Study on Correlation of Agromorphologic Properties in Some Camelina (Camelina sativa (L.) CRANTZ.) Genotypes

Abstract

The correlation of agromorphological traits can be useful for breeders in the selection of plant genotypes. In this study, the rosette period (days), days of maturity, plant height (cm), 1000-seed weight (g), and seed yield (kg ha–1) characteristics of 42 different Camelina genotypes that grown in Ankara (middle Anatolia) and Şanlıurfa (southeastern Anatolia), and their correlations with each other, were investigated. The accessions showed different results depending on the location in terms of the studied characters in both locations under rainfed conditions. The results showed that the highest seed yield was obtained from the PI 311735 accession (3151.8 kg ha–1) in Ankara and the PI 650142 accession (3056.0 kg ha–1) in Şanlıurfa. While the rosette period (days), days of maturity, plant height (cm), and 1000-seed weight (g), in Ankara were between 152.3 and 132.3 days, 274 and 247 days, 103.8 and 59.5 cm, and 1.50 and 0.84 g, while there were between 108.8 and 88.8 days, 202.1 and 180.1 days, 115.4 and 59.2 cm, and 1.40 and 0.50 g, in Şanlıurfa, respectively. Results showed significant differences among the genotypes in all of the studied parameters. Correlation analysis of the genotypes in both locations on the mentioned parameters was also performed. Since climate and environment affect each agromorphological parameter differently, it was observed that a genotypic correlation independent of the climate and environment could not be explained in the Camelina sativa genotypes.

Keywords

• Camelina sativa (L.) Crantz
• correlation
• agromorphology
• principal component analysis
• seed yield.

References

1. Arslan, Y., İ., Subaşi, D., Katar, R., Kodaş, H., Keyvanoğlu (2014): Farkli azot ve fosfor dozlarinin ketencik bitkisi (Camelina sativa (L.) Crantz)’nin bazi bitkisel özellikleri üzerine olan etkisinin belirlenmesi. Anadolu Tarım Bilim. Derg., 29(3): 231–239.
2. Downey, R.K. (1971): Agricultural and genetic potential of cruciferous oilseed crops. J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc., 48: 718–722.
3. Franz, C.H. (1993): Genetics. In: Hay, R.K.M., P.G., Waterman (eds). Volatile oil crops: London: Longman Group UK Limited.
4. Frohlic, A., B., Rice (2005): Evaluation of Camelina sativa oil as feedstock for biodiesel production. Ind. Crop. Prod., 21(1): 25–31.
5. Goksoy, A. T., M., Sincik, M., Erdogmus, M., Ergin, S., Aytac, G., Gumuscu, O., Gunduz, R., Keles, G., Bayram, E., Senyigit (2019): The parametric and non-parametric stability analyses for interpreting genotype by environment interaction of some soybean genotypes. Turk. J. Field Crop., 24(1): 28–38.
6. Hussain, A., F., Anjum, A., Rab, M., Sajid (2006): Effects of nitrogen on the growth and yield of asparagus (Asparagus officinalis), J. Agric. Biol. Sci., 1(2): 41–47.
7. Janina, M.S. (2003): Melissa officinalis. Int. J. Aromather., 10: 132–139.
8. Katar, D., N., Katar (2017): Farklı sıra aralıklarında uygulanan ekim normlarının ketenciğin Camelina sativa L. Crantz verim ve verim unsurlarına etkisi. Gazi Osman Paşa Üniv. Ziraat Fak. Derg., 34(1): 76–85.

9. Katar, D., Y., Arslan, I., Subaşi (2012): Ankara ekolojik koşullarında farklı ekim zamanlarının ketencik (Camelina sativa (L.) Crantz) bitkisinin yağ oranı ve bileşimi üzerine olan etkisinin belirlenmesi. Tekirdağ Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 9(3): 84–90.
10. Kinay, A., G., Yilmaz, S., Ayisigi, S., Dokulen (2019): Yield and quality parameters of winter and summer-sown different camelina (Camelina sativa L.) genotypes. Turkish J. Field Crop., 24(2): 164–169.
11. Knorzer K.H. (1978): Evolution and spread of gold of pleasure (Camelina sativa (L.) Crantz). Ber. Dtsch. Bot. Ges., 91: 187–195.
12. Kurt, O., F., Seyis (2008): Alternatif Yağ Bitkisi: Ketencik (Camelina sativa (L.) Crantz). OMU. Zir. Fak. Derg., 23(2): 116–120.
13. Kurt, O., M., Gore (2020): Effects of sowing date and genotype on oil content and main fatty acid composition in camelina [Camelina sativa L. (Crantz)]. Turkish J. Field Crop., 25(2): 227–235.
14. Mcvay, K.A. (2008): Camelina Production in Montana: A self learning resource from MSU Extension (MT200701AG). Available at: http://www.msuextension.org
15. Mutlu, B. (2012): Camelina Crantz. In: Güner, A., S., Aslan, T., Ekim, M., Vural, M,T., Babaç (edlr.). Türkiye Bitkileri Listesi (Damarlı Bitkiler).
16. Nezahat Gökyiğit Botanik Bahçesi ve Flora Araştırmaları Derneği Yayını. İstanbul.
17. Putnam, D.H., J.T., Budin, L.A., Field, W.M., Breene (1993): Camelina: a promising low-input oilseed. In: JANICK, J, J.E., SIMON (eds) New crops. Wiley, New York, pp. 314–322.
18. Reddy, M.P., B. N., Reddy, B. T., Arsul, J. J., Maheshwari (2013): Genetic variability, heritability and genetic advance of growth and yield components of linseed (Linum usitatissimum L.). Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci., 2(9): 231–237.
19. Robinson, R.G. (1987): Camelina: a useful research crop and a potential oilseed crop. Minnesota Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull., 579 (AD-SB-3275).
20. Seehuber, R., M., Ambroth (1983): Studies on genetic variability of yield components in linseed (Linum usitatissimum L.), poppy (Papaver somniferum L.) and Camelina sativa Crtz. Landbauforschung Volkenrode., 33:183–188.
21. Smykal, P., N., Bačová-Kerteszová, R., Kalendar, J., Corander, A.H., Schulman, M. Pavelek (2011): Genetic diversity of cultivated flax (Linum usitatissimum L.) germplasm assessed by retrotransposon-based markers. Theor. Appl. Genet., 122: 1385–1397.
22. Straton, A., J., Kleinschmidt, D., Keeley (2007): Camelina. Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy. (Avaible at: http://www.iatp.org/iatp/publications.cfm?accountID=258&refID=97279).
23. Vollmann, J., T., Moritz, C., Kargl, S., Baumgarner, H., Wagentristl (2007): Agronomic evaluation of Camelina genotypes selected for seed quality characteristics. Ind. Crops Prod., 26(3): 270–277.
24. Yilmaz, G., Ş., Dökülen, A., Kinay (2019): Effects of different sowing densities on some agronomic characteristics of Camelina (Camelina sativa L.). Turk J. Food Sci. Technol., 7(2): 157–162.