International Journal of Entomology Research

International Journal of Entomology Research

ISSN: 2455-4758; Impact Factor: RJIF 5.24
Received: 22-08-2020; Accepted: 07-09-2020; Published: 23-09-2020
www.entomologyjournals.com
Volume 5; Issue 5; 2020; Page No. 82-85

Genetic variability of leaf caterpillar resistance traits among groundnut (Arachis hypogea L.)
germplasm
Manikandan P1*, V Selvanarayanan2, T Sabesan3
1, 2
Department of Entomology, Faculty of Agriculture, Annamalai University, Annamalai Nagar, Tamil Nadu, India
3
Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Faculty of Agriculture, Annamalai University, Annamalai Nagar, Tamil Nadu,
India

Abstract
Two hundred and ten accessions of groundnut (Arachis hypogea L.) were evaluated for leaf caterpillar (Spodoptera litura F.)
resistance and yield potential during Rabi season, 2018- 2019 at Thandavankulam, Nagapattinam, Tamil Nadu, India.
Observations were recorded on mean larval population, per cent damage caused by leaf caterpillar and biometrical traits such
as plant height, pod yield, number of mature pods, immature pods, primary branches, secondary branches and plant biomass.
The mean larval population per plant was significant but negatively correlated with pod yield and number of secondary
branches per plant whereas it was positively correlated with the number of matured pods and primary branches per plant. Per
cent leaf damage exerted a significant negative correlation with secondary branches per plant and had a non-significant
association with pod yield and plant biomass. A significant positive association was observed between the mean larval
population and per cent leaf damage. For the characters viz., plant height, pod yield, number of matured pods, plant biomass
and per cent leaf damage, high GCV, PCV, heritability and genetic advance were recorded indicating the role of additive gene
action in controlling these characters and hence, selection for improvement of these characters in early generation itself might
be effective.

Keywords: Groundnut, genetic diversity, leaf caterpillar, resistance

Introduction measured as the genotypic coefficient of variation (GCV),

Groundnut Arachis hypogea L. is the important legume phenotypic coefficient of variation (PCV), broad-sense
oilseed crop rich in protein, starch, soluble sugar, crude heritability (BS)%, and genetic advance expressed as per
fibre, vitamins and minerals (Doyle and Luckow, 2003; cent mean (GAM%). Screening of available groundnut
Heywood et al., 2007) [12, 16]. It is cultivated in tropical and germplasm is the important step in the development of leaf
sub-tropical regions of the world in 22.2 million hectares. caterpillar resistant variety. Keeping this in view, this
India is the leading producer which occupies 41 % of the experiment was conducted to evaluate the genetic variability
total world production (APEDA, 2018) [3]. Yield reduction in different morphological traits and their association with
in groundnut is caused by many biotic and abiotic factors. leaf caterpillar resistance.
Among the biotic factors, insect pests are the major yield
affecting factors leading up to 50 % reduction in yield by Materials and methods
the direct feeding and also by vectoring diseases. The field screening was conducted at Thandavankulam
Leaf caterpillar, Spodoptera litura (F.) is an important village, Nagappattinam district of Tamil Nadu, India during
defoliator of groundnut throughout India especially in Tamil Rabi season 2018 –2019. Groundnut germplasm comprising
Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Maharashtra and 210 accessions collected from various sources and the
Karnataka. It causes more than 30 per cent yield loss accessions were sown in the field with forty plants per
(Sahayaraj and Raju, 2003; Atwal and Dhaliwal, 2008) [30, 4]. accession, maintained in 30 cm row –row spacing and 20
Use of resistant crop varieties against insect pests is an cm plant-plant spacing. All packages of practices were
important eco-friendly approach that will reduce the use of followed (Ntare et al. 2008) [24] except pest management
insecticides in the agroecosystem. Groundnut is a highly activities.
self-pollinated crop with narrow genetic variability. Many The larval population on ten randomly selected plants from
attempts were made on the genetic study in groundnut for each row was recorded. The mean number of larvae per
yield-related attributes and disease resistance (John et al. plant was recorded from 15 days after sowing (DAS)
2005; Dolma et al. 2010; Channayya et al. 2011; Choudhary onwards up to 92 DAS at weekly intervals in all the
et al. 2013) [17, 11, 17, 9] but comparatively fewer attempts were accessions and the mean larval population per plant was
made on the assessment of groundnut genotypes for leaf calculated. Per cent damage caused by leaf caterpillar in ten
caterpillar resistance (Dharne and Patel, 2000) [10]. randomly selected plants per accession was observed at 45
For any resistance breeding program, germplasm collection DAS. Per cent damage was calculated using the following
and assessment of genetic variability is an important step. formula.
Hence, it is very essential to partition the observed
variability into heritable and nonheritable components

82
International Journal of Entomology Research www.entomologyjournals.com

Seven characters such as plant height, pod yield, number of (GCV) was worked out as per the procedure given by
matured pods, number of immature pods, number of Burton and Dewane (1953) [6] while, heritability was
primary branches, number of secondary branches and plant calculated based on the method suggested by Falconer
biomass were observed in ten plants from each accession (1981) [13] and the genetic advance was calculated based on
and mean value was worked out for each parameter. the formula given by Johnson et al. (1955) [18]. Analysis of
The simple correlation coefficient was calculated based on variance was computed for all the traits evaluated, using
the procedure given by Panse and Sukhatme (1995) [26]. SPSS 16.00 for Windows 16.0 computer software system
Phenotypic (PCV) and genotypic coefficient of variation (SPSS Inc., 2007).

Table 1: Analysis of variance for Spodoptera litura resistance and other traits in groundnut genotypes (Arachis hypogaea L.)
Mean sum of square
Source of Number of Primary Secondary
Degrees of Plant Pod Yield Number of Plant Per cent leaf
Variation immature branches per branches per
freedom Height (cm) (g) matured pods Biomass damage
pods plant plant
Genotypes 209 302.8026** 459.7797** 137.9098** 124.1762** 3.640018** 28.6109** 2762.25** 376.5308**
Replications 1 0.0607 0.02933 3.5494 0.0644 1.1840 2.4259 0.5379 1.2118
Error 209 0.2899 0.3139 0.6080 87.5690 0.1519 0.1175 4.6127 1.3639
** Significant at 1% level of probability

Table 2: Correlation coefficient among the different plant traits and leaf caterpillar incidence and per cent damage
Mean Per cent Plant Number of Number of Primary Secondary
Pod Plant
Plant Traits Larval leaf Height matured immature branches per branches per
Yield (g) Biomass
population damage (cm) pods pods plant plant
Mean Larval population 1
Per cent leaf damage 0.6935** 1
Plant Height (cm) -0.0022 0.1146** 1
Pod Yield (g) -0.1484* -0.0106 0.3365** 1
Number of matured pods 0.0942* 0.2066** 0.1655** 0.5660** 1
Number of immature pods -0.0027 0.0645 0.1219** 0.5214** 0.7715** 1
Primary branches per plant 0.0262 0.0992* 0.0942* 0.1751** 0.1833** 0.2054** 1
Secondary branches per plant -0.2802** -0.2551** 0.0764 0.2028** 0.0995* 0.2245** 0.1451* 1
Plant Biomass -0.0733 -0.0278 0.4051** 0.5816** 0.4513** 0.4535** 0.2003** 0.4040** 1
* -Significant at 0.05%, ** -Significant at 0.01% level of probability

Table 3: Genetic components of variation for Spodoptera litura resistance and other traits
Plant Height Pod Yield Number of Number of Primary branches Secondary branches Plant Per cent leaf
(cm) (g) matured pods immature pods per plant per plant Biomass damage
GV 151.26 229.73 68.65 18.30 1.74 14.25 1378.82 187.58
EV 0.29 0.31 0.61 87.57 0.15 0.12 4.61 1.36
PV 151.55 230.05 69.26 105.87 1.90 14.36 1383.43 188.95
GCV 28.97 34.52 43.29 13.52 29.93 77.70 60.31 45.05
ECV 1.27 1.28 4.07 29.56 8.84 7.06 3.49 3.84
PCV 29.00 34.55 43.48 32.50 31.21 78.02 60.41 45.21
h2BS 99.81 99.86 99.12 17.29 91.98 99.18 99.67 99.28
GA 25.35 31.25 17.02 3.67 2.61 7.75 76.48 28.15
GV-Genetic variation, EV- Environment variation, PV- Phenotypic variation, GCV- Genetic coefficient variation (%), ECV- Environment
coefficient variation (%), PCV- Phenotypic coefficient variation (%), h2BS- Heritability (Broad Sense) (%), GA- Genetic advance (%)

Result and Discussion per cent leaf damage showed a highly significant and
Analysis of variance for various characters confirmed the positive correlation. Pod yield and number of matured pods
existence of significant variation among the genotypes taken per plant, primary branches, secondary branches, plant
for the study (Table 1). The results revealed that leaf height and plant biomass were strongly correlated with a
caterpillar population was significantly correlated with traits positive association (Table 1). The positive correlation
such as plant height, pod yield, number of pods per plant, between pod yield and number of pods per plant
number of primary and secondary branches per plant (Table corroborates with earlier reports of Meta and Monpara
2). Gangadhara et al. (2016) [14] also reported association of (2010) [22]; Raut et al. (2010) [29] and Vekariya et al. (2010)
[34]
plant traits with S.litura damage and foliar disease .
incidence. Mean larval population per plant was negatively The highest genetic variation (GV) was observed with
correlated with pod yield and number of secondary branches regard to plant biomass and the lowest in case of number of
per plant whereas it was positively correlated with the primary plant branches per plant. Moderate to low GV was
number of primary branches and plant height. Per cent leaf recorded for pod yield, per cent leaf damage, plant height,
damage was negatively correlated but non-significant with number of mature pods, immature pods and number of
pod yield. Mohammad Saleem et al. (2018) [23] also reported primary branches. Environment variation (EV) was the
the non-significant correlation between S. litura damage and maximum in case of number of immature pods per plant in
pod yield per plant. Mean larval population per plant and contrast to the minimum in case of number of secondary

83
International Journal of Entomology Research www.entomologyjournals.com

branches per plant (Table 3). University for his help in statistical analysis.
In general, higher phenotypic coefficient of variability
values than that of genotypic coefficient of variability References
values indicate the influence of environment on traits. But, 1. Agropedia. Nutritional features of groundnut, 2009.
minimal differences between PCV and GCV values were http://agropedia.iitk.ac.in/content/ nutritional-features-
observed for all the characters, as they are less influenced by groundnut. Accessed on 27.01.2020
the environment indicating the reliability of selection based 2. Ali A, Khan S, Asad MA. Drought tolerance in wheat:
on these traits. The PCV and GCV values were ranked as Genetic variation and heritability for growth and ion
low, medium and high as follows: 0-10%-Low; 10-20%- relations. Asian J Plant Sci, 2002; 1:420-422.
Moderate; >20%-High. High genetic coefficient variation 3. APEDA.2018. Groundnut crop survey.
(GCV) was observed for almost all the characters with the https://apeda.gov.in/apedawebsite/Announcements/
exception of the number of immature pods. Many authors 2018 Groundnut_Survey_Report.PDF. Accessed on
estimate high GCV in various plant traits such as kernel 27.01.2020.
yield and branch numbers (Chavadhari et al. 2017) [8], 4. Atwal AS, Dhaliwal GS. Agricultural Pests of South
number of branches per plant (Gupta et al. 2015; Vasanthi et Asia and their Management, Kalyani Publishers, New
al. 2016) [15, 17], biological yield per plant (Gupta et al. 2015) Delhi, India, 2008.
[15]
. In the present study, high level of GCV estimates for per 5. Bhargavi G, Rao SV, Rao KLN. Genetic variability,
cent leaf damage, number of matured pods, pod yield, heritability and genetic advance of yield and related
primary branches and plant height were observed as like the traits of Spanish bunch groundnut (Arachis hypogaea
earlier findings of Rao et al. (2014) [5], Maurya et al. (2014) L.). Agric. Sci. Digest. 2016; 36(1):60-62.
[21]
and Ramana et al. (2015) [27]. 6. Burton GW, Dewane EM. Estimating heritability from
The higher level of heritability was recorded for almost all replicated clonal material. Agron. J. 1953; 45:478-481.
the traits except the number of immature pods per plant 7. Channayya P, Hiremath Nadaf HL, Keerthi CM.
which suggests that the selection based on the phenotypic Induced genetic variability and correlation studies for
performance of these traits would be more effective. High yield and its component traits in groundnut (Arachis
heritability for biological yield per plant was recorded by hypogaea L.). Electron. J Plant Breed. 2011; 2(1):135-
Korat et al. (2009) [20]; pod yield by Chavadhari et al. (2017) 142.
[8]
; plant height, biological yield branches per plant and 8. Chavadhari RM, Kachhadia VH, Vachhani JH, Virani
biological yield per plant by Gupta et al. (2015) [15] and MB. Genetic variability studies in groundnut (Arachis
Bhargavi et al. (2016) [5]; kernel yield per plant by Ramana hypogaea L.). Electron. J Plant Breed. 2017; 8(4):1288-
et al. (2015) [27] and Rao et al. (2015) [5]; plant height by 1292.
Kadam et al. (2016) [19] and the number of branches per 9. Choudhary M, Sharma SP, Dashora A, Maloo SR.
plant by Yadlapalli (2014) [35]. Assessment of genetic variability, correlation and path
Since high heritability does not always indicate a high analysis for yield and its components in groundnut
genetic gain, heritability with genetic advance considered (Arachis hypogaea L.). J Oilseeds Res. 2013;
together should be used in predicting the ultimate effect of 30(2):163-166.
selecting superior varieties (Ali et al. 2002) [2]. High genetic 10. Dharne PK, Patel SK. Screening of promising
advance (GA) was recorded in most of the traits except groundnut genotypes for their reaction to Spodoptera
immature pods per plant, the number of primary branches litura. Int. Arach. News. 2000; 20:67-69.
per plant and number of secondary branches per plant 11. Dolma T, Sekhar MR, Reddy KR. Genetic variability,
(Table 3). correlation and path analysis for yield its components in
High heritability coupled with high genetic advance as per late leaf spot resistance in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea
cent of mean indicates that such traits are under the strong L.). J Oilseeds Res. 2010; 27(2):154-157.
influence of additive gene action and hence simple selection 12. Doyle JJ, Luckow MA. The rest of the iceberg. Legume
based on the phenotypic performance of these traits would diversity and evolution in a phylogenetic context. Plant
be more effective. High heritability and moderate genetic Physiol. 2003; 131:900-910.
advance as per cent of mean values indicate the influence of 13. Falconer DS. Introduction to Quantitative Genetics.2nd
non-additive gene action and considerable influence of edition. Oliver and Boyd, Edinburg, London, UK, 1981.
environment on the expression of these traits. This trait 14. Gangadhara K, Nadaf HL, Chetana C. Phenotypic
could be exploited through the manifestation of dominance evaluation of backcross population for yield and foliar
and epistatic components through heterosis. diseases in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). The
It is concluded that significant differences were observed bioscan. 2016; 11(2):1323-1327.
among the groundnut accessions regarding all the traits 15. Gupta R, Vachhani JH, Kachhadia VH, Vaddoria MA,
studied. The characters namely, plant height, pod yield, Reddy P. Genetic variability and heritability studies in
number of matured pods, plant biomass and per cent leaf Virginia groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.).Electron. J.
damage recorded higher level of GCV, PCV, heritability Pl. Breed. 2015; 6(1):253-256.
and genetic advance indicating the role of additive gene 16. Heywood VH, Brummitt RK, Culham A, Seberg O.
action in controlling these characters. Selection for Leguminosae (Fabaceae). Pp.185-188. In: Flowering
improvement of these characters in early generation itself Plant Families of the World. New York, Firefly Books,
might be effective. 2007.
17. John K, Vasanthi RP, Venkatewarlu O, Haranath Naidu
Acknowledgement P. Variability and correlation studies for quantitative
The authors thank Dr.K.Saravanan, Department of Genetics traits in Spanish bunch groundnut. Legume Res. 2005;
and Plant breeding, Faculty of Agriculture, Annamalai 28(3):189-193.

84
International Journal of Entomology Research www.entomologyjournals.com

18. Johnson HW, Robinson HF, Comstock RE. Estimates Intl. J Pl. Sci. 2010; 6:11-15.
of genetic and environmental variability in soybean. 35. Yadlapalli S. Genetic variability and character
Agron. J. 1955; 47:314-318. association studies in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.).
19. Kadam VK, Chavan BH, Rajput HJ, Wakale MB. Int. J Plant Animal and Environ. Sci. 2014; 4(4):298-
Genetic diversity in summer groundnut (Arachis 300.
hypogaea Linn.). Int. Res. J Multidisciplinary Studies.
2016; 2(1):1-11.
20. Korat VP, Pithia MS, Savaliya JJ, Pansuriya AG,
Sodavadiya PR. Studies on genetic variability in
different genotypes of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea
L.). Legume Res. 2009; 32(3):224-226.
21. Maurya MK, Rai PK, Kumar A, Singh BA, Chaurasia
AK. Study on genetic variability and seed quality of
groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) genotypes. Int. J
Emerg. Tech. Adv. Engg. 2014; 4(6):818-823.
22. Meta HR, Monpara BA. Genetic variation and trait
relationships in summer groundnut, Arachis hypogaea
L. J Oilseeds Res. 2010; 27(1):8-11.
23. Mohammad Saleem A, Gopalakrishna Naidu K,
Mahalaxmi KK, Tippannavar PS, Nadaf HL.
Evaluation of recombinant inbred population for
Spodoptera litura resistance and productivity
parameters in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). J
Pharm. Phytochem. 2018; 7(6):987-990.
24. Ntare BR, Diallo AT, Ndjeunga J, Waliyar F.
Groundnut Seed production Manual. Patancheru 502
324, Andhra Pradesh, India: International Crops
Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics
(ICRISAT), 2008.
25. Panse VG. Genetics of quantitative characters in
relation to plant breeding. Indian J Genet. Pl. Br. 1957;
28:225-229.
26. Panse VG, Sukhatme PV. Statistical methods for
agricultural workers. ICAR Publication, New Delhi.
India, 1995.
27. Ramana E, Vasanthi RP, Reddy KH, Reddy BVB,
Reddy BR. Studies on genetic variability for yield,
yield components and resistance to kalahasti malady in
groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Int. J App. Bio.
Pharm. Tech. 2015; 6(1):1-4.
28. Rao VT, Venkanna V, Bhadru D, Bharathi D. Studies
on variability, character association and path analysis
on groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.).Int. J Pure. Appl.
Biosci. 2014; 2(2):194-197.
29. Raut RD, Dhaduk LK, Vachhani JH. Character
association and path coefficient analysis in F2
generation of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Int. J
Agric. Sci. 2010; 1:305-310.
30. Sahayaraj K, Raju G. Pest and natural enemy complex
of groundnut in Tuticorin and Tirunelveli districts of
Tamil Nadu, India. Int. Arach. Newsl. 2003; 233:25-29.
31. Savaliya JJ, Pansuriya AG, Sodavadiya PR, Leva RL.
Evaluation of inter and intraspecific hybrid derivatives
of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) for yield and its
components. Legume Res. 2009; 32(2):129-132.
32. SPSS Inc. SPSS for Windows. Release 16.0. SPSS Inc.
Chicago, IL. USA, 2007.
33. Vasanthi RP, Suneetha N, Sudhakar P. Genetic
diversity based on physiological attributes among
released and pre-release cultures of groundnut (Arachis
hypogaea L.). Legume Res. 2015; 38(1):110-113.
34. Vekariya HB, Khanpara MD, Vachhani JH, Jivani LL,
Vagadiya KJ, Revar HJ, et al. Correlation and path
analysis in bunch groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.).

85