Greener Journal of Agricultural Sciences

Vol. 8(12), pp. 351-361, 2018

ISSN: 2276-7770

Copyright ©2018, the copyright of this article is retained by the author(s)

DOI Link: http://doi.org/10.15580/GJAS.2018.12.122118179

http://gjournals.org/GJAS

 

 

 

 

 

New Potential Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) Varieties for Farmers in Rain-Fed Agro-Ecologies of North Western Ethiopia

 

 

 

Kedir Wulchafo Hussen1*, Gudeta Nepir2, Bedada Girma3

 

 

 

1Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Assosa Research Center, Assosa, Ethiopia

2Ambo University, e-mail:gudetangt@gmail.com, P.O.Box 552; Ambo, Ethiopia

3Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Kulumsa Research Center, Kulumsa, Ethiopia

 

 

 

 

 

ARTICLE INFO

ABSTRACT

 

Article No.: 122118179

Type: Research

DOI: 10.15580/GJAS.2018.12.122118179

 

 

Seed cotton yield and fiber quality traits are controlled by many genes and also greatly affected by biotic and abiotic environmental factors. Hence, selection based on only yield would not be effective. In order to improve the yield potential of the cotton cultivars, an understanding of the relationship among various traits is of more importance. The current research was aimed to determine and record phenotypic and genotypic variation of elite cotton lines for utilization of the information in the breeding program to enhance cotton crop productivity and production in Ethiopia. Thus, 14 genotypes, five rows each, were evaluated in three replications at Homosha district of Benishangul-Gumz. The results depicted significant differences (P ≤0.05) among the varieties for all the studied traits, exhibiting the availability of substantial genetic variability among the cultivars for studied traits. Hence, these promising cultivars can further be exploited in various breeding programs to improve various characters of the cotton genotypes. Furthermore, correlation analysis showed that sympodial branches plant-1, boll weight and bolls plant-1 made significant and positive associations with seed cotton yield plant-1. Thus, selection for these traits will ultimately enhance the chances of increasing seed cotton yield plant-1. High heritability estimates were found for all studied traits with the exception of monopodial branches plant-1, indicating that these traits were inherited together and direct selection may be proved to be useful for these traits.

 

Submitted: 21/12/2018

Accepted:  27/12/2018

Published: 03/01/2019

 

*Corresponding Author

Kedir Wulchafo Hussen

E-mail: kedir.wulchafo@ gmail.com

Phone: +251910716747

 

Keywords: Fiber traits; Yield traits; Gossypium hirsutum

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


INTRODUCTION

 

Cotton, the king of fiber crops, is one of the momentous and an important cash crop exercising profound influence on economics and social affairs of the world. Any other fiber crop cannot compete with cotton for its fiber quality. It is also known as “White Gold”. Apart from world’s leading natural fiber, cotton is world’s second most important oilseed crop (Kohel, 1987).  Primarily it is industrial  raw material  in textile manufacturing which provides employment to millions of people all over the world for various activities such as cultivation, seed production, marketing, industrial utilization and research.

Cotton is most widely cultivated crop in the world and has attained main focus of research of which upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) species meet 90% of the bulk world’s cotton demand. Upland cotton belongs to the genus Gossypium, which consists of 45 diploid and five Allotetraploid species which are distributed mostly in tropical and subtropical areas of the world. Historically, natural hybridization has played an important role in the evolution of modern cultivated cottons (Wendel and Crown, 2003).

The genetic variability of a trait within a population is the proportion of observable differences in a trait between individuals within a population that is due to genetic differences. Factors including genetics, environment and random chance can all contribute to the variation between individuals in their observable characteristics. Heritability measures the fraction of phenotype variability that can be attributed to genetic variation (Raj et al., 2008).

To develop high yielding varieties of cotton, genetic information  regarding  different quantitative and qualitative traits is helpful to cotton breeders to improve genetic architecture of the crop in a particular direction, to improve and  attain the proper production level of the crop (Nadeem and Azhar et al., 2004; Ali & Khan, 2007 and Abbas et al., 2008). The use of existing genetic variability in the breeding material and the creation of new variability along with the underlining knowledge on the genetic behavior are of crucial importance for this purpose in a breeding program (Basal and Turgut, 2005; Abbas et al., 2008; Ali et al., 2008; and Ali and Awan, 2009).

To address the current demand and supply gap targeted, intervention works in developing
high yielding and excellent quality lint genotypes should be one of the main components to step forward the cotton sector through exploiting the available genetic resources. To
set proper breeding strategy and exploit genetic potential of existing genotypes, understanding of genetic variability is very crucial.

 Yield is a complex polygenic character which is final product resulting from the interaction of yield attributing characters. For rational improvement of seed cotton yield, the understanding of relationship of component traits with yield is very essential to make effective selection and also simultaneous improvement of most characters.  Keeping the above facts in view, the present study was, therefore, planned with the following specific objectives:

 

1.      To estimate heritability of quantitative and qualitative traits of cotton genotypes.

2.      To analyze the correlation of seed cotton yield with yield attributing components.

3.      To assess and select high yielding potential varieties for rain-fed areas.

 

 

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 

Description of the study area

 

The experiment was conducted at Homosha district in Benishangul Gumuz Regional State in the western part of Ethiopia during the main cropping season of 2017/18.It is one of the potential area for cotton production in the Region.

Homosha is located 38 km north of Assosa town and 701 km west of Addis Ababa with an altitude of 1390 meter above sea level and found at 10018.764' N latitude and 034038.630' E longitude. This district has also a uni-modal rainfall pattern, which starts at the end of April and extends to mid of October. Its maximum rainfall is received during June to October (AsARC Report, 2013) while its major soil type is Nitosol with a dark reddish brown color (AsARC Report, 2011). And also, its optimum temperature range is 28 to 32C.

 

Experimental Materials and Design

 

In this study, a total of 14 genotypes including 12 elite genotypes and two check varieties were evaluated at Homosha (Table 1). These genotypes were obtained from Werer Agricultural Research Center (WARC). The genotypes were organized in a randomized complete block design with three replications.  Five rows of 5 m length were used for each plot. Inter-row and intra-row spacing of 90 cm and 20 cm, respectively, were used to make up plot sizes of  22.5 m2 (5 rows x 5 m x 0.9 m) each. This translates to a population of about 55,000 plants on a per hectare basis.


 

 

Table 1. List of 14 cotton genotypes used in the study in Benshangul-Gumuze Regional State.

Item

number

Name of

Genotypes

Pedigree/description

Selection number

 1

WARC-1

HTO#052 x Deltapine 90

21-7

 2

WARC-2

Cucurova1518 x LG-450

35-4

 3

WARC-3

Deltapine 90 x Cucurova1518

37-7

 4

WARC-4

Deltapine 90 x Stam-59A

38-8

 5

WARC-5

Del Cero x GL-7

8-2

 6

WARC-6

ISA 205H  x Stam-59A

11-4

7

WARC-7

ISA 205H  x Beyazealtin/5

16-2

8

WARC-8

HS-46 x Stoneville 453

19-2

9

WARC-9

HS-46 x Stoneville 453

19-8

10

WARC-10

Stam-59 A x Cucurova 1518

30-2

11

WARC-11

Stam-59 A x Cucurova 1518

30-6

12

WARC-12

Stam-59A x Europa-5

-

13

Deltapine 90 (Check)

n.a.; Introduced from the USA in the 1980’s

-

14

Stam-59A (Check)

n.a.; Imported from Mali in 2004 through technology shopping.

-

n.a = Pedigree not available.

 


 

Management Practices

 

All recommended agronomic practices which included land preparation to harvesting were followed as per the recommendations from research. Plantings were carried out in June. Recommended DAP and urea fertilizers (each at 100 kg per hectare) were applied at sowing and later after plant establishment. All DAP was applied at sowing time while urea was applied in split, 2/3 at sowing and 1/3 at initial flowering stage. To control grass and broad leaf weeds, two hand weeding were performed at critical stages of crop development. The first hand weeding was carried out 35 days after seedling emergence and the second weeding 65 days after emergence or 30 days after the first weeding.

 

Measurement of phenological and growth parameters

 

Data of different traits were collected and recorded either from randomly selected plants or on a plot basis. Days to seedling emergence (DSE) was recorded as the number of days from plating to the time when 50% of the seedlings have emerged in each plot. Days to initial squaring (DIS) was recorded as the number of days from seedling emergence to the appearance of first squares in each plot. Days to initial flowering (DIF) was recorded as the number of days from seedling emergence to the appearance of first flowers in each plot. Days to 50% flowering was recorded as number of days from seedling emergence to a growth stage when about 50% of plants have flowered in each plot. Days to 65% boll opening was recorded as days from seedling emergence to the appearance of open bolls on about 65% of the plants in each plot. Plant height (PHt) was recorded by measuring the height of 5 randomly selected plants at maturity from ground level to the tip of the main stem and taking mean of the total. Number of nodes to the first sympodial branch (NFSB) was recorded from 5 randomly selected plants on a plot basis and counting the number of nodes from the base of a plant to the first sympodial or fruiting branch. Number of bolls per plant were counted from 5 randomly selected plants and then averaged for each plot. The average weight (g) of 30 bolls measured from randomly selected plants at maturity and the total weight of seed cotton yield harvested from each plot weighed in grams per plot and converted into kilogram per hectare. Number of monopodial and sympodial branches per plant were counted from 5 randomly selected plants and then averaged for each plot.

 

Seed Cotton yield per plant (gm): Seed cotton yield per plant was recorded by weighing total seed cotton of each plant recorded in grams.

 

Lint Percentage (GOT): From each plant 50gm dry seed cotton was weighed and was ginned on roller ginning machine. Lint percentage from each plant was recorded by following formula.

 

Lint percentage =

 

Lint yield: The product of total weight of seed cotton yield per plot multiplied by lint percentage value for that plot.

 

Data Analysis

 

Analysis of variance

 

Analysis of variance, phenotypic and genotypic variance and coefficient of variation were computed with SAS statistical software (9.0); heritability and genetic advance were computed using the excel Microsoft program.

Mean separation was conducted using Duncan’s multiple range test (DMRT) at 0.05 probability level. The simple correlation coefficients were computed to determine the degree of association between pair of characters using PROC CORR procedure of SAS (SAS, 2002) program based on across location mean data.

 

 


Table 2. Analysis of variance in randomized complete block design and expected mean square.

Source of Variation

Df

Mean Square

Expected Mean Square

Replication

r-1

MSr

σ2e + gσ2r

Genotypes

g-1

MSg

σ2e + rσ2g

Error

(r-1) (g-1)

MSe

σ2e

 


Where,

 

r = number of replications;

g = number of genotypes;

MSr = mean square due to replications;

MSg = mean square due to genotypes;

MSe = mean square of error; and

σ2r, σ2g, and σ2e are variances due to replication, genotype, and error, respectively.

 

Analysis of variance in a randomized complete block design was computed using the following model:

Yij = µ + rj + gi + εij

 

Where,

 

Yij = the response of trait Y in the ith genotype and the jth replication

µ= the grand mean of trait Y;

rj = the effect of the jth replication;

gi = the effect of the ith genotype; and

εij = experimental error effect.

 

Phenotypic and genotypic variances

 

The phenotypic and genotypic variances of each trait were estimated from the RCBD analysis of variance and the expected mean squares under the assumption of random effects model computed from linear combinations of the mean squares and the phenotypic and genotypic coefficient of variations, which were also computed as per the methods suggested by Burton et al. (1953).

 

Genotypic variance (σ2g) =

 

Environmental variance (σ2e) = MSe

 

Where,

        

MSg and MSe are the mean sum of squares for the genotypes and error in the analysis of variance, respectively.

         

 r is the number of replications.

 

Then, the phenotypic variance was estimated as the sum of the genotypic and environmental variances:

Phenotypic variance (σ2ph) = σ2g + σ2e

 

 

Genotypic and phenotypic coefficient of variations

 

The genotypic and phenotypic coefficients of variability were estimated according to the formulae of Singh and Chaudhary, (1977) as follows

 

Genotypic Coefficient of Variation (GCV) = (σg/grand mean)*100

Phenotypic Coefficient of Variation (PCV) = (σph/grand mean)*100

 

Where,    σg and σph are genotypic and phenotypic standard deviations, respectively.

 

Heritability analysis

 

Broad sense heritability values were estimated based on the formula of Falconer et al., 1996 as follows:

 

Heritability in broad sense (H2) = (σ2g/σ2ph)*100

 

Then, the genetic advance for selection intensity (k) at 5% was estimated by the following formula (Allard, 1960):

 

EGA = k*σph*H2

 

Where,

 

EGA represents the expected genetic advance under selection;

σph is the phenotypic standard deviation;

 H2 is heritability in broad sense and k is selection intensity.

 

The genetic advance as percent of population mean was also estimated following the procedure of Johnson et al. (1955b):

 

Genetic advance as percent of population mean = (EGA/grand mean)*100

 

Correlation analysis

 

Estimations of genotypic and phenotypic correlation coefficients were done based on the procedure of Dabholkar (1992) as follows:

 

Genotypic correlation coefficient (rg) =  

 

Phenotypic correlation coefficient (rph) =   

 

Where,

 

COVg(xy) and COVph(xy) are the genotypic and phenotypic covariance of two variables (X and Y), respectively; σg(x) and σg(y) are the genotypic standard deviations for variables X and Y, respectively, while σph(x) and σph(y) are the phenotypic standard deviations of variables X and Y, respectively.

 

The calculated phenotypic correlation values were tested for its significance using t-test: 

 

t = rph/SE(rph)

 

Where,

 

rph = Phenotypic correlation; SErph) = Standard error of phenotypic correlation obtained using the following formula (Sharma, 1998).

 

SE(rph) = √(1-r2ph)/(n-2)

 

Where,

 

n is the number of genotypes tested,

r2ph is phenotypic correlation coefficient.

 

The coefficients of correlations at genotypic levels were also tested for their significance by the formula described by Robertson (1959) as indicated below:

 

t = rgxy/SErgxy

 

The calculated ''t'' values were compared with the tabulated ''t'' value at (n-2) degree of freedom at 5% level of significance. Where, n is number of genotypes.

 

SErgxy = √ (1-r2gxy)/2H2x.H2y

 

Where,    H2x = Heritability of trait x; and H2y = Heritability of trait y.

 

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

 

The analysis of variance results for the fourteen traits studied are given in Tables 3. Highly significant (P<0.01) differences among genotypes were observed days to seedling emergence, days to initial squaring, days to 50% flowering, days to 65% boll opening, plant height, number of nodes to first fruiting branch, number of monopodial branches per plant, number of sympodial branches per plant, number of bolls per plant, seed cotton yield, lint yield and lint percentage; while only boll weight showed non-significant difference among the tested genotypes.

The study results clearly showed that the presence of considerable variations among genotypes for many of the traits measured. This indicated the presence of appreciable variations among genotypes for most of the characters and justifies carrying out further genetic analysis and identifying important traits for future breeding work relevant to Benishangul-Gumuze Regional State and other similar cotton producing areas.


 

Table 3. Analysis of variance (mean square) for 14 traits of 14 cotton genotypes

Traits

Replication

Genotype

Error

CV (%)

DSE

0.21ns

1.13**

0.29

10.64

DIS

8.00ns

34.86**

3.77

4.39

DIF

0.17*

13.68**

0.68

1.21

D50F

0.93ns

6.95**

2.08

1.51

D65BO

39.59

66.36**

17.77

2.59

PHt

170.99*

431078.00**

53.09

7.56

NFSB

1.98**

0.47**

0.13

10.87

NMoB

3.32**

1.92**

0.51

13.36

NSyB

9.93**

3.48**

0.61

13.80

NBP

31.28**

8.50**

1.56

8.68

BWt

0.11ns

0.07ns

0.06

9.18

SCY

13004.87ns

70015.24**

18719.01

11.39

LY

1212.19ns

12746.82**

3030.50

11.52

L% (GOT)

0.94*

8.45**

0.22

1.19

*, ** Indicate significant difference at P<0.05, P<0.01 levels, respectively; ns=Non-significant.

DSE=Days from planting to seedling emergence; DIS=Days from seedling emergence to initial squaring; DIF=Days to initial flowering; D50F=Days to 50% flowering; D65BO=Days to 65% boll opening; PHt=Plant height; NFSB=Number of nodes to first fruiting or sympodial branch; NMoB=Number of monopodial branches per plant; NSyB=Number of sympodial branches per plant; NBP=Number of bolls per plant; BWt=Boll weight in grams; LY=Lint yield in kg per ha;  L%=Lint percentage or GOT (Ginning out turn); SCY=Seed cotton yield in kg per ha.

 

 


Mean Performance of Cotton Genotypes

 

Crop phenology expressions

 

Range and mean values for 14 characters of 14 cotton genotypes are presented in Tables 4. Also, the mean performances of these genotypes are presented in Tables 6. Regarding phenological characters, days to 50% flowering ranged from 93.67 to 98.33 days and days to 65% boll opening ranged from 155.3 to 170.3 days. The wide ranges in mean performance of the above traits among genotypes suggested the presence of variations that could be exploited to improve cotton genotypes through breeding and appropriate selection.

Analysis of variance showed highly significant differences among the genotypes for plant height ranged from 80.73 cm to 125.00 cm with the mean value of 96.42 and coefficient of variation of 7.56% (Table 6). Minimum plant height was observed in genotypes WARC-10 (80.73 cm) followed by WARC-8 (82.30 cm), WARC-1 (84.13 cm), WARC-5 (89.00 cm) and Deltapine 90 (91.00 cm) while, Stam-59A (125.00 cm) exhibited maximum plant height which can lead the genotypes to lodging problems in areas where continuous rain fall exist as of the area where the present study was conducted.

The magnitude of genetic variability for number of monopodial branch per plant ranged from 4.20 to 7.03 with the mean value of 5.34 and the coefficient of variability is recorded as 13.36%.  And, the means for number of sympodial branch per plant was ranged from 3.67 to 7.33 with the mean value of 5.67 and coefficient of variability is 13.80%. Maximum number of sympodial branch per plant (7.33) was recorded for the genotype WARC-12, while the minimum number of sympodial branch per plant (3.67) was recorded for the genotype WARC-9. The result of this study indicated that the monopodial branches follow the growth pattern of main stem and bear indirect fruit. And, genotypes with large number of monopodia lead to vegetative growth of the plant and delayed the time of maturity, hence it leads to terminal moisture stress.  .

 

Yield and yield components of genotypes

 

Seed cotton yield (SCY) for genotypes ranged from 946.00 kg/ha to 1478.50 kg/ha, and the mean value was 1201.43 kg/ha (Table 4). As presented in Table 6, the top yielders included WARC 4, WARC-7, WARC-2 and WARC-3 with 1478.50 kg/ha, 1418.30 kg/ha, 1366.20 kg/ha and 1306.70 kg/ha, respectively. Lint is a major and important component of cotton yield, and a vital raw material for the textile industry. All of the above genotypes, except WARC-3, showed satisfactory SCY and lint yield (LY) potential.  Boll number per plant (BNP) and boll weight (BWt) are important components that contribute to yield parameter. BNP of genotypes averaged 14.36. The top scorers were WARC-4, WARC-12, WARC-7 and WARC-1 (Tables 6). A combination of higher SCY and GOT is an advantage to harvest satisfactory lint yield which is needed by the textile industry. In this regard, genotypes WARC-7, WARC-4, WARC-2, WARC-10 and WARC-11 possessed higher combination of SCY and GOT for a better lint yield.

 


 

Table 4.  Minimum and Maximum values, mean and standard error of mean (SE) for the 14 traits of 14 cotton genotypes.

Traits

Min. value

Genotypes with Min. value

Max. value

Genotype with Max. value

Mean

SE

CV (%)

DSE

4.33

  WARC-5, -9, & -12

6

WARC-4

5.07

0.31

10.64

DIS

39

WARC-12 &      Deltapine 90

51.33

WARC-1

44.02

0.41

4.39

DIF

64

   WARC-7

71.33

WARC-9

67.95

0.47

1.21

D50F

93.67

WARC-6

98.33

WARC-5

95.43

0.83

1.51

D65BO

155

WARC-5

170.33

Stam-59A

162.31

2.42

2.59

PHt

80.73

WARC-10

125

Stam-59A

96.42

4.2

7.56

NFSB

2.6

WARC-9

4.07

WARC-8

3.37

0.21

10.87

NMoB

4.2

WARC-9

7.03

WARC-4

22.16

0.41

13.36

NSyB

3.67

WARC-9

7.33

WARC-12

5.67

0.45

13.8

NBP

10.47

WARC-9

16.97

WARC-4

14.36

0.72

8.68

BWt

2.56

WARC-6

3.02

WARC-4

2.76

0.14

9.18

SCY

946

WARC-1

1478.5

WARC-4

1201.43

78.99

11.39

LY

358.91

WARC-1

585.4

WARC-8

478

31.78

11.52

L% (GOT)

37.33

Deltapine-90

42.17

Stam-59A

39.77

0.27

1.19

DSE=Days from planting to seedling emergence; DIS=Days from seedling emergence to initial squaring; DIF=Days to initial flowering; D50F=Days to 50% flowering; D65BO=Days to 65% boll opening; PHt=Plant height; NFSB=Number of nodes to first fruiting or sympodial branch; NMoB= Number of monopodial branches per plant; NSyB=Number of sympodial branches per plant; NBP=Number of bolls per plant; BWt=Boll weight in grams; LY=Lint yield in kg per ha;  L%=Lint percentage or GOT (Ginning out turn); SCY=Seed cotton yield in kg per ha.

 


 

 

Phenotypic and genotypic coefficients of variation (PCV)

 

Higher phenotypic and genotypic variances were obtained from days to initial squaring, days to 65% boll opening, plant height, seed cotton yield and lint yield, indicating high influence of the environment on these traits.

High phenotypic coefficient of variation (PCV) values was noted on number of days to seedling emergence, plant height, number of nodes to the first fruiting branch, number of monopodial branch per plant, number of sympodial branch per plant, number of bolls per plant, seed cotton yield and lint yield. The PCV values for days to initial squaring and boll weight were medium (10-20%).  Days to initial flowering, days to 50% flowering, days to 65% boll opening and lint percentage (GOT) had low values (< 10 %).

 

Estimation of broad-sense heritability

 

Estimates of heritability in broad sense ranged from 45% for average boll weight to 97% for lint percentage (GOT) (Table 6). Pramoda and Gangaprasad (2007) generally classified heritability estimates as low (< 40%), medium (40-59%), moderately high (60-79%) and very high (80-100%). If heritability were 100 %, which is genotypic variance (s2g) is equal to phenotypic variance (s2p), and then phenotypic performance would be a perfect indication of genotypic value (Johnson et al., 1955). Based on this bench mark, moderately high heritability (60-79%) was noted for days to seedling emergence, days to 50% flowering, days to 65% boll opening, number of nodes to first fruiting branch, number of monopodial branches per plant, seed cotton yield and lint yield. And genotypes which have high range of heritability (80-100%) were noted for days to initial squaring, days to initial flowering, plant height, number of sympodial branches per plant, number of bolls per plant and lint percentage. This result agrees with Amir et al., (2012) and Ali et al., (2011).

Moderately high heritability (60-79%) but low genetic advance as percent of mean was observed for the traits days to initial flowering, days to 50% flowering and days to 65% boll opening. For both testing sites, high heritability and yet low genetic advance as percent of mean indicated the involvement of non-additive gene actions for expression of the traits.

Generally, most of the traits studied showed moderately high to high heritability estimates indicating the possibility of improving these traits through selection. According to Poehlmon and David (1995) if a trait has high heritability accompanied with high genetic advance as percent of mean value, it indicates that the influence of the environment on the trait is less and selection for that trait becomes easy. The present study results are also in agreement with those obtained by Abbas et al., (2013), Dhivya et al., (2014) and Farooq et al., (2013).

 

Genetic advance as percent of mean

 

The genetic advance as the percentage of the mean (GAM) at 5% selection intensity is presented in Tables 3. It ranged from 4.68 for days to 50% flowering to 60.62 for sympodial branches per plant followed by monopodial branches per plant (44.98), lint yield (41.68), plant height (41.02), seed cotton yield (38.13) and number of bolls per plant (37.12).

Plant height and sympodial branches per plant showed moderately high heritability coupled with high genetic advance as percent of mean. These results indicate that there is good opportunity to improve these traits through crossing and selection.

In general, plant height, monopodial branch per plant, sympodial branch per plant, boll number per plant, seed cotton yield and lint yield showed moderately high heritability coupled with high genetic advance as percent of mean value.

 

Correlations of seed cotton yield and yield related traits

 

As shown in the Table 7, seed cotton yield had highly significant and positive phenotypic correlation with days to 50% flowering (rp = 0.61), days to 65% boll opening (rp = 0.69), plant height (rp = 0.89), number of sympodial branches per plant (rp = 0.87), number of bolls per plant (rp = 0.81) boll weight (rp =0.79), lint yield (rp=0.86) and lint percentage (0.83). Days to initial flowering, number of nodes to the first fruiting branch and number of monopodial branches per plant also showed significance and positive correlation with seed cotton yield. Days to initial squaring had positive association with seed cotton yield but not significant correlation.

At genotypic level, days to 50% flowering, plant height, number of sympodial branches per plant, number of bolls per plant, lint yield and lint percentage were observed to have positive and highly significant (p ≤ 0.01) correlations with seed cotton yield. At genotypic level seed cotton yield was significantly and positively correlated with days to initial flowering (rg = 0.51*), number of nodes to the first fruiting branch (rg = 0.63*) and Number of monopodial branch per plant (rg = 0.57*). The strong positive correlation of days to 50% flowering, plant height, sympodial branch per plant, number of bolls per plant, lint yield and lint percentage with seed cotton yield indicated that these characters might be utilized as selection criteria for improving seed cotton yield in upland cotton (G. hirustum. L.).


 

Table 5. Range, mean, SE, 𝝈𝟐𝒑, 𝝈𝟐𝒈, 𝝈𝟐𝒆, GCV, PCV, h2, GA and GAM% for the 14 characters of G. hirustum L. genotypes

Traits

Range

Mean

SE

σ2 P

σ2 G

σ2 e

PCV%

GCV%

h2

GA

GAM%

DSE

4.33-6.00

5.07

0.31

1.33

1.04

0.29

22.78

20.14

0.78

1.86

36.73

DIS

39.00-51.33

44.14

0.41

37.37

33.60

3.77

13.85

13.13

0.90

11.34

25.69

DIF

64.00-71.33

67.95

0.47

14.13

13.46

0.67

5.53

5.40

0.95

7.39

10.87

D50F

94.00-98.00

95.43

0.83

8.34

6.26

2.08

3.03

2.62

0.75

4.47

4.68

D65BO

155.00-170.00

162.31

2.42

77.91

60.31

17.60

5.44

4.78

0.77

14.10

8.68

PHt

82.33-125.00

96.41

4.20

464.96

413.40

51.56

22.37

21.09

0.89

39.55

41.02

NFSB

2.60-4.07

3.37

0.21

0.56

0.43

0.13

22.21

19.37

0.76

1.17

34.85

NMoB

4.20-7.03

5.34

0.41

2.26

1.75

0.51

28.15

24.77

0.77

2.40

44.98

NSyB

3.67-7.30

5.66

0.45

3.88

3.28

0.61

34.85

32.00

0.84

3.43

60.62

NBP

10.47-16.97

14.36

0.72

9.54

7.98

1.56

21.50

19.67

0.84

5.33

37.12

BWt

2.53-3.02

2.76

0.14

0.11

0.05

0.06

12.02

8.10

0.45

0.31

11.27

SCY

946.00-1478.50

1201.43

78.99

82495.00

63775.60

18719.01

23.91

21.02

0.77

458.08

38.13

LY

358.31-584.91

478.00

31.78

14767.15

11736.65

3030.50

25.42

22.66

0.79

199.25

41.68

L% (GOT)

37.33-42.13

39.77

0.27

8.60

8.38

0.22

7.38

7.28

0.97

5.89

14.82

DSE=Days from planting to seedling emergence; DIS=Days from seedling emergence to initial squaring; DIF=Days to initial flowering; D50F=Days to 50% flowering; D65BO=Days to 65% boll opening; PHt=Plant height; NFSB=Number of nodes to first fruiting or sympodial branch; NMoB= Number of monopodial branches per plant; NSyB=Number of sympodial branches per plant; NBP=Number of bolls per plant; BWt=Boll weight in grams; LY=Lint yield in kg per ha; L%=Lint percentage or GOT (Ginning out turn); SCY=Seed cotton yield in kg per ha.

 

 

 

Table 6.  Mean values of 14 traits of 14 cotton genotypes tested at Homosha in 2017.

Genotypes

DSE

DIS

DIF

D50F

D65BO

PHt

NFSB

NMoB

NSyB

NBP

BWt

LY

L%

SCY

WARC-1

5.67ba

51.33a

71.00ba

96.33bac

161.00edfc

84.13ge

3.47bac

6.30ba

5.27bdec

15.06bac

2.86bac

358.31e

37.867e

946.00f

WARC-2

5.00bdc

47.67b

67.00gfe

94.00dc

161.33edfc

100.00cbd

3.40bc

4.60ecd

5.00de

13.00dc

2.78bac

537.81ba

39.36d

1366.20ba

WARC-3

5.33bac

47.00bc

66.00g

96.67ba

169.00ba

103.73cbd

3.33bc

5.30bcd

5.73bdec

14.40bc

2.88bac

490.78bc

37.50e

1306.70bd

WARC-4

6.00a

47.00bc

66.67gf

94.00dc

159.67edf

91.73gefd

3.47bc

7.03a

6.47bac

16.97a

3.02a

583.47a

39.47d

1478.50a

WARC-5

4.33d

45.67d

68.67dc

98.00a

155.33f

89.07gef

3.67dc

4.40ed

7.20a

14.67bc

2.97ba

483.60dc

41.30bc

1172.70fc

WARC-6

4.67dc

41.00f

66.67gf

93.67d

162.30ebdfc

94.07cefd

3.80ba

5.20bcd

4.53fe

13.53dc

2.56bc

454.00bd

40.74c

1114.30fe

WARC-7

5.33bac

45.33ed

69.67bc

94.00dc

163.67edac

91.80gefd

3.30bc

6.27ba

6.47bac

16.07ba

2.89bac

584.91a

41.27bc

1418.30ba

WARC-8

5.66ba

44.33e

64.00h

97.33ba

158.00ef

82.33ge

4.067a

5.30bed

4.93fde

14.33bc

2.62bac

485.40dc

38.86d

1248.40bc

WARC-9

4.33d

41.00f

71.33a

97.00ba

159.67edf

103.73cbd

2.60d

4.20e

3.67f

10.47e

2.62bac

451.10bd

41.67ba

1083.20e

WARC-10

5.67ba

41.33f

67.67dfe

94.00dc

167.67bac

80.73g

2.87dc

4.60ecd

4.67fe

12.13ed

2.62bac

505.4bac

41.02bc

1231.90bd

WARC-11

4.67dc

46.00cd

70.67ba

95.30bc

161.33edfc

104.07cb

3.00dc

5.40bcd

6.20bdac

14.60bc

2.77bac

499.60ba

40.53c

1232.40bc

WARC-12

4.33d

39.00g

68.33dce

94.00dc

166.67bdac

108.467b

3.47bc

5.40bcd

7.33a

16.20ba

2.73bac

413.30dc

37.71e

1096.50fd

Deltpine 90

4.33d

39.00g

67.67dfe

95.00bdc

155.67f

91.00gef

3.87ba

5.73bc

5.20dec

14.80bc

2.71bac

394.08ed

37.33e

1057.80fe

Stam-59A

5.67ba

40.67f

66.00g

96.67ba

170.33a

125.00a

3.40bc

4.93ecd

6.53ba

14.87bc

2.57bc

450.00bdc

42.17a

1067.20fe

Mean

5.07

44.14

67.95

95.43

162.26

96.41

3.37

5.34

5.66

14.36

2.76

478

39.77

1201.43

LSD

0.91

3.26

1.38

2.42

7.08

12.23

0.61

1.2

1.31

2.09

0.43

92.39

0.79

229.63

CV%

10.64

4.39

1.21

1.51

2.59

7.56

10.87

13.36

13.8

8.68

9.18

11.51

1.19

11.39

In the same column, means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at the 5% level of significance.

DSE=Days from planting to seedling emergence; DIS=Days from seedling emergence to initial squaring; DIF=Days to initial flowering; D50F=Days to 50% flowering; D65BO=Days to 65% boll opening; PHt=Plant height; NFSB=Number of nodes to first fruiting or sympodial branch; NMoB= Number of monopodial l branches per plant; NSyB=Number of sympodial branches per plant; NBP=Number of bolls per plant; BWt=Boll weight in grams; LY=Lint yield in kg per ha; L%=Lint percentage or GOT (Ginning out turn); SCY=Seed cotton yield in kg per ha.


 

Table  7.  Estimates of genotypic (above diagonal) and phenotypic (below diagonal) correlation coefficients for 14 traits of 14 cotton genotypes.

Traits

DSE

DIS

DIF

D50F

D65BO

PHt

NFSB

NMoB

NSyB

NBP

BWt

LY

L%

SCY

DSE

0.43*

0.65*

0.84**

0.08

0.27

0.53

0.23ns

0.06ns

0.08

0.01

0.21ns

-0.31ns

0.42ns

DIS

0.52**

0.89**

0.75*

0.53*

-0.57*

-0.48**

-0.35ns

-0.37*

0.45*

0.25ns

0.24ns

0.25ns

0.32ns

DIF

0.53**

0.55**

0.64*

0.51*

0.47

0.41*

0.57*

0.47

0.56*

0.38ns

0.19ns

0.41*

0.35*

D50F

0.45**

0.58*

0.65**

0.72*

0.74*

0.09

-0.83**

0.36*

0.63**

0.67**

0.26ns

0.35*

0.75**

D65BO

0.24ns

0.31ns

0.54*

0.51*

0.84*

0.43

-0.79*

0.33*

-0.42*

0.79**

- 0.52ns

0.31ns

0.59*

PHt

0.13ns

0.18ns

0.19ns

0.65*

0.59*

0.53

0.37**

-0.22

0.36**

0.25ns

0.66**

0.62*

0.83**

NFSB

0.09ns

0.23

0.25

0.55*

0.87**

-0.59*

0.38**

0.68*

0.52*

0.23ns

0.53*

0.45*

0.57*

NMoB

0.21ns

0.87*

-0.58*

-0.54*

-0.66*

0.68*

0.35**

0.59*

0.65*

0.54*

-0.38*

-0.66*

-0.69*

NSyB

0.33ns

0.26ns

0.53*

0.82**

0.73*

0.59*

0.98**

-57*

0.38*

0.57*

0.61*

0.59**

0.89**

NBP

0.24ns

0.29ns

0.08ns

0.25ns

0.79**

0.37**

0.86**

0.51*

0.93**

-0.59*

0.48**

0.67**

0.78**

BWt

0.35ns

0.35ns

0.07ns

0.56**

0.84**

0.69*

0.71*

0.55

0.88*

-0.66*

0.26

-0.23

0.48*

LY

0.37ns

0.22ns

0.56*

0.55*

0.61*

0.78**

0.56*

-0.35*

0.66*

0.78**

0.37

0.94**

0.88**

L%

0.18ns

-0.28

0.45*

0.49*

0.65*

0.71*

0.48*

0.47*

0.58**

0.79**

-0.19

0.79**

0.65**

SCY

- 0.33ns

0.38ns

0.51*

0.61**

0.69**

0.89**

0.63*

0.57*

0.87**

0.81**

0.79**

0.86**

0.83**

1

*, **Indicate significant at the 0.05 and 0.01 probability levels, respectively.

DSE=Days from planting to seedling emergence; DIS=Days from seedling emergence to initial squaring; DIF=Days to initial flowering; D50F=Days to 50% flowering; D65BO=Days to 65% boll opening; PHt=Plant height; NFSB=Number of nodes to first fruiting or sympodial branch; NMoB= Number of monopodial branches per plant; NSyB=Number of sympodial branches per plant; NBP=Number of bolls per plant; BWt=Boll weight in grams; LY=Lint yield in kg per ha; L%=Lint percentage or GOT (Ginning out turn); SCY=Seed cotton yield in kg per ha.

 


 


 


CONCLUSION

     

The analysis of variance showed significant differences among the tested genotypes for all characters considered in the study; this indicated the existence of variability among the tested genotypes. Phenotypic variances and phenotypic coefficients of variation were higher than their respective genotypic variances and genotypic coefficients of variation for all the traits considered in the study. This indicated the presence of environmental influence to some degree in the phenotypic expression of the traits.

Estimates of heritability in a broad sense ranged from 45% for boll weight to 95% for days to initial flowering. Moderately high heritability values were noted for days to seedling emergence, days to 50% flowering, days to 65% boll opening, number of nodes to the first fruiting branch, number of monopodial branches per plant, seed cotton yield and lint yield. Genotypes with high heritability values were noted for days to initial squaring, days to initial flowering, plant height, number of sympodial branches per plant, and number of bolls per plant, indicating that these traits are less affected by environmental conditions. High heritability but low genetic advance as percent of mean revealed the involvement of non-additive gene actions for the expression of the traits. The high heritability estimates suggested that the traits are primarily under genetic control and selection for them can be achieved through their phenotypic performance.  Generally, most of the traits studied showed moderately high to high heritability estimates indicating the possibility of improving these traits through selection.

Correlation analysis among the characters studied revealed that positive and significant association of seed cotton yield and its components were more explained at phenotypic than at genotypic level. This implies that the correlation of these characters is reasonably expressed as a result of environmental factors rather than their genetic characteristics.

 

 

REFFERENCE

 

Abbas A, Ali M.A., and Khan T.M (2008). Studies on gene effects of seed cotton yield and its attributes in five American cotton cultivars. J. Agric. Social Sci. 4:147-152.

Abbas H.G, Mahmood A., Ali Q. (2013). Genetic variability, heritability, genetic advance and correlation studies in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). Int. Res. J. Microbiol., 4(6):156-161.

Ali M.A., Khan I.A. (2007). Assessment of genetic variation and inheritance mode in some metric traits of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) J. Agri. Social Sci. 3:112-116.

Ali M.A., Khan I.A., Awan S.I., Ali S,  Niaz (2008. Genetics of fiber quality traits in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.).Aust. J. Crop. Sci. 2: 10-17.)

Ali M A., Awan S.I (2009). Inheritance pattern of seed and lint traits in Gossypium hirsutum L. Int. J. Agric. Biol. 11: 44-48.

Ali Q., Ahsan M (2011). Estimation of variability and correlation analysis for quantitative traits in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). IJAVMS 5 (2):194-200.

Amir S., Farooq J., Bibi A., Khan S.H., Saleem M.H (2012). Genetic studies of earliness in Gossypium hirsutum L. IJAVM S 6 (3):189-207.

Assosa Agricultural Research Center (AsARC), 2011.Farming system survey document.

Assosa Agricultural Research Center (AsARC), 2013.Farming system survey document.

Basal H., Turgut I (2005). Genetic analysis of yield components and fiber strength in upland Cotton (G. hirsutumL.), Asian J. Plant Sci., 4(3): 293-298 http://dx.doi.org/10.3923/ajps.2005.293.298.

Dhivya  R., Amalabalu P., Pushpa R., Kavi-thamani D (2014). Variability, heritability and genetic advance in upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). African J. Plant Sci. 8 (1):1-5.

Farooq J., Anwar M., Riaz M., Mahmood A., Farooq A., Iqbal M.S., Iqbal M.S (2013). Association and path analysis of earliness yield and fiber related traits under cotton leaf curl virus (CLCuV) intensive conditions in G. hirsutum L. Plant Knowledge J. 2 (1):43-50.

Fisher R.A (1958). Statistical methods for researcher works. 13th edition. Olover and Boyed Edinburgh.

Kohel R.J., Benedict C.R (1987). Growth analysis of cottons with differing maturities. Agron. J. 79:

Mahalingam A., Saraswathi R., Ramalingam J., Jayaraj T (2013). Genetics of floral traits in cytoplasmic male sterile (CMS) and restorer lines of hybrid rice (Oryza sativa L.). Pak. J. Bot. 45 (6):1897-1904. 31-34.

Poehlman J.M., David D.A (1995). Breeding Field Crops, 4th Ed. Iowa State University Press. Ames, Iowa.

Pramoda H.P., Gangaprasad S (2007). Biometrical basis of handling segregation population for improving productivity in onion (Allium cepa L.) Asian Horti.J. 3:278-280.

Prasad G.S.V., Muralidharan K., Rao C.S, Prasad A.S.R (2001). Stability and Yield Performance of Genotypes: A Proposal for Regrouping World Rice Area into Mega-Environments. Current Sci. 81 (10):1337-1346.

Raj  A., Oudenaarden V., Alexander A (2008). Nature, nurture, or chance: Stochastic gene expression and its consequences. Cell, 135 (2): 216–226.

Statistical Analysis System (SAS) ( 2002). Version 9.0. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.

Wendel J.F., Crown R.C (2003).Polyploidy and the evolutionary history of cotton. Adv. Agron., 78: 140–186.


 

                             

Cite this Article: Kedir WH, Gudeta N, Bedada G (2018). New Potential Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) Varieties for Farmers in Rain-Fed Agro-Ecologies of North Western Ethiopia. vol. 8(12), pp. 351-361, http://doi.org/10.15580/GJAS.2018.12.122118179