Heterosis analysis among genetically variable parents and its effect

1. AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATION CENTRE
www.arccjournals.com/www.ijarjournal.com
*Corresponding author’s e-mail: mbgbhu@gmail.com
1
Department of Horticulture, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi.
2
Department of Plant Pathology College of Agriculture, Indore, R.V.S.K.V.V, Gwalior.
Indian J. Agric. Res., 50 (5) 2016 : 466-470
Print ISSN:0367-8245 / Online ISSN:0976-058X
Heterosis in bottle gourd [Lagenaria siceraria (Mol.) Standl.]
Mahesh B. Ghuge*, M. M. Syamal1
and Shraddha Karcho2
Department of Horticulture,
Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi-221 002, India.
Received: 28-02-2016 Accepted: 12-08-2016 DOI:10.18805/ijare.v0iOF.3756
ABSTRACT
Studies were carried out to estimate heterosis for yield and yield traits in bottle gourd. Heterosis for fruit yield per vine
ranged from -35.2 to 23.9 per cent over mid parent and -17.6 to 68.5 per cent over standard check Samrat. For number of
fruits per plant and average fruit weight was ranged from -28.2 to17.9 per cent and -22.1 to 22.4 per cent over mid parent
and -17.6 to 53.3 per cent and -11.7 to 44.6 per cent over standard check Samrat, respectively. Regarding fruit length the
heterosis ranged from -15.1 to 19.9 over mid parent while standard heterosis ranged from -7.05 to 48.9. Heterosis for days
to first fruit harvest ranged from -0.53 to -12.4 and -0.55 to -14.7 over mid parent and standard check respectively. It was
important to note that six F1
hybrids viz., Samrat XAditi followed byAditi X TC 092372, IC 093236 X TC 092372, Samrat
X TC 092372, Samrat X IC 093236 andAditi X PSPLproduced significantlyhigher yield than the standard check Samrat.
Key words: Fruit diameter, Fruit length, Heterosis, PSPL, Samrat, Yield per vine.
INTRODUCTION
Bottle gourd [Lagenaria siceraria (Mol.) Standl.]
is synonymouslycalled as Calabash gourd. It is an important
annual cucurbitaceous crop grown through out country. The
tender edible fruit are also prepared into sweets, pickles,
rayata and other delicious preparation. It is one of the most
nutritive menu for human and tone up his energy and vigour,
because it happens to be valuable source of carbohydrates,
proteins, vitamins and minerals.
Inspite of the potential economic and medicinal
importance of the crop, due attention was not given towards
a need based crop improvement programme. However,
recently the cultivation of bottle gourd has become
increasingly popular, because of the growing awareness of
the anti-diabetic property and nutritive value of the crop
among the consumers. Due to the efforts of the many
vegetable breeders marked improvement in yield has been
achieved and a good number of new varieties and hybrids
have been developed.
The commercial exploitation of hybrid vigour
depends on the ease with which the technique employed for
hybrid seed production and reasonably the low cost of seed
production. Bottle gourd being monoecious in sex expression
can be profitably utilized for the production of hybrid seeds
at cheaper rate. High number of hybrid seeds per cross makes
it more economical. Further, the crop being cultivated at
wider spacing, the seed requirement per hectare for
commercial cultivation would be low and cost effective.
Therefore, bottle gourd offers greater scope for exploitation
of hybrid vigour on commercial scale to increase the
productivityand production.
Therefore, for development of effective heterosis
breeding programme in bottle gourd one need to elucidate
the genetic nature and magnitude of quantitative traits and
estimated prepotency of parents in hybrid combinations.
MATERIALSAND METHODS
The experimental material for the present study
consisted of eight distinct genotypes and important varieties
collected from Indian Institute ofVegetable Research. These
were Samrat (P1
+ Stranded variety), Aditi (P2
), Pusa Summer
Prolific Long (P3
), IC 093236 (P4
), TC 092372 (P5
), VRBG
100 (P6
), VRBG VAR - 45 (P7
) and VRBG 444 (P8
). The
experiment was conducted in randomized complete block
design with three replications to assess the performance of
28 hybrids and their 8 parental lines conducted at Vegetable
Research Farm, Department ofHorticulture, Banaras Hindu
University, Varanasi during the summer season of 2013 and
2014. The crop was planted in rows spaced at 3.0 meters
with plant to plant spacing of 0.5 meter apart. All the
recommended agronomic package of practices and plant
protection measures were followed to raise a good crop.
The data were recorded on sixteen quantitative
characters viz., days to first staminate flower anthesis, days
to first pistilate flower anthesis, days to first fruit harvest,
fruit length, fruit diameter, rind thickness, flesh thickness,
fruit circumference, average fruit weight, fruits per plant,
fruit yield per vine, vine length, primary branches per plant,

2. Volume 50 Issue 5 (2016) 467
node number of first staminate flower and node number of
first pistilate flower.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The magnitude of heterosis was calculated as per
cent increase or decrease of F1
values over the mid parent
(MP) and standard check Samrat which as used as parental
line in the investigation. The estimates of heterosis of F1
hybrids are presented in Table 1. The negative estimates of
heterosis were considered desirable for all maturity traits
viz. days to first staminate flower anthesis, days to first
pistilate flower anthesis and days to first fruit harvest, rind
thickness, primary branches per plant, node number of first
staminate flower and node number of first pistilate flower.
However, for rest of the characters positive estimates of
heterosis was considered favourable.
Among 28 F1
’s, eleven hybrids showed significant
heterosis in favourable direction over standard check for days
to anthesis of first staminate flower. The F1
, TC 092372 X
VRBG 444 (-12.6%) showed highlysignificant heterosis in
desirable direction for days to anthesis of first staminate
flower over mid parent. Hybrid TC 092372 X VRBG VAR-
45 and TC 092372 X VRBG 444 showed highly significant
heterosis (-13.5%) in desirable direction over standard check.
The F1
, TC 092372 X VRBG VAR-45 showed maximum
heterosis (-11.3%) which was highly significant over mid
parent while PSPL X VRBG 100 showed maximum
significant heterosis (-12.8%) over standard check in
desirable direction for days to pistilate flower anthesis. In
case of days to first fruit harvest, maximum significant
heterosis (-14.7%) was recorded in F1
,PSPLX VRBG VAR-
45 over standard check. Highly significant heterosis
percentage for fruit length (48.9%) was expressed by IC
093236 X TC 092372 followed by Samrat X IC 093236
(23.9%) over standard variety Samrat.
In case of fruit diameter, IC 093236 XVRBG VAR-
45 exhibited highly significant heterosis (25.6%) over
standard check. F1
Samrat X IC 093236 (-56.0%) showed
highly significant heterosis over standard variety for rind
thickness in desirable direction while IC 093236 X TC
092372 showed minimum heterosis (-4.31%) over standard
check in favourable direction. Highly significant heterosis
percentage for flesh thickness (26.0%) was expressed byIC
093236 X VRBG VAR-45 followed by VRBG VAR-45 X
VRBG 444 (24.2%) over standard varietySamrat. Maximum
significant heterosis for fruit circumference in favourable
direction (25.5%) was recorded in F1
IC 093236 X VRBG
VAR-45, whereas minimum heterosis (2.89%) was observed
in hybrid Samrat X PSPL over standard variety.
IC 093236 X VRBG 444 showed highlysignificant
heterosis (44.6) over standard varietyin desirable direction
for average fruit weight. The F1
Aditi X PSPL showed
maximum heterosis for fruits per vine (17.9%), which was
highlysignificant over midparent while minimum favourable
heterosis (2.33%) expressed by F1
IC 093236 X TC 092372
over mid parent. Aditi X PSPL (53.3%) showed highly
significant heterosis for number of fruits per vine. Highly
significant heterosis for fruit yield per vine in desirable
direction (68.5%) was recorded in F1
, Aditi X PSPL over
standard check.
In case of vine length, highly significant heterosis
for vine length (35.7%) was expressed by PSPL X VRBG
100 followed by Samrat XVRBG 100 (23.5%) over standard
check Samrat in desirable direction. Highly significant
heterosis percentage for primarybranches per plant (53.6%)
was expressed by TC 092372 X VRBG 444 followed by
PSPL X IC 093236 (37.9%) over standard variety Samrat.
Hybrid Aditi X VRBG VAR-45 possess highly significant
heterosis (-24.1) followed by PSPL X IC 093236 (-17.3) in
desirable direction over standard check for node number of
first staminate flower. Maximum significant heterosis (-
18.5%) was recorded in F1
,Aditi X VRBG VAR-45 whereas
minimum heterosis (-0.97%) was observed in hybrid Samrat
X VRBG 444 over standard check in favourable direction
for node number of first pistilate flower.
Number of fruit per vine is one of the most
important components of fruit yield in respect of which
hybrids with positive heterosis are desirable. The findings
of the present study revealed that the twenty four crosses
expressed significant heterosis in desirable direction over
standard check (Sharma et al., 2009). The highest heterosis
for number of fruit per plant was recorded bythe crossAditi
X PSPL followed by Aditi X VRBG 100 and Samrat X
VRBG 444 over standard variety Samrat. In general, the
hybrids with significant heterosis for yield also expressed
significant heterosis either for fruit weight or for fruits per
vine (Yadav and Kumar, 2012).
Fruit yield per plant being a complex trait and is a
multiplicative product of several basic component traits
(Singh et al., 2005). The improvement in heterosis for yield
component may not necessarily be reflected in increased
yield. Contrarily the increased fruit yield will definitely
because of increase in one or more components traits (Pandit
et al., 2009). In the present studythe top performing hybrids
for yield also showed significant heterosis for average fruit
weight along with some other yield component traits.
Likewise, crosses showing heterosis for other yield
component did not necessarilyshow heterosis for fruit yield.
This showed that heterosis depends upon nicking for genes
(Singh, 2008).
The above finding indicated that some inbreds has
strong heterotic capability compared to other ones during
hybridization process. This might be due to diverse parents
and favourable cross combination. As the performance of
hybrids developed upon the heterotic capabilityof the parents
involved, from economic point of view it will be useful to
select and utilize the parental inbreds with strong heterotic

3. 468 INDIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH
Table
1:
Estimates
of
heterosis
(%)
over
mid
parent
(MP)
and
standard
variety
(SV)
for
sixteen
characters
in
bottle
gourd
Crosses
Days
to
first
Days
to
first
Days
to
first
Primary
Branches
Node
Number
of
Node
Number
staminate
pistillate
Fruit
harvest
Per
Plant
first
Staminate
of
first
Pistilate
flower
anthesis
flower
anthesis
Flowers
Flower
M.P.
S.V.
M.P.
S.V.
M.P.
S.V.
M.P.
S.V.
M.P.
S.V.
M.P.
S.V.
Samrat
X
Aditi
-1.14*
-2.99**
-3.60**
-6.29**
-4.71**
-8.99**
24.3**
35.1**
-0.19**
-2.55**
-1.43**
-5.94**
Samrat
X
PSPL
20.3**
19.4**
17.6**
14.7**
8.88
6.74*
3.61*
16.7*
10.8*
0.60**
3.85
-3.70**
Samrat
X
IC
093236
8.01
1.31
6.00*
1.27
4.74*
3.87
9.00*
12.7*
10.9*
8.36*
6.07
3.41
Samrat
X
TC
092372
-1.38*
-8.33**
-1.33*
-5.73*
-3.33*
-4.40*
16.6*
22.4**
2.57*
1.65**
4.42
2.48*
Samrat
X
VRBG
100
0.34
-7.55**
-1.63*
-7.93*
-3.28*
-5.85*
-12
18.1*
4.56*
-5.59*
-0.14*
-9.55*
Samrat
X
VRBG
VAR-45
4.56**
-1.32*
2.36
-1.30*
-1.63*
-4.74*
-28.3**
-7.87
10.3*
-1.44*
16.5
7.29
Samrat
X
VRBG
444
1.74
-4.58*
1.34
-2.58*
0
-0.56*
-26.0*
6.32*
3.27*
-10.0*
10.9*
-0.97*
Aditi
X
PSPL
5.75
4.55
4.80*
4.41
-1.50*
-4.09**
-0.38
23.0**
16.9**
3.87*
11.1*
-1.32**
Aditi
X
IC
093236
9.93*
1.31*
9.59*
1.91
5.54**
0
-2.73*
9.50*
21.9**
16.38**
24.3*
21.6
Aditi
X
TC
092372
-4.56*
-12.8**
-2.05**
-8.92*
1.74
-3.85*
17.6*
34.7**
13.3*
9.68
21.8
18.3
Aditi
X
VRBG
100
-0.69*
-10.1*
-2.34*
-11.0**
-1.14*
-7.98*
-14.9
26.6*
17.1*
3.53**
11.9
-2.76*
Aditi
X
VRBG
VAR-45
0.71*
-6.62**
-0.35*
-6.49*
-1.70*
-8.95**
-15.1
20.7*
-13.3*
-24.1**
-7.59*
-18.5**
Aditi
X
VRBG
444
2.84
-5.23*
2.07*
-4.52*
2.34
-2.78*
-16.9
32.7*
7.30*
-8.40*
3.35
-11.4**
PSPL
X
IC
093236
5.96*
-1.31*
6.48
-0.64*
2.27
-0.55*
26.8**
37.9**
-10.8*
-17.3**
-4.38*
-13.4**
PSPL
X
TC
092372
-1.39*
-8.97*
-1.02*
-7.64*
-3.12*
-6.04**
18.7**
27.0**
-3.09*
-11.3*
7.98
-1.59*
PSPL
X
VRBG
100
-4.47*
-12.6**
-4.67**
-12.8**
-5.29*
-9.57*
2.40*
20.0**
2.66*
2.06
-3.09**
-5.53*
PSPL
X
VRBG
VAR-45
-4.59*
-10.6**
-3.45**
-9.09**
-10.2**
-14.7**
16.7**
31.5**
-2.34**
-4.02*
-2.89*
-3.65*
PSPL
X
VRBG
444
1.05
-5.88*
1.03
-5.16*
-1.99*
-4.44**
9.78*
36.9**
-5.82*
-10.0*
1.9
-2.19**
IC
093236
X
TC
092372
-4.21*
-5.13*
-3.18*
-3.18*
0.28
0
30.5**
32.4**
19.1**
17.4**
30.1**
29.3*
IC
093236
X
VRBG
100
-7.69**
-9.43*
-7.79*
-9.76*
-9.49**
-11.2**
-9.58
16.6**
4.31
-3.82**
11.2
-1.51*
IC
093236
X
VRBG
VAR-45
-1.97*
-2.61**
-1.61*
-2.55**
-6.20*
-8.42**
-25.5*
-7.87
7.72
-1.72*
13.8
2.34
IC
093236
X
VRBG
444
2.61
2.61
3.21
2.55
5.26
4.97
-8.17
26.5**
10.4**
-1.90*
15.9*
1.22
TC
092372
X
VRBG
100
-11.1**
-11.9**
-10.3**
-12.2**
-8.65**
-10.1**
1.73*
28.8**
8.24
-1.47*
9.73*
-2.26*
TC
092372
X
VRBG
VAR-45
-12.1**
-13.5**
-11.3**
-12.1*
-12.4**
-14.2**
4.68*
27.1**
8.77
-2.01*
17.4
6.25
TC
092372
X
VRBG
444
-12.6**
-13.5**
-10.9**
-11.5**
-9.94*
-10.4**
13.7**
53.6**
4.32
-8.40**
6.09
-6.81**
VRBG
100
X
VRBG
VAR-45
0
-2.52*
0
-3.05*
-0.53*
-1.05*
0.03*
3.62*
1.16*
0.00*
-3.84*
-5.53*
VRBG
100
X
VRBG
444
-3.85**
-5.66*
-2.82**
-5.49**
-2.17*
-4.26*
-15.4
-10.7
-2.40*
-6.23*
-5.81*
-7.30*
VRBG
VAR-45
X
VRBG
444
-2.63*
-3.27*
-1.62*
-1.94*
-3.24*
-5.79*
-0.76
8.76*
0.7
-2.17*
5.41*
1.95

4. Volume 50 Issue 5 (2016) 469
Table
1:
Cont.
Crosses
Fruit
Length
Fruit
Diameter
Rind
Thickness
Flesh
Thickness
Fruit
Circumference
M.P.
S.V.
M.P.
S.V.
M.P.
S.V.
M.P.
S.V.
M.P.
S.V.
Samrat
X
Aditi
11.5**
17.7**
1.81*
3.23**
-17.0**
-27.5**
2.41*
4.38**
1.80**
3.27**
Samrat
X
PSPL
2.41*
9.39*
-3.11
3.03*
-8.74*
-16.1**
-2.93
3.72*
-3.23
2.89*
Samrat
X
IC
093236
2.46*
23.9**
-9.25*
8.90**
-44.6**
-56.0**
-8.04
9.85**
-9.12*
8.91*
Samrat
X
TC
092372
8.04**
10.5*
-2.61*
-2.50
-0.64
-10.6**
-2.67*
-2.23*
-2.63
-2.45
Samrat
X
VRBG
100
-2.79
6.51*
-6.99
-0.39
8.44*
-8.15*
-7.54*
-0.05*
-6.96
-0.42
Samrat
X
VRBG
VAR-45
-6.44*
4.43*
-6.07*
2.07*
9.43
-4.40*
-6.60
2.35*
-6.13
2.01*
Samrat
X
VRBG
444
-15.1**
-7.05
1.21*
13.5**
-17.5**
-21.3*
1.80*
14.8**
1.29*
13.7**
Aditi
X
PSPL
15.5**
16.8**
0.58*
5.40*
-10.5**
-15.4*
0.98*
5.78**
0.59*
5.36*
Aditi
X
IC
093236
2.49*
16.7*
-13.8**
5.09*
-4.35*
-14.7*
-14.1**
4.95**
-13.8**
5.03*
Aditi
X
TC
092372
12.8**
21.9**
-7.26
-6.07
7.95
4.40
-7.80
-6.46
-7.20
-6.03
Aditi
X
VRBG
100
14.7**
18.9**
-10.3*
-5.30*
-33.3**
-35.7**
-9.33*
-3.94*
-10.3
-5.43
Aditi
X
VRBG
VAR-45
9.26*
15.3*
3.15*
10.4**
-9.88*
-9.88*
3.67*
11.3**
3.08*
10.3*
Aditi
X
VRBG
444
13.3**
17.3**
9.46**
20.9**
22.9*
12.1
8.96**
20.4**
9.49*
21.0**
PSPL
X
IC
093236
-0.63
11.7**
-9.15
17.1*
-6.60*
-20.7*
-9.13
17.2**
-9.03
17.1*
PSPL
X
TC
092372
-0.93*
8.40*
1.16*
7.43*
-12.0*
-14.1*
1.62*
8.06*
1.10*
7.29**
PSPL
X
VRBG
100
-0.12
2.30*
-5.29
-4.64
-27.4**
-33.7**
-4.39*
-3.34*
-5.33
-4.74
PSPL
X
VRBG
VAR-45
5.95*
10.4**
-5.29*
-3.33
-31.4**
-35.2**
-4.26
-1.97
-5.40*
-3.44
PSPL
X
VRBG
444
-5.03
-2.85
2.22*
7.54*
-5.14*
-8.65*
2.49*
7.87*
2.24*
7.60*
IC
093236
X
TC
092372
19.9**
48.9**
-13.6**
3.81*
10.4
-4.31*
-14.3**
2.90*
-13.4**
4.04*
IC
093236
X
VRBG
100
-1.81
7.56*
-24.6**
-1.97
-24.3**
-30.2**
-24.5**
-1.28*
-24.5**
-2.09
IC
093236
X
VRBG
VAR-45
13.1**
21.6**
-4.94*
25.6**
2.42*
-8.62*
-5.09
26.0**
-4.89
25.5**
IC
093236
X
VRBG
444
11.9**
22.8**
-13.3**
18.8**
-19.4*
-33.6**
-13.0*
19.4*
-13.2**
18.8*
TC
092372
X
VRBG
100
-4.59
7.14**
-6.39
0.13*
14.8*
7.15*
-7.21
-0.18
-6.39
0.00
TC
092372
X
VRBG
VAR-45
3.16*
18.1**
-10.7*
-3.06
-17.0*
-19.8*
-10.4*
-2.35*
-10.7
-3.15
TC
092372
X
VRBG
444
-10.5*
0.40*
-2.92
8.78**
10.0
3.53
-3.37
8.46*
-2.71*
8.97*
VRBG
100
X
VRBG
VAR-45
1.69*
3.45*
-5.44
-4.14
-11.1*
-14.3*
-5.19
-3.99
-5.51*
-4.15
VRBG
100
X
VRBG
444
14.8**
14.9*
-8.06*
-3.96
5.21*
-7.13*
-8.61
-4.90
-8.14
-3.95
VRBG
VAR-45
X
VRBG
444
-6.81
-5.09*
19.7**
23.3**
-10.9*
-18.7**
21.0**
24.2**
19.8**
23.4**

5. 470 INDIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH
Table 1: Cont.
Crosses Average Fruit Weight Fruits Per Plant Vine Length Fruit Yield Per Vine
M.P. S.V. M.P. S.V. M.P. S.V. M.P. S.V.
Samrat X Aditi 0.94* 2.72* 13.0** 18.2** 6.38** 9.21** 16.0** 17.3**
Samrat X PSPL 0.28* 7.53* -2.70* 20.0* -0.68 0.71* -1.41 32.1*
Samrat X IC 093236 1.66* 5.00* -4.55 -4.55 -5.19 -2.28 -1.28 1.73*
Samrat X TC 092372 -3.05 -2.40* 6.97** 9.52** 9.17* 11.7** 4.59* 7.20*
Samrat X VRBG 100 -13.7 0.70** -18.9* 0.00** 3.93* 23.5** -30.1* 3.31**
Samrat X VRBG VAR-45 7.46* 24.1** -17.9 -5.88** -4.76 2.82* -11.5 20.3**
Samrat X VRBG 444 -18.8 6.87** 5.56* 35.7** -12.0** -1.44 -19.7 40.9**
Aditi X PSPL 12.7* 18.7** 17.9** 53.3** -5.40* -1.49 23.9* 68.5**
Aditi X IC 093236 -4.92 0.00 -4.34 0.00* 2.79* 8.86* -5.59 -3.85
Aditi X TC 092372 0.27* 1.36* 11.1** 19.1** -4.03 -3.71 14.2** 18.4**
Aditi X VRBG 100 -3.37* 10.5* 7.69* 40.0* 0.10* 22.7** 6.77* 60.3**
Aditi X VRBG VAR-45 -22.1* -11.7** -17.1 0.00* -6.32 4.03* -35.2** -10.5*
Aditi X VRBG 444 3.33* 33.0* -10.5 21.4* -3.89 10.8** -8.63 63.0**
PSPL X IC 093236 -3.93 6.63* -2.70* 20.0* 3.54* 5.23* -7.73 28.4*
PSPL X TC 092372 -4.10 2.11* 5.56* 26.7** 0.60* 4.41* -0.47 29.4*
PSPL X VRBG 100 7.94* 16.8** 6.67* 6.67* 16.0** 35.7** 12.5* 21.8**
PSPL X VRBG VAR-45 1.29* 8.62** -12.5 -6.67** -1.96 4.30* -8.15 -7.07
PSPL X VRBG 444 -3.36 17.2** -17.2* -14.3** 1.50* 11.9** -19.0 1.09*
IC 093236 X TC 092372 0.51* 4.53* 2.33* 4.77* -2.97 2.40* 2.67** 8.52**
IC 093236 X VRBG 100 -16.5 1.05** 8.10* 33.3** -8.09 5.59* -11.4 36.3**
IC 093236 X VRBG VAR-45 3.88* 24.5** -28.2* -17.6** -11.1** -6.98 -25.8* 4.84**
IC 093236 X VRBG 444 5.64* 44.6** -11.1* 14.3** -3.81* 4.24* -12.9* 59.5*
TC 092372 X VRBG 100 -4.24 10.9* -16.7 0.00** -10.0* 9.82* -27.5* 3.88*
TC 092372 X VRBG VAR-45 -8.57 4.83* -10.5* -0.01* -3.13 7.19* -14.8* 12.4**
TC 092372 X VRBG 444 2.30* 33.5* -14.3 7.14** -1.91 12.6* -16.1 42.2**
VRBG 100 X VRBG VAR-45 -11.0 -10.2 -12.5* -6.67** -4.52 4.47* -22.9 -17.6
VRBG 100 X VRBG 444 22.4** 36.1* -10.3* -7.14** 7.71** 13.7** 10.2* 25.8*
VRBG VAR-45 X VRBG 444 8.22* 21.5** 3.23** 14.3** -7.91 -4.74 14.0* 40.2**
capabilityfor important traits associated with yield in order
to achieve higher fruit yield in hybrids through exploitation
of heterosis.
The best cross combination Samrat X Aditi
followed by Aditi X TC 092372, IC 093236 X TC 092372,
Samrat X TC 092372, Samrat X IC 093236 and Aditi X
PSPL produced significantlyhigher yield than the standard
check Samrat. These F1 combinations may be exploited as
commercial hybrids after their stability test as they are not
onlyhigher yielder but also possessed attractive fruit as per
present market demand.
REFERENCES
Pandit, M.K., Mahato, B., Sarkar, A. (2009). Genetic variability, heritabilityand genetic advance for some fruit characters
and yield in bottle gourd (Lagenaria siceraria Molina. Standl.) genotypes. Acta Horticulturae, 809: 221-225
Sharma, N., Sharma, N.K. and Malik, Y.S. (2009). Estimate of economic heterosis for yield and yield related traits in
bottle gourd [Lagenaria siceraria (Molina) Standl.]. Haryana Journal of Horticultural Sciences, 38: 137-139
Singh, K.P., Choudhury, D.N., Mandal, G. and Saha, B.C. (2008). Genetic variability in bottle gourd (Lagenaria siceraria
(Molina) Standl.). Journal of Interacademicia, 12: 159-163
Singh, N.P., Narayan, P., Dubey, A.K. and Srivastava, J.P. (2005). Studies on combining ability, heritability and genetic
advance in bottle gourd (Lagenaria siceraria (Mol.) Standl.). In : Abstract Book of National Seminar on Cucurbits,
Sept. 22-23, G.B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar. pp. 101
Yadav, Y.C. and Kumar, S. (2012). Estimation of heterosis for yield and yield contributing traits in bottle gourd [Lagenaria
siceraria (Molina) Standl]. Asian Journal of Horticulture, 7: 310-314