The Determination of Agronomic Characteristics of Pea Lines in F4 Generation

Abstract

Peas, the fourth most produced legume globally, suffer from yield losses due to diseases. Developing disease-tolerant varieties can contribute to sustainable agriculture by meeting the protein needs through pea cultivation. For this reason, 24 pea lines, advanced to the F4 generation through hybridization and single-seed descent selection, along with 6 control varieties, were evaluated in 2016 under field conditions in Konya using an Augmented Experimental Design with three replications. Among the genotypes, the highest number of pods per plant (11.35 pods) was observed in the line coded as G1 (10-1). The line coded as G11 (12-1) demonstrated the highest seed yield (229.93 kg da⁻¹). Additionally, plants exhibiting natural symptoms of viral infection and powdery mildew under field conditions were scored as 1 (diseased), while those without symptoms were scored as 3 (healthy). To evaluate the tolerance of genotypes under these biotic stress conditions, a path analysis was conducted. The path model revealed that plant height, pod width, and pod height were associated with the presence of viral and powdery mildew pathogens. Furthermore, a cluster analysis based on these five traits grouped the 24 lines and 6 control varieties into four clusters. In the first group, comprising susceptible genotypes, G11 (12-1) and G9 (4) emerged as the most tolerant lines. The second group included genotypes tolerant to both pathogens, with G10 (208) standing out. The third group consisted of genotypes tolerant to powdery mildew, with G1 (10-1), G2 (15), and G18 (10-1 Ozel S) being prominent. The fourth and final group, composed of the most tolerant genotypes, identified G12 (10-1 Ozel) as the most productive type. Based on the findings, we conclude that these eight genotypes, characterized by high tolerance to diseases and superior seed yield, hold potential as genetic resources for developing high-yielding, disease-resistant pea varieties.

Keywords

• Augmented Trial Design
• Plant Breeding
• Pisum sativum ssp. arvense
• Selection
• Yield

F4 Generasyonundaki Bezelye Hatlarının Tarımsal Özelliklerinin Belirlenmesi

Abstract

Dünyada en çok üretilen dördüncü baklagil olan bezelyede hastalıklar verim kaybına neden olan faktörlerdendir. Hastalıklara toleranslı çeşit geliştirilmesi suretiyle bezelye protein ihtiyacının karşılanmasında sürdürülebilir tarıma imkan sunmaktadır. Bu sebeple, melezlenmiş ve teksel seleksiyonla F4 generasyonuna getirilmiş olan 24 bezelye hattı ve 6 kontrol variety 2016 yılında Konya’da tarla şartlarında Augmented Deneme Desenine göre 3 tekerrürlü olacak şekilde planlanması yapılmıştır. Genotipler içerisinde ise bitki başına en fazla bakla sayısı 11.35 adet ile G1 kodlu 10-1 hattından elde edilmiştir. G11 kodlu 12-1 hat ise tohum verimi (229,93 kg da-1) açısından en yüksek değerlere sahip olduğu ifade edilebilir. Ayrıca çalışmamızda, tarla şartlarında doğal olarak gelişen virüs ve külleme semptom varlığı gösterenler skor 1 hasta olarak, göstermeyenler ise skor 3 sağlıklı olarak belirlenmiş ve bu etmenlerin varlığında genotiplerin gösterdikleri toleransı belirlemek amacıyla path analizi yapılmıştır. Path model sonucunda bitki boyu, bakla genişliği ve bakla yüksekliğinin virüs ve külleme etmeni varlığı ile ilişkili olduğu ifade edilebilir. Ayrıca bu beş özellik kullanılarak yapılan kümeleme analizi sonucunda 24 hat ve 6 kontrol variety dört gruba ayrılmıştır. Birinci grup olan hassas içindeki en toleranslı genotipler G11 (12-1) ve G9(4) hatları ön plana çıkmıştır. İkinci grup olan iki patojen etmenine karşı toleranslı olan ise G10 (208) genotipidir. Üçüncü grupta külleme hastalığına toleranslı tipler yer almakta olup G1 (10-1), G2 (15) ve G18 (10-1 Ozel S) genotipleri ön plana çıkmaktadır. En toleranslı genotiplerden oluşan son grupta ise G12 kodlu 10-1 Ozel genotipi en verimli tip olarak belirlenmiştir. Çalışmamızın sonucunda ön plana çıkan bu sekiz genotip ile hastalıklara yüksek tolerans gösteren ve tane verimi yüksek olan çeşitlerin geliştirilmesinde gen kaynağı olarak kullanabileceği kanaatindeyiz.

Keywords

• Augmented Deneme Deseni
• Bitki Islahı
• Pisum sativum ssp. arvense
• Seleksiyon
• Verim

References

1. Al-Rubaye BMA (2023). Selection of winter-resistant genotypes and determination of some agricultural characteristics ın hybrid field pea lines (F2). Master's Thesis, Selcuk University (Unpublished), Türkiye.
2. Anonymous (2021). Example of very simple path analysis via regression (with correlation matrix input). https://psych.unl.edu/psycrs/971/pathanalysis/path1ex.pdf (26.10.2021)
3. Avcı MA, Ceyhan E (2006). Correlations and genetic analysis of pod characteristics in pea (Pisum sativum L.). Asian Journal of Plant Sciences 1(2), 1-4.
4. Bilgili U (2009). Forage Crops, Vol. II. (Ed: Avcıoğlu R., Hatipoğlu R., Karadağ Y.), Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs Publications, İzmir, s. 440-448 (In Turkish).
5. Bilgili U, Uzun A, Sincik M, Yavuz M, Aydinolu B, Cakmakci S, Geren H, Avciolu R, Nizam I, Tekel S, Gül S, Anlarsal E, Yücel C, Avci M, Acar Z, Ayan I, Ustün A, Acikgoz E (2010). Forage yield and lodging traits in peas (Pisum sativum L.) with different leaf types. Turkish Journal of Field Crops 15 (1), 50-53
6. Endes T, Tamkoç A (2006). Comparative karyotype analyses in some F7 generation pea (Pisum sativum L.) lines and their parents. Selcuk Journal of Agriculture and Food Sciences 20(38), 150-158 (In Turkish).
7. FAOSTAT (2024). FAO statistical databases. http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QCL (25.12.2024)
8. FAO (2011). Grassland Index. A searchable catalogue of grass and forage legumes. FAO, Rome, Italy

9. Fondevilla S, Rubiales D (2012). Powdery mildew control in pea. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 32, 401-409.
10. Georgieva N, Nikolova I, Kosev V (2015). Association study of yield and its components pea (Pisum Sativum L ). İnternational Journal of Pharmacognosy 2(11), 536-542
11. Hammarlund C. von. (1925). Zur genetik, biologie und physiologie einiger Erysiphaceen (The genetics, biology and physiology of some Erysiphes). Hereditas 6, 11–26.
12. Heuze V, Tran G, Giger-Reverdin S, Noblet J, Renaudeau D, Lessire M, Lebas F (2015). Pea seeds. Feedipedia, a programme by INRA, CIRAD, AFZ and FAO. Retrieved August 8, 2015, from http://www.feedipedia.org/node/264.
13. Ho R (2013). Handbook of univariate and multivariate data analysis with IBM SPSS. CRC press
14. Janila P, Sharma B (2004). RAPD and SCAR markers for powdery mildew resistance gene er in pea. Plant Breeding 123, 271–274.
15. Kadioğlu S, Tan M, Kadioğlu B, Taşğin G (2020). Determination of yield and some characteristics of forage pea genotypes (Pisum sativum ssp. arvense L.) under Erzurum conditions. Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 51(2), 151-158.
16. Kingsolver JG, Schemske DW (1991). Path analyses of selection. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 6(9), 276-280.
17. Kora D, Teshome E (2016). Field evaluation of some botanical extracts against the pea aphid Acrythosiphon pisum (Homoptera: Aphididae) on Field pea Pisum sativum L.. Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies 4(4), 336-339.
18. Katoch V, Sharma S, Pathania S, Banayal DK, Sharma SK, Rathour R (2010). Molecular mapping of pea powdery mildew resistance gene er2 to pea linkage group III. Molecular Breeding 25, 229-237.
19. Olle M (2015). Which varieties of field peas to grow? (Milliseid hernesorte kasvatada?) Maamajandus 10(40), 4−4.
20. Olle M (2017). The yield, height and content of protein of field peas (Pisum sativum L.) in Estonian agro-climatic conditions. Agronomy Research 15(4), 1725–1732, https://doi.org/10.15159/AR.17.026
21. Ouafi L, Alane F, Rahal-Bouziane H, Abdelguerfi A (2016). Agro-morphological diversity within field pea (Pisum sativum L.) genotypes. African Journal of Agricultural Research 11(40), 4039-4047.
22. Özdemir B, Tamkoç A (2019). The determination of field pea lines suitable for the second crop production. Journal of Bahri Dagdas Crop Research 8(2), 299-305.
23. Özköse A (2012). Determination of some morphological and agronomic characteristics of perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) genotypes collected from the natural flora of Ankara, PhD's Thesis, The Graduate School of Natural and Applıed Scıence of Selçuk Unıversıty, (Unpublished) Konya (In Turkish)
24. Petersen RG (1994). Agricultural field experiments: design and analysis. Crc Press.
25. Sall J, Stephens ML, Lehman A, Loring S (2017). JMP Start Statistics: A Guide to Statistics and Data Analysis Using JMP; SAS Institute: Cary, NC, USA.
26. Sharma B (2015). Powdery mildew resistance in pea: Historical perspective. Pulses: Challenges & Opportunities, 37. Selvi BS, Rajangam J, Suresh J, Muthuselvi R (2016). Character association and path analysis studies for yield and its components in pea (Pisum sativum L.). Electronic Journal of Plant Breeding 7(3), 750-757.
27. Singh AK, Srivastava CP (2015). Effect of plant types on grain yield and lodging resistance in pea (Pisum sativum L.). Indian Journal of Genetics and Plant Breeding 75(01), 69-74.
28. Singh J, Dhall RK, Aujla IS (2015). Characterization of resistance response of garden pea (Pisum sativum L.) against powdery mildew (Erysiphe pisi DC) in sub-tropical plains of India.
29. Tang D, Chen M, Huang X, Zhang G, Zeng L, Zhang G, Wu S (2023). Wang Y. SRplot: A free online platform for data visualization and graphing. PLoS One 18(11), e0294236. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0294236
30. Timmerman GM, Frew TJ, Weeden NF, Miller AL, Goulden DS. (1994). Linkage analysis of er-1, a recessive Pisum sativum gene for resistance to powdery mildew fungus (Erysiphe pisi DC). Theoretical and Applied Genetics 88, 1050-1055.
31. TUİK (2024). Turkish Statistical Institute Crop Production Statistics. http://www.tuik.gov.tr/ (25.12.2024)
32. Vaid A, Tyagi PD (1997). Genetics of powdery mildew resistance in pea. Euphytica 96, 203–206.