|
Greener Journal of Agricultural Sciences Vol. 11(2), pp. 90-97, 2021 ISSN: 2276-7770 Copyright ©2021, the copyright of this
article is retained by the author(s) |
|
Combining Ability for Resistance to Maize Lethal Necrosis Disease in
Kenya
1Sitta, B.J., 2Nzuve, F.M., 2Olubayo,
C., 2Muthomi, J.W. 2Muiru, W.M., 2Miano, D.W.
1Tanzania Agricultural
Research Institute (TARI) Dakawa Centre, P.O. Box 1892, Morogoro, Tanzania.
2Department
of plant science and Crop Protection, University of Nairobi, P O Box 29053-
00625, Nairobi, Kenya.
|
ARTICLE INFO |
ABSTRACT |
|
Article
No.: 060221054 Type: Research |
Maize is a natural host to more than 50
viruses including members of the Potyviridae group which in combination with
Maize Chlorotic mottle virus (MCMV) cause maize lethal necrosis leading to
high yield losses. A study involving an assortment of maize germplasm was
used to estimate the genetic effects attributable to the resistance to maize
lethal necrosis resistance. The maize genotypes were crossed in a North
Carolina design II to generate 25 crosses. The parents and their derivative
crosses were screened for their combining ability for MLN and associated
disease parameters. Among the parents involved in the study, only one parent
UON-2015-119 showed desirable GCA for all the traits implying diversity of
the rest of the material involved. Thus, the good combiners for the
different traits could be used to produce desirable transgressive segregants
to maximize the disease resistance. For the SCA effects, UON-2015- 50/
UON-2015-109, UON-2015-50 /UON-2015-112 and UON-2015-50 / UON-2015- 113
showed good values for all the disease parameters. These elite crosses had
the parent UON-2015- 50. The parent UON-2015- 50 showed poor GCA effects for
all the disease parameters. Also, the parent UON-2015-119 showed poor SCA
effects despite the desirable GCA effect for all the disease
parameters. This implies that any
breeding method chosen should first accumulate favourable genes in
homozygous state while breaking the linkage blocks. Also, non additive gene action
attributable to both additive x epistatic and dominance x dominance gene
interaction could be responsible for the resistance to the MLN. The non additive gene action is also non
allelic and produces over-dominance which is non fixable. These superior
parents and crosses could be used to develop maize varieties to improve
maize production in Kenya. |
|
Accepted: 03/06/2021 Published: 31/07/2021 |
|
|
*Corresponding
Author Barnabas
Justo Sitta E-mail:
barnabassitta@ gmail.com |
|
|
Keywords:
|
|
|
|
|
INTRODUCTION
Maize
production in Kenya is greatly threatened by the maize lethal necrosis (MLN)
disease which is caused by the synergistic interaction of the maize chlorotic
mottle virus (MCMV) and sugarcane mosaic virus (SCMV). The MLN is characterized
by chlorotic mottling of leaves, necrotic lesions, dead heart, sterile pollen,
small cobs, or no seed set at all and even plant death. The maize crop offers a habitat to more than
50 viruses most of which are a major contributor to the low yields (Masuka et al., 2017; Zambrano et al., 2014). The Kenyan climatic conditions favour the
thriving of the viruses coupled with the maize monoculture within the
country. Extremely hot conditions cause
mosaics, necrosis and stripes leading to reduction in the incubation period leading
to rapid multiplication and spread of the viruses within susceptible varieties.
In the moderately resistant varieties, the viruses move slowly from the foci of
inoculation into the young leaves, roots, and the emerging leaves of the plant
(Gemechu et al., 2004). Most of the currently grown maize varieties are
highly susceptible to MLN putting maize production at stake. MLN could be
managed through cultural methods, chemical control, and host resistance
breeding. Cultural methods include the use of crop rotation whereby the farmers
are advised to alternate their crop with non-cereal crops such as potatoes for
at least two seasons. Practicing sanitation in the field could also help to
reduce the pathogen and vector population (CABI, 2016). Under chemical management,
focus is on the use of insecticides to control the vectors both for soil borne
and early season vectors. Use of chemicals such as Thunder (Imidacloprid 100g) and bulldock (Beta – Cyfluthrin 0.5g/kg) is effective in
controlling the vector carrying the pathogens. However, chemical method is not
economically viable to most farmers since they are expensive, and most farmers
cannot afford them. Thus, host resistance breeding aimed at identifying
resistance sources presents the most feasible option to the resource constraint
small scale farmers who form the bulk of the maize producers in Kenya. The
development of bi-parental crosses and their evaluation under either hot spots
or under natural infestation could enhance identification of promising resistance.
However, a proper understanding of the elite germplasm population structure
regarding their combining ability is imperative if any breeding efforts are to
be efficient and to enable the realization of genetic gains (Kamara et al., 2014; Masuka et al., 2017).
The
combining ability of any inbred line rests on its capacity to produce superior
hybrids in combination with the other inbred lines (Salami and Agbowuro,
2016). Both the general and specific
combining ability of the lines and progenies remain imperative in any
meaningful breeding program. This implies that a breeder should establish
whether the resistance to MLN is attributed to additive genetic variance or non
additive genetic variance (dominance or epistatic deviations) (Kinfe et al., 2015). The GCA gives the breeding value of the
parents and determines the future usefulness and commercial utilization of such
parents in hybrid generation. Heterosis is also an important component to be
considered in breeding efforts and the genetic material must have adequate
genetic diversity which determines the choice of breeding method and the
prediction of the hybrid performance. The nature of the gene action is also
important in enhancing the expression of important traits (Abera et al., 2016).
The resistance to the MLN causal agents has
been attributed to different types and number of genes. The involvement of a
single gene, oligogenic genes with modifier effects and the existence of
genotype by environment interaction have complicated the elucidation of the
exact gene effects thus the efficient utilization of any identified resistance
(Souza et al., 2008). Mapping studies
have also revealed the presence of different loci conditioning resistance to
the different viruses causing MLN (Souza et
al., 2008). Previous efforts by the
International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) and Kenya
Agricultural and Livestock Research Organization (KALRO) have made great
strides towards combating the threat posed by MLN (Semagn et al., 2014; Gowda et al.,
2015; http://www.cimmyt.org). Previous research has also reported the
involvement of genes with major, epistatic, and minor effects (Semagn et al., 2014; Wu et al., 2007). Non additive gene action associated with the effect
of genotype by environment interaction has also been reported. Thus, to efficiently reduce yield losses
associated with MLN, knowledge of the combining ability and gene action of any
promising maize lines needs to be established. This will enable the efficient
deployment and introgression of the resistance sources into adapted maize
backgrounds to combat further maize yield losses. Thus, this study set out to
achieve the following objectives: a) To estimate the general combining ability
(GCA) and specific combining ability (SCA) of maize in respect to MLN
resistance and b) To identify the best single cross hybrids with regard to the
MLN resistance.
Ten maize genotypes were identified to have
resistance to MLN at the Field Station of the University of Nairobi and at
KALRO Naivasha during the 2015 – 2016 cropping seasons (Table 1). These were crossed in a North Carolina Design
II (NCDII) mating design.
|
Table 1: List of genotypes used
in the development of the F1 crosses following a North Carolina Design II |
|||
|
Parent |
Accession |
Entry designation |
MLN score (across two seasons)
(based on Sitta et al., 2017) |
|
P1 |
UoN-2015-117 |
MLR-12
(Female) |
3 |
|
P2 |
UoN-2015-49 |
MUG-49
(Female) |
2 |
|
P3 |
UoN-2015-50 |
MUG-50
(Female) |
2 |
|
P4 |
UoN-2015-119 |
MLR-14
(Female) |
3 |
|
P5 |
UoN-2015-114 |
MLR-9
(Female) |
3 |
|
P6 |
UoN-2015-116 |
MLR-11
(Male) |
3 |
|
P7 |
UoN-2015-112 |
MLR-7
(Male) |
3 |
|
P8 |
UoN-2015-113 |
MLR-8
(Male) |
1 |
|
P9 |
UoN-2015-106 |
MLR-1
(Male) |
3 |
|
P10 |
UoN-2015-109 |
MLR-4
(Male) |
2 |
(UoN=
University of Nairobi)
Development
of the F1 crosses
Each of the ten
parents (Table 1) was planted in double rows at a spacing of 0.75 m inter-rows and 0.25 m intra-row
spacing at KARLO-Kiboko. Two seeds were planted per hill and later thinned to
one plant per hill. Diammonium Phosphate (DAP) fertilizer was applied during
planting at the rate of 10 g/hill and Calcium ammonium nitrate (CAN) was used as a top dress at
the rate of 10 g/hill. The field was kept weed free by hand hoe weeding. Before
silk emergence, the ear shoots were covered with shoot bags to prevent
contamination from unwanted pollen. The tassels were also bagged a day after
the main branch started shedding pollen. Pollen was collected from bagged
tassels and used to pollinate the emerged silk. After pollination, ears were
covered by use of the pollen bags and stapled to ensure seed set and avoid any
other contamination from foreign pollen.
The 25 F1s,
their parents and three local checks were grown in the greenhouse at the field
station (Upper Kabete) of the University of Nairobi. The experiment was
laid out following a completely randomized design (CRD) with three replicates.
Two seeds were planted per hill and then thinned to one seedling after
emergence. Each pot had four hills of the maize seeds. DAP fertilizer was used
at a rate of 10grams per pot and the urea fertilizer was used during top dressing at the
rate of 10 grams per pot.
Maize
chlorotic mottle virus (MCMV) and sugarcane mosaic virus (SCMV) were isolated from
diseased tissue of maize leaves showing clear symptoms of MCMV and SCMV at
National Agriculture Research Institute (NARI-KENYA) whereby the two viruses
are maintained at the Biosafety Greenhouse (BGH). The leaves were cut into
small pieces and stored in the freezer at a temperature of -20˚C. 0.1M of
phosphate buffer was made by mixing potassium phosphate dibasic (Anhydrous) and
Potassium dihydrogen orthophosphate (Potassium phosphate monobasic) to a pH of
7.0 using the following ratios: KH2PO4 = 10.8g, K2HPO4
= 4.8g and Na2SO3 = 1.26 and Carborandum (SiCO3)
= 1g/l. Then 5g of
leaves with MCMV and 25g of leaves with SCMV at a ratio of 1:5 were weighed and
ground using
sterile pestle and mortar to obtain homogenate solution. This solution was
added to the buffer to make 300 ml. The combination of MCMV and SCMV inocula
was rubbed onto the young leaves at the age of two weeks from germination. Carborandum
(SiCO3) was used to cause microscopic injury of the leaves for easy
penetration of the virus. The second inoculation was done one week (7 days)
later to ensure that there were no disease escapes.
MLN
disease assessment
|
Table
2: MLN disease severity assessment among the genotypes |
|
|
MLN
Score |
Symptoms |
|
1 |
No MLN symptoms |
|
2 |
Fine chlorotic streaks |
|
3 |
Chlorotic mottling |
|
4 |
Excessive chlorotic mottling and
some necrosis |
|
5 |
Dead heart symptoms/complete plant
death |
|
Source (CIMMYT) |
|
Disease
Incidence = Number of
infected leaves × 100
Total Number of leaves
on the maize plant
The
disease scores were converted into the area under disease progress curve
(AUDPC) following Wilcoxson et al.,
(1975) method. AUDPC is simply the intensity of disease integrated between two times; it
is a crucial quantitative summary of the disease intensity over time for
comparison across years, locations as well as management tactics. The AUDPC
expresses the dynamic of an epidemic as a single value. The different epidemics
can be compared by normalizing the AUDPC value of each epidemic by calculating
the relative area under disease progress curve (rAUDPC) (Wilcoxson et al., 1975).

Where,
Nt =total number of observations, yi =
injury intensity at the ith observation, t = time at the ith
observation (Wilcoxson et al., 1975; Sitta et al., 2017).
Analysis of variance
for the traits was done based on the model by Brigitte, (1999) following
Equation 2. The mean comparison was done using the Fisher’s protected least
significant differences (LSD) at 5% significance level.
ANOVA model
(Brigitte, 1999)
Yij = µ + ti + rj+eij…………………Equation 2
Where, µ = the
overall mean, rj
= jth replication
effect, ti = ith
treatment effect, and eij = error
term
The collected data were analyzed by SAS
(Version 9.3) program. General combining ability (GCA) and specific combining
ability (SCA) effects were estimated by the following formula by Singh and
Chaundhary (1985).
For testing
significance of GCA and SCA
SE (GCA for lines) = √ (Me/
r × m)
SE (GCA for testers) = √ (Me /r
× f)
SE (SCA effects) = √ (Me /r)
For calculation of
CD
GCA: SE
(gi-gj) line=√ (2 Me /r × m)
GCA: SE
(gi-gj) tester=√ (2 Me /r × f)
SCA: SE (sij-skl) = =√
(2 Me / r)
CD = SE difference
× t value
Where, r, f and m = number of replications,
female and male, respectively, SE = standard error of the estimate and Me = error mean square.
Baker`s ratio (1978) was used for the
estimation of the relative importance for the GCA and SCA by using Equation 3.
…...Equation 3
Whereas,
ϭ2GCA (female) indicates
variance components for general combining ability of female, ϭ2GCA
(male) indicates variance components for general combining ability for male and
ϭ2SCA indicates the variance components for specific combining
ability.
RESULTS
The parent UON-2015-119 showed good GCA effects for all the
disease parameters assessed namely the percentage MLN incidence, the MLN
severity scores and their AUDPC values. UON-2015-117 showed good GCA value for AUDPC values. Other
parents who showed good GCA values for percentage MLN incidence included
UON-2015-109, UON-2015-112.
UON-2015-113
and UON-2015- 116 (Table 3).
|
Table
3: General Combining Ability effects for the parents evaluated for resistance
to MLN in the greenhouse in two seasons |
||||
|
Parents |
%MLN
Incidence |
MLN
AUDPC |
Final
MLN score |
MLN
rAUDPC |
|
UON-2015-117 |
5.3 |
-6.3 |
0.0 |
-4.1 |
|
UON-2015-119 |
-10.4 |
-10.2 |
-0.5 |
-6.7 |
|
UON-2015-49 |
0.0 |
0.5 |
0.3 |
0.4 |
|
UON-2015-50 |
4.3 |
4.1 |
0.4 |
2.8 |
|
UON-2015-109 |
-1.4 |
4.3 |
0.2 |
2.8 |
|
UON-2015-112 |
-0.1 |
0.4 |
0.3 |
0.2 |
|
UON-2015-113 |
-6.7 |
0.0 |
0.2 |
0.0 |
|
UON-2015- 116 |
-2.8 |
2.3 |
0.2 |
1.5 |
For the SCA effects, UON-2015- 50/ UON-2015-109, UON-2015-50 /UON-2015-112 and
UON-2015-50 / UON-2015- 113 showed good values for all the disease parameters.
These elite crosses had the parent UON-2015- 50. The crosses UON-2015- 117 / UON-2015- 109,
UON-2015- 117/ UON-2015-112, UON-2015- 117 / UON-2015- 113 and UON-2015- 117 /
UON-2015- 116 showed good SCA effects for the percentage MLN incidence (Table
4). The cross UON-2015- 49 / UON-2015- 112 showed good SCA effects for
percentage MLN incidence and MLN severity score
.
|
Table 4: Specific Combining
Ability effects for the parents evaluated for resistance to MLN in the
greenhouse in two seasons |
||||
|
Parents |
%MLN
Incidence |
Final
MLN score |
MLN
AUDPC |
MLN
rAUDPC |
|
UON-2015-
117 / UON-2015- 109 |
-7.5 |
0 |
6.7 |
4.4 |
|
UON-2015-
117/ UON-2015-112 |
-0.1 |
0.4 |
23.1 |
15.2 |
|
UON-2015-
117 / UON-2015- 113 |
-11.7 |
-0.5 |
2 |
1.3 |
|
UON-2015-
117 / UON-2015- 116 |
-10.6 |
-0.3 |
16.6 |
10.9 |
|
UON-2015-
119 / UON-2015- 109 |
11.2 |
0.8 |
13.4 |
8.8 |
|
UON-2015-
119 / UON-2015- 112 |
11.7 |
0.9 |
20 |
13.2 |
|
UON-2015-119
/ UON-2015- 113 |
9.5 |
0.3 |
6.1 |
3.9 |
|
UON-2015-
119 / UON-2015- 116 |
7 |
0.6 |
11.5 |
7.5 |
|
UON-2015-
49 / UON-2015- 109 |
-4.9 |
-0.6 |
3.6 |
2.4 |
|
UON-2015-
49 / UON-2015- 112 |
2.9 |
-0.4 |
-2.2 |
-1.4 |
|
UON-2015-49
/ UON-2015- 113 |
6.6 |
-0.1 |
4.1 |
2.7 |
|
UON-2015-49
/ UON-2015- 116 |
5.2 |
-0.1 |
4.8 |
3.2 |
|
UON-2015-50
/ UON-2015-109 |
-3.7 |
-0.4 |
-13.9 |
-9.2 |
|
UON-2015-50
/ UON-2015- 112 |
-13.9 |
-0.8 |
-15.4 |
-10.1 |
|
UON-2015-
50 / UON-2015-113 |
-6.9 |
-0.7 |
-21.1 |
-13.9 |
|
UON-2015-50
/ UON-2015-116 |
6 |
0.3 |
13.4 |
8.8 |
DISCUSSION,
CONCLUSION, AND IMPLICATION
The
combining ability information helps to inform on the selection of best parents
and nature and magnitude of involved gene action thus ensuring the effective
utilization of genetic variation (Kiyyo
and Kusolwa, 2017; Legesse et al.,
2009). This allows the estimation
of such effects without interference by linkage effects (Murtadha et al., 2016). Among the parents
involved in the study, only one parent showed desirable GCA for all the disease
parameters assessed. This implies the diversity of the rest of the material
involved. Through the information from this study, exploitation of the resident
variability will enable the discrimination of such variation among parents
which could be highly related (Kiyyo
and Kusolwa, 2017). Thus, the
good combiners for the different traits could be used to produce desirable
transgressive segregants to maximize the disease resistance. For disease
resistance, a high negative GCA implies superiority of the parental mean to the
general mean. Thus, there is a desirable
gene flow from parents to offspring with high intensity associated with
additive genes (Fasahat et al., 2016). The high GCA value also
implies high heritability and less environmental influence (Fasahat et
al., 2016). The exploitation
of the parents with good GCA could lead to development of good open
pollinated varieties, since populations with high frequency of favorable
alleles are important sources for plant selection. The utilization of such
elite parents in breeding programs will save time and resources in ensuring
that only elite populations are used in producing superior crosses. The
evaluation of the parents maximizes on the heterotic response. The use of genotypes with high combining
ability will give superior hybrids and segregant populations with large genetic
variability.
In
general, populations with large GCA exhibited potential as parents of hybrid
varieties, as well as for inclusion in breeding programs, since they may
contribute superior alleles in new populations (Vacaro et al., 2002). The parent UON-2015-119 can be said to be highly adaptable regarding
these disease parameters. GCA determines the best lines to be used as
parents in a crop improvement program and this helps breeders to combine such
desirable genes found in different genotypes. Also, there is a high probability
of getting superior hybrids when superior inbred lines are used. This is enabled by the fact that favourable
alleles are accumulated through selection (Asea et al., 2012). GCA is controlled by genetic material, is heritable
and can be transmitted to the offspring enabling steady genetic gain in plant
breeding. The involvement of the NCDII
enables the determination of maternal effects and calculation of heritability based
on male variance, which is free from maternal effects (Fasahat et al., 2016). Parents with good GCA
imply that they can transmit these traits to their progeny, and they could be
used to develop synthetic populations (Apraku et al. 2013). Thus, the parent UON-2015-119 could be used to develop superior varieties
through hybridization,
backcrossing, and recurrent selection methods (Apraku et al., 2015).
The SCA
shows the non additive component of the genetic variation and is due to
dominance and epistatic gene effects and is non-fixable in nature. The non
additive component is useful in heterosis breeding (Kiyyo and Kusolwa, 2017). The involvement of the F1
generation allows estimation of genetic parameters and assessment of dominance
in the polygenic systems. The SCA
indicates importance of the joint action of the genes of parental forms.
However, great variability regarding SCA effects is unfavorable because it
increases the probability of obtaining hybrid progenies with an average value
of that trait (Murtadha et al.,
2016). The SCA helps to establish the heterotic patterns of inbred lines and to
identify superior hybrids (Legesse et al., 2009). Populations with high GCA also reveal hybrids
with high SCA suggesting the presence of alleles with non addictive effects
which are accumulated through selection (Vacaro et al., 2002; Asea et al., 2012). When two unrelated parents are crossed, they produce single cross
hybrids heterozygous at all loci and which is thought to be superior to the two
parents. This is not always the case as shown by the fact that the parent
UON-2015- 50 showed poor GCA for all the disease parameters. Also, the parent
UON-2015-119 showed poor SCA effects despite the desirable GCA effect for all
the disease parameters. This implies that any breeding method chosen should
first accumulate favourable genes in homozygous state while breaking the
linkage blocks (Solanki and Gupta, 2001).
Also, the parents could be selected for different traits for further
improvement. Elite parents for use in
hybrid development require that one considers the SCA and the GCA (Makanda et
al., 2010). From this study, the best crosses were derived from crosses which
had low GCA values for the disease parameters. Thus, additive by epistatic and
dominance by dominance gene interaction could be responsible for the resistance
to the MLN. The non additive gene action which is also non
allelic produces over-dominance which is non fixable in nature (Fasahat et al., 2016). Some
crosses which showed high SCA effects, had only one good combiner implying that
such combinations may have desirable transgressive segregations provided that
the additive genetic system present in the crosses are acting in the same
direction to reduce undesirable plant characteristics and maximize the
characters in view which is important in breeding programs (Farag et al., 2012).
A parent good in per
se performance may not necessarily produce better hybrids when used in
hybridization. Concurrently, it also
indicated that one parent of the worst combination could make the best
combination if the other parent were selected properly. High SCA effects
resulting from crosses where both parents are good general combiners (good GCA
× good GCA) may be ascribed to additive × additive gene action. The high SCA
effects derived from crosses including good × poor general combiner parents may
be attributed to favourable additive effects of the good general combiner
parent and epistatic effects of poor general combiner, which fulfils the
favourable plant attribute. High SCA effects manifested by low × low crosses
may be due to dominance × dominance type of non-allelic gene interaction
producing over dominance thus being non-fixable while in the presence of
non-additive component, selection should be undertaken in later generations
when these impacts are fixed in the homozygous lines (Fasahat et al., 2016).
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This work was jointly supported by the Alliance
for Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) and the Association for Strengthening
Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa (ASARECA).
REFERENCES
Abera
W., Shimelis H., Derera J., Worku M., and Laing, M. 2016Northern Leaf Blight
Response of Elite Maize Inbred Lines Adapted to the Mid-altitude Sub-humid
Tropics. Cereal Research Communications 44(1), pp. 141–152 (2016) DOI:
10.1556/0806.43.2015.037.
Apraku
B. B., Annor B., Oyekunle M., Akinwale
R.O., Fakorede M.A.B., Talabi A.O., Akaogu I.C., Melaku G., Fasanmad Y. 2015. Grouping of early maturing quality protein
maize inbreds based on SNP markers and combining ability under multiple
environments. Field Crops Research. 183:169–183
Apraku,
B. B., Oyekunle M., Fakorede, M. A. B., Vroh, I., Akinwale, R. O., Aderounmu,
M. 2013. Combining ability, heterotic patterns, and genetic
diversity of extra-early yellow inbreds under contrasting environments. Euphytica. 192:413–433. DOI 10.1007/s10681-013-0876-4
Asea, G., Kwemoi, K.B.,
Ebellu, M., Okanya, S., Walusimbi, M.and Nakayima, A. 2012. Combining ability and heritability for host resistance to Aspergillus flavus and Aflatoxin
accumulation in tropical mid-altitude maize. Uganda Journal of
Agricultural Sciences. 13 2: 21-37. ISSN
1026-0919
Baker
RJ (1978) Issues in diallel analysis. Crop Science 18(4):
533- 536.
Brigitte,
F.N. 1999. Factor Analysis of People Rather than Variables: Q and Other
Two-Mode Factor Analytic Models. PUB DATE 1999-01-21 NOTE
24p. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Southwest Educational
Research Association (San Antonio, TX, January 21-23, 1999).
CABI, 2016. Invasive
species compendium, Datasheets,Maps,Images,Abstracts
and full-textinvasive species
of the world.
Farag, H.I.A., Afiah,
S.A. 2012. Analysis of gene action in diallel crosses among some
Faba bean Vicia faba L. genotypes under Maryout conditions. Annals of
Agricultural Science 571:37–46
Fasahat
P., Rajabi A., Rad J.M. and Derera J. 2016. Principles and Utilization
of Combining Ability in Plant Breeding. Biom Biostat Int J 41:00085.
DOI:10.15406/bbij.2016.04.00085
Gemechu
AL, Chiemsombat P, Attathom S, Reanwarakorn K, Lersrutaiyotin R (2006). Cloning
and sequence analysis of coat protein gene for characterization of sugarcane
mosaic virus isolated from sugarcane and maize in Thailand. Arch. Virol. 151:
167-172.
Gowda, M., Das, B., Makumbi, D., Babu, R., Kassa
Semagn, K., Mahuku, G., Olsen, M.S., Bright, M.J., Beyene, Y., Prasanna, M.B.,
(2015). Genome‑wide association and genomic
prediction of resistance to maize lethal necrosis disease in tropical maize
germplasm.
TheorAppl Genet. 127:867–880. DOI 10.1007/s00122-014
Kamara, M., El-Degwy, I. S. and Koyama, H. 2014.
Estimation combining ability of some maize inbred lines using line × tester
mating design under two nitrogen levels. AJCS 8(9):1336-1342.
Kinfe
H, Tsehaye Y. 2015. Studies of heritability, genetic
parameters, correlation and Path coefficient in elite maize hybrids.
Academic Research Journal of Agricultural Science and Research 3(10), 296-303.
Doi:10.14662/ARJASR2015.062.
Kiyyo, J. G. and Kusolwa, P. M. 2009. Estimation of heterosis and combining ability in maize
Zea mays L. for maize lethal necrosis MLN disease. Journal of Plant Breeding and Crop Science. 99:
144-150. DOI: 10.5897/JPBCS2017.0657.
Legesse, B.W., Pixley, K.V., Botha, A.M. 2009. Combining ability and heterotic grouping of
highland transition maize inbred lines. Maydica. 54
1-9.
Makanda I,
Tongoona P, Derera J, Sibiya J, Fato P (2010) Combining ability and cultivar
superiority of sorghum germplasm for grain yield across tropical low- and
mid-altitude environments. Field Crops Research 116: 75-85.
Masuka,
B., Atlin, Gary N., Olsen Mike, Magorokosho Cosmos, Labuschagne Maryke, Crossa
Jose, Bänziger Marianne, Pixley Kevin V., Vivek Bindiganavile S., Biljon Angela
von, Macrobert John, Alvarado Gregorio, Prasanna B.M., Makumbi Dan, Tarekegne
Amsal, Das Bish, Allah Mainassara Zaman, and Cairns Jill E. 2017. Gains in Maize Genetic Improvement in Eastern
and Southern Africa: I. CIMMYT Hybrid Breeding Pipeline. Crop Sci.
57:168–179. doi: 10.2135/cropsci2016.05.0343
Murtadha,
M.A., Ariyo, O.J., Alghamdi, S.S. 2016. Analysis of combining ability over
environments in diallel crosses of maize Zea mays. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2016.01.004
Salami,
A.E and Agbowuro, A.O. 2016. Gene Action and
Heritability Estimates of Grain Yield and Disease Incidence Traits of Low-N
Maize (Zea mays L.) Inbred lines. Agriculture
and Biology Journal of North America ISSN Print: 2151-7517, ISSN Online:
2151-7525, doi:10.5251/abjna.2016.7.2.50.54 © 2016, ScienceHuβ,
http://www.scihub.org/ABJNASemagn, K., Beyene Y., Babu R., Nair S., Gowda M.,
Das B., Tarekegne A, Mugo S., Mahuku G., Worku M., Warburton M. L., Olsen M.,
and Prasanna, B. M.. 2014. Quantitative
Trait Loci Mapping and Molecular Breeding for Developing Stress Resilient Maize
for Sub-Saharan Africa. Crop Sci. 55:1–11 (2015). Doi:
10.2135/cropsci2014.09.0646
Singh RK,
Chaudhary BD (1985) Biometrical methods in quantitative genetic analysis,
Kalyani Publishers, New Delhi, India.
Sitta,
J. , Nzuve, F. M. , Olubayo, F. M. , Mutinda, C., Muiru, W. M. , Miano, D. W.,
Muthomi, J. W. & Leley, P. K. 2017. Response of Assorted Maize Germplasm to the Maize Lethal Necrosis
Disease in Kenya. Journal
of Plant Studies, [S.l.], v. 6, n. 2, p. p65, july 2017. ISSN 1927-047X.
Solanki,
Z.S. and Gupta, D. 2001. Combining Ability and Heterosis Studies
for Seed Yield and its Components in Sesame. Sesame and Safflower Newsletter. Pg 9-12
Souza, I.
R. P. de, Schuelter, A. R., Guimara˜es, C. T., Schuster, I., Oliveira, E. de,
and Redinbaugh, M. 2008. Clustering of QTL conferring SCMV
resistance in tropical maize. Hereditas 145: 167_173. DOI:
10.1111/j.2008.0018-0661. 02006.x)
Vacaro,
E., Neto, J. F. B., Pegoraro, D. G., Nuss, C. N. and Conceição, L. D. H. 2002. Combining ability of twelve
maize populations. Pesq. agropec. bras.,
Brasília, 37 1: 67-72
Wilcoxson, R.D. Skovmand, B. and Atif,
A.H., 1975, Evaluation of wheat cultivars for ability to retard development of
stem rust. Annual
Applied Biology. 80:275-281.
Wu, J.C., C.X. Xu, H.M. Chen, J. Tan, X.R. Han, B.H.
Huang, and X.M. Fan. 2007. Studies on combining ability and heterotic grouping
of 24 quality protein maize inbreds and four temperate representative inbreds
of Chinese major heterotic groups. (In Chinese, with English abstract.) Chin.
Agric. Sci. 40:1288–1296.
Zambrano, J. L., Francis, D. M., and
Redinbaugh, M. G. 2013. Identification of resistance to Maize
rayado fino virus in maize inbred lines. Plant Dis. 97:1418-1423. http://dx.doi.org/10.1094 /
PDIS-01-13-0037-RE
Zambrano, J.
L., Jones, M. W., Brenner, E., Francis, D. M., Tomas, A., Redinbaugh, M. G. 2014. Genetic analysis of resistance to six virus
diseases in a multiple virus‑resistant maize inbred line. Theor Appl
Genet.
127:867–880. DOI 10.1007/s00122-014-2263-5
|
Cite this Article: Sitta, BJ; Nzuve, FM; Olubayo, C; Muthomi, JW; Muiru, WM; Miano, DW
(2021). Combining Ability for Resistance to Maize Lethal Necrosis Disease in
Kenya. Greener Journal of Agricultural
Sciences 11(2): 90-97. |