MGIDI-based selection and stability analysis of mungbean (Vigna radiata L. Wilczek) mutants under acidic soils using AMMI and GGE models

Main Article Content

S. MD. Basid Ali
Surendra Singh Khangembam
Noren Singh Konjengbam

Abstract

In the present study, eighty-four M3 generation mungbean mutant families along with two controls/parents were evaluated for eleven morphological traits during Zaid 2024 under acidic soils of Meghalaya. Based on phenotypic selection and MGIDI selection index ten number of superior mutant families were identified namely viz., B1-8, A2-8, A1-5, B1-1, A1-10, A2-9, B1-12, B1-11, B2-12 and B1-13. The selected mutant lines were evaluated for single plant yield (SYP) in four different locations of  Meghalaya i.e., CPGS AS- Farm (E1), NBPGR, Shillong (E2), Umeit field (E3) and COA – Experimental farm, Krydemkulai (E4) with highly acidic soil conditions pH ranging from (4.80 – 5.12).  AMMI ANOVA revealed significant differences among the mutant lines, environments and Mutant × Environment interaction and most of the variation was accounted by mutant lines (65.78%) indicating least influence of mutant and environment interaction. The mean single plant yield (SYP) of tested genotypes involving ten mutant lines along with two controls ranged from 3.12 gm Pusa 1431 (Control) to 10.37 gm in A1-10 (mutant) across the environments. The AMMI analysis revealed that mutant line A1-10 showed higher seed yield, performing well across a wide range of environments.  The mutant lines A1-10, in E1, E2 and E3, A2-8 in E1, E3 and E4 and B1 -11 in E3 were found to be highly stable and gave the highest yield in their respective mega-environments. Out of four locations E2 (NBPGR, Shillong) was the most discriminating and E3 (Farmers Field, Umeit) was the most representative to provide unbiased information about the performance of genotypes. Based on the mean versus stability graph, the mutant A1-10 stands out because of simultaneous high yield and high stability.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Ali, S. M. B. ., Khangembam, S. S., & Konjengbam, N. S. (2025). MGIDI-based selection and stability analysis of mungbean (Vigna radiata L. Wilczek) mutants under acidic soils using AMMI and GGE models. INDIAN JOURNAL OF GENETICS AND PLANT BREEDING, 85(04), 629–636. https://doi.org/10.31742/ISGPB.85.4.11
Section
Research Article

References

Ahir D. K., Kumar R., Chetariya C.P., Upadhyay V., Pandey A. and Chaitanya A.K. 2023. Effect of mutation on seed yield per plant and chlorophyll content in M3 generation of green gram [Vigna radiata (L.) R. Wilczek]. Int. J. Environ. Cli., 13(8): 1001-1013.

Akinyosoye S.T. 2022. Genotype-genotypeenvironment (GGE) biplot analysis of extra-early maturing quality protein maize hybrids for grain yield. J. Crop Sci. Biotech., 25(5): 599-610.

Ali S.MD.B., Konjengbam N.S., Ahmad F., Sanasam S. and Kumawat R. 2024. Ascertaining Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) and Simultaneous Effect of Ethyl Methane Sulphonate (EMS) and Sodium Azide (SA) On Seedling Characters in Mungbean Genotypes ‘Pusa 1031’ and ‘Pusa 1431’. Legume Res., 47: 11.

Das A., Gupta S., Parihar A.K., Singh D., Chand R. and Pratap A. 2019. Delineating Genotype × Environment interactions towards durable resistance in mungbean against Cercospora leaf spot (Cercospora canescens) using GGE biplot. Plant Breed., 139, 639–650. doi: 10.1111/pbr.12789.

Das A., Babu S., Yadav G.S., Ansari, M.A., Singh R., Baishya L.K. and Ngachan, S.V. 2016. Status and strategies for pulses production for food and nutritional security in north-eastern region of India. Ind. J. Agro., 61: 43-57.

Gauch H.G, Jr. 1988. Model selection and validation for yield trials with interaction. Biometrics. 44:705–715.

Kim S.K., Nair R.M., Lee J., and Lee, S.H. 2015. Genomic resources in mungbean for future breeding programs. Front. Plant Sci., 6: 626.

Maranna S., Nataraj V., Kumawat G., Chandra S., Rajesh V., Ramteke R., Patel R.M. Ratnaparkhe M.B., Husain S.M. and Gupta S. 2021. Breeding for higher yield, early maturity, wider adaptability and waterlogging tolerance in soybean (Glycine max L.): A case study.” Sci. Rep., 11(1): 22853

Olivoto T. and Nardino M. 2021. MGIDI: Toward an effective multivariate selection in biological experiments. Bioinformatics, 37(10): 1383 -1389.

Olivoto T., and Lúcio A.D. 2020. metan: An R package for multi‐environment trial analysis. Methods Ecol. Evol., 11:783-789. doi:10.1111/2041-210X.13384.

Palaniyappan S., Arunachalam P., Banumathy S. and Muthuramu S. 2024. Introspection of discriminate function analysis and MGIDI selection index for selection to improve yield in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Indian J. Genet. Plant Breed., 84(2): 202-208.

Pour-Aboughadareh, A., Sanjani S., Nikkhah-Chamanabad H., Mehrvar M.R., Asadi A. and Amini A. 2021. Identification of salt-tolerant barley genotypes using multiple-traits index and yield performance at the early growth and maturity stages. Bull. Natl. Res. Cent., 45(1): 1-16.

Purchase J., Hatting H. and Van Deventer C. 2000. Genotype× environment interaction of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in South Africa. Stability analysis of yield performance. S. Afr. J. Plant Soil, 17:101–107.

Rao P.J.M., Sandhyakishore N., Srinivasan S., Sandeep S., Praveen G., Neelima G. and Anil Kumar G. 2023. AMMI and GGE Stability Analysis of Drought Tolerant Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L) Genotypes for Target Environments. Legume Res., 46(9): 1105-1116. doi: 10.18805/LR-5156.

Sarma A., Dhole V.J., Bhattacharjee A., Das P., Sarma D., and Bordoloi D. 2022. Induced genetic variability through physical and chemical mutagens in M2 generation of greengram. Legume Res., 45(11): 1357-1361.

Sheeba A., and Yogameenakshi P. 2024. Dissection of genotype x environment interaction and yield stability analysis in greengram (Vigna radiata L.) using AMMI and GGE biplot. Indian J. Genet. Plant Breed., 84(02): 304-307.

Sanasam S., Ali S.M.B., and Maibam, U. Evaluation of Diverse Greengram Genotypes for Seed Yield Stability under Acidic Soils by AMMI and GGE Biplots Analysis. Legume Res., 1-8. doi:10.18805/LR-5345.

Uddin M.S., Azam M.G., Billah M., Bagum S.A., Biswas P.L., Khaldun A.B.M., Hossain N., Gaber A., Althobaiti Y. S. and. Abdelhadi A.A. 2021. High-throughput root network system analysis for low phosphorus tolerance in maize at seedling stage. Agronomy, 11(11): 2230.

Yan W. and Kang M.S. 2003. GGE Biplot Analysis, a Graphical Tool for Breeders, Geneticists and Agronomists. CRC Press, Washington, DC.

Yan W. and Tinker N.A. 2006. Biplot analysis of multi-environment trial data: Principles and applications. Can. J. Plant Sci., 86(3): 623-645. DOI: 10.4141/P05-169.

Yan W., Hunt L., Sheng Q., Szlavnics Z. 2000. Cultivar evaluation and mega-environment investigation based on the GGE biplot. Crop Sci., 40:597–605.

Yan W., Kang M.S., Ma B., Woods S. and Cornelius P.L. (2007). GGE biplot vs. AMMI analysis of genotype by environment data. Crop Sci., 47(2): 643-653.