SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 54
Download to read offline
Heterosis, combining ability and per se performance
of new hybrids of upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)
for kapas yield and its attributing characters.
Chair person
Dr .M.R.Gururaja Rao
.
Yanal Alkuddsi
PAK 7207
Dept of Genetics & plant
Breeding
Contents
Introduction
Objectives
Reviews
Material and Methods
Results and Discussion
Family: Malvaceae
Tribe: Gossypia
Genus: Gossipium
FLORAL BIOLOGY IN COTTON
1. Varies from species to species
2. Calyx –5.
3. Petals-5.
4. Stamens numerous.
Four cultivated species
1- G. hirsutum
2- G . arboreum
3- G . barbadense
4- G . herbaseum
 1.To study the heterosis and combining ability of
new cotton hybrids in respect of seed cotton
yield and its attributing characters.
 2.To study the type of gene action in the control
of above traits.
 3. To study the association, direct and indirect
effects of component characters on kapas
yield .
Heterosis
Combining ability analysis
Correlation studies
Path coefficient analysis
The experimental material used in the present study comprised of
fourty eight experimental hybrids of cotton (G. hirsutum.L.) received
from Sr. Cotton Breeder, ARS, Hebballi farm, Dharwad along with
three released hybrid as checks .
Experimental material
These hybrids were produced by crossing six female lines with
eight male testers.
The present investigation in cotton was taken up during kharif
2008 at Agricultural Research Station, Bavikere, UAS.
Experimental Design & Layout
Sl. No Hybrid
Code
Hybrids
Sl. No Hybrid
Code
Hybrids
Sl. No Hybrid
Code
Hybrids
1 L1T1 701 /101/241 17 L5T3 703/118/243 33 L3T6 705/135/245
2 L2T1 701 /102/234 18 L6T3 703/119/236 34 L4T6 705/136/238
3 L3T1 701 /103/247 19 L1T4 703/120/249 35 L5T6 705/137/251
4 L4T1 701/104 /201 20 L2T4 703/ 121/203 36 L6T6 705/138/205
5 L5T1 701/105 /207 21 L3T4 703/122/210 37 L1T7 705/139/212
6 L6T1 701/106 /214 22 L4T4 703/123/216 38 L2T7 705/140/218
7 L1T2 701/107/220 23 L5T4 703/124/223 39 L3T7 705/141/225
8 L2T2 701/108/227 24 L6T4 703/125/229 40 L4T7 705/142/231
9 L3T2 702/110/242 25 L1T5 704/127/244 41 L5T7 706/144/246
10 L4T2 702/111/235 26 L2T5 704/128/237 42 L6T7 706/145/239
11 L5T2 702/112/248 27 L3T5 704/129/250 43 L1T8 706/146/252
12 L6T2 702/113/202 28 L4T5 704/130/204 44 L2T8 706/147/206
13 L1T3 702/114/209 29 L5T5 704/131/211 45 L3T8 706/148/213
14 L2T3 702/115/215 30 L6T5 704/132/217 46 L4T8 706/149/219
15 L3T3 702/116/222 31 L1T6 704/133/224 47 L5T8 706/150/226
16 L4T3 702/117/228 32 L2T6 704/134/230 48 L6T8 706/151/233
List of Cotton hybrids involved in the study of heterosis and combining ability
Sl. No Checks
1 BUNNY BT/143/221
2 RCH2 BT/109/240
3 RAHH 95/126/208
List of cotton checks involved in the study :
Modified Line × tester
Arunachalam and Bandyopadhyay (1979)
Hybrids +Checks– randomization
RCBD with 2 replications
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
1. Analysis of variance - ( Panse and Sukhatme, 1967)
2. ANOVA for combining ability analysis - ( Kempthrome, 1957)
3. Estimation of variances - (Singh and Chowdhary ,1985)
4. Estimation of combining ability effects - (Kempthrome, 1957)
5. Overall status of a parent and cross with respect to gca and sca
- Arunachalam and Bandyopadhyay (1979) concept that was slightly modified
by Mohan Rao (2001).
6. Estimation of heterosis - Turner (1953) and Hayes et al. (1955)
7. Test of significance for heterosis - Arunachalam (1976)
8. verall status of a parent and cross with respect to gca and sca and
heterosis Arunachalam and Bandyopadhyay (1979) concept that was
slightly modified by Mohan Rao (2001).
Observations Recorded
•Days to 50% flowering
•Plant height (cm)
•Monopodial branches/plant
•Sympodial branches /plant.
•Bolls/plant.
•Mean boll weight (g).
•Seed cotton yield/plant (g).
•Seed index (g).
•Ginning percentage(%).
•Lint index .
RESULTS
Sl
No.
Hybrids
Days to
50%
flowering
Plant
height
(cm)
Monopodia
per plant
Sympodia
per plant
Bolls per
plant
Mean boll
Weight (g)
Kapas yield
(g/plant)
Ginning
per cent
Seed
index
(g)
Lint index
1 101 71.50 101.00 2.20 19.30 23.70 2.77 66.15 31.90 8.75 4.10
2 102 71.50 110.30 2.10 16.30 16.30 3.20 60.27 33.17 9.75 4.84
3 103 68.50 111.30 1.90 21.40 23.50 2.79 65.91 32.81 8.75 4.27
4 104 67.50 116.50 1.80 24.90 18.00 2.47 44.34 34.32 8.50 4.44
5 105 70.00 110.10 2.09 21.50 19.10 3.29 60.65 34.44 9.25 4.86
6 106 69.50 95.40 1.70 18.10 33.20 2.98 103.60 35.06 9.75 5.26
7 107 67.00 114.40 2.40 22.10 31.30 3.23 82.33 36.54 9.25 5.33
8 108 70.00 84.50 1.90 17.50 26.10 3.08 86.53 37.31 8.00 4.76
9 110 69.00 105.70 2.25 23.90 25.30 2.53 63.86 32.08 8.25 3.90
10 111 72.00 123.80 1.90 25.15 21.60 2.83 64.42 28.74 8.75 3.53
11 112 67.50 129.80 1.90 24.80 31.40 2.91 91.61 31.60 9.25 4.27
12 113 71.00 132.40 2.30 28.30 18.70 2.52 47.33 34.85 9.00 4.82
13 114 67.00 118.70 1.90 25.90 22.50 2.87 65.18 37.06 9.00 5.30
14 115 69.50 119.00 2.30 25.00 28.50 3.05 89.09 33.44 9.75 4.90
15 116 70.00 114.70 1.60 26.50 29.50 2.48 66.10 33.54 8.50 4.29
16 117 71.00 109.60 1.60 25.20 28.90 2.91 72.11 37.40 9.25 5.53
17 118 72.50 134.30 1.70 28.40 23.80 2.67 69.49 31.99 9.00 4.23
18 119 71.50 117.70 1.90 24.20 27.50 2.88 77.78 35.70 9.00 5.00
19 120 70.50 128.20 1.40 27.20 26.40 2.88 76.17 32.76 8.25 4.02
20 121 68.50 123.50 1.60 27.60 33.30 2.83 79.94 33.09 8.50 4.20
21 122 68.00 130.90 2.00 25.90 22.90 3.15 71.98 38.69 9.00 5.68
22 123 67.00 133.90 1.80 27.20 31.10 2.97 91.16 31.38 10.00 4.57
23 124 71.00 110.40 2.00 27.00 30.10 2.97 89.20 36.09 8.75 4.94
24 125 72.00 86.10 2.10 19.00 23.90 2.92 63.63 33.69 10.25 5.21
Table 3. Mean performance of experimental hybrids and checks of cotton [G .hirsutum L.] in respect of kapas yield and its
attributing characters.
Sl
No.
Hybrids
Days to
50%
flowering
Plant
height
(cm)
Monopodia
per plant
Sympodia
per plant
Bolls per
plant
Mean boll
Weight (g)
Kapas
yield
( g/plant)
Ginning
per cent
Seed
index
(g)
Lint index
25 127 71.50 110.00 1.50 25.30 21.10 2.61 55.06 35.20 8.50 4.62
26 128 71.50 113.60 1.90 27.90 23.30 3.36 78.48 36.78 9.00 5.24
27 129 69.50 121.80 2.00 26.80 31.10 2.87 95.26 36.23 8.50 4.83
28 130 71.50 128.80 2.00 27.40 30.70 2.76 81.47 40.38 9.00 6.10
29 131 72.00 123.10 1.90 23.70 25.90 3.44 88.96 42.23 9.25 6.76
30 132 71.00 138.70 2.10 24.40 22.90 3.40 77.58 35.15 10.00 5.42
31 133 70.00 129.60 2.20 28.00 33.80 2.98 104.90 41.37 9.50 6.70
32 134 72.00 122.90 2.50 26.70 29.50 2.89 106.18 36.87 8.75 5.11
33 135 72.00 122.00 2.10 26.10 19.00 3.58 64.71 36.26 10.25 5.83
34 136 72.00 128.40 1.70 26.00 16.10 3.52 139.96 35.74 10.50 5.84
35 137 69.50 115.70 1.90 25.40 17.90 3.76 66.52 34.01 10.75 5.54
36 138 66.50 120.10 1.70 26.20 13.10 2.83 36.93 37.23 9.50 5.64
37 139 69.50 114.90 2.40 25.60 17.10 3.74 58.25 39.38 10.25 6.66
38 140 69.00 102.50 1.50 24.10 13.20 3.26 42.93 41.47 11.50 8.15
39 141 68.50 92.90 1.60 21.50 18.50 3.42 63.10 38.15 10.75 6.63
40 142 71.50 112.50 2.00 23.50 23.00 2.85 77.91 37.83 10.75 6.54
41 144 70.50 111.90 1.60 26.00 26.70 2.69 68.99 35.83 9.00 5.03
42 145 69.50 116.80 1.60 28.85 24.20 2.71 62.84 33.75 10.25 5.22
43 146 69.50 102.40 1.20 23.30 20.00 2.51 48.20 32.95 10.25 5.04
44 147 70.50 102.90 1.80 24.80 21.00 2.71 56.83 36.52 9.25 5.32
45 148 70.50 117.80 2.25 25.90 22.30 3.13 67.45 39.11 9.50 6.10
46 149 71.50 98.90 1.70 22.30 15.30 2.52 38.65 35.40 9.75 5.34
47 150 70.00 101.60 1.60 23.30 20.40 2.55 49.46 38.74 9.00 5.69
48 151 72.00 106.80 1.95 25.20 19.70 3.45 75.83 38.96 9.75 6.22
49 109 ( C ) 69.50 111.80 2.10 21.60 31.60 3.32 107.58 32.25 9.25 4.40
50 126 ( C ) 71.50 112.30 1.40 23.90 30.60 2.31 68.15 37.54 8.50 5.11
51 143 ( C ) 67.50 109.00 1.60 25.70 26.40 3.30 91.14 34.88 8.00 4.29
Mean 70.1 114.7 1.89 24.55 24.14 2.971 72.98 35.644 9.33 5.208
S.Em 1.58 9.73 0.22 2.23 2.43 0.26 8.64 2.98 0.71 0.73
CD@ 5% 4.49 27.67 0.65 6.35 6.91 0.76 24.57 8.47 2.04 2.09
CV % 3.20 12.00 17.21 12.89 14.26 12.75 16.75 11.69 10.89 19.79
Continued..
Note: Figures in bold face indicates maximum and minimum values.
Mean sum of squares
Source of
Variation
df Days to
50%
flowering
Plant
height
(cm)
Monopodia
Per plant
Sympodia
Per plant
Bolls per
plant
Mean
boll
weight
(g)
Kapas
yield
(g/plant)
Ginning
per cent
Seed
index
(g)
Lint
index
Replication 1 30.74** 316.94** 0.71 1.86 43.22** 0.25 1.4 3.7 1.78 0.7
Hybrids 47 5.47** 311.77** 0.16 17.15** 61.15** 0.23 762.36** 18.69** 1.2 1.60*
Checks 2 8.00** 6.32** 0.26 8.44** 15.22** 0.66 784.51** 37.52** 0.79 0.46
Hybrids Vs
Checks
1 1.59 87.55** 0.21 4.20** 185.62** 0.0001 1626.66** 44.55** 3.53 2.69
Error 50 5.005 189.57 0.1 10.003 11.84 0.14 149.43 17.76 1.03 1.09
Table 4. Analysis of variance for kapas yield and its attributing characters in cheks and experimental
hybrids of cotton [G .hirsutum L.]
Hybrid
Mean
of
F1
Mean of
Check
109
Heterosis
( % )
Mean of
Check 143
Heterosis
( % ) Hybrid
Mean of
F1
Mean of
Check
109
Heterosis
( % )
Mean of
Check
143
Heterosis
( % )
101 71.50 69.50 2.88 67.50 5.93** 127 71.50 69.50 2.88 67.50 5.93**
102 71.50 69.50 2.88 67.50 5.93** 128 71.50 69.50 2.88 67.50 5.93**
103 68.50 69.50 -1.44 67.50 1.48 129 69.50 69.50 0.00 67.50 2.96
104 67.50 69.50 -2.88 67.50 0.00 130 71.50 69.50 2.88 67.50 5.93**
105 70.00 69.50 0.72 67.50 3.70 131 72.00 69.50 3.60 67.50 6.67**
106 69.50 69.50 0.00 67.50 2.96 132 71.00 69.50 2.16 67.50 5.19
107 67.00 69.50 -3.60 67.50 -0.74 133 70.00 69.50 0.72 67.50 3.70
108 70.00 69.50 0.72 67.50 3.70 134 72.00 69.50 3.60 67.50 6.67**
110 69.00 69.50 -0.72 67.50 2.22 135 72.00 69.50 3.60 67.50 6.67**
111 72.00 69.50 3.60 67.50 6.67** 136 72.00 69.50 3.60 67.50 6.67**
112 67.50 69.50 -2.88 67.50 0.00 137 69.50 69.50 0.00 67.50 2.96
113 71.00 69.50 2.16 67.50 5.19 138 66.50 69.50 -4.32 67.50 -1.48
114 67.00 69.50 -3.60 67.50 -0.74 139 69.50 69.50 0.00 67.50 2.96
115 69.50 69.50 0.00 67.50 2.96 140 69.00 69.50 -0.72 67.50 2.22
116 70.00 69.50 0.72 67.50 3.70 141 68.50 69.50 -1.44 67.50 1.48
117 71.00 69.50 2.16 67.50 5.19 142 71.50 69.50 2.88 67.50 5.93**
118 72.50 69.50 4.32 67.50 7.41** 144 70.50 69.50 1.44 67.50 4.44
119 71.50 69.50 2.88 67.50 5.93** 145 69.50 69.50 0.00 67.50 2.96
120 70.50 69.50 1.44 67.50 4.44 146 69.50 69.50 0.00 67.50 2.96
121 68.50 69.50 -1.44 67.50 1.48 147 70.50 69.50 1.44 67.50 4.44
122 68.00 69.50 -2.16 67.50 0.74 148 70.50 69.50 1.44 67.50 4.44
123 67.00 69.50 -3.60 67.50 -0.74 149 71.50 69.50 2.88 67.50 5.93**
124 71.00 69.50 2.16 67.50 5.19 150 70.00 69.50 0.72 67.50 3.70
125 72.00 69.50 3.60 67.50 6.67** 151 72.00 69.50 3.60 67.50 6.67
Table 5. Performance of hybrids and per cent heterosis over best commercial check with respect to days to 50% flowering
In cotton [G .hirsutum L.]
SE ± 2.23 * Significant at P = 0.05 **Significant at P = 0.01
Hybrid Mean of
F1
Mean of
Check
126
Heterosis
( % )
Mean of
Check
143
Heterosis
( % )
Hybrid Mean of
F1
Mean of
Check
126
Heterosis
( % )
Mean of
Check
143
Heterosis
( % )
101 101.00 112.30 -10.06 109.00 -7.34 127 110.00 112.30 -2.05 109.00 0.92
102 110.30 112.30 -1.78 109.00 1.19 128 113.60 112.30 1.16 109.00 4.22
103 111.30 112.30 -0.89 109.00 2.11 129 121.80 112.30 8.46 109.00 11.74
104 116.50 112.30 3.74 109.00 6.88 130 128.80 112.30 14.69 109.00 18.17
105 110.10 112.30 -1.96 109.00 1.01 131 123.10 112.30 9.62 109.00 12.94
106 95.40 112.30 -15.05 109.00 -12.48 132 138.70 112.30 23.51** 109.00 27.25**
107 114.40 112.30 1.87 109.00 4.95 133 129.60 112.30 15.41 109.00 18.90
108 84.30 112.30 -24.93** 109.00 -22.66** 134 122.90 112.30 9.44 109.00 12.75
110 105.70 112.30 -5.88 109.00 -3.03 135 122.00 112.30 8.64 109.00 11.93
111 123.80 112.30 10.24 109.00 13.58 136 128.40 112.30 14.34 109.00 17.80
112 129.80 112.30 15.58 109.00 19.08 137 115.70 112.30 3.03 109.00 6.15
113 132.40 112.30 17.90 109.00 21.47** 138 120.10 112.30 6.95 109.00 10.18
114 118.70 112.30 5.70 109.00 8.90 139 114.90 112.30 2.32 109.00 5.41
115 119.00 112.30 5.97 109.00 9.17 140 102.50 112.30 -8.73 109.00 -5.96
116 114.70 112.30 2.14 109.00 5.23 141 92.90 112.30 -17.28 109.00 -14.77
117 109.60 112.30 -2.40 109.00 0.55 142 112.50 112.30 0.18 109.00 3.21
118 134.30 112.30 19.59 109.00 23.21** 144 111.90 112.30 -0.36 109.00 2.66
119 117.70 112.30 4.81 109.00 7.98 145 116.80 112.30 4.01 109.00 7.16
120 128.20 112.30 14.16 109.00 17.61 146 102.40 112.30 -8.82 109.00 -6.06
121 123.50 112.30 9.97 109.00 13.30 147 102.90 112.30 -8.37 109.00 -5.60
122 130.90 112.30 16.56 109.00 20.09 148 117.80 112.30 4.90 109.00 8.07
123 133.90 112.30 19.23 109.00 22.84** 149 98.90 112.30 -11.93 109.00 -9.27
124 110.40 112.30 -1.69 109.00 1.28 150 101.60 112.30 -9.53 109.00 -6.79
125 86.10 112.30 -23.33** 109.00 -21.01 151 106.80 112.30 -4.90 109.00 -2.02
Table 6. Performance of hybrids and per cent heterosis over best commercial check with respect to plant height in cotton [G
.hirsutum L.]
SE ± 13.76
* Significant at P = 0.05 **Significant at P = 0.01
Hybrid Mean
of
F1
Mean of
Check 109
Heterosis
(%)
Mean of
Check
143
Heterosis
( % )
Hybrid
Mean of
F1
Mean of
Check 109
Heterosis
(%)
Mean of
Check 143
Heterosis
(%)
101 2.20 2.10 4.76 1.60 37.50** 127 1.50 2.10 -28.57** 1.60 -6.25
102 2.10 2.10 0.00 1.60 31.25 128 1.90 2.10 -9.52 1.60 18.75
103 1.90 2.10 -9.52 1.60 18.75 129 2.00 2.10 -4.76 1.60 25.00
104 1.80 2.10 -14.29 1.60 12.50 130 2.00 2.10 -4.76 1.60 25.00
105 2.09 2.10 -0.71 1.60 30.31 131 1.90 2.10 -9.52 1.60 18.75
106 1.70 2.10 -19.05 1.60 6.25 132 2.10 2.10 0.00 1.60 31.25
107 2.40 2.10 14.29 1.60 50.00 133 2.20 2.10 4.76 1.60 37.50
108 1.90 2.10 -9.52 1.60 18.75 134 2.50 2.10 19.05 1.60 56.25*
110 2.25 2.10 7.14 1.60 40.63** 135 2.10 2.10 0.00 1.60 31.25
111 1.90 2.10 -9.52 1.60 18.75 136 1.70 2.10 -19.05 1.60 6.25
112 1.90 2.10 -9.52 1.60 18.75 137 1.90 2.10 -9.52 1.60 18.75
113 2.30 2.10 9.52 1.60 43.75** 138 1.70 2.10 -19.05 1.60 6.25
114 1.90 2.10 -9.52 1.60 18.75 139 2.40 2.10 14.29 1.60 50.00*
115 2.30 2.10 9.52 1.60 43.75** 140 1.50 2.10 -28.57** 1.60 -6.25
116 1.60 2.10 -23.81 1.60 0.00 141 1.60 2.10 -23.81 1.60 0.00
117 1.60 2.10 -23.81 1.60 0.00 142 2.00 2.10 -4.76 1.60 25.00
118 1.70 2.10 -19.05 1.60 6.25 144 1.60 2.10 -23.81 1.60 0.00
119 1.90 2.10 -9.52 1.60 18.75 145 1.60 2.10 -23.81 1.60 0.00
120 1.40 2.10 -33.33** 1.60 -12.50 146 1.20 2.10 -42.86** 1.60 -25.00
121 1.60 2.10 -23.81 1.60 0.00 147 1.80 2.10 -14.29 1.60 12.50
122 2.00 2.10 -4.76 1.60 25.00 148 2.25 2.10 7.14 1.60 40.63**
123 1.80 2.10 -14.29 1.60 12.50 149 1.70 2.10 -19.05 1.60 6.25
124 2.00 2.10 -4.76 1.60 25.00 150 1.60 2.10 -23.81 1.60 0.00
125 2.10 2.10 0.00 1.60 31.25 151 1.95 2.10 -7.14 1.60 21.88
Table 7. Performance of hybrids and per cent heterosis over best commercial check with respect to monopodia per
plant in cotton [G .hirsutum L.]
SE ± 0.32 * Significant at P = 0.05 **Significant at P = 0.01
Hybrid
Mean
of
F1
Mean of
Check
126
Heterosis
( % )
Mean of
Check
143
Heterosis
( % )
Hybrid Mean of
F1
Mean of
Check
126
Heterosis
( % )
Mean of
Check
143
Heterosis
( % )
101 19.30 23.90 -19.25 25.70 -24.90** 127 25.30 23.90 5.86 25.70 -1.56
102 16.30 23.90 -31.80* 25.70 -36.58* 128 27.90 23.90 16.74 25.70 8.56
103 21.40 23.90 -10.46 25.70 -16.73 129 26.80 23.90 12.13 25.70 4.28
104 24.90 23.90 4.18 25.70 -3.11 130 27.40 23.90 14.64 25.70 6.61
105 21.50 23.90 -10.04 25.70 -16.34 131 23.70 23.90 -0.84 25.70 -7.78
106 18.10 23.90 -24.27** 25.70 -29.57* 132 24.40 23.90 2.09 25.70 -5.06
107 22.10 23.90 -7.53 25.70 -14.01 133 28.00 23.90 17.15 25.70 8.95
108 17.50 23.90 -26.78** 25.70 -31.91* 134 26.70 23.90 11.72 25.70 3.89
110 23.90 23.90 0.00 25.70 -7.00 135 26.10 23.90 9.21 25.70 1.56
111 25.15 23.90 5.23 25.70 -2.14 136 26.00 23.90 8.79 25.70 1.17
112 24.80 23.90 3.77 25.70 -3.50 137 25.40 23.90 6.28 25.70 -1.17
113 28.30 23.90 18.41 25.70 10.12 138 26.20 23.90 9.62 25.70 1.95
114 25.90 23.90 8.37 25.70 0.78 139 25.60 23.90 7.11 25.70 -0.39
115 25.00 23.90 4.60 25.70 -2.72 140 24.10 23.90 0.84 25.70 -6.23
116 26.50 23.90 10.88 25.70 3.11 141 21.50 23.90 -10.04 25.70 -16.34
117 25.20 23.90 5.44 25.70 -1.95 142 23.50 23.90 -1.67 25.70 -8.56
118 28.40 23.90 18.83 25.70 10.51 144 26.00 23.90 8.79 25.70 1.17
119 24.20 23.90 1.26 25.70 -5.84 145 28.85 23.90 20.71 25.70 12.26
120 27.20 23.90 13.81 25.70 5.84 146 23.30 23.90 -2.51 25.70 -9.34
121 27.60 23.90 15.48 25.70 7.39 147 24.80 23.90 3.77 25.70 -3.50
122 25.90 23.90 8.37 25.70 0.78 148 25.90 23.90 8.37 25.70 0.78
123 27.20 23.90 13.81 25.70 5.84 149 22.30 23.90 -6.69 25.70 -13.23
124 27.00 23.90 12.97 25.70 5.06 150 23.30 23.90 -2.51 25.70 -9.34
125 19.00 23.90 -20.50 25.70 -26.07** 151 25.20 23.90 5.44 25.70 -1.95
Table 8. Performance of hybrids and per cent heterosis over best commercial check with respect to sympodia per
plant in cotton [G .hirsutum L.]
SE ± 3.16
*
Significant at P = 0.05 **Significant at P = 0.01
Hybrid Mean
of
F1
Mean of
Check
109
Heterosis
( % )
Mean of
Check
143
Heterosis
( % )
Hybrid
Mean of
F1
Mean of
Check
109
Heterosis
( % )
Mean of
Check
143
Heterosis
( % )
101 23.70 31.60 -25.00** 26.40 -10.23 127 21.10 31.60 -33.23* 26.40 -20.08
102 16.30 31.60 -48.42* 26.40 -38.26* 128 23.30 31.60 -26.27* 26.40 -11.74
103 23.50 31.60 -25.63** 26.40 -10.98 129 31.10 31.60 -1.58 26.40 17.80
104 18.00 31.60 -43.04* 26.40 -31.82* 130 30.70 31.60 -2.85 26.40 16.29
105 19.10 31.60 -39.56* 26.40 -27.65** 131 25.90 31.60 -18.04 26.40 -1.89
106 33.20 31.60 5.06 26.40 25.76** 132 22.90 31.60 -27.53* 26.40 -13.26
107 31.30 31.60 -0.95 26.40 18.56 133 33.80 31.60 6.96 26.40 28.03**
108 26.10 31.60 -17.41 26.40 -1.14 134 29.50 31.60 -6.65 26.40 11.74
110 25.30 31.60 -19.94** 26.40 -4.17 135 19.00 31.60 -39.87* 26.40 -28.03**
111 21.60 31.60 -31.65* 26.40 -18.18 136 16.10 31.60 -49.05* 26.40 -39.02*
112 31.40 31.60 -0.63 26.40 18.94 137 17.90 31.60 -43.35* 26.40 -32.20*
113 18.70 31.60 -40.82* 26.40 -29.17** 138 13.10 31.60 -58.54* 26.40 -50.38*
114 22.50 31.60 -28.80* 26.40 -14.77 139 17.10 31.60 -45.89* 26.40 -35.23*
115 28.50 31.60 -9.81 26.40 7.95 140 13.20 31.60 -58.23* 26.40 -50.00*
116 29.50 31.60 -6.65 26.40 11.74 141 18.50 31.60 -41.46* 26.40 -29.92**
117 28.90 31.60 -8.54 26.40 9.47 142 23.00 31.60 -27.22* 26.40 -12.88
118 23.80 31.60 -24.68** 26.40 -9.85 144 26.70 31.60 -15.51 26.40 1.14
119 27.50 31.60 -12.97 26.40 4.17 145 24.20 31.60 -23.42** 26.40 -8.33
120 26.40 31.60 -16.46 26.40 0.00 146 20.00 31.60 -36.71* 26.40 -24.24**
121 33.30 31.60 5.38 26.40 26.14** 147 21.00 31.60 -33.54* 26.40 -20.45
122 22.90 31.60 -27.53* 26.40 -13.26 148 22.30 31.60 -29.43* 26.40 -15.53
123 31.10 31.60 -1.58 26.40 17.80 149 15.30 31.60 -51.58* 26.40 -42.05*
124 30.10 31.60 -4.75 26.40 14.02 150 20.40 31.60 -35.44* 26.40 -22.73**
125 23.90 31.60 -24.37** 26.40 -9.47 151 19.70 31.60 -37.66* 26.40 -25.38**
Table 9. Performance of hybrids and per cent heterosis over best commercial check with respect to bolls per plant in
cotton [G .hirsutum L.]
SE ± 3.44 * Significant at P = 0.05 **Significant at P = 0.01
Hybrid Mean
of
F1
Mean of
Check
109
Heterosis
( % )
Mean of
Check
143
Heterosis
( % ) Hybrid
Mean of
F1
Mean of
Check
109
Heterosis
( % )
Mean of
Check 143
Heterosis
( % )
101 2.77 3.32 -16.57 3.30 -16.06 127 2.61 3.32 -21.39** 3.30 -20.91**
102 3.20 3.32 -3.61 3.30 -3.03 128 3.36 3.32 1.05 3.30 1.67
103 2.79 3.32 -16.11 3.30 -15.61 129 2.87 3.32 -13.70 3.30 -13.18
104 2.47 3.32 -25.75** 3.30 -25.30** 130 2.76 3.32 -16.87 3.30 -16.36
105 3.29 3.32 -1.05 3.30 -0.45 131 3.44 3.32 3.46 3.30 4.09
106 2.98 3.32 -10.39 3.30 -9.85 132 3.40 3.32 2.26 3.30 2.88
107 3.23 3.32 -2.86 3.30 -2.27 133 2.98 3.32 -10.24 3.30 -9.70
108 3.08 3.32 -7.38 3.30 -6.82 134 2.89 3.32 -13.10 3.30 -12.58
110 2.53 3.32 -23.95** 3.30 -23.48** 135 3.58 3.32 7.83 3.30 8.48
111 2.83 3.32 -14.76 3.30 -14.24 136 3.52 3.32 5.87 3.30 6.52
112 2.91 3.32 -12.35 3.30 -11.82 137 3.76 3.32 13.10 3.30 13.79
113 2.52 3.32 -24.10** 3.30 -23.64** 138 2.83 3.32 -14.76 3.30 -14.24
114 2.87 3.32 -13.55 3.30 -13.03 139 3.74 3.32 12.65 3.30 13.33
115 3.05 3.32 -8.28 3.30 -7.73 140 3.26 3.32 -1.81 3.30 -1.21
116 2.48 3.32 -25.45** 3.30 -25.00** 141 3.42 3.32 2.86 3.30 3.48
117 2.91 3.32 -12.50 3.30 -11.97 142 2.85 3.32 -14.31 3.30 -13.79
118 2.67 3.32 -19.58** 3.30 -19.09 144 2.69 3.32 -18.98** 3.30 -18.48
119 2.88 3.32 -13.40 3.30 -12.88 145 2.71 3.32 -18.37 3.30 -17.88
120 2.88 3.32 -13.40 3.30 -12.88 146 2.51 3.32 -24.40** 3.30 -23.94**
121 2.83 3.32 -14.76 3.30 -14.24 147 2.71 3.32 -18.52 3.30 -18.03
122 3.15 3.32 -5.27 3.30 -4.70 148 3.13 3.32 -5.72 3.30 -5.15
123 2.97 3.32 -10.54 3.30 -10.00 149 2.52 3.32 -24.10** 3.30 -23.64**
124 2.97 3.32 -10.69 3.30 -10.15 150 2.55 3.32 -23.34** 3.30 -22.88**
125 2.92 3.32 -12.20 3.30 -11.67 151 3.45 3.32 3.92 3.30 4.55
Table 10. Performance of hybrids and per cent heterosis over best commercial check with respect to mean boll
weight in cotton [G .hirsutum L.]
SE ± 0.37 * Significant at P = 0.05 **Significant at P = 0.01
Hybrid
Mean
of
F1
Mean of
Check
109
Heterosis
( % )
Mean of
Check
143
Heterosis
( % )
Hybrid Mean
of
F1
Mean of
Check
109
Heterosis
( % )
Mean
of
Check
143
Heterosis
( % )
101 66.15 107..58 -38.51* 91.14 -27.42** 127 55.06 107..58 -48.82* 91.14 -39.59*
102 60.27 107..58 -43.98* 91.14 -33.87* 128 78.48 107..58 -27.05** 91.14 -13.89
103 65.91 107..58 -38.73* 91.14 -27.68** 129 95.26 107..58 -11.45 91.14 4.52
104 44.34 107..58 -58.78* 91.14 -51.35* 130 81.47 107..58 -24.27** 91.14 -10.61
105 60.65 107..58 -43.62* 91.14 -33.45* 131 88.96 107..58 -17.31 91.14 -2.39
106 103.60 107..58 -3.70 91.14 13.67 132 77.58 107..58 -27.89* 91.14 -14.88
107 82.33 107..58 -23.47** 91.14 -9.67 133 104.90 107..58 -2.49 91.14 15.10
108 86.53 107..58 -19.57** 91.14 -5.06 134 106.18 107..58 -1.31 91.14 16.50
110 63.86 107..58 -40.64* 91.14 -29.93** 135 64.71 107..58 -39.85* 91.14 -29.00**
111 64.42 107..58 -40.12* 91.14 -29.32** 136 139.96 107..58 30.09* 91.14 53.56*
112 91.61 107..58 -14.84 91.14 0.52 137 66.52 107..58 -38.17* 91.14 -27.01**
113 47.33 107..58 -56.00* 91.14 -48.07* 138 36.93 107..58 -65.67* 91.14 -59.48*
114 65.18 107..58 -39.41* 91.14 -28.48** 139 58.25 107..58 -45.85* 91.14 -36.09*
115 89.09 107..58 -17.19 91.14 -2.25 140 42.93 107..58 -60.09* 91.14 -52.90*
116 66.10 107..58 -38.56* 91.14 -27.47** 141 63.10 107..58 -41.35* 91.14 -30.77**
117 72.11 107..58 -32.97* 91.14 -20.88 142 77.91 107..58 -27.58* 91.14 -14.52
118 69.49 107..58 -35.41* 91.14 -23.75** 144 68.99 107..58 -35.87* 91.14 -24.30**
119 77.78 107..58 -27.70** 91.14 -14.66 145 62.84 107..58 -41.59* 91.14 -31.05**
120 76.17 107..58 -29.20* 91.14 -16.43 146 48.20 107..58 -55.20* 91.14 -47.11*
121 79.94 107..58 -25.69** 91.14 -12.29 147 56.83 107..58 -47.17* 91.14 -37.65*
122 71.98 107..58 -33.09* 91.14 -21.02 148 67.45 107..58 -37.30* 91.14 -25.99**
123 91.16 107..58 -15.26 91.14 0.02 149 38.65 107..58 -64.07* 91.14 -57.59*
124 89.20 107..58 -17.08 91.14 -2.13 150 49.46 107..58 -54.02* 91.14 -45.73*
125 63.63 107..58 -40.85* 91.14 -30.18** 151 75.83 107..58 -29.52* 91.14 -16.80
Table 11. Performance of hybrids and per cent heterosis over best commercial check with respect to kapas yield per
plant (g) in cotton [G .hirsutum L.]
SE ± 12.22
* Significant at P = 0.05 **Significant at P = 0.01
Hybrid
Mean
of
F1
Mean of
Check
126
Heterosis
( % )
Mean of
Check
143
Heterosis
( % ) Hybrid Mean
of
F1
Mean of
Check
126
Heterosis
( % )
Mean of
Check
143
Heterosis
( % )
101 31.90 37.54 -15.02 34.88 -8.54 127 35.20 37.54 -6.24 34.88 0.91
102 33.17 37.54 -11.64 34.88 -4.90 128 36.78 37.54 -2.03 34.88 5.45
103 32.81 37.54 -12.59 34.88 -5.92 129 36.23 37.54 -3.50 34.88 3.86
104 34.32 37.54 -8.58 34.88 -1.61 130 40.38 37.54 7.56 34.88 15.76
105 34.44 37.54 -8.27 34.88 -1.27 131 42.23 37.54 12.49 34.88 21.07**
106 35.06 37.54 -6.61 34.88 0.52 132 35.15 37.54 -6.36 34.88 0.78
107 36.54 37.54 -2.68 34.88 4.75 133 41.37 37.54 10.19 34.88 18.60
108 37.31 37.54 -0.61 34.88 6.97 134 36.87 37.54 -1.78 34.88 5.71
110 32.08 37.54 -14.56 34.88 -8.04 135 36.26 37.54 -3.41 34.88 3.96
111 28.74 37.54 -23.43** 34.88 -17.59 136 35.74 37.54 -4.80 34.88 2.46
112 31.60 37.54 -15.84 34.88 -9.42 137 34.01 37.54 -9.39 34.88 -2.48
113 34.85 37.54 -7.16 34.88 -0.08 138 37.23 37.54 -0.82 34.88 6.75
114 37.06 37.54 -1.27 34.88 6.26 139 39.38 37.54 4.90 34.88 12.90
115 33.44 37.54 -10.93 34.88 -4.14 140 41.47 37.54 10.47 34.88 18.90
116 33.54 37.54 -10.66 34.88 -3.85 141 38.15 37.54 1.63 34.88 9.38
117 37.40 37.54 -0.38 34.88 7.21 142 37.83 37.54 0.78 34.88 8.47
118 31.99 37.54 -14.78 34.88 -8.28 144 35.83 37.54 -4.56 34.88 2.72
119 35.70 37.54 -4.90 34.88 2.36 145 33.75 37.54 -10.10 34.88 -3.24
120 32.76 37.54 -12.74 34.88 -6.08 146 32.95 37.54 -12.24 34.88 -5.55
121 33.09 37.54 -11.86 34.88 -5.14 147 36.52 37.54 -2.73 34.88 4.69
122 38.69 37.54 3.06 34.88 10.92 148 39.11 37.54 4.17 34.88 12.12
123 31.38 37.54 -16.41 34.88 -10.03 149 35.40 37.54 -5.71 34.88 1.48
124 36.09 37.54 -3.87 34.88 3.46 150 38.74 37.54 3.21 34.88 11.08
125 33.69 37.54 -10.26 34.88 -3.42 151 38.96 37.54 3.77 34.88 11.69
Table 12. Performance of hybrids and per cent heterosis over best commercial check with respect to ginning
per cent in cotton( G .hirsutum L.]
SE± 4.21 * Significant at P = 0.05 **Significant at P = 0.01
Hybrids Mean
of
F1
Mean of
Check
109
Heterosis
( % )
Mean of
Check 143
Heterosis
( % ) Hybrids
Mean of
F1
Mean of
Check
109
Heterosis
( % )
Mean of
Check
143
Heterosis
( % )
101 8.75 9.25 -5.41 8.00 9.38 127 8.50 9.25 -8.11 8.00 6.25
102 9.75 9.25 5.41 8.00 21.88** 128 9.00 9.25 -2.70 8.00 12.50
103 8.75 9.25 -5.41 8.00 9.38 129 8.50 9.25 -8.11 8.00 6.25
104 8.50 9.25 -8.11 8.00 6.25 130 9.00 9.25 -2.70 8.00 12.50
105 9.25 9.25 0.00 8.00 15.63 131 9.25 9.25 0.00 8.00 15.63
106 9.75 9.25 5.41 8.00 21.88** 132 10.00 9.25 8.11 8.00 25.00**
107 9.25 9.25 0.00 8.00 15.63 133 9.50 9.25 2.70 8.00 18.75
108 8.00 9.25 -13.51 8.00 0.00 134 8.75 9.25 -5.41 8.00 9.38
110 8.25 9.25 -10.81 8.00 3.13 135 10.25 9.25 10.81 8.00 28.13**
111 8.75 9.25 -5.41 8.00 9.38 136 10.50 9.25 13.51 8.00 31.25*
112 9.25 9.25 0.00 8.00 15.63 137 10.75 9.25 16.22 8.00 34.38*
113 9.00 9.25 -2.70 8.00 12.50 138 9.50 9.25 2.70 8.00 18.75
114 9.00 9.25 -2.70 8.00 12.50 139 10.25 9.25 10.81 8.00 28.13**
115 9.75 9.25 5.41 8.00 21.88** 140 11.50 9.25 24.32** 8.00 43.75*
116 8.50 9.25 -8.11 8.00 6.25 141 10.75 9.25 16.22 8.00 34.38*
117 9.25 9.25 0.00 8.00 15.63 142 10.75 9.25 16.22 8.00 34.38*
118 9.00 9.25 -2.70 8.00 12.50 144 9.00 9.25 -2.70 8.00 12.50
119 9.00 9.25 -2.70 8.00 12.50 145 10.25 9.25 10.81 8.00 28.13**
120 8.25 9.25 -10.81 8.00 3.13 146 10.25 9.25 10.81 8.00 28.13**
121 8.50 9.25 -8.11 8.00 6.25 147 9.25 9.25 0.00 8.00 15.63
122 9.00 9.25 -2.70 8.00 12.50 148 9.50 9.25 2.70 8.00 18.75
123 10.00 9.25 8.11 8.00 25.00** 149 9.75 9.25 5.41 8.00 21.88**
124 8.75 9.25 -5.41 8.00 9.38 150 9.00 9.25 -2.70 8.00 12.50
125 10.25 9.25 10.81 8.00 28.13** 151 9.75 9.25 5.41 8.00 21.88**
Table 13. Performance of hybrids and per cent heterosis over best commercial check with respect to seed index in cotton
[G .hirsutum L.]
SE ± 1.01 * Significant at P = 0.05 **Significant at P = 0.01
Hybrids Mean of
F1
Mean of
Check
126
Heterosis
( % )
Mean of
Check
143
Heterosis
( % )
Hybrids
Mean of
F1
Mean of
Check
126
Heterosis
( % )
Mean of
Check
143
Heterosis
( %)
101 4.10 5.11 -19.78 4.29 -4.45 127 4.62 5.11 -9.65 4.29 7.62
102 4.84 5.11 -5.30 4.29 12.81 128 5.24 5.11 2.46 4.29 22.05
103 4.27 5.11 -16.37 4.29 -0.38 129 4.83 5.11 -5.51 4.29 12.55
104 4.44 5.11 -13.09 4.29 3.52 130 6.10 5.11 19.28 4.29 42.08**
105 4.86 5.11 -4.92 4.29 13.25 131 6.76 5.11 32.33 4.29 57.62**
106 5.26 5.11 3.01 4.29 22.70 132 5.42 5.11 6.08 4.29 26.36
107 5.33 5.11 4.21 4.29 24.13 133 6.70 5.11 31.16 4.29 56.23**
108 4.76 5.11 -6.83 4.29 10.98 134 5.11 5.11 0.01 4.29 19.13
110 3.90 5.11 -23.76 4.29 -9.19 135 5.83 5.11 14.11 4.29 35.92
111 3.53 5.11 -30.93 4.29 -17.72 136 5.84 5.11 14.27 4.29 36.11
112 4.27 5.11 -16.39 4.29 -0.41 137 5.54 5.11 8.44 4.29 29.17
113 4.82 5.11 -5.77 4.29 12.24 138 5.64 5.11 10.29 4.29 31.37
114 5.30 5.11 3.71 4.29 23.54 139 6.66 5.11 30.30 4.29 55.20**
115 4.90 5.11 -4.16 4.29 14.16 140 8.15 5.11 59.47* 4.29 89.95*
116 4.29 5.11 -16.06 4.29 -0.02 141 6.63 5.11 29.77 4.29 54.58**
117 5.53 5.11 8.13 4.29 28.80 142 6.54 5.11 28.02 4.29 52.50**
118 4.23 5.11 -17.14 4.29 -1.31 144 5.03 5.11 -1.66 4.29 17.13
119 5.00 5.11 -2.20 4.29 16.49 145 5.22 5.11 2.19 4.29 21.72
120 4.02 5.11 -21.35 4.29 -6.31 146 5.04 5.11 -1.45 4.29 17.39
121 4.20 5.11 -17.75 4.29 -2.03 147 5.32 5.11 4.13 4.29 24.03
122 5.68
5.11
11.14 4.29 32.38 148 6.10
5.11
19.40 4.29 42.22**
123 4.57 5.11 -10.50 4.29 6.60 149 5.34 5.11 4.54 4.29 24.52
124 4.94 5.11 -3.32 4.29 15.16 150 5.69 5.11 11.40 4.29 32.69
125 5.21 5.11 1.90 4.29 21.38 151 6.22 5.11 21.77 4.29 45.04**
SE ± 1.04 * Significant at P = 0.05 **Significant at P = 0.01
Table 14. Performance of hybrids and per cent heterosis over best commercial check with respect to lint index in cotton
[G .hirsutum L.]
Mean sum of squares
Source of
Variation
df Days to
50%
flowering
Plant
height (cm)
Bolls per
plant
Mean
boll
weight
(g)
Kapas yield
(g/plant)
Ginning
per cent
Seed
index (g)
Lint
index
Monopodia Sympodia
Per plant Per plant
Replication 1 33.84** 148.00** 0.72 0.22 29.04** 0.22 7.96** 0.008 1.76 0.57
Cross 47 5.47** 311.77** 0.16 17.15** 61.15** 0.23 762.36** 18.69** 1.2 1.60**
Lines(c) 5 6.71** 878.26** 0.23 81.10** 252.09** 0.78 1348.67** 50.28** 5.97** 7.22**
Testers(c) 7 14.02** 377.85** 0.14 13.94** 47.30** 0.36 739.63** 44.19** 1.64 2.89**
L × T ( c) 35 3.59** 217.63** 0.15 8.66** 36.64** 0.12 683.14** 9.08** 0.43 0.54
Error 47 5.14 192 0.1 10.23 11.89 0.14 150.65 11.99 1.07 1.15
Total 95 - - - - - - - - - -
* Significant at P = 0.05 **Significant at P = 0.01
Table 15. Combining ability analysis of variance as per Kempthorne (1957) in respect of kapas yield and its
attributing characters of cotton hybrids [G .hirsutum L.]
Character
Variance due
to GCA
Variance due
to SCA
GCA:SCA
ratio
VA VD
1. Days to 50% flowering 0.04 1.27 1:31.75 0.09 0.77
2. Plant height (cm) 2.24 139.12 1:62.10 4.49 12.81
3 Monopodia per plant 0.0002 0.03 1:150.00 0.0004 0.02
4. Sympodia per plant 0.20 11.22 1:56.10 0.40 0.78
5. Bolls per plant 0.58 47.33 1:81.60 1.17 12.37
6. Mean boll weight (g) 0.0026 0.12 1:46.15 0.005 0.01
7. Kapas yield (g /plant) 1.89 377.75 1:199.86 3.78 266.24
8. Ginning per cent (%) 0.22 10.19 1:46.31 0.45 1.45
9. Seed index (g) 0.01 0.72 1:72 0.03 0.31
10. Lint index 0.02 1.08 1:54 0.05 0.30
Table 16. Variance due to general and specific combining ability for kapas yield and its attributing
characters of cotton hybrids [G .hirsutum L.
LINES
Days to
50%
flowering
Plant
height
(cm)
Monopodia
per plant
Sympodia
per plant
Bolls per
plant
Mean
boll
weight(g)
Kapas
yield
(g / plant)
Ginning
Per cent
Seed
index
Lint index
1 -0.59 -9.56 ** 0.11 -4.46 ** 0.10 0.00 -0.76 -0.67 -0.38 -0.37
2 -0.41 4.24 0.07 1.00 2.00 * -0.21 * -2.02 -2.20 * -0.41 -0.72 **
3 -0.34 5.65 -0.08 1.22 3.57 ** -0.07 5.43 -1.61 -0.28 -0.54
4 1.09 8.59 * 0.12 1.68 * 3.49 ** 0.06 14.00 ** 2.19 * -0.31 0.32
5 -0.22 -1.35 -0.03 0.20 -6.56 ** 0.40 ** -3.20 1.61 1.16 ** 1.07 **
6 0.47 -7.58 * -0.18 * 0.36 -2.60 ** -0.19 -13.45 ** 0.68 0.22 0.25
S.Em.± 0.5669 3.46 0.08 0.79 0.86 0.09 3.06 0.86 0.25 0.26
CD ( ĝ i – ĝ j) at 5% 1.61 9.84 0.23 2.27 2.45 0.27 8.72 2.46 0.73 0.76
CD ( ĝ i – ĝ j ) at 1% 2.14 13.12 0.31 3.03 3.26 0.36 11.62 3.28 0.98 1.01
TESTERS
1 1.14 -0.82 -0.00 0.24 -0.53 -0.16 -7.27 * -1.80 -0.42 -0.61
2 1.30 3.46 -0.05 0.14 -2.30 * 0.11 8.64 * -1.70 0.17 -0.29
3 -0.86 3.23 -0.18 0.22 1.25 -0.02 1.96 -2.42 * -0.08 -0.62
4 -0.78 5.73 -0.03 1.94 * -1.33 -0.29 * -14.18 ** 0.24 -0.42 -0.21
5 -0.53 4.28 0.19 * 0.15 -2.17 * 0.30 ** -3.24 2.64 * 0.00 0.59
6 -0.45 -0.24 -0.05 -1.08 0.23 0.06 1.85 -0.53 0.75 * 0.32
7 -1.20 -4.37 0.00 0.14 3.47 ** -0.04 3.86 1.62 -0.08 0.33
8 1.39 * -11.27 ** 0.11 -1.75 1.38 0.04 8.38 * 1.95 0.08 0.49
S.Em.± 0.65 4.0001 0.09 0.92 0.99 0.11 3.54 0.99 0.29 0.30
CD ( ĝ i – ĝ j ) at 5% 1.86 11.37 0.26 2.62 2.82 0.31 10.07 2.84 0.85 0.88
CD (ĝ i – ĝ j ) at 1% 2.48 15.16 0.35 3.50 3.77 0.41 13.42 3.78 1.13 1.17
Table 17. General combining ability effects of parents (lines and testers) in respect of kapas yield and its
attributing characters of cotton[G .hirsutum L.]
*Significant at P = 0.05 ** Significant at P = 0.01
Crosses
Days to
50%
flowering
Plant
height
(cm)
Monopodia
per plant
Sympodia
per plant
Bolls
per
plant
Mean boll
weight(g)
Kapas
yield
( g /plant)
Ginning
per cent
Seed
index
( g)
Lint
index
101 (L1 T 1) 0.93 -3.59 0.19 -1.07 0.33 -0.04 2.20 -1.55 0.17 -0.21
102 (L1 T2) 0.76 1.42 0.14 -3.97 -5.30 * 0.12 -19.59 * -0.40 0.58 0.18
103 (L1 T3) -0.07 2.66 0.07 1.04 -1.65 -0.17 -7.27 0.01 -0.17 -0.06
104 (L1 T 4) -1.16 5.36 -0.18 2.82 -4.57 -0.22 -12.70 -0.99 -0.08 -0.23
105 (L1 T5) 1.09 0.41 -0.12 1.21 -2.63 0.02 -7.33 -3.42 0.25 -0.67
106 (L1 T6) 0.51 -9.77 -0.26 -0.96 9.07 ** -0.05 30.53 ** 0.56 0.00 0.06
107 (L1 T7) -1.24 13.36 0.39 1.83 3.93 0.29 7.24 -0.10 0.33 0.14
108 (L1 T8) -0.82 -9.84 -0.22 -0.89 0.82 0.06 6.93 5.88 * -1.08 0.80
110 (L2 T1) -1.76 -12.69 0.29 -1.93 0.03 -0.07 1.17 0.18 -0.30 -0.09
111 (L2 T2) 1.07 1.13 -0.02 -0.58 -1.90 -0.04 -14.18 -3.00 -0.39 -0.68
112 (L2 T 3) -1.26 7.36 0.11 -1.01 4.35 0.17 19.69 * 0.33 0.36 0.30
113 (L2 T4) 2.16 7.46 0.36 0.77 -5.77 * 0.05 -8.45 1.16 0.45 0.49
114 (L2 T 5) -2.09 -4.79 -0.26 0.15 -1.13 -0.19 -1.54 0.90 0.03 0.15
115 (L2 T 6) 0.32 0.02 0.38 0.49 2.47 0.23 17.27 0.45 0.03 0.01
116 (L2 T 7) 1.57 -0.14 -0.37 0.77 0.23 -0.25 -7.73 -1.78 -0.39 -0.63
117 (L2 T8) -0.01 1.66 -0.48 * 1.35 1.72 0.10 -6.23 1.76 0.20 0.45
118 (L3 T1) 1.68 14.50 -0.11 2.35 -3.04 -0.07 -0.65 -0.47 0.32 0.10
119 (L3 T2) 0.51 -6.39 0.13 -1.75 2.43 -0.14 -8.28 3.52 -0.26 0.63
120 (L3 T3) 1.68 4.35 -0.23 1.17 -2.23 -0.01 -3.21 0.89 -0.76 -0.14
121 (L3 T4) -0.41 -2.85 -0.18 -0.15 7.26 ** 0.21 16.70 -1.46 -0.18 -0.36
122 (L3 T5) -1.16 6.00 -0.01 -0.07 -2.31 -0.06 -2.20 1.85 -0.09 0.35
123 (L3 T6) -2.24 13.51 0.03 2.47 3.49 0.01 11.89 -2.35 0.16 -0.53
Table 18 . Specific combining ability effects of hybrids in respect of kapas yield and their attributing characters in
cotton [G .hirsutum L.]
124 (L3 T7) -0.99 -5.85 0.18 1.05 -0.74 0.10 7.92 0.59 -0.26 -0.03
125 (L3 T8) 0.93 -23.25 * 0.18 -5.07 * -4.86 -0.03 -22.17 * -2.56 1.07 -0.01
127 (L4 T1) -0.76 -12.74 -0.51 * -1.21 -5.65 * -0.26 -23.65 ** -0.60 -0.15 -0.32
128 (L4 T2) -0.93 -13.43 -0.07 1.49 -1.69 0.21 -16.15 0.64 -0.23 0.00
129 (L4 T3) -0.76 -4.99 0.17 0.30 2.56 -0.15 7.31 0.82 -0.48 -0.15
130 (L4 T4) 1.16 -0.49 0.02 -0.81 4.75 0.01 9.66 2.06 0.35 0.67
131 (L4 T 5) 1.41 -4.74 -0.31 -2.73 0.78 0.10 6.21 1.51 0.19 0.54
132 (L4 T6) 0.32 15.37 0.13 -0.80 -4.62 0.30 -10.26 -2.15 0.19 -0.44
133 (L4T7) 0.07 10.41 0.18 1.59 3.05 -0.02 15.05 1.63 0.52 0.73
134 (L4 T8) -0.51 10.61 0.38 2.17 0.83 -0.19 11.81 -3.91 -0.40 -1.04
135 (L5 T1) 1.05 9.20 0.24 1.06 2.30 0.38 3.20 0.74 0.14 0.15
136 (L5T2) 0.89 11.31 -0.12 1.06 1.16 0.04 62.53 ** 0.14 -0.20 -0.15
137 (L5 T3) 0.55 -1.15 0.22 0.38 -0.59 0.41 -4.23 -1.11 0.30 -0.16
138 (L5 T4) -2.53 0.75 -0.13 -0.54 -2.80 -0.25 -17.68 * -0.47 -0.61 -0.54
139 (L5T 5) 0.22 -3.00 0.34 0.65 2.03 0.08 -7.30 -0.74 -0.28 -0.30
140 (L5T6) -0.36 -10.89 -0.32 0.38 -4.27 -0.16 -27.71 ** 4.13 0.22 1.45
141 (L5 T7) -0.11 -16.35 -0.27 -3.44 -2.20 0.08 -9.55 -1.09 0.30 -0.10
142 (L5 T8) 0.30 10.15 0.03 0.45 4.38 -0.56 * 0.74 -1.60 0.14 -0.35
144 (L6 T1) -1.14 5.33 -0.11 0.81 6.03 * 0.07 17.73 * 1.70 -0.18 0.36
145 (L6 T2) -2.30 5.95 -0.07 3.76 5.30 * -0.18 -4.33 -0.90 0.49 0.02
146 (L6 T3) -0.14 -8.22 -0.33 -1.88 -2.45 -0.25 -12.29 -0.94 0.74 0.22
147 (L6 T4) 0.78 -10.22 0.12 -2.09 1.13 0.21 12.48 -0.30 0.07 -0.04
148 (L6 T5) 0.53 6.13 0.34 0.79 3.27 0.05 12.16 -0.10 -0.09 -0.06
149 (L6 T6) 1.45 -8.25 0.03 -1.58 -6.13 * -0.32 -21.73 * -0.64 -0.59 -0.56
150 (L6 T7) 0.70 -1.42 -0.12 -1.79 -4.27 -0.20 -12.93 0.74 -0.51 -0.12
151 (L6 T 8) 0.11 10.68 0.13 1.99 -2.88 0.63 * 8.92 0.43 0.07 0.17
S.Em.± 1.603 9.798 0.232 2.262 2.438 0.270 8.6790
2.4489
0.732
0.7588
CD at 5% (sij-skl) 4.55 27.85 0.66 6.43 6.93 0.76 24.67 6.96 2.08 2.15
CD at 1% (sij-skl) 6.07 37.13 0.88 8.57 9.24 1.02 32.89 9.28 2.77 2.87
*Significant at P = 0.05 ** Significant at P = 0.01
Continued
Lines Across traits Overall Status
1 47 H
2 48 H
3 35 L
4 17 L
5 37 L
6 47 H
Final Mean = 38.5
Testers Across traits Overall Status
1 60 H
2 46 L
3 58.5 H
4 59.5 H
5 34 L
6 51.5 H
7 46.5 L
8 40 L
Final Mean=49.5
Table 19. Overall general combining ability status of parents in Cotton hybrids
H= High gca status L = Low gca status
Lines
Testers
1
(H)
2
(H)
3
(L)
Total
Score
Overall
Status
Total
Score
Overall
Status
Total
Score
Overall
Status
1 (H) 277 H 328.5 H 222 L
2 (L) 278.5 H 366 H 253.5 L
3 (H) 303.5 H 177 L 273 H
4 (H) 363 H 171 L 278.5 H
5 (L) 305.5 H 310 H 257 L
6 (H) 233 L 184.5 L 251 L
7 (L) 153.5 L 349.5 H 247.5 L
8 (L) 261 L 226.5 L 343 H
Lines
Testers
4
(L)
5
(L)
6
(H)
Total
Score
Overall
Status
Total
Score
Overall
Status
Total
Score
Overall
Status
1 (H) 451.5 H 130 L 194 L
2 (L) 305 H 210.5 L 228.5 L
3 (H) 290 H 244.5 L 332.5 H
4 (H) 161.5 L 411 H 238 L
5 (L) 231 L 292.5 H 182.5 L
6 (H) 261.5 L 328 H 413.5 H
7 (L) 115.5 L 365.5 H 373.5 H
8 (L) 292.5 H 258 L 201 L
Final Mean =269.281
Table 20. Overall specific combining ability status of Cotton hybrids
(H) = High gca status H = High sca status
(L) = Low gca status L = Low sca status
Characters
Contribution of
Lines Testers
Line x Tester
Interaction
1. Days to 50% flowering 13.05 38.13 48.82
2. Plant height (cm) 29.97 18.05 51.98
3. Monopodia per plant 15.65 13.88 70.47
4. Sympodia per plant 50.28 12.10 37.62
5. Bolls per plant 43.85 11.52 44.62
6. Mean boll weight (g) 36.36 23.88 39.76
7. Kapas yield (g/plant) 18.82 14.45 66.73
8. Ginning per cent 28.61 35.20 36.19
9. Seed index (g) 52.64 20.26 27.09
10. Lint index 47.88 26.86 25.26
Table 21. Proportional contribution of lines, testers and their interactions to the total variance in Cotton
(G. hirsutum L.)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Lines
Testers
Line x Tester
Interaction
Characters
Contribution
percent
Figure2. Proportional contribution of lines, testers and their interactions to the variance in hybrids of Cotton (G. hirsutum
L.)
1. Days to 50 % flowering 6. Mean boll weight
2. Plnt height ( cm) 7.Kapas yield per plant (g / plant)
3. Monopodia per plant 8. Ginning per cent
4. Sympodia per plant 9. Seed index (g)
5. Bolls per plant 10. Lint index
characters X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 X7 X8 X9 X10
X1 0.312* 0.621** -0.255 -0.498** 0.195 -0.808** 0.214 -0.254 0.359**
X2 1.000 0.389** 0.887** 0.342* -0.071 -0.322* -0.658** -0.474** 0.443**
X3 1.000 -0.082 -0.041 0.540** 0.011 0.246 -0.063 0.254
X4 1.000 0.125 -0.529** -0.231 -0.401** -0.201 0.005
X5 1.000 -0.305* -0.142 -0.081 -0.644** 0.590**
X6 1.000 0.454** 0.126 0.261 0.422**
X7 1.000 0.387** 0.073 0.379**
X8 1.000 0.647** -0.352*
X9 1.000 -0.115
Table 22.Genotypic correlation coefficients among kapas yield and its attributing characters in cotton hybrids
(G. hirsutum L.)
* Significant at P = 0.05 ** Significant at P = 0.01
x1. Days to 50 % flowering x6. Mean boll weight ( g )
x2. Plnt height ( cm) x7. Ginning per cent
x3. Monopodia per plant x8. Seed index ( g)
x4. Sympodia per plant x9. Lint index
x5. Bolls per plant x10. Kapas yield ( g/plant)
Characters X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 X7 X8 X9 X10
X1 -0.049 0.013 -0.051 -0.076 -0.021 0.194 0.066 0.227 0.019
X2 1.000 0.140 0.649** 0.130 0.098 -0.156 -0.002 -0.112 0.224
X3 1.000 -0.086 0.164 0.281* 0.120 -0.033 0.063 0.228
X4 1.000 0.127 0.018 -0.034 -0.056 -0.001 0.104
X5 1.000 -0.167 0.042 -0.335* -0.205 0.624**
X6 1.000 0.313* 0.529** 0.492** 0.327*
X7 1.000 0.107 0.731** 0.132
X8 1.000 0.623** -0.028
X9 1.000 0.006
Table 24. Phenotypic correlation coefficients among kapas yield and its attributing characters in cotton hybrids (G.
hirsutum L.)
Significant at P = 0.05 ** Significant at P = 0.01
x1. Days to 50 % flowering x6. Mean boll weight ( g )
x2. Plnt height ( cm) x7. Ginning per cent
x3. Monopodia per plant x8. Seed index ( g)
x4. Sympodia per plant x9. Lint index
x5. Bolls per plant x10. Kapas yield ( g/plant)
Characters X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 X7 X8 X9
‘r ‘
with
kapas
yield
x1 -0.176 -0.140 0.384 -0.054 0.084 0.062 0.625 -0.199 -0.227 0.358**
x2 -0.054 -0.451 0.240 0.189 -0.058 -0.022 0.071 0.614 -0.086 0.442**
x3 -0.109 -0.175 0.619 -0.017 0.006 0.173 -0.002 -0.229 -0.011 0.253
x4 0.045 -0.400 -0.050 0.213 -0.021 -0.170 0.051 0.374 -0.036 0.004
x5 0.087 -0.154 -0.025 0.026 -0.169 -0.098 0.031 1.008 -0.116 0.590**
x6 -0.034 0.031 0.334 -0.112 0.051 0.321 -0.101 -0.117 0.047 0.421**
x7 0.495 0.145 0.006 -0.049 0.024 0.145 -0.222 -0.361 0.194 0.379**
x8 -0.037 0.297 0.152 -0.085 0.183 0.040 -0.086 -0.933 0.117 -0.351*
x9 0.221 0.213 -0.039 -0.042 0.109 0.083 -0.239 -0.603 0.181 -0.114
Residual Effect = 0.919892 * Significant at P = 0.05 ** Significant at P = 0.01
x1. Days to 50 % flowering x6. Mean boll weight ( g )
x2. Plnt height ( cm) x7. Ginning per cent
x3. Monopodia per plant x8. Seed index ( g)
x4. Sympodia per plant x9. Lint index
x5. Bolls per plant
Table 25. Path analysis indicating direct and indirect effects of component characters on kapas yield in cotton hybrids
(G. hirsutum L.)
Sl. No. Characters High heterosis High sca effect
1 Days to 50 % flowering 138 138
2 Plant height 132 132
3 Monopodia per plant 134 134
4 Sympodia per plant 145 145
5 Bolls per plant 133 106
6 Mean boll weight 137 137
7 Ginning per cent 131 108
8 Seed index 140 146
9 Lint index 140 140
Table 26 High kapas yield hybrids and their important contributing characters in
cotton
Sl.
No.
Hybrid Contributing Characters
1 133
kapas yield per plant, sympodia per plant,
bolls per plant, ginning per cent
2 134 kapas yield per plant, monopodia per plant
Table 27. Dual purpose cotton hybrids identified from the study
and their characters
Best mean performing hybrid - 136 for kapas yield and
general view
Best performing hybrid - 133 for bolls per plant
General view of hybrid - 133
Best performing hybrid - 137 for mean boll
weight
Future line of work
 1- The performance of two top hybrids viz., 133, 134
in respect of kapas yield needs to be verified
performance on large scale basis.
 2- The results implies that one line and four testers
studied were high combiners across all the traits,
indicating their ability in transmitting additive genes
in the desirable direction to their progenies. Further,
these lines and testers can be tested for the
confirmation of their superiority as good parents for
hybridization
Acknowledgement
Heterosis, combining ability and per se performance of new hybrids of upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL.) for kapas yield and its attributing characters.
Heterosis, combining ability and per se performance of new hybrids of upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL.) for kapas yield and its attributing characters.
Heterosis, combining ability and per se performance of new hybrids of upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL.) for kapas yield and its attributing characters.
Heterosis, combining ability and per se performance of new hybrids of upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL.) for kapas yield and its attributing characters.

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Gene interaction ns-w12
Gene interaction ns-w12Gene interaction ns-w12
Gene interaction ns-w12Tatatunga
 
Principle of inheritance
Principle of inheritancePrinciple of inheritance
Principle of inheritanceNitika Sharma
 
Genetics and evolution
Genetics and evolutionGenetics and evolution
Genetics and evolutionAnand P P
 
Diallele selective mating system
Diallele selective mating systemDiallele selective mating system
Diallele selective mating systemDev Hingra
 
Evolutionary concepts of genetics and plant breeding
Evolutionary concepts of genetics and plant breedingEvolutionary concepts of genetics and plant breeding
Evolutionary concepts of genetics and plant breedingSachin Ekatpure
 
Molecular basis of Self Incompatibility In Crop Plants
Molecular basis of Self Incompatibility In Crop PlantsMolecular basis of Self Incompatibility In Crop Plants
Molecular basis of Self Incompatibility In Crop PlantsGowthami R
 
Basic Biological Concepts & Basic Genetics
Basic Biological Concepts & Basic GeneticsBasic Biological Concepts & Basic Genetics
Basic Biological Concepts & Basic Geneticsbharti sharma
 
Anova randomized block design
Anova randomized block designAnova randomized block design
Anova randomized block designIrfan Hussain
 
Genetical and physiological basis of heterosis and inbreeding
Genetical and physiological basis of heterosis and inbreedingGenetical and physiological basis of heterosis and inbreeding
Genetical and physiological basis of heterosis and inbreedingDev Hingra
 
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), MANOVA: Expected variance components, Random an...
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), MANOVA: Expected variance components, Random an...Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), MANOVA: Expected variance components, Random an...
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), MANOVA: Expected variance components, Random an...Satish Khadia
 
Genetics chapter 4 part 2(1)
Genetics chapter 4 part 2(1)Genetics chapter 4 part 2(1)
Genetics chapter 4 part 2(1)vanessawhitehawk
 
Presentation on Epistasis
Presentation on EpistasisPresentation on Epistasis
Presentation on EpistasisSantosh pathak
 
Biparental mating design
Biparental mating designBiparental mating design
Biparental mating designLokesh Gour
 
Molecular quantitative genetics for plant breeding roundtable 2010x
Molecular quantitative genetics for plant breeding roundtable 2010xMolecular quantitative genetics for plant breeding roundtable 2010x
Molecular quantitative genetics for plant breeding roundtable 2010xFOODCROPS
 
Interaction of genes for slide share
Interaction of genes for slide shareInteraction of genes for slide share
Interaction of genes for slide shareICHHA PURAK
 
ANOVA & EXPERIMENTAL DESIGNS
ANOVA & EXPERIMENTAL DESIGNSANOVA & EXPERIMENTAL DESIGNS
ANOVA & EXPERIMENTAL DESIGNSvishwanth555
 

Viewers also liked (20)

Gene interaction ns-w12
Gene interaction ns-w12Gene interaction ns-w12
Gene interaction ns-w12
 
Principle of inheritance
Principle of inheritancePrinciple of inheritance
Principle of inheritance
 
Genetics and evolution
Genetics and evolutionGenetics and evolution
Genetics and evolution
 
principle of inheritance
principle of inheritanceprinciple of inheritance
principle of inheritance
 
Diallele selective mating system
Diallele selective mating systemDiallele selective mating system
Diallele selective mating system
 
Evolutionary concepts of genetics and plant breeding
Evolutionary concepts of genetics and plant breedingEvolutionary concepts of genetics and plant breeding
Evolutionary concepts of genetics and plant breeding
 
Molecular basis of Self Incompatibility In Crop Plants
Molecular basis of Self Incompatibility In Crop PlantsMolecular basis of Self Incompatibility In Crop Plants
Molecular basis of Self Incompatibility In Crop Plants
 
Basic Biological Concepts & Basic Genetics
Basic Biological Concepts & Basic GeneticsBasic Biological Concepts & Basic Genetics
Basic Biological Concepts & Basic Genetics
 
Anova randomized block design
Anova randomized block designAnova randomized block design
Anova randomized block design
 
Genetical and physiological basis of heterosis and inbreeding
Genetical and physiological basis of heterosis and inbreedingGenetical and physiological basis of heterosis and inbreeding
Genetical and physiological basis of heterosis and inbreeding
 
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), MANOVA: Expected variance components, Random an...
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), MANOVA: Expected variance components, Random an...Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), MANOVA: Expected variance components, Random an...
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), MANOVA: Expected variance components, Random an...
 
Genetics chapter 4 part 2(1)
Genetics chapter 4 part 2(1)Genetics chapter 4 part 2(1)
Genetics chapter 4 part 2(1)
 
Presentation on Epistasis
Presentation on EpistasisPresentation on Epistasis
Presentation on Epistasis
 
Gene ineractions jb
Gene ineractions jbGene ineractions jb
Gene ineractions jb
 
Biparental mating design
Biparental mating designBiparental mating design
Biparental mating design
 
Mating designs..
Mating designs..Mating designs..
Mating designs..
 
Molecular quantitative genetics for plant breeding roundtable 2010x
Molecular quantitative genetics for plant breeding roundtable 2010xMolecular quantitative genetics for plant breeding roundtable 2010x
Molecular quantitative genetics for plant breeding roundtable 2010x
 
Interaction of genes for slide share
Interaction of genes for slide shareInteraction of genes for slide share
Interaction of genes for slide share
 
Gene interaction
Gene interactionGene interaction
Gene interaction
 
ANOVA & EXPERIMENTAL DESIGNS
ANOVA & EXPERIMENTAL DESIGNSANOVA & EXPERIMENTAL DESIGNS
ANOVA & EXPERIMENTAL DESIGNS
 

Similar to Heterosis, combining ability and per se performance of new hybrids of upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL.) for kapas yield and its attributing characters.

到都市的權利
到都市的權利到都市的權利
到都市的權利Shuwei Huang
 
Catalogo tubos colmena
Catalogo tubos colmenaCatalogo tubos colmena
Catalogo tubos colmenajairecas
 
Pipe wall thickness and weight
Pipe wall thickness and weightPipe wall thickness and weight
Pipe wall thickness and weightMuralikrishnan C
 
Genotype x Environment (GxE) interaction studies in hybrids and elite cultiva...
Genotype x Environment (GxE) interaction studies in hybrids and elite cultiva...Genotype x Environment (GxE) interaction studies in hybrids and elite cultiva...
Genotype x Environment (GxE) interaction studies in hybrids and elite cultiva...ICRISAT
 
Findings of on farm research findings under sdtt-sri programme
Findings of on farm research findings under sdtt-sri programmeFindings of on farm research findings under sdtt-sri programme
Findings of on farm research findings under sdtt-sri programmeAshutosh Pal
 
GRM 2013: Marker-assisted breeding for improving phosphorus-use efficiency an...
GRM 2013: Marker-assisted breeding for improving phosphorus-use efficiency an...GRM 2013: Marker-assisted breeding for improving phosphorus-use efficiency an...
GRM 2013: Marker-assisted breeding for improving phosphorus-use efficiency an...CGIAR Generation Challenge Programme
 
Economics of nitrogen sources and rates in a long term cropping system
Economics of nitrogen sources and rates in a long term cropping systemEconomics of nitrogen sources and rates in a long term cropping system
Economics of nitrogen sources and rates in a long term cropping systemLPE Learning Center
 
Analysis of Adoption and Diffusion of Improved Wheat Varieties in Ethiopia
Analysis of Adoption and Diffusion of Improved Wheat Varieties in EthiopiaAnalysis of Adoption and Diffusion of Improved Wheat Varieties in Ethiopia
Analysis of Adoption and Diffusion of Improved Wheat Varieties in EthiopiaCIMMYT
 
Seminar (Pawan Kumar Nagar)
Seminar (Pawan Kumar Nagar)Seminar (Pawan Kumar Nagar)
Seminar (Pawan Kumar Nagar)Pawan Nagar
 
Moyno pump 2000 dimensions g2
Moyno pump 2000 dimensions g2Moyno pump 2000 dimensions g2
Moyno pump 2000 dimensions g2NelsonBort
 
Study about the effect of fungi, cultivars, and countries on seed .docx
Study about the effect of fungi, cultivars, and countries on seed .docxStudy about the effect of fungi, cultivars, and countries on seed .docx
Study about the effect of fungi, cultivars, and countries on seed .docxflorriezhamphrey3065
 
Dr. Steve Pollmann - Sow lifetime productivity: Importance of monitoring in c...
Dr. Steve Pollmann - Sow lifetime productivity: Importance of monitoring in c...Dr. Steve Pollmann - Sow lifetime productivity: Importance of monitoring in c...
Dr. Steve Pollmann - Sow lifetime productivity: Importance of monitoring in c...John Blue
 

Similar to Heterosis, combining ability and per se performance of new hybrids of upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL.) for kapas yield and its attributing characters. (20)

Genetic diversity and association studies of quantitative traits
Genetic diversity and association studies of quantitative traitsGenetic diversity and association studies of quantitative traits
Genetic diversity and association studies of quantitative traits
 
到都市的權利
到都市的權利到都市的權利
到都市的權利
 
Catalogo tubos colmena
Catalogo tubos colmenaCatalogo tubos colmena
Catalogo tubos colmena
 
Pest position 2015
Pest position 2015Pest position 2015
Pest position 2015
 
Pipe wall thickness and weight
Pipe wall thickness and weightPipe wall thickness and weight
Pipe wall thickness and weight
 
mung bean ppt.pptxnew.pptx
mung bean ppt.pptxnew.pptxmung bean ppt.pptxnew.pptx
mung bean ppt.pptxnew.pptx
 
002 apicasing
002 apicasing002 apicasing
002 apicasing
 
186024212 tabel-baja-lengkap
186024212 tabel-baja-lengkap186024212 tabel-baja-lengkap
186024212 tabel-baja-lengkap
 
186024212 tabel-baja-lengkap
186024212 tabel-baja-lengkap186024212 tabel-baja-lengkap
186024212 tabel-baja-lengkap
 
Genotype x Environment (GxE) interaction studies in hybrids and elite cultiva...
Genotype x Environment (GxE) interaction studies in hybrids and elite cultiva...Genotype x Environment (GxE) interaction studies in hybrids and elite cultiva...
Genotype x Environment (GxE) interaction studies in hybrids and elite cultiva...
 
Findings of on farm research findings under sdtt-sri programme
Findings of on farm research findings under sdtt-sri programmeFindings of on farm research findings under sdtt-sri programme
Findings of on farm research findings under sdtt-sri programme
 
GRM 2013: Marker-assisted breeding for improving phosphorus-use efficiency an...
GRM 2013: Marker-assisted breeding for improving phosphorus-use efficiency an...GRM 2013: Marker-assisted breeding for improving phosphorus-use efficiency an...
GRM 2013: Marker-assisted breeding for improving phosphorus-use efficiency an...
 
Economics of nitrogen sources and rates in a long term cropping system
Economics of nitrogen sources and rates in a long term cropping systemEconomics of nitrogen sources and rates in a long term cropping system
Economics of nitrogen sources and rates in a long term cropping system
 
Analysis of Adoption and Diffusion of Improved Wheat Varieties in Ethiopia
Analysis of Adoption and Diffusion of Improved Wheat Varieties in EthiopiaAnalysis of Adoption and Diffusion of Improved Wheat Varieties in Ethiopia
Analysis of Adoption and Diffusion of Improved Wheat Varieties in Ethiopia
 
Oferta hídrica
Oferta hídricaOferta hídrica
Oferta hídrica
 
Seminar (Pawan Kumar Nagar)
Seminar (Pawan Kumar Nagar)Seminar (Pawan Kumar Nagar)
Seminar (Pawan Kumar Nagar)
 
Moyno pump 2000 dimensions g2
Moyno pump 2000 dimensions g2Moyno pump 2000 dimensions g2
Moyno pump 2000 dimensions g2
 
Study about the effect of fungi, cultivars, and countries on seed .docx
Study about the effect of fungi, cultivars, and countries on seed .docxStudy about the effect of fungi, cultivars, and countries on seed .docx
Study about the effect of fungi, cultivars, and countries on seed .docx
 
Erlang table
Erlang tableErlang table
Erlang table
 
Dr. Steve Pollmann - Sow lifetime productivity: Importance of monitoring in c...
Dr. Steve Pollmann - Sow lifetime productivity: Importance of monitoring in c...Dr. Steve Pollmann - Sow lifetime productivity: Importance of monitoring in c...
Dr. Steve Pollmann - Sow lifetime productivity: Importance of monitoring in c...
 

Recently uploaded

Gwal Pahari Call Girls 9873940964 Book Hot And Sexy Girls
Gwal Pahari Call Girls 9873940964 Book Hot And Sexy GirlsGwal Pahari Call Girls 9873940964 Book Hot And Sexy Girls
Gwal Pahari Call Girls 9873940964 Book Hot And Sexy Girlshram8477
 
thanksgiving dinner and more information
thanksgiving dinner and more informationthanksgiving dinner and more information
thanksgiving dinner and more informationlialiaskou00
 
Abu Dhabi Housewife Call Girls +971509530047 Abu Dhabi Call Girls
Abu Dhabi Housewife Call Girls +971509530047 Abu Dhabi Call GirlsAbu Dhabi Housewife Call Girls +971509530047 Abu Dhabi Call Girls
Abu Dhabi Housewife Call Girls +971509530047 Abu Dhabi Call Girlstiril72860
 
Estimation of protein quality using various methods
Estimation of protein quality using various methodsEstimation of protein quality using various methods
Estimation of protein quality using various methodsThiviKutty
 
如何办韩国SKKU文凭,成均馆大学毕业证学位证怎么辨别?
如何办韩国SKKU文凭,成均馆大学毕业证学位证怎么辨别?如何办韩国SKKU文凭,成均馆大学毕业证学位证怎么辨别?
如何办韩国SKKU文凭,成均馆大学毕业证学位证怎么辨别?t6tjlrih
 
Aquaculture Market Trends, Top Manufactures, Industry Growth Analysis and For...
Aquaculture Market Trends, Top Manufactures, Industry Growth Analysis and For...Aquaculture Market Trends, Top Manufactures, Industry Growth Analysis and For...
Aquaculture Market Trends, Top Manufactures, Industry Growth Analysis and For...Next Move Strategy Consulting
 
Planning your Restaurant's Path to Profitability
Planning your Restaurant's Path to ProfitabilityPlanning your Restaurant's Path to Profitability
Planning your Restaurant's Path to ProfitabilityAggregage
 
Affordable PriceD Call Girls In Crowne Plaza Greater Noida 8377877756 Short 2...
Affordable PriceD Call Girls In Crowne Plaza Greater Noida 8377877756 Short 2...Affordable PriceD Call Girls In Crowne Plaza Greater Noida 8377877756 Short 2...
Affordable PriceD Call Girls In Crowne Plaza Greater Noida 8377877756 Short 2...dollysharma2066
 
How Ang Chong Yi Singapore is serving up sustainable future-ready foods?
How Ang Chong Yi Singapore is serving up sustainable future-ready foods?How Ang Chong Yi Singapore is serving up sustainable future-ready foods?
How Ang Chong Yi Singapore is serving up sustainable future-ready foods?Ang Chong Yi Singapore
 
韩国学位证,全北大学毕业证书1:1制作
韩国学位证,全北大学毕业证书1:1制作韩国学位证,全北大学毕业证书1:1制作
韩国学位证,全北大学毕业证书1:1制作7tz4rjpd
 
(办理学位证)加州大学圣塔芭芭拉分校毕业证成绩单原版一比一
(办理学位证)加州大学圣塔芭芭拉分校毕业证成绩单原版一比一(办理学位证)加州大学圣塔芭芭拉分校毕业证成绩单原版一比一
(办理学位证)加州大学圣塔芭芭拉分校毕业证成绩单原版一比一Fi sss
 
FUTURISTIC FOOD PRODUCTS OFTEN INVOLVE INNOVATIONS THAT
FUTURISTIC FOOD PRODUCTS OFTEN INVOLVE INNOVATIONS THATFUTURISTIC FOOD PRODUCTS OFTEN INVOLVE INNOVATIONS THAT
FUTURISTIC FOOD PRODUCTS OFTEN INVOLVE INNOVATIONS THATBHIKHUKUMAR KUNWARADIYA
 
NO1 WorldWide kala jadu Love Marriage Black Magic Punjab Powerful Black Magic...
NO1 WorldWide kala jadu Love Marriage Black Magic Punjab Powerful Black Magic...NO1 WorldWide kala jadu Love Marriage Black Magic Punjab Powerful Black Magic...
NO1 WorldWide kala jadu Love Marriage Black Magic Punjab Powerful Black Magic...Amil Baba Dawood bangali
 
Prepare And Cook Meat.pptx Quarter II Module
Prepare And Cook Meat.pptx Quarter II ModulePrepare And Cook Meat.pptx Quarter II Module
Prepare And Cook Meat.pptx Quarter II Modulemaricel769799
 
Irradiation preservation of food advancements
Irradiation preservation of food advancementsIrradiation preservation of food advancements
Irradiation preservation of food advancementsDeepika Sugumar
 
pitch presentation B2.pptx Sunderland Culture
pitch presentation B2.pptx Sunderland Culturepitch presentation B2.pptx Sunderland Culture
pitch presentation B2.pptx Sunderland CultureChloeMeadows1
 
ACCEPTABILITY-OF-AMPALAYA-BITTER-GOURD.pptx
ACCEPTABILITY-OF-AMPALAYA-BITTER-GOURD.pptxACCEPTABILITY-OF-AMPALAYA-BITTER-GOURD.pptx
ACCEPTABILITY-OF-AMPALAYA-BITTER-GOURD.pptxBELARMINOJOLINA
 
Food-Allergy-PowerPoint-Presentation-2.ppt
Food-Allergy-PowerPoint-Presentation-2.pptFood-Allergy-PowerPoint-Presentation-2.ppt
Food-Allergy-PowerPoint-Presentation-2.pptIsaacMensah62
 
Parental and enteral nutrition Final.pdf
Parental and enteral nutrition Final.pdfParental and enteral nutrition Final.pdf
Parental and enteral nutrition Final.pdfShahariorMohammed1
 
526350093-Online-Food-Ordering-System-Ppt.pptx
526350093-Online-Food-Ordering-System-Ppt.pptx526350093-Online-Food-Ordering-System-Ppt.pptx
526350093-Online-Food-Ordering-System-Ppt.pptxJaidBagwan2
 

Recently uploaded (20)

Gwal Pahari Call Girls 9873940964 Book Hot And Sexy Girls
Gwal Pahari Call Girls 9873940964 Book Hot And Sexy GirlsGwal Pahari Call Girls 9873940964 Book Hot And Sexy Girls
Gwal Pahari Call Girls 9873940964 Book Hot And Sexy Girls
 
thanksgiving dinner and more information
thanksgiving dinner and more informationthanksgiving dinner and more information
thanksgiving dinner and more information
 
Abu Dhabi Housewife Call Girls +971509530047 Abu Dhabi Call Girls
Abu Dhabi Housewife Call Girls +971509530047 Abu Dhabi Call GirlsAbu Dhabi Housewife Call Girls +971509530047 Abu Dhabi Call Girls
Abu Dhabi Housewife Call Girls +971509530047 Abu Dhabi Call Girls
 
Estimation of protein quality using various methods
Estimation of protein quality using various methodsEstimation of protein quality using various methods
Estimation of protein quality using various methods
 
如何办韩国SKKU文凭,成均馆大学毕业证学位证怎么辨别?
如何办韩国SKKU文凭,成均馆大学毕业证学位证怎么辨别?如何办韩国SKKU文凭,成均馆大学毕业证学位证怎么辨别?
如何办韩国SKKU文凭,成均馆大学毕业证学位证怎么辨别?
 
Aquaculture Market Trends, Top Manufactures, Industry Growth Analysis and For...
Aquaculture Market Trends, Top Manufactures, Industry Growth Analysis and For...Aquaculture Market Trends, Top Manufactures, Industry Growth Analysis and For...
Aquaculture Market Trends, Top Manufactures, Industry Growth Analysis and For...
 
Planning your Restaurant's Path to Profitability
Planning your Restaurant's Path to ProfitabilityPlanning your Restaurant's Path to Profitability
Planning your Restaurant's Path to Profitability
 
Affordable PriceD Call Girls In Crowne Plaza Greater Noida 8377877756 Short 2...
Affordable PriceD Call Girls In Crowne Plaza Greater Noida 8377877756 Short 2...Affordable PriceD Call Girls In Crowne Plaza Greater Noida 8377877756 Short 2...
Affordable PriceD Call Girls In Crowne Plaza Greater Noida 8377877756 Short 2...
 
How Ang Chong Yi Singapore is serving up sustainable future-ready foods?
How Ang Chong Yi Singapore is serving up sustainable future-ready foods?How Ang Chong Yi Singapore is serving up sustainable future-ready foods?
How Ang Chong Yi Singapore is serving up sustainable future-ready foods?
 
韩国学位证,全北大学毕业证书1:1制作
韩国学位证,全北大学毕业证书1:1制作韩国学位证,全北大学毕业证书1:1制作
韩国学位证,全北大学毕业证书1:1制作
 
(办理学位证)加州大学圣塔芭芭拉分校毕业证成绩单原版一比一
(办理学位证)加州大学圣塔芭芭拉分校毕业证成绩单原版一比一(办理学位证)加州大学圣塔芭芭拉分校毕业证成绩单原版一比一
(办理学位证)加州大学圣塔芭芭拉分校毕业证成绩单原版一比一
 
FUTURISTIC FOOD PRODUCTS OFTEN INVOLVE INNOVATIONS THAT
FUTURISTIC FOOD PRODUCTS OFTEN INVOLVE INNOVATIONS THATFUTURISTIC FOOD PRODUCTS OFTEN INVOLVE INNOVATIONS THAT
FUTURISTIC FOOD PRODUCTS OFTEN INVOLVE INNOVATIONS THAT
 
NO1 WorldWide kala jadu Love Marriage Black Magic Punjab Powerful Black Magic...
NO1 WorldWide kala jadu Love Marriage Black Magic Punjab Powerful Black Magic...NO1 WorldWide kala jadu Love Marriage Black Magic Punjab Powerful Black Magic...
NO1 WorldWide kala jadu Love Marriage Black Magic Punjab Powerful Black Magic...
 
Prepare And Cook Meat.pptx Quarter II Module
Prepare And Cook Meat.pptx Quarter II ModulePrepare And Cook Meat.pptx Quarter II Module
Prepare And Cook Meat.pptx Quarter II Module
 
Irradiation preservation of food advancements
Irradiation preservation of food advancementsIrradiation preservation of food advancements
Irradiation preservation of food advancements
 
pitch presentation B2.pptx Sunderland Culture
pitch presentation B2.pptx Sunderland Culturepitch presentation B2.pptx Sunderland Culture
pitch presentation B2.pptx Sunderland Culture
 
ACCEPTABILITY-OF-AMPALAYA-BITTER-GOURD.pptx
ACCEPTABILITY-OF-AMPALAYA-BITTER-GOURD.pptxACCEPTABILITY-OF-AMPALAYA-BITTER-GOURD.pptx
ACCEPTABILITY-OF-AMPALAYA-BITTER-GOURD.pptx
 
Food-Allergy-PowerPoint-Presentation-2.ppt
Food-Allergy-PowerPoint-Presentation-2.pptFood-Allergy-PowerPoint-Presentation-2.ppt
Food-Allergy-PowerPoint-Presentation-2.ppt
 
Parental and enteral nutrition Final.pdf
Parental and enteral nutrition Final.pdfParental and enteral nutrition Final.pdf
Parental and enteral nutrition Final.pdf
 
526350093-Online-Food-Ordering-System-Ppt.pptx
526350093-Online-Food-Ordering-System-Ppt.pptx526350093-Online-Food-Ordering-System-Ppt.pptx
526350093-Online-Food-Ordering-System-Ppt.pptx
 

Heterosis, combining ability and per se performance of new hybrids of upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL.) for kapas yield and its attributing characters.

  • 1.
  • 2. Heterosis, combining ability and per se performance of new hybrids of upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) for kapas yield and its attributing characters. Chair person Dr .M.R.Gururaja Rao . Yanal Alkuddsi PAK 7207 Dept of Genetics & plant Breeding
  • 4. Family: Malvaceae Tribe: Gossypia Genus: Gossipium FLORAL BIOLOGY IN COTTON 1. Varies from species to species 2. Calyx –5. 3. Petals-5. 4. Stamens numerous. Four cultivated species 1- G. hirsutum 2- G . arboreum 3- G . barbadense 4- G . herbaseum
  • 5.  1.To study the heterosis and combining ability of new cotton hybrids in respect of seed cotton yield and its attributing characters.  2.To study the type of gene action in the control of above traits.  3. To study the association, direct and indirect effects of component characters on kapas yield .
  • 6. Heterosis Combining ability analysis Correlation studies Path coefficient analysis
  • 7. The experimental material used in the present study comprised of fourty eight experimental hybrids of cotton (G. hirsutum.L.) received from Sr. Cotton Breeder, ARS, Hebballi farm, Dharwad along with three released hybrid as checks . Experimental material These hybrids were produced by crossing six female lines with eight male testers. The present investigation in cotton was taken up during kharif 2008 at Agricultural Research Station, Bavikere, UAS. Experimental Design & Layout
  • 8. Sl. No Hybrid Code Hybrids Sl. No Hybrid Code Hybrids Sl. No Hybrid Code Hybrids 1 L1T1 701 /101/241 17 L5T3 703/118/243 33 L3T6 705/135/245 2 L2T1 701 /102/234 18 L6T3 703/119/236 34 L4T6 705/136/238 3 L3T1 701 /103/247 19 L1T4 703/120/249 35 L5T6 705/137/251 4 L4T1 701/104 /201 20 L2T4 703/ 121/203 36 L6T6 705/138/205 5 L5T1 701/105 /207 21 L3T4 703/122/210 37 L1T7 705/139/212 6 L6T1 701/106 /214 22 L4T4 703/123/216 38 L2T7 705/140/218 7 L1T2 701/107/220 23 L5T4 703/124/223 39 L3T7 705/141/225 8 L2T2 701/108/227 24 L6T4 703/125/229 40 L4T7 705/142/231 9 L3T2 702/110/242 25 L1T5 704/127/244 41 L5T7 706/144/246 10 L4T2 702/111/235 26 L2T5 704/128/237 42 L6T7 706/145/239 11 L5T2 702/112/248 27 L3T5 704/129/250 43 L1T8 706/146/252 12 L6T2 702/113/202 28 L4T5 704/130/204 44 L2T8 706/147/206 13 L1T3 702/114/209 29 L5T5 704/131/211 45 L3T8 706/148/213 14 L2T3 702/115/215 30 L6T5 704/132/217 46 L4T8 706/149/219 15 L3T3 702/116/222 31 L1T6 704/133/224 47 L5T8 706/150/226 16 L4T3 702/117/228 32 L2T6 704/134/230 48 L6T8 706/151/233 List of Cotton hybrids involved in the study of heterosis and combining ability
  • 9. Sl. No Checks 1 BUNNY BT/143/221 2 RCH2 BT/109/240 3 RAHH 95/126/208 List of cotton checks involved in the study :
  • 10. Modified Line × tester Arunachalam and Bandyopadhyay (1979) Hybrids +Checks– randomization RCBD with 2 replications
  • 11. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS 1. Analysis of variance - ( Panse and Sukhatme, 1967) 2. ANOVA for combining ability analysis - ( Kempthrome, 1957) 3. Estimation of variances - (Singh and Chowdhary ,1985) 4. Estimation of combining ability effects - (Kempthrome, 1957) 5. Overall status of a parent and cross with respect to gca and sca - Arunachalam and Bandyopadhyay (1979) concept that was slightly modified by Mohan Rao (2001). 6. Estimation of heterosis - Turner (1953) and Hayes et al. (1955) 7. Test of significance for heterosis - Arunachalam (1976) 8. verall status of a parent and cross with respect to gca and sca and heterosis Arunachalam and Bandyopadhyay (1979) concept that was slightly modified by Mohan Rao (2001).
  • 12. Observations Recorded •Days to 50% flowering •Plant height (cm) •Monopodial branches/plant •Sympodial branches /plant. •Bolls/plant. •Mean boll weight (g). •Seed cotton yield/plant (g). •Seed index (g). •Ginning percentage(%). •Lint index .
  • 14. Sl No. Hybrids Days to 50% flowering Plant height (cm) Monopodia per plant Sympodia per plant Bolls per plant Mean boll Weight (g) Kapas yield (g/plant) Ginning per cent Seed index (g) Lint index 1 101 71.50 101.00 2.20 19.30 23.70 2.77 66.15 31.90 8.75 4.10 2 102 71.50 110.30 2.10 16.30 16.30 3.20 60.27 33.17 9.75 4.84 3 103 68.50 111.30 1.90 21.40 23.50 2.79 65.91 32.81 8.75 4.27 4 104 67.50 116.50 1.80 24.90 18.00 2.47 44.34 34.32 8.50 4.44 5 105 70.00 110.10 2.09 21.50 19.10 3.29 60.65 34.44 9.25 4.86 6 106 69.50 95.40 1.70 18.10 33.20 2.98 103.60 35.06 9.75 5.26 7 107 67.00 114.40 2.40 22.10 31.30 3.23 82.33 36.54 9.25 5.33 8 108 70.00 84.50 1.90 17.50 26.10 3.08 86.53 37.31 8.00 4.76 9 110 69.00 105.70 2.25 23.90 25.30 2.53 63.86 32.08 8.25 3.90 10 111 72.00 123.80 1.90 25.15 21.60 2.83 64.42 28.74 8.75 3.53 11 112 67.50 129.80 1.90 24.80 31.40 2.91 91.61 31.60 9.25 4.27 12 113 71.00 132.40 2.30 28.30 18.70 2.52 47.33 34.85 9.00 4.82 13 114 67.00 118.70 1.90 25.90 22.50 2.87 65.18 37.06 9.00 5.30 14 115 69.50 119.00 2.30 25.00 28.50 3.05 89.09 33.44 9.75 4.90 15 116 70.00 114.70 1.60 26.50 29.50 2.48 66.10 33.54 8.50 4.29 16 117 71.00 109.60 1.60 25.20 28.90 2.91 72.11 37.40 9.25 5.53 17 118 72.50 134.30 1.70 28.40 23.80 2.67 69.49 31.99 9.00 4.23 18 119 71.50 117.70 1.90 24.20 27.50 2.88 77.78 35.70 9.00 5.00 19 120 70.50 128.20 1.40 27.20 26.40 2.88 76.17 32.76 8.25 4.02 20 121 68.50 123.50 1.60 27.60 33.30 2.83 79.94 33.09 8.50 4.20 21 122 68.00 130.90 2.00 25.90 22.90 3.15 71.98 38.69 9.00 5.68 22 123 67.00 133.90 1.80 27.20 31.10 2.97 91.16 31.38 10.00 4.57 23 124 71.00 110.40 2.00 27.00 30.10 2.97 89.20 36.09 8.75 4.94 24 125 72.00 86.10 2.10 19.00 23.90 2.92 63.63 33.69 10.25 5.21 Table 3. Mean performance of experimental hybrids and checks of cotton [G .hirsutum L.] in respect of kapas yield and its attributing characters.
  • 15. Sl No. Hybrids Days to 50% flowering Plant height (cm) Monopodia per plant Sympodia per plant Bolls per plant Mean boll Weight (g) Kapas yield ( g/plant) Ginning per cent Seed index (g) Lint index 25 127 71.50 110.00 1.50 25.30 21.10 2.61 55.06 35.20 8.50 4.62 26 128 71.50 113.60 1.90 27.90 23.30 3.36 78.48 36.78 9.00 5.24 27 129 69.50 121.80 2.00 26.80 31.10 2.87 95.26 36.23 8.50 4.83 28 130 71.50 128.80 2.00 27.40 30.70 2.76 81.47 40.38 9.00 6.10 29 131 72.00 123.10 1.90 23.70 25.90 3.44 88.96 42.23 9.25 6.76 30 132 71.00 138.70 2.10 24.40 22.90 3.40 77.58 35.15 10.00 5.42 31 133 70.00 129.60 2.20 28.00 33.80 2.98 104.90 41.37 9.50 6.70 32 134 72.00 122.90 2.50 26.70 29.50 2.89 106.18 36.87 8.75 5.11 33 135 72.00 122.00 2.10 26.10 19.00 3.58 64.71 36.26 10.25 5.83 34 136 72.00 128.40 1.70 26.00 16.10 3.52 139.96 35.74 10.50 5.84 35 137 69.50 115.70 1.90 25.40 17.90 3.76 66.52 34.01 10.75 5.54 36 138 66.50 120.10 1.70 26.20 13.10 2.83 36.93 37.23 9.50 5.64 37 139 69.50 114.90 2.40 25.60 17.10 3.74 58.25 39.38 10.25 6.66 38 140 69.00 102.50 1.50 24.10 13.20 3.26 42.93 41.47 11.50 8.15 39 141 68.50 92.90 1.60 21.50 18.50 3.42 63.10 38.15 10.75 6.63 40 142 71.50 112.50 2.00 23.50 23.00 2.85 77.91 37.83 10.75 6.54 41 144 70.50 111.90 1.60 26.00 26.70 2.69 68.99 35.83 9.00 5.03 42 145 69.50 116.80 1.60 28.85 24.20 2.71 62.84 33.75 10.25 5.22 43 146 69.50 102.40 1.20 23.30 20.00 2.51 48.20 32.95 10.25 5.04 44 147 70.50 102.90 1.80 24.80 21.00 2.71 56.83 36.52 9.25 5.32 45 148 70.50 117.80 2.25 25.90 22.30 3.13 67.45 39.11 9.50 6.10 46 149 71.50 98.90 1.70 22.30 15.30 2.52 38.65 35.40 9.75 5.34 47 150 70.00 101.60 1.60 23.30 20.40 2.55 49.46 38.74 9.00 5.69 48 151 72.00 106.80 1.95 25.20 19.70 3.45 75.83 38.96 9.75 6.22 49 109 ( C ) 69.50 111.80 2.10 21.60 31.60 3.32 107.58 32.25 9.25 4.40 50 126 ( C ) 71.50 112.30 1.40 23.90 30.60 2.31 68.15 37.54 8.50 5.11 51 143 ( C ) 67.50 109.00 1.60 25.70 26.40 3.30 91.14 34.88 8.00 4.29 Mean 70.1 114.7 1.89 24.55 24.14 2.971 72.98 35.644 9.33 5.208 S.Em 1.58 9.73 0.22 2.23 2.43 0.26 8.64 2.98 0.71 0.73 CD@ 5% 4.49 27.67 0.65 6.35 6.91 0.76 24.57 8.47 2.04 2.09 CV % 3.20 12.00 17.21 12.89 14.26 12.75 16.75 11.69 10.89 19.79 Continued.. Note: Figures in bold face indicates maximum and minimum values.
  • 16. Mean sum of squares Source of Variation df Days to 50% flowering Plant height (cm) Monopodia Per plant Sympodia Per plant Bolls per plant Mean boll weight (g) Kapas yield (g/plant) Ginning per cent Seed index (g) Lint index Replication 1 30.74** 316.94** 0.71 1.86 43.22** 0.25 1.4 3.7 1.78 0.7 Hybrids 47 5.47** 311.77** 0.16 17.15** 61.15** 0.23 762.36** 18.69** 1.2 1.60* Checks 2 8.00** 6.32** 0.26 8.44** 15.22** 0.66 784.51** 37.52** 0.79 0.46 Hybrids Vs Checks 1 1.59 87.55** 0.21 4.20** 185.62** 0.0001 1626.66** 44.55** 3.53 2.69 Error 50 5.005 189.57 0.1 10.003 11.84 0.14 149.43 17.76 1.03 1.09 Table 4. Analysis of variance for kapas yield and its attributing characters in cheks and experimental hybrids of cotton [G .hirsutum L.]
  • 17. Hybrid Mean of F1 Mean of Check 109 Heterosis ( % ) Mean of Check 143 Heterosis ( % ) Hybrid Mean of F1 Mean of Check 109 Heterosis ( % ) Mean of Check 143 Heterosis ( % ) 101 71.50 69.50 2.88 67.50 5.93** 127 71.50 69.50 2.88 67.50 5.93** 102 71.50 69.50 2.88 67.50 5.93** 128 71.50 69.50 2.88 67.50 5.93** 103 68.50 69.50 -1.44 67.50 1.48 129 69.50 69.50 0.00 67.50 2.96 104 67.50 69.50 -2.88 67.50 0.00 130 71.50 69.50 2.88 67.50 5.93** 105 70.00 69.50 0.72 67.50 3.70 131 72.00 69.50 3.60 67.50 6.67** 106 69.50 69.50 0.00 67.50 2.96 132 71.00 69.50 2.16 67.50 5.19 107 67.00 69.50 -3.60 67.50 -0.74 133 70.00 69.50 0.72 67.50 3.70 108 70.00 69.50 0.72 67.50 3.70 134 72.00 69.50 3.60 67.50 6.67** 110 69.00 69.50 -0.72 67.50 2.22 135 72.00 69.50 3.60 67.50 6.67** 111 72.00 69.50 3.60 67.50 6.67** 136 72.00 69.50 3.60 67.50 6.67** 112 67.50 69.50 -2.88 67.50 0.00 137 69.50 69.50 0.00 67.50 2.96 113 71.00 69.50 2.16 67.50 5.19 138 66.50 69.50 -4.32 67.50 -1.48 114 67.00 69.50 -3.60 67.50 -0.74 139 69.50 69.50 0.00 67.50 2.96 115 69.50 69.50 0.00 67.50 2.96 140 69.00 69.50 -0.72 67.50 2.22 116 70.00 69.50 0.72 67.50 3.70 141 68.50 69.50 -1.44 67.50 1.48 117 71.00 69.50 2.16 67.50 5.19 142 71.50 69.50 2.88 67.50 5.93** 118 72.50 69.50 4.32 67.50 7.41** 144 70.50 69.50 1.44 67.50 4.44 119 71.50 69.50 2.88 67.50 5.93** 145 69.50 69.50 0.00 67.50 2.96 120 70.50 69.50 1.44 67.50 4.44 146 69.50 69.50 0.00 67.50 2.96 121 68.50 69.50 -1.44 67.50 1.48 147 70.50 69.50 1.44 67.50 4.44 122 68.00 69.50 -2.16 67.50 0.74 148 70.50 69.50 1.44 67.50 4.44 123 67.00 69.50 -3.60 67.50 -0.74 149 71.50 69.50 2.88 67.50 5.93** 124 71.00 69.50 2.16 67.50 5.19 150 70.00 69.50 0.72 67.50 3.70 125 72.00 69.50 3.60 67.50 6.67** 151 72.00 69.50 3.60 67.50 6.67 Table 5. Performance of hybrids and per cent heterosis over best commercial check with respect to days to 50% flowering In cotton [G .hirsutum L.] SE ± 2.23 * Significant at P = 0.05 **Significant at P = 0.01
  • 18. Hybrid Mean of F1 Mean of Check 126 Heterosis ( % ) Mean of Check 143 Heterosis ( % ) Hybrid Mean of F1 Mean of Check 126 Heterosis ( % ) Mean of Check 143 Heterosis ( % ) 101 101.00 112.30 -10.06 109.00 -7.34 127 110.00 112.30 -2.05 109.00 0.92 102 110.30 112.30 -1.78 109.00 1.19 128 113.60 112.30 1.16 109.00 4.22 103 111.30 112.30 -0.89 109.00 2.11 129 121.80 112.30 8.46 109.00 11.74 104 116.50 112.30 3.74 109.00 6.88 130 128.80 112.30 14.69 109.00 18.17 105 110.10 112.30 -1.96 109.00 1.01 131 123.10 112.30 9.62 109.00 12.94 106 95.40 112.30 -15.05 109.00 -12.48 132 138.70 112.30 23.51** 109.00 27.25** 107 114.40 112.30 1.87 109.00 4.95 133 129.60 112.30 15.41 109.00 18.90 108 84.30 112.30 -24.93** 109.00 -22.66** 134 122.90 112.30 9.44 109.00 12.75 110 105.70 112.30 -5.88 109.00 -3.03 135 122.00 112.30 8.64 109.00 11.93 111 123.80 112.30 10.24 109.00 13.58 136 128.40 112.30 14.34 109.00 17.80 112 129.80 112.30 15.58 109.00 19.08 137 115.70 112.30 3.03 109.00 6.15 113 132.40 112.30 17.90 109.00 21.47** 138 120.10 112.30 6.95 109.00 10.18 114 118.70 112.30 5.70 109.00 8.90 139 114.90 112.30 2.32 109.00 5.41 115 119.00 112.30 5.97 109.00 9.17 140 102.50 112.30 -8.73 109.00 -5.96 116 114.70 112.30 2.14 109.00 5.23 141 92.90 112.30 -17.28 109.00 -14.77 117 109.60 112.30 -2.40 109.00 0.55 142 112.50 112.30 0.18 109.00 3.21 118 134.30 112.30 19.59 109.00 23.21** 144 111.90 112.30 -0.36 109.00 2.66 119 117.70 112.30 4.81 109.00 7.98 145 116.80 112.30 4.01 109.00 7.16 120 128.20 112.30 14.16 109.00 17.61 146 102.40 112.30 -8.82 109.00 -6.06 121 123.50 112.30 9.97 109.00 13.30 147 102.90 112.30 -8.37 109.00 -5.60 122 130.90 112.30 16.56 109.00 20.09 148 117.80 112.30 4.90 109.00 8.07 123 133.90 112.30 19.23 109.00 22.84** 149 98.90 112.30 -11.93 109.00 -9.27 124 110.40 112.30 -1.69 109.00 1.28 150 101.60 112.30 -9.53 109.00 -6.79 125 86.10 112.30 -23.33** 109.00 -21.01 151 106.80 112.30 -4.90 109.00 -2.02 Table 6. Performance of hybrids and per cent heterosis over best commercial check with respect to plant height in cotton [G .hirsutum L.] SE ± 13.76 * Significant at P = 0.05 **Significant at P = 0.01
  • 19. Hybrid Mean of F1 Mean of Check 109 Heterosis (%) Mean of Check 143 Heterosis ( % ) Hybrid Mean of F1 Mean of Check 109 Heterosis (%) Mean of Check 143 Heterosis (%) 101 2.20 2.10 4.76 1.60 37.50** 127 1.50 2.10 -28.57** 1.60 -6.25 102 2.10 2.10 0.00 1.60 31.25 128 1.90 2.10 -9.52 1.60 18.75 103 1.90 2.10 -9.52 1.60 18.75 129 2.00 2.10 -4.76 1.60 25.00 104 1.80 2.10 -14.29 1.60 12.50 130 2.00 2.10 -4.76 1.60 25.00 105 2.09 2.10 -0.71 1.60 30.31 131 1.90 2.10 -9.52 1.60 18.75 106 1.70 2.10 -19.05 1.60 6.25 132 2.10 2.10 0.00 1.60 31.25 107 2.40 2.10 14.29 1.60 50.00 133 2.20 2.10 4.76 1.60 37.50 108 1.90 2.10 -9.52 1.60 18.75 134 2.50 2.10 19.05 1.60 56.25* 110 2.25 2.10 7.14 1.60 40.63** 135 2.10 2.10 0.00 1.60 31.25 111 1.90 2.10 -9.52 1.60 18.75 136 1.70 2.10 -19.05 1.60 6.25 112 1.90 2.10 -9.52 1.60 18.75 137 1.90 2.10 -9.52 1.60 18.75 113 2.30 2.10 9.52 1.60 43.75** 138 1.70 2.10 -19.05 1.60 6.25 114 1.90 2.10 -9.52 1.60 18.75 139 2.40 2.10 14.29 1.60 50.00* 115 2.30 2.10 9.52 1.60 43.75** 140 1.50 2.10 -28.57** 1.60 -6.25 116 1.60 2.10 -23.81 1.60 0.00 141 1.60 2.10 -23.81 1.60 0.00 117 1.60 2.10 -23.81 1.60 0.00 142 2.00 2.10 -4.76 1.60 25.00 118 1.70 2.10 -19.05 1.60 6.25 144 1.60 2.10 -23.81 1.60 0.00 119 1.90 2.10 -9.52 1.60 18.75 145 1.60 2.10 -23.81 1.60 0.00 120 1.40 2.10 -33.33** 1.60 -12.50 146 1.20 2.10 -42.86** 1.60 -25.00 121 1.60 2.10 -23.81 1.60 0.00 147 1.80 2.10 -14.29 1.60 12.50 122 2.00 2.10 -4.76 1.60 25.00 148 2.25 2.10 7.14 1.60 40.63** 123 1.80 2.10 -14.29 1.60 12.50 149 1.70 2.10 -19.05 1.60 6.25 124 2.00 2.10 -4.76 1.60 25.00 150 1.60 2.10 -23.81 1.60 0.00 125 2.10 2.10 0.00 1.60 31.25 151 1.95 2.10 -7.14 1.60 21.88 Table 7. Performance of hybrids and per cent heterosis over best commercial check with respect to monopodia per plant in cotton [G .hirsutum L.] SE ± 0.32 * Significant at P = 0.05 **Significant at P = 0.01
  • 20. Hybrid Mean of F1 Mean of Check 126 Heterosis ( % ) Mean of Check 143 Heterosis ( % ) Hybrid Mean of F1 Mean of Check 126 Heterosis ( % ) Mean of Check 143 Heterosis ( % ) 101 19.30 23.90 -19.25 25.70 -24.90** 127 25.30 23.90 5.86 25.70 -1.56 102 16.30 23.90 -31.80* 25.70 -36.58* 128 27.90 23.90 16.74 25.70 8.56 103 21.40 23.90 -10.46 25.70 -16.73 129 26.80 23.90 12.13 25.70 4.28 104 24.90 23.90 4.18 25.70 -3.11 130 27.40 23.90 14.64 25.70 6.61 105 21.50 23.90 -10.04 25.70 -16.34 131 23.70 23.90 -0.84 25.70 -7.78 106 18.10 23.90 -24.27** 25.70 -29.57* 132 24.40 23.90 2.09 25.70 -5.06 107 22.10 23.90 -7.53 25.70 -14.01 133 28.00 23.90 17.15 25.70 8.95 108 17.50 23.90 -26.78** 25.70 -31.91* 134 26.70 23.90 11.72 25.70 3.89 110 23.90 23.90 0.00 25.70 -7.00 135 26.10 23.90 9.21 25.70 1.56 111 25.15 23.90 5.23 25.70 -2.14 136 26.00 23.90 8.79 25.70 1.17 112 24.80 23.90 3.77 25.70 -3.50 137 25.40 23.90 6.28 25.70 -1.17 113 28.30 23.90 18.41 25.70 10.12 138 26.20 23.90 9.62 25.70 1.95 114 25.90 23.90 8.37 25.70 0.78 139 25.60 23.90 7.11 25.70 -0.39 115 25.00 23.90 4.60 25.70 -2.72 140 24.10 23.90 0.84 25.70 -6.23 116 26.50 23.90 10.88 25.70 3.11 141 21.50 23.90 -10.04 25.70 -16.34 117 25.20 23.90 5.44 25.70 -1.95 142 23.50 23.90 -1.67 25.70 -8.56 118 28.40 23.90 18.83 25.70 10.51 144 26.00 23.90 8.79 25.70 1.17 119 24.20 23.90 1.26 25.70 -5.84 145 28.85 23.90 20.71 25.70 12.26 120 27.20 23.90 13.81 25.70 5.84 146 23.30 23.90 -2.51 25.70 -9.34 121 27.60 23.90 15.48 25.70 7.39 147 24.80 23.90 3.77 25.70 -3.50 122 25.90 23.90 8.37 25.70 0.78 148 25.90 23.90 8.37 25.70 0.78 123 27.20 23.90 13.81 25.70 5.84 149 22.30 23.90 -6.69 25.70 -13.23 124 27.00 23.90 12.97 25.70 5.06 150 23.30 23.90 -2.51 25.70 -9.34 125 19.00 23.90 -20.50 25.70 -26.07** 151 25.20 23.90 5.44 25.70 -1.95 Table 8. Performance of hybrids and per cent heterosis over best commercial check with respect to sympodia per plant in cotton [G .hirsutum L.] SE ± 3.16 * Significant at P = 0.05 **Significant at P = 0.01
  • 21. Hybrid Mean of F1 Mean of Check 109 Heterosis ( % ) Mean of Check 143 Heterosis ( % ) Hybrid Mean of F1 Mean of Check 109 Heterosis ( % ) Mean of Check 143 Heterosis ( % ) 101 23.70 31.60 -25.00** 26.40 -10.23 127 21.10 31.60 -33.23* 26.40 -20.08 102 16.30 31.60 -48.42* 26.40 -38.26* 128 23.30 31.60 -26.27* 26.40 -11.74 103 23.50 31.60 -25.63** 26.40 -10.98 129 31.10 31.60 -1.58 26.40 17.80 104 18.00 31.60 -43.04* 26.40 -31.82* 130 30.70 31.60 -2.85 26.40 16.29 105 19.10 31.60 -39.56* 26.40 -27.65** 131 25.90 31.60 -18.04 26.40 -1.89 106 33.20 31.60 5.06 26.40 25.76** 132 22.90 31.60 -27.53* 26.40 -13.26 107 31.30 31.60 -0.95 26.40 18.56 133 33.80 31.60 6.96 26.40 28.03** 108 26.10 31.60 -17.41 26.40 -1.14 134 29.50 31.60 -6.65 26.40 11.74 110 25.30 31.60 -19.94** 26.40 -4.17 135 19.00 31.60 -39.87* 26.40 -28.03** 111 21.60 31.60 -31.65* 26.40 -18.18 136 16.10 31.60 -49.05* 26.40 -39.02* 112 31.40 31.60 -0.63 26.40 18.94 137 17.90 31.60 -43.35* 26.40 -32.20* 113 18.70 31.60 -40.82* 26.40 -29.17** 138 13.10 31.60 -58.54* 26.40 -50.38* 114 22.50 31.60 -28.80* 26.40 -14.77 139 17.10 31.60 -45.89* 26.40 -35.23* 115 28.50 31.60 -9.81 26.40 7.95 140 13.20 31.60 -58.23* 26.40 -50.00* 116 29.50 31.60 -6.65 26.40 11.74 141 18.50 31.60 -41.46* 26.40 -29.92** 117 28.90 31.60 -8.54 26.40 9.47 142 23.00 31.60 -27.22* 26.40 -12.88 118 23.80 31.60 -24.68** 26.40 -9.85 144 26.70 31.60 -15.51 26.40 1.14 119 27.50 31.60 -12.97 26.40 4.17 145 24.20 31.60 -23.42** 26.40 -8.33 120 26.40 31.60 -16.46 26.40 0.00 146 20.00 31.60 -36.71* 26.40 -24.24** 121 33.30 31.60 5.38 26.40 26.14** 147 21.00 31.60 -33.54* 26.40 -20.45 122 22.90 31.60 -27.53* 26.40 -13.26 148 22.30 31.60 -29.43* 26.40 -15.53 123 31.10 31.60 -1.58 26.40 17.80 149 15.30 31.60 -51.58* 26.40 -42.05* 124 30.10 31.60 -4.75 26.40 14.02 150 20.40 31.60 -35.44* 26.40 -22.73** 125 23.90 31.60 -24.37** 26.40 -9.47 151 19.70 31.60 -37.66* 26.40 -25.38** Table 9. Performance of hybrids and per cent heterosis over best commercial check with respect to bolls per plant in cotton [G .hirsutum L.] SE ± 3.44 * Significant at P = 0.05 **Significant at P = 0.01
  • 22. Hybrid Mean of F1 Mean of Check 109 Heterosis ( % ) Mean of Check 143 Heterosis ( % ) Hybrid Mean of F1 Mean of Check 109 Heterosis ( % ) Mean of Check 143 Heterosis ( % ) 101 2.77 3.32 -16.57 3.30 -16.06 127 2.61 3.32 -21.39** 3.30 -20.91** 102 3.20 3.32 -3.61 3.30 -3.03 128 3.36 3.32 1.05 3.30 1.67 103 2.79 3.32 -16.11 3.30 -15.61 129 2.87 3.32 -13.70 3.30 -13.18 104 2.47 3.32 -25.75** 3.30 -25.30** 130 2.76 3.32 -16.87 3.30 -16.36 105 3.29 3.32 -1.05 3.30 -0.45 131 3.44 3.32 3.46 3.30 4.09 106 2.98 3.32 -10.39 3.30 -9.85 132 3.40 3.32 2.26 3.30 2.88 107 3.23 3.32 -2.86 3.30 -2.27 133 2.98 3.32 -10.24 3.30 -9.70 108 3.08 3.32 -7.38 3.30 -6.82 134 2.89 3.32 -13.10 3.30 -12.58 110 2.53 3.32 -23.95** 3.30 -23.48** 135 3.58 3.32 7.83 3.30 8.48 111 2.83 3.32 -14.76 3.30 -14.24 136 3.52 3.32 5.87 3.30 6.52 112 2.91 3.32 -12.35 3.30 -11.82 137 3.76 3.32 13.10 3.30 13.79 113 2.52 3.32 -24.10** 3.30 -23.64** 138 2.83 3.32 -14.76 3.30 -14.24 114 2.87 3.32 -13.55 3.30 -13.03 139 3.74 3.32 12.65 3.30 13.33 115 3.05 3.32 -8.28 3.30 -7.73 140 3.26 3.32 -1.81 3.30 -1.21 116 2.48 3.32 -25.45** 3.30 -25.00** 141 3.42 3.32 2.86 3.30 3.48 117 2.91 3.32 -12.50 3.30 -11.97 142 2.85 3.32 -14.31 3.30 -13.79 118 2.67 3.32 -19.58** 3.30 -19.09 144 2.69 3.32 -18.98** 3.30 -18.48 119 2.88 3.32 -13.40 3.30 -12.88 145 2.71 3.32 -18.37 3.30 -17.88 120 2.88 3.32 -13.40 3.30 -12.88 146 2.51 3.32 -24.40** 3.30 -23.94** 121 2.83 3.32 -14.76 3.30 -14.24 147 2.71 3.32 -18.52 3.30 -18.03 122 3.15 3.32 -5.27 3.30 -4.70 148 3.13 3.32 -5.72 3.30 -5.15 123 2.97 3.32 -10.54 3.30 -10.00 149 2.52 3.32 -24.10** 3.30 -23.64** 124 2.97 3.32 -10.69 3.30 -10.15 150 2.55 3.32 -23.34** 3.30 -22.88** 125 2.92 3.32 -12.20 3.30 -11.67 151 3.45 3.32 3.92 3.30 4.55 Table 10. Performance of hybrids and per cent heterosis over best commercial check with respect to mean boll weight in cotton [G .hirsutum L.] SE ± 0.37 * Significant at P = 0.05 **Significant at P = 0.01
  • 23. Hybrid Mean of F1 Mean of Check 109 Heterosis ( % ) Mean of Check 143 Heterosis ( % ) Hybrid Mean of F1 Mean of Check 109 Heterosis ( % ) Mean of Check 143 Heterosis ( % ) 101 66.15 107..58 -38.51* 91.14 -27.42** 127 55.06 107..58 -48.82* 91.14 -39.59* 102 60.27 107..58 -43.98* 91.14 -33.87* 128 78.48 107..58 -27.05** 91.14 -13.89 103 65.91 107..58 -38.73* 91.14 -27.68** 129 95.26 107..58 -11.45 91.14 4.52 104 44.34 107..58 -58.78* 91.14 -51.35* 130 81.47 107..58 -24.27** 91.14 -10.61 105 60.65 107..58 -43.62* 91.14 -33.45* 131 88.96 107..58 -17.31 91.14 -2.39 106 103.60 107..58 -3.70 91.14 13.67 132 77.58 107..58 -27.89* 91.14 -14.88 107 82.33 107..58 -23.47** 91.14 -9.67 133 104.90 107..58 -2.49 91.14 15.10 108 86.53 107..58 -19.57** 91.14 -5.06 134 106.18 107..58 -1.31 91.14 16.50 110 63.86 107..58 -40.64* 91.14 -29.93** 135 64.71 107..58 -39.85* 91.14 -29.00** 111 64.42 107..58 -40.12* 91.14 -29.32** 136 139.96 107..58 30.09* 91.14 53.56* 112 91.61 107..58 -14.84 91.14 0.52 137 66.52 107..58 -38.17* 91.14 -27.01** 113 47.33 107..58 -56.00* 91.14 -48.07* 138 36.93 107..58 -65.67* 91.14 -59.48* 114 65.18 107..58 -39.41* 91.14 -28.48** 139 58.25 107..58 -45.85* 91.14 -36.09* 115 89.09 107..58 -17.19 91.14 -2.25 140 42.93 107..58 -60.09* 91.14 -52.90* 116 66.10 107..58 -38.56* 91.14 -27.47** 141 63.10 107..58 -41.35* 91.14 -30.77** 117 72.11 107..58 -32.97* 91.14 -20.88 142 77.91 107..58 -27.58* 91.14 -14.52 118 69.49 107..58 -35.41* 91.14 -23.75** 144 68.99 107..58 -35.87* 91.14 -24.30** 119 77.78 107..58 -27.70** 91.14 -14.66 145 62.84 107..58 -41.59* 91.14 -31.05** 120 76.17 107..58 -29.20* 91.14 -16.43 146 48.20 107..58 -55.20* 91.14 -47.11* 121 79.94 107..58 -25.69** 91.14 -12.29 147 56.83 107..58 -47.17* 91.14 -37.65* 122 71.98 107..58 -33.09* 91.14 -21.02 148 67.45 107..58 -37.30* 91.14 -25.99** 123 91.16 107..58 -15.26 91.14 0.02 149 38.65 107..58 -64.07* 91.14 -57.59* 124 89.20 107..58 -17.08 91.14 -2.13 150 49.46 107..58 -54.02* 91.14 -45.73* 125 63.63 107..58 -40.85* 91.14 -30.18** 151 75.83 107..58 -29.52* 91.14 -16.80 Table 11. Performance of hybrids and per cent heterosis over best commercial check with respect to kapas yield per plant (g) in cotton [G .hirsutum L.] SE ± 12.22 * Significant at P = 0.05 **Significant at P = 0.01
  • 24. Hybrid Mean of F1 Mean of Check 126 Heterosis ( % ) Mean of Check 143 Heterosis ( % ) Hybrid Mean of F1 Mean of Check 126 Heterosis ( % ) Mean of Check 143 Heterosis ( % ) 101 31.90 37.54 -15.02 34.88 -8.54 127 35.20 37.54 -6.24 34.88 0.91 102 33.17 37.54 -11.64 34.88 -4.90 128 36.78 37.54 -2.03 34.88 5.45 103 32.81 37.54 -12.59 34.88 -5.92 129 36.23 37.54 -3.50 34.88 3.86 104 34.32 37.54 -8.58 34.88 -1.61 130 40.38 37.54 7.56 34.88 15.76 105 34.44 37.54 -8.27 34.88 -1.27 131 42.23 37.54 12.49 34.88 21.07** 106 35.06 37.54 -6.61 34.88 0.52 132 35.15 37.54 -6.36 34.88 0.78 107 36.54 37.54 -2.68 34.88 4.75 133 41.37 37.54 10.19 34.88 18.60 108 37.31 37.54 -0.61 34.88 6.97 134 36.87 37.54 -1.78 34.88 5.71 110 32.08 37.54 -14.56 34.88 -8.04 135 36.26 37.54 -3.41 34.88 3.96 111 28.74 37.54 -23.43** 34.88 -17.59 136 35.74 37.54 -4.80 34.88 2.46 112 31.60 37.54 -15.84 34.88 -9.42 137 34.01 37.54 -9.39 34.88 -2.48 113 34.85 37.54 -7.16 34.88 -0.08 138 37.23 37.54 -0.82 34.88 6.75 114 37.06 37.54 -1.27 34.88 6.26 139 39.38 37.54 4.90 34.88 12.90 115 33.44 37.54 -10.93 34.88 -4.14 140 41.47 37.54 10.47 34.88 18.90 116 33.54 37.54 -10.66 34.88 -3.85 141 38.15 37.54 1.63 34.88 9.38 117 37.40 37.54 -0.38 34.88 7.21 142 37.83 37.54 0.78 34.88 8.47 118 31.99 37.54 -14.78 34.88 -8.28 144 35.83 37.54 -4.56 34.88 2.72 119 35.70 37.54 -4.90 34.88 2.36 145 33.75 37.54 -10.10 34.88 -3.24 120 32.76 37.54 -12.74 34.88 -6.08 146 32.95 37.54 -12.24 34.88 -5.55 121 33.09 37.54 -11.86 34.88 -5.14 147 36.52 37.54 -2.73 34.88 4.69 122 38.69 37.54 3.06 34.88 10.92 148 39.11 37.54 4.17 34.88 12.12 123 31.38 37.54 -16.41 34.88 -10.03 149 35.40 37.54 -5.71 34.88 1.48 124 36.09 37.54 -3.87 34.88 3.46 150 38.74 37.54 3.21 34.88 11.08 125 33.69 37.54 -10.26 34.88 -3.42 151 38.96 37.54 3.77 34.88 11.69 Table 12. Performance of hybrids and per cent heterosis over best commercial check with respect to ginning per cent in cotton( G .hirsutum L.] SE± 4.21 * Significant at P = 0.05 **Significant at P = 0.01
  • 25. Hybrids Mean of F1 Mean of Check 109 Heterosis ( % ) Mean of Check 143 Heterosis ( % ) Hybrids Mean of F1 Mean of Check 109 Heterosis ( % ) Mean of Check 143 Heterosis ( % ) 101 8.75 9.25 -5.41 8.00 9.38 127 8.50 9.25 -8.11 8.00 6.25 102 9.75 9.25 5.41 8.00 21.88** 128 9.00 9.25 -2.70 8.00 12.50 103 8.75 9.25 -5.41 8.00 9.38 129 8.50 9.25 -8.11 8.00 6.25 104 8.50 9.25 -8.11 8.00 6.25 130 9.00 9.25 -2.70 8.00 12.50 105 9.25 9.25 0.00 8.00 15.63 131 9.25 9.25 0.00 8.00 15.63 106 9.75 9.25 5.41 8.00 21.88** 132 10.00 9.25 8.11 8.00 25.00** 107 9.25 9.25 0.00 8.00 15.63 133 9.50 9.25 2.70 8.00 18.75 108 8.00 9.25 -13.51 8.00 0.00 134 8.75 9.25 -5.41 8.00 9.38 110 8.25 9.25 -10.81 8.00 3.13 135 10.25 9.25 10.81 8.00 28.13** 111 8.75 9.25 -5.41 8.00 9.38 136 10.50 9.25 13.51 8.00 31.25* 112 9.25 9.25 0.00 8.00 15.63 137 10.75 9.25 16.22 8.00 34.38* 113 9.00 9.25 -2.70 8.00 12.50 138 9.50 9.25 2.70 8.00 18.75 114 9.00 9.25 -2.70 8.00 12.50 139 10.25 9.25 10.81 8.00 28.13** 115 9.75 9.25 5.41 8.00 21.88** 140 11.50 9.25 24.32** 8.00 43.75* 116 8.50 9.25 -8.11 8.00 6.25 141 10.75 9.25 16.22 8.00 34.38* 117 9.25 9.25 0.00 8.00 15.63 142 10.75 9.25 16.22 8.00 34.38* 118 9.00 9.25 -2.70 8.00 12.50 144 9.00 9.25 -2.70 8.00 12.50 119 9.00 9.25 -2.70 8.00 12.50 145 10.25 9.25 10.81 8.00 28.13** 120 8.25 9.25 -10.81 8.00 3.13 146 10.25 9.25 10.81 8.00 28.13** 121 8.50 9.25 -8.11 8.00 6.25 147 9.25 9.25 0.00 8.00 15.63 122 9.00 9.25 -2.70 8.00 12.50 148 9.50 9.25 2.70 8.00 18.75 123 10.00 9.25 8.11 8.00 25.00** 149 9.75 9.25 5.41 8.00 21.88** 124 8.75 9.25 -5.41 8.00 9.38 150 9.00 9.25 -2.70 8.00 12.50 125 10.25 9.25 10.81 8.00 28.13** 151 9.75 9.25 5.41 8.00 21.88** Table 13. Performance of hybrids and per cent heterosis over best commercial check with respect to seed index in cotton [G .hirsutum L.] SE ± 1.01 * Significant at P = 0.05 **Significant at P = 0.01
  • 26. Hybrids Mean of F1 Mean of Check 126 Heterosis ( % ) Mean of Check 143 Heterosis ( % ) Hybrids Mean of F1 Mean of Check 126 Heterosis ( % ) Mean of Check 143 Heterosis ( %) 101 4.10 5.11 -19.78 4.29 -4.45 127 4.62 5.11 -9.65 4.29 7.62 102 4.84 5.11 -5.30 4.29 12.81 128 5.24 5.11 2.46 4.29 22.05 103 4.27 5.11 -16.37 4.29 -0.38 129 4.83 5.11 -5.51 4.29 12.55 104 4.44 5.11 -13.09 4.29 3.52 130 6.10 5.11 19.28 4.29 42.08** 105 4.86 5.11 -4.92 4.29 13.25 131 6.76 5.11 32.33 4.29 57.62** 106 5.26 5.11 3.01 4.29 22.70 132 5.42 5.11 6.08 4.29 26.36 107 5.33 5.11 4.21 4.29 24.13 133 6.70 5.11 31.16 4.29 56.23** 108 4.76 5.11 -6.83 4.29 10.98 134 5.11 5.11 0.01 4.29 19.13 110 3.90 5.11 -23.76 4.29 -9.19 135 5.83 5.11 14.11 4.29 35.92 111 3.53 5.11 -30.93 4.29 -17.72 136 5.84 5.11 14.27 4.29 36.11 112 4.27 5.11 -16.39 4.29 -0.41 137 5.54 5.11 8.44 4.29 29.17 113 4.82 5.11 -5.77 4.29 12.24 138 5.64 5.11 10.29 4.29 31.37 114 5.30 5.11 3.71 4.29 23.54 139 6.66 5.11 30.30 4.29 55.20** 115 4.90 5.11 -4.16 4.29 14.16 140 8.15 5.11 59.47* 4.29 89.95* 116 4.29 5.11 -16.06 4.29 -0.02 141 6.63 5.11 29.77 4.29 54.58** 117 5.53 5.11 8.13 4.29 28.80 142 6.54 5.11 28.02 4.29 52.50** 118 4.23 5.11 -17.14 4.29 -1.31 144 5.03 5.11 -1.66 4.29 17.13 119 5.00 5.11 -2.20 4.29 16.49 145 5.22 5.11 2.19 4.29 21.72 120 4.02 5.11 -21.35 4.29 -6.31 146 5.04 5.11 -1.45 4.29 17.39 121 4.20 5.11 -17.75 4.29 -2.03 147 5.32 5.11 4.13 4.29 24.03 122 5.68 5.11 11.14 4.29 32.38 148 6.10 5.11 19.40 4.29 42.22** 123 4.57 5.11 -10.50 4.29 6.60 149 5.34 5.11 4.54 4.29 24.52 124 4.94 5.11 -3.32 4.29 15.16 150 5.69 5.11 11.40 4.29 32.69 125 5.21 5.11 1.90 4.29 21.38 151 6.22 5.11 21.77 4.29 45.04** SE ± 1.04 * Significant at P = 0.05 **Significant at P = 0.01 Table 14. Performance of hybrids and per cent heterosis over best commercial check with respect to lint index in cotton [G .hirsutum L.]
  • 27. Mean sum of squares Source of Variation df Days to 50% flowering Plant height (cm) Bolls per plant Mean boll weight (g) Kapas yield (g/plant) Ginning per cent Seed index (g) Lint index Monopodia Sympodia Per plant Per plant Replication 1 33.84** 148.00** 0.72 0.22 29.04** 0.22 7.96** 0.008 1.76 0.57 Cross 47 5.47** 311.77** 0.16 17.15** 61.15** 0.23 762.36** 18.69** 1.2 1.60** Lines(c) 5 6.71** 878.26** 0.23 81.10** 252.09** 0.78 1348.67** 50.28** 5.97** 7.22** Testers(c) 7 14.02** 377.85** 0.14 13.94** 47.30** 0.36 739.63** 44.19** 1.64 2.89** L × T ( c) 35 3.59** 217.63** 0.15 8.66** 36.64** 0.12 683.14** 9.08** 0.43 0.54 Error 47 5.14 192 0.1 10.23 11.89 0.14 150.65 11.99 1.07 1.15 Total 95 - - - - - - - - - - * Significant at P = 0.05 **Significant at P = 0.01 Table 15. Combining ability analysis of variance as per Kempthorne (1957) in respect of kapas yield and its attributing characters of cotton hybrids [G .hirsutum L.]
  • 28. Character Variance due to GCA Variance due to SCA GCA:SCA ratio VA VD 1. Days to 50% flowering 0.04 1.27 1:31.75 0.09 0.77 2. Plant height (cm) 2.24 139.12 1:62.10 4.49 12.81 3 Monopodia per plant 0.0002 0.03 1:150.00 0.0004 0.02 4. Sympodia per plant 0.20 11.22 1:56.10 0.40 0.78 5. Bolls per plant 0.58 47.33 1:81.60 1.17 12.37 6. Mean boll weight (g) 0.0026 0.12 1:46.15 0.005 0.01 7. Kapas yield (g /plant) 1.89 377.75 1:199.86 3.78 266.24 8. Ginning per cent (%) 0.22 10.19 1:46.31 0.45 1.45 9. Seed index (g) 0.01 0.72 1:72 0.03 0.31 10. Lint index 0.02 1.08 1:54 0.05 0.30 Table 16. Variance due to general and specific combining ability for kapas yield and its attributing characters of cotton hybrids [G .hirsutum L.
  • 29. LINES Days to 50% flowering Plant height (cm) Monopodia per plant Sympodia per plant Bolls per plant Mean boll weight(g) Kapas yield (g / plant) Ginning Per cent Seed index Lint index 1 -0.59 -9.56 ** 0.11 -4.46 ** 0.10 0.00 -0.76 -0.67 -0.38 -0.37 2 -0.41 4.24 0.07 1.00 2.00 * -0.21 * -2.02 -2.20 * -0.41 -0.72 ** 3 -0.34 5.65 -0.08 1.22 3.57 ** -0.07 5.43 -1.61 -0.28 -0.54 4 1.09 8.59 * 0.12 1.68 * 3.49 ** 0.06 14.00 ** 2.19 * -0.31 0.32 5 -0.22 -1.35 -0.03 0.20 -6.56 ** 0.40 ** -3.20 1.61 1.16 ** 1.07 ** 6 0.47 -7.58 * -0.18 * 0.36 -2.60 ** -0.19 -13.45 ** 0.68 0.22 0.25 S.Em.± 0.5669 3.46 0.08 0.79 0.86 0.09 3.06 0.86 0.25 0.26 CD ( ĝ i – ĝ j) at 5% 1.61 9.84 0.23 2.27 2.45 0.27 8.72 2.46 0.73 0.76 CD ( ĝ i – ĝ j ) at 1% 2.14 13.12 0.31 3.03 3.26 0.36 11.62 3.28 0.98 1.01 TESTERS 1 1.14 -0.82 -0.00 0.24 -0.53 -0.16 -7.27 * -1.80 -0.42 -0.61 2 1.30 3.46 -0.05 0.14 -2.30 * 0.11 8.64 * -1.70 0.17 -0.29 3 -0.86 3.23 -0.18 0.22 1.25 -0.02 1.96 -2.42 * -0.08 -0.62 4 -0.78 5.73 -0.03 1.94 * -1.33 -0.29 * -14.18 ** 0.24 -0.42 -0.21 5 -0.53 4.28 0.19 * 0.15 -2.17 * 0.30 ** -3.24 2.64 * 0.00 0.59 6 -0.45 -0.24 -0.05 -1.08 0.23 0.06 1.85 -0.53 0.75 * 0.32 7 -1.20 -4.37 0.00 0.14 3.47 ** -0.04 3.86 1.62 -0.08 0.33 8 1.39 * -11.27 ** 0.11 -1.75 1.38 0.04 8.38 * 1.95 0.08 0.49 S.Em.± 0.65 4.0001 0.09 0.92 0.99 0.11 3.54 0.99 0.29 0.30 CD ( ĝ i – ĝ j ) at 5% 1.86 11.37 0.26 2.62 2.82 0.31 10.07 2.84 0.85 0.88 CD (ĝ i – ĝ j ) at 1% 2.48 15.16 0.35 3.50 3.77 0.41 13.42 3.78 1.13 1.17 Table 17. General combining ability effects of parents (lines and testers) in respect of kapas yield and its attributing characters of cotton[G .hirsutum L.] *Significant at P = 0.05 ** Significant at P = 0.01
  • 30. Crosses Days to 50% flowering Plant height (cm) Monopodia per plant Sympodia per plant Bolls per plant Mean boll weight(g) Kapas yield ( g /plant) Ginning per cent Seed index ( g) Lint index 101 (L1 T 1) 0.93 -3.59 0.19 -1.07 0.33 -0.04 2.20 -1.55 0.17 -0.21 102 (L1 T2) 0.76 1.42 0.14 -3.97 -5.30 * 0.12 -19.59 * -0.40 0.58 0.18 103 (L1 T3) -0.07 2.66 0.07 1.04 -1.65 -0.17 -7.27 0.01 -0.17 -0.06 104 (L1 T 4) -1.16 5.36 -0.18 2.82 -4.57 -0.22 -12.70 -0.99 -0.08 -0.23 105 (L1 T5) 1.09 0.41 -0.12 1.21 -2.63 0.02 -7.33 -3.42 0.25 -0.67 106 (L1 T6) 0.51 -9.77 -0.26 -0.96 9.07 ** -0.05 30.53 ** 0.56 0.00 0.06 107 (L1 T7) -1.24 13.36 0.39 1.83 3.93 0.29 7.24 -0.10 0.33 0.14 108 (L1 T8) -0.82 -9.84 -0.22 -0.89 0.82 0.06 6.93 5.88 * -1.08 0.80 110 (L2 T1) -1.76 -12.69 0.29 -1.93 0.03 -0.07 1.17 0.18 -0.30 -0.09 111 (L2 T2) 1.07 1.13 -0.02 -0.58 -1.90 -0.04 -14.18 -3.00 -0.39 -0.68 112 (L2 T 3) -1.26 7.36 0.11 -1.01 4.35 0.17 19.69 * 0.33 0.36 0.30 113 (L2 T4) 2.16 7.46 0.36 0.77 -5.77 * 0.05 -8.45 1.16 0.45 0.49 114 (L2 T 5) -2.09 -4.79 -0.26 0.15 -1.13 -0.19 -1.54 0.90 0.03 0.15 115 (L2 T 6) 0.32 0.02 0.38 0.49 2.47 0.23 17.27 0.45 0.03 0.01 116 (L2 T 7) 1.57 -0.14 -0.37 0.77 0.23 -0.25 -7.73 -1.78 -0.39 -0.63 117 (L2 T8) -0.01 1.66 -0.48 * 1.35 1.72 0.10 -6.23 1.76 0.20 0.45 118 (L3 T1) 1.68 14.50 -0.11 2.35 -3.04 -0.07 -0.65 -0.47 0.32 0.10 119 (L3 T2) 0.51 -6.39 0.13 -1.75 2.43 -0.14 -8.28 3.52 -0.26 0.63 120 (L3 T3) 1.68 4.35 -0.23 1.17 -2.23 -0.01 -3.21 0.89 -0.76 -0.14 121 (L3 T4) -0.41 -2.85 -0.18 -0.15 7.26 ** 0.21 16.70 -1.46 -0.18 -0.36 122 (L3 T5) -1.16 6.00 -0.01 -0.07 -2.31 -0.06 -2.20 1.85 -0.09 0.35 123 (L3 T6) -2.24 13.51 0.03 2.47 3.49 0.01 11.89 -2.35 0.16 -0.53 Table 18 . Specific combining ability effects of hybrids in respect of kapas yield and their attributing characters in cotton [G .hirsutum L.]
  • 31. 124 (L3 T7) -0.99 -5.85 0.18 1.05 -0.74 0.10 7.92 0.59 -0.26 -0.03 125 (L3 T8) 0.93 -23.25 * 0.18 -5.07 * -4.86 -0.03 -22.17 * -2.56 1.07 -0.01 127 (L4 T1) -0.76 -12.74 -0.51 * -1.21 -5.65 * -0.26 -23.65 ** -0.60 -0.15 -0.32 128 (L4 T2) -0.93 -13.43 -0.07 1.49 -1.69 0.21 -16.15 0.64 -0.23 0.00 129 (L4 T3) -0.76 -4.99 0.17 0.30 2.56 -0.15 7.31 0.82 -0.48 -0.15 130 (L4 T4) 1.16 -0.49 0.02 -0.81 4.75 0.01 9.66 2.06 0.35 0.67 131 (L4 T 5) 1.41 -4.74 -0.31 -2.73 0.78 0.10 6.21 1.51 0.19 0.54 132 (L4 T6) 0.32 15.37 0.13 -0.80 -4.62 0.30 -10.26 -2.15 0.19 -0.44 133 (L4T7) 0.07 10.41 0.18 1.59 3.05 -0.02 15.05 1.63 0.52 0.73 134 (L4 T8) -0.51 10.61 0.38 2.17 0.83 -0.19 11.81 -3.91 -0.40 -1.04 135 (L5 T1) 1.05 9.20 0.24 1.06 2.30 0.38 3.20 0.74 0.14 0.15 136 (L5T2) 0.89 11.31 -0.12 1.06 1.16 0.04 62.53 ** 0.14 -0.20 -0.15 137 (L5 T3) 0.55 -1.15 0.22 0.38 -0.59 0.41 -4.23 -1.11 0.30 -0.16 138 (L5 T4) -2.53 0.75 -0.13 -0.54 -2.80 -0.25 -17.68 * -0.47 -0.61 -0.54 139 (L5T 5) 0.22 -3.00 0.34 0.65 2.03 0.08 -7.30 -0.74 -0.28 -0.30 140 (L5T6) -0.36 -10.89 -0.32 0.38 -4.27 -0.16 -27.71 ** 4.13 0.22 1.45 141 (L5 T7) -0.11 -16.35 -0.27 -3.44 -2.20 0.08 -9.55 -1.09 0.30 -0.10 142 (L5 T8) 0.30 10.15 0.03 0.45 4.38 -0.56 * 0.74 -1.60 0.14 -0.35 144 (L6 T1) -1.14 5.33 -0.11 0.81 6.03 * 0.07 17.73 * 1.70 -0.18 0.36 145 (L6 T2) -2.30 5.95 -0.07 3.76 5.30 * -0.18 -4.33 -0.90 0.49 0.02 146 (L6 T3) -0.14 -8.22 -0.33 -1.88 -2.45 -0.25 -12.29 -0.94 0.74 0.22 147 (L6 T4) 0.78 -10.22 0.12 -2.09 1.13 0.21 12.48 -0.30 0.07 -0.04 148 (L6 T5) 0.53 6.13 0.34 0.79 3.27 0.05 12.16 -0.10 -0.09 -0.06 149 (L6 T6) 1.45 -8.25 0.03 -1.58 -6.13 * -0.32 -21.73 * -0.64 -0.59 -0.56 150 (L6 T7) 0.70 -1.42 -0.12 -1.79 -4.27 -0.20 -12.93 0.74 -0.51 -0.12 151 (L6 T 8) 0.11 10.68 0.13 1.99 -2.88 0.63 * 8.92 0.43 0.07 0.17 S.Em.± 1.603 9.798 0.232 2.262 2.438 0.270 8.6790 2.4489 0.732 0.7588 CD at 5% (sij-skl) 4.55 27.85 0.66 6.43 6.93 0.76 24.67 6.96 2.08 2.15 CD at 1% (sij-skl) 6.07 37.13 0.88 8.57 9.24 1.02 32.89 9.28 2.77 2.87 *Significant at P = 0.05 ** Significant at P = 0.01 Continued
  • 32. Lines Across traits Overall Status 1 47 H 2 48 H 3 35 L 4 17 L 5 37 L 6 47 H Final Mean = 38.5 Testers Across traits Overall Status 1 60 H 2 46 L 3 58.5 H 4 59.5 H 5 34 L 6 51.5 H 7 46.5 L 8 40 L Final Mean=49.5 Table 19. Overall general combining ability status of parents in Cotton hybrids H= High gca status L = Low gca status
  • 33. Lines Testers 1 (H) 2 (H) 3 (L) Total Score Overall Status Total Score Overall Status Total Score Overall Status 1 (H) 277 H 328.5 H 222 L 2 (L) 278.5 H 366 H 253.5 L 3 (H) 303.5 H 177 L 273 H 4 (H) 363 H 171 L 278.5 H 5 (L) 305.5 H 310 H 257 L 6 (H) 233 L 184.5 L 251 L 7 (L) 153.5 L 349.5 H 247.5 L 8 (L) 261 L 226.5 L 343 H Lines Testers 4 (L) 5 (L) 6 (H) Total Score Overall Status Total Score Overall Status Total Score Overall Status 1 (H) 451.5 H 130 L 194 L 2 (L) 305 H 210.5 L 228.5 L 3 (H) 290 H 244.5 L 332.5 H 4 (H) 161.5 L 411 H 238 L 5 (L) 231 L 292.5 H 182.5 L 6 (H) 261.5 L 328 H 413.5 H 7 (L) 115.5 L 365.5 H 373.5 H 8 (L) 292.5 H 258 L 201 L Final Mean =269.281 Table 20. Overall specific combining ability status of Cotton hybrids (H) = High gca status H = High sca status (L) = Low gca status L = Low sca status
  • 34. Characters Contribution of Lines Testers Line x Tester Interaction 1. Days to 50% flowering 13.05 38.13 48.82 2. Plant height (cm) 29.97 18.05 51.98 3. Monopodia per plant 15.65 13.88 70.47 4. Sympodia per plant 50.28 12.10 37.62 5. Bolls per plant 43.85 11.52 44.62 6. Mean boll weight (g) 36.36 23.88 39.76 7. Kapas yield (g/plant) 18.82 14.45 66.73 8. Ginning per cent 28.61 35.20 36.19 9. Seed index (g) 52.64 20.26 27.09 10. Lint index 47.88 26.86 25.26 Table 21. Proportional contribution of lines, testers and their interactions to the total variance in Cotton (G. hirsutum L.)
  • 35. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Lines Testers Line x Tester Interaction Characters Contribution percent Figure2. Proportional contribution of lines, testers and their interactions to the variance in hybrids of Cotton (G. hirsutum L.) 1. Days to 50 % flowering 6. Mean boll weight 2. Plnt height ( cm) 7.Kapas yield per plant (g / plant) 3. Monopodia per plant 8. Ginning per cent 4. Sympodia per plant 9. Seed index (g) 5. Bolls per plant 10. Lint index
  • 36. characters X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 X7 X8 X9 X10 X1 0.312* 0.621** -0.255 -0.498** 0.195 -0.808** 0.214 -0.254 0.359** X2 1.000 0.389** 0.887** 0.342* -0.071 -0.322* -0.658** -0.474** 0.443** X3 1.000 -0.082 -0.041 0.540** 0.011 0.246 -0.063 0.254 X4 1.000 0.125 -0.529** -0.231 -0.401** -0.201 0.005 X5 1.000 -0.305* -0.142 -0.081 -0.644** 0.590** X6 1.000 0.454** 0.126 0.261 0.422** X7 1.000 0.387** 0.073 0.379** X8 1.000 0.647** -0.352* X9 1.000 -0.115 Table 22.Genotypic correlation coefficients among kapas yield and its attributing characters in cotton hybrids (G. hirsutum L.) * Significant at P = 0.05 ** Significant at P = 0.01 x1. Days to 50 % flowering x6. Mean boll weight ( g ) x2. Plnt height ( cm) x7. Ginning per cent x3. Monopodia per plant x8. Seed index ( g) x4. Sympodia per plant x9. Lint index x5. Bolls per plant x10. Kapas yield ( g/plant)
  • 37. Characters X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 X7 X8 X9 X10 X1 -0.049 0.013 -0.051 -0.076 -0.021 0.194 0.066 0.227 0.019 X2 1.000 0.140 0.649** 0.130 0.098 -0.156 -0.002 -0.112 0.224 X3 1.000 -0.086 0.164 0.281* 0.120 -0.033 0.063 0.228 X4 1.000 0.127 0.018 -0.034 -0.056 -0.001 0.104 X5 1.000 -0.167 0.042 -0.335* -0.205 0.624** X6 1.000 0.313* 0.529** 0.492** 0.327* X7 1.000 0.107 0.731** 0.132 X8 1.000 0.623** -0.028 X9 1.000 0.006 Table 24. Phenotypic correlation coefficients among kapas yield and its attributing characters in cotton hybrids (G. hirsutum L.) Significant at P = 0.05 ** Significant at P = 0.01 x1. Days to 50 % flowering x6. Mean boll weight ( g ) x2. Plnt height ( cm) x7. Ginning per cent x3. Monopodia per plant x8. Seed index ( g) x4. Sympodia per plant x9. Lint index x5. Bolls per plant x10. Kapas yield ( g/plant)
  • 38. Characters X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 X7 X8 X9 ‘r ‘ with kapas yield x1 -0.176 -0.140 0.384 -0.054 0.084 0.062 0.625 -0.199 -0.227 0.358** x2 -0.054 -0.451 0.240 0.189 -0.058 -0.022 0.071 0.614 -0.086 0.442** x3 -0.109 -0.175 0.619 -0.017 0.006 0.173 -0.002 -0.229 -0.011 0.253 x4 0.045 -0.400 -0.050 0.213 -0.021 -0.170 0.051 0.374 -0.036 0.004 x5 0.087 -0.154 -0.025 0.026 -0.169 -0.098 0.031 1.008 -0.116 0.590** x6 -0.034 0.031 0.334 -0.112 0.051 0.321 -0.101 -0.117 0.047 0.421** x7 0.495 0.145 0.006 -0.049 0.024 0.145 -0.222 -0.361 0.194 0.379** x8 -0.037 0.297 0.152 -0.085 0.183 0.040 -0.086 -0.933 0.117 -0.351* x9 0.221 0.213 -0.039 -0.042 0.109 0.083 -0.239 -0.603 0.181 -0.114 Residual Effect = 0.919892 * Significant at P = 0.05 ** Significant at P = 0.01 x1. Days to 50 % flowering x6. Mean boll weight ( g ) x2. Plnt height ( cm) x7. Ginning per cent x3. Monopodia per plant x8. Seed index ( g) x4. Sympodia per plant x9. Lint index x5. Bolls per plant Table 25. Path analysis indicating direct and indirect effects of component characters on kapas yield in cotton hybrids (G. hirsutum L.)
  • 39. Sl. No. Characters High heterosis High sca effect 1 Days to 50 % flowering 138 138 2 Plant height 132 132 3 Monopodia per plant 134 134 4 Sympodia per plant 145 145 5 Bolls per plant 133 106 6 Mean boll weight 137 137 7 Ginning per cent 131 108 8 Seed index 140 146 9 Lint index 140 140 Table 26 High kapas yield hybrids and their important contributing characters in cotton
  • 40. Sl. No. Hybrid Contributing Characters 1 133 kapas yield per plant, sympodia per plant, bolls per plant, ginning per cent 2 134 kapas yield per plant, monopodia per plant Table 27. Dual purpose cotton hybrids identified from the study and their characters
  • 41.
  • 42. Best mean performing hybrid - 136 for kapas yield and general view
  • 43. Best performing hybrid - 133 for bolls per plant
  • 44. General view of hybrid - 133
  • 45. Best performing hybrid - 137 for mean boll weight
  • 46.
  • 47.
  • 48.
  • 49. Future line of work  1- The performance of two top hybrids viz., 133, 134 in respect of kapas yield needs to be verified performance on large scale basis.  2- The results implies that one line and four testers studied were high combiners across all the traits, indicating their ability in transmitting additive genes in the desirable direction to their progenies. Further, these lines and testers can be tested for the confirmation of their superiority as good parents for hybridization