Summary
Three selection methods (single seed descent (SSD), mass selection and selective intermating) were applied simultaneously to a highly heterogeneous and broadly based population of greengram. Progeny developing after two cycles of selection were evaluated for yield and seven other economic characters. The relative efficacy of each selection method was judged on the basis of the number of high yielding progeny, mean yield of top 10% progeny, and mean of the highest yielding progeny. Selection after two cycles of selective intermating was found to be the best method for generating productive progeny although mass selection favouring smaller seeds was an equally efficient method. Both of these were found superior to SSD selection.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bisen MS, Singh SP (1983) Effectiveness of breeding methods under different environments in chickpea. In: 15th Int Congr Genet. New Delhi, India, pp 15–18
Bisen MS, Singh SP, Rao SK (1985) Effectiveness of selection methods in chickpeaCicer arietinum under different environments. Theor Appl Genet 70:661–666
Boerma HR, Cooper RL (1975) Comparison of three selection procedures for yield in soybeans. Crop Sci 15:225–229
Casali VWD, Tigchelaar EC (1975) Computer simulation studies comparing pedigree bulk and single seed descent selection in self pollinated populations. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 100:364–367
Dahiya BN, Singh VP (1985) Comparative efficacy of pedigree selection and selective intermating in greengramVigna radiata L. Wilczek. Theor Appl Genet 71:129–132
Dahiya BN, Singh VP, Dahiya BS (1983) Comparative efficacy of different selection methods in mungbean In: 15th Int Congr Genet. New Delhi, India, pp 5–8
Dahiya BN, Singh VP, Dahiya BS (1984) Relative efficacy of mass selection for seed size pedigree selection and selection on yield per se in greengram. Legume Res 7:77–81
Dahiya BS, Waldia RS, Kaushik LS, Solanki IS (1983) Early generation yield testing Vs visual selection in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) In: 15th Int Congr Genet. New Delhi, India, pp 10–12
Empig LT, Fehr WR (1971) Evaluation of methods for generation advance in bulk hybrid soybean populations. Crop Sci 11:51–54
Green JM, Sharma D, Reddy LJ, Saxena KB, Gupta SC, Jain KC, Reddy BVS, Rao MR (1980) Methodology and progress in the ICRISAT pigeonpea breeding programme. In: Proc Int Workshop Pigeonpea. Patancheru, India, pp 437–449
Haddad NI, Muehlbauer FJ (1981) Comparison of random bulk population and single seed descent methods for lentil breeding. Euphytica 30:643–651
Knott DR, Kumar J (1975) Comparison of early generation yield testing and a single seed descent procedure in wheat breeding. Crop Sci 15:295–299
Luedders VD, Duclos LA, Matson AL (1973) Bulk pedigree and early generation testing breeding methods compared in soybeans. Crop Sci 13:363–364
Mishra MN, Tiwari AS, Shebeski A, Singh Laxman (1978) Selection gains in Bangal gram. Indian J Genet 38:86–89
Panse VG, Sukhatme PV(1978) Statistical methods for agricultural workers. ICAR, New Delhi
Park SJ, Walsh EJ, Reinbergs E, Song LSP, Kasha KJ (1976) Field performance of doubled haploid barley lines in comparison with lines developed by the pedigree and single seed descent methods. Can J Plant Sci 56:467–474
Singh M, Singh VP (1983) A comparative study of recurrent mass and pedigree selection in American cotton. In: 15th Int Congr Genet. New Delhi, India, pp 50–56
Tee S Thean, Qualset CO (1975) Bulk population in wheat breeding comparison of SSD and random bulk method. Euphytica 24:393–405
Voigt RL, Weber CR (1960) Effectiveness of selection methods for yield in soybean crosses. Agron J 52:527–530
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Communicated by G.S. Khush
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dahiya, B.N., Singh, V.P. Comparison of single seed descent, selective intermating and mass selection for seed size in greengram (Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek). Theoret. Appl. Genetics 72, 678–681 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00289008
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00289008