Siruguppa A.R.S., and Parameshwarappa S.G., 1998, Heterosis and inbreeding depression in intra hirsutum crosses of cotton, J. Indian Soc. Cotton Improv., 23(1): 124-125

Soomro A.R., 2000, Assessment of useful heterosis in glandless G. hirsutum L., cotton strains through their performance in hybrids combination, Pak. J. Bot., 32: 65-68

Soomro A.R., and A.D. Kalhoro, 2000, Hybrid vigor (F1) and inbreeding depression (F2) for some economic traits in crosses between glandless and glanded cotton, Pak. J. Biol. Sci., 3: 2013-2015
http://dx.doi.org/10.3923/pjbs.2000.2013.2015

Tang B., J.N. Jenkins, J.C. McCarty, and C.E. Watson, 1993, F2 hybrids of host plant germplasm and cotton cultivars L. Heterosis and combining ability for lint yield and yield components, Crop Sci., 33: 700-705
http://dx.doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1993.0011183X003300040012x

Turner J.H., 1953, A study of heterosis in upland cotton: II. Combining ability and inbreeding effects, Agron. J., 45: 487-490
http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/agronj1953.00021962004500100008x

Tuteja O.P., Singh A.K., and Senapathi B.K., 1996, Combining ability in relation to heterosis for quantitative characters in cotton, J. Cotton Res. Dev., 10: 139-145

Vande Roovart E., and Fuller G.D., 1935, Stomatal frequency in cereals, Ecologia., 16: 69-87

Wei X.C., Q.Z. Li, J.Q. Pang, J. Zhang, J.H. Zhao, and L.G. Wang, 2002, Heterosis of pre-forest lint yield of hybrid between cultivars or lines within upland cotton (G. hirsutum L.), Cotton Sci., 14: 269-272

Wells R., W.R. Meredith, and J.R. Williford, 1988, Heterosis in upland cotton: II. Relationship of leaf area to plant photosynthesis, Crop Sci. 28: 522-525
http://dx.doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1988.0011183X002800030020x

Whisler F.D., B. Acock, D.N. Baker, R.E. Hye, H.F. Hodges, and J.R. Lambert, 1986, Heterosis in upland cotton: I. Growth and leaf area partitioning, Crop Sci., 26: 1119-1123
http://dx.doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1986.0011183X002600060006x

White T.G., 1966, Diall analysis of quantitatively inherited characters in Gossypium hirsutiom L., Crop Sci., 6: 253-255
http://dx.doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1966.0011183X000600030011x

White T.G., and R.J. Kohel, 1964, A diall analysis of agronomic characters in selected lines of cotton Gossypium hirsutiom L., Crop Sci., 4: 254-257
http://dx.doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1964.0011183X000400030004x

Wong S.C., Cowan I.R., and Farquhar G.D., 1979, Stomatal conductance correlates with photo synthesis capacity, Nature, 282: 424-426
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/282424a0

Wu Y. T., J.M. Yin, W.Z. Guo, X.F. Zhu, and T.Z. Zhang, 2004, Heterosis performance of yield and fiber quality in F1 and F2 hybrids in upland cotton, Plant Breed, 123: 285-289
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0523.2004.00990.x

Yuan Y.L, T.Z. Zhang, S.R. Jing, J.J. Pan, C.Z. Xing, L.P. Guo, and C.M. Tang, 2001, Studies of the inheritance of seed qualities and the exploitation of F2 heterosis in low gossypol strains in upland cotton, Acta Genet. Sin., 28: 471-481

Yuan Y.L., T.Z. Zhang, W.Z. Guo, J.J. Pan, and R.J. Kohel, 2002, Heterosis and gene action of boll weight and lint percentage in high quality fiber property varieties in upland cotton, Acta Agron. Sin., 28: 196-202

Cotton Genomics and Genetics
• Volume 4
View Options
. PDF(210KB)
. FPDF
. HTML
. Online fPDF
Associated material
. Readers' comments
Other articles by authors
pornliz suckporn sex videos bbw mom xxx big fucking arabin porn videos teen gril sex video riding hard cock woman hard vagina . Yanal Alkuddsi
. S.S. Patil
. S.M. Manjula
. B.C. Patil
. H.L. Nadaf
. B.S. Nandihali
Related articles
. Heterosis
. Per se performance
. Seed cotton yield
. Physiological parameters
Tools
. Email to a friend
. Post a comment