Main Article Content
Mutation breeding is one of the most reliable techniques in improving crop plants. The study was frequency and spectrum of macro-mutations along with the mutagenic effectiveness and efficiency of different doses of gamma rays in pea variety (Arkel). The irradiated seeds were sown in the M1, M2 generations in their respective control and harvested in bulk to raise the M3 generation (2013-14) in Randomized Block Design with three replications. Screening of the M3 generation revealed that the mutagenic treatments induced morphological and physiological changes in the variety. A spectrum of mutations which included variants with respect to plant stature, maturity, pod shape, seed colour and seed shape were observed mutagenic effectiveness is measure of the frequency of mutations induced by unit mutagen doses whereas mutagenic efficiency is measure of proportion of mutation in relation to undesirable changes like lethality and sterility etc. The frequency of mutagenic efficiency and effectiveness was found to be highest at lower doses. In mutation breeding where large populations are handled, estimation of mutagenic effect for macro mutation, effectiveness and efficiency may help the breeders in identifying effective treated populations in early generation for reduction in cost of breeding and enhancing scope of selection.
Kumar A, Mishra MN, Kharkwal MC. Induced mutagenesis in black gram (Vigna mungo L. Hepper). Indian Journal of Genetics. 2007;67(1):41-46.
Malusynski M, Ahloowalia BS, Sigurbjornsson BS. Application of in vivo and in vitro mutation techniques for crop improvement. Euphytica. 1995;85:303-315.
Gustaffson A. Characterization and role of highly productive mutations in diploid barley. Rad. Bot. 1996;5(Suppl.):323-337.
Varghese G, Sharma B. Changes in protein quantity and quality associated with a mutation for amber grain colour in wheat. Sci. 1994;35:469-470.
Konzak CF, Nilan RA, Froese Gerten EE, Foster RJ. Factors affecting the biological action of mutagens. In: Proc. Symposium on Induction of Mutation and the Mutation Process, Prague. 1965;123-132.
Gaur PM, Gour VK. A gene inhibiting flower colour in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Indian J. Genet. 2001;62(3):273-274.
Kartika R, Subba Lakshmi B. Effects of gamma-rays and EMS on two varieties of soybean. Asian J. Plant Sci. 2006;5(4):721-724.
Prem D, Gupta K, Agnihotri A. Can we predict mutagen induced damage in plant systems mathematically? Insights from zygotic embryo and haploid mutagenesis in Indian mustard (Brassica juncea). Botanica Serbica. 2011;35:137-143.
Vinita Sharma, Kumar G. EMS induced viable macro mutants in Cicer arietinum L. J. Cytol. Genet. 2003;4:85-89.
Ahirwar RN, Lal JP, Singh P. Gamma-rays and ethyl methane sulphonate induced mutation in Microsperma lentil (Lens culinaris L. Medikus). The Bioscan. 2014;9(2):691-695.
Khan S, Wani MR, Bhat M, Kouser P. Induction of morphological mutants in chickpea. International Chickpea and Pigeonpea Newsletter. 2004;6-11.
Barshile JD, Apparao BJ. Genetic improvement of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) using induced mutations: Proc. Induced Plant Mutations in the Genomics Era. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations. Italy, Rome. 2009;101-104.
Singh VP, Srivastava K, Singh S. Gamma ray and EMS induced mutations in mungbean (Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek). Crop Res. 2005;29(3):480-485.
Singh B. Induced leaf and inflorescence mutations in Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek. Indian J. Genet. 2007;67(2):180-182.
Mishra D, Singh B, Sahu R. Gamma ray induced macro mutations in greengram (Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek). International J. Agriculture and Forestry. 2013;3(3):105-109.
Ramya B, Nallathambi G, Ganesh Ram S. Screening for low Raffinose family oligosaccharides and low phytic acid lines in macro mutant urdbean (Vigna mungo L. Hepper). Vegetos. 2014;27(1):17-22.
Nawale SR. Studies on induced mutagenesis in cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.). M.Sc. (Agri) Diss., Dr. B. S. K. K. Vidyapeeth, Dapoli (MS) M.Sc. (Agri); 2004.
Sagade SV. Genetic improvement of urdbean (Vigna mungo L. Hepper) through mutation breeding. Doctoral Diss., University of Pune, Pune (MS), India, M.Sc.; 2008.
Sharma R, Singh VP. The influence of altered moisture levels in seeds on the induction of mutations with EMS and gamma rays in mungbean. J. Ind. Bot. Soc. 1992;71:125-128.
Toker C, Cagirgan MI. Spectrum and frequency of induced mutations in chickpea. ICPN. 2004;11:8-10.
Senapati N, Misra RC, Muduli KC. Induced macromutations in blackgram (Vigna mungo (L.) Hepper). Legume Res. 2008;31(4):243-248.
Anbu Selvam Y, Elangaimannan R, Venkatesan M, Karthikeyan P, Palaniraja K. Chemically induced mutagenesis in blackgram (Vigna mungo (L.) Hepper). Electronic J. Pl. Breed. 2010;1(4):921-924.
Nilan RA, Fonzak CF, Wagner J, Legault RR. Effectiveness and efficiency of radiation for inducing genetic and cytogenetic changes. Rad. Bot. 1965;5:71-89.
Dhanavel D, Pavadai P, Mullainathan L, Mohana D, Raju G, Girija M, Thilagavathi C. Effectiveness and efficiency of chemical mutagens in cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp). Afr J Biotechnol. 2008;7(22):4116–4117.
Khan MH, Tyagi SD. Studies on effectiveness and efficiency of gamma rays, EMS and their combination in soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merrill.]. J Plant Breed Crop Sci. 2010;2(3):055–58.
Kumar A, Chaurasia AK, Marker S, Shukla PK, Rai PK, Verma PK, Bara BM. Effect of gamma radiation of macro mutations, effectiveness and efficiency under M2 generation in pea (Pisum sativum L.). Annals of West University of Timişoara, Ser. Biology. 2016;71-76.
Jabee F, Ansari MYK. Mutagenic effectiveness and efficiency of hydrazine sulphate (HS) in inducing cytomorphological mutation in Cicer arietinum L. var. K. 850. J. Cytol. Genet. 2005;6(2):161-166.
Wani AA. Mutagenic effectiveness and efficiency of gamma rays, ethyl methane sulphonate and their combination treatments in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Asian J Plant Sci. 2009;8(4):318.
Khursheed S, Laskar RA, Raina A, Amin R, Khan S. Comparative analysis of cytological abnormalities induced in Vicia faba L. genotypes using physical and chemical mutagenesis. Chromosome Sci. 2015;18(3–4):47–51