Variability analysis in F6 lines of tomato for the role of trichomes for resistance against fruit borer (Helicoverpa armigira)
Paper Details
Variability analysis in F6 lines of tomato for the role of trichomes for resistance against fruit borer (Helicoverpa armigira)
Abstract
Use of pesticides to control the pest is unsafe practice for environment and human health therefore the present era scientist are seeking to adopt host-plant resistance which is a natural strategy to control the pests on crops. Our study aims to find the role of trichomes in conferring resistance against fruit borers(Helicoverpa armigira) in tomato breeding lines.F6 lines were transplanted in the field and data were collected on trichomes density, No of fruits affected by fruit borers(Helicoverpa armigira) and total number of fruits/plant. The lines having higher density of trichomes (6.5 on the scale of 10) were found to be less affected (1.33 Nos fruits affected) by fruit borers (Helicoverpa armigira)as compared to the lines with lower trichome density .Highest value of Va(5.3) was reported for Number of fruits/plant. Heritability % was found to be lower for all the parameters. The degree of resemblance was found to be moderate for all the parameters. Vp (Phenotypic variance) and Va values within the lines exceeded the Vp and Va values of the whole population. The high difference was found between the Vp and Va within the lines. The PCV (Phenotypic Coefficient of Variation) within the lines for fruits affected/plant, for non-glandular trichomes type V and for glandular trichomes type VI was found to be higher. The above mentioned findings depict that trichomes confer resistance to host plant against fruit borers and can be relayed upon to some extent for crop protection.
Ahmad M, IqbalM, Khan BA, Khan ZU, Ullah I, Akbar K, Shahid M, Rehman A. 2017. Response to Selection and Decline in Variability, Heritabilty and Genetic Advance from F2 to F3 Generation of Tomato (Solanum lycopercicum). International Journal of Plant Research 7(1),1-4. http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.plant.20170701.01
Burton GW, Devane EH.1953. Estimating heritability in tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea) from Replicated Colonel Material. Agronomy Journal 45, 478-481.
Dimoch MB, Kennedy GG. 1983. The role of glandular trichomes in the resistance of Lycopersicum hirsutum f. glabratumto Heliothiszea. Entomologia Experimentali Set Applicata 33, 263-268.
Duffey SS, Isman MB. 1981. Inhibition of insect larval growth by phenolics in glandular trichomes of tomato leaves.Experientia 37(6),574-574.
Falconer DS. 1960. Introduction to quantitative genetics. Oliver and boydLtd ,Edinberg .
Farrar RRJ, Kennedy GG, Kashyap RK. 1992. influence of life history differences of two tachinid of parsitiods of Helicoverazea and their interection with glandular trichomes /methyl ketone based insect resistance in tomato. Journal of Chemical Ecology 18,499-515.
Gopalakarshinan R. 2006. Induced resistance in tomato against key insect pests. M.S Dissertation, Annamali university, India.
Haider MS, Tahir M, Latif S, Briddon RW. 2006. First report of Tomato leaf curl New Delhi virus infecting Ecliptaprostrata in Pakistan. Plant Pathology 55(2),285-289. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3059.2005.01278.x
Inayatullah M.2007. Biological control of tomato fruitworm (Helicoverpa armigera) using egg parasitoid Trichogramma chilonis (Trichogrammatidae: Hymenoptera) and Chrysoperla carnea (Chrysopidae: Neuroptera). First Annual Technical Report, HEC Funded Project.
Kamil MM, Mohamed GF, Shaheen MS. 2011. Fourier transformer infrared spectroscopy for quality assurance of tomato products. Journal of American Science7,558-72.
Kowalski SP, Plaisted RL, Steffens JC. 1993. Immunodetection of Polyphenol oxidase in glandular trichomes of S. berthaultii, S. tuberosum and their hybrids. Aemrican potato Journal 70(3), 185-199. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02849308
Maiti R, Satya P, Rajkumar D, Ramaswamy A. 2012. Crop plant anatomy.CAB . international, Oxfordshire,UK.
Romeis J, Shannower TG , Peter AG.1999.Trichomes on pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan L) and two wild cajanusspp . Crop science 39, 564-569.
Sahu IK, Shaw SS, Gupta AK. 2005. Relative preference of tomato genotypes by fruit borer (Helicoverpa armigera) (Hub.). National Journal of Plant Improvement 7(1), 44-46.
Selvanarayanan V. 2015. Redesigning research on crop resistance to insect:Experience with tomato. In: A.K. Chakarvathy, New horizons in insect science :Towards sustaianable pest management). New Dehli, India: Springer. 295-299.
Sharma HC, Sujana G, Rao DM. 2009. Morphological and chemical components of resistance to pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera in wild relatives of pigeonpea. Arthropod-Plant Interactions 3(3), 151-61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11829-009-9068-5
Souza JC, Reis PR. 1999. Pragas da batataem Minas Gerais. In: EPAMIG: Belo Horizonte, p. 62.
Sultani MS,Omid AR. 2013. Evaluation of tomato genotypes for resistance to fruit borer Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner), (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Conference: The International Conference on Insect Science (14, 15, 16 and 17th February 2013Bangalore, India), At Bangalore, India.
Wallace DH, Ozbun JL, Munger HM. 1972. Advances in agronomy. American society of agronomy, Academic press, New York.
Wrike G,Weber WE. 1986. Quantitative genetics and selection in plant breeding. Walter de Gruyter, Newyork.
Mehboob Ahmad, Bilal Ahmed Khan, Mazhar Iqbal, Isma Khurshid, Kehkashan Akbar, Muhmmad Shahid, Adil Rehman, Mehmoodur Rehman, Akhtar Nawaz, 2018. Variability analysis in F6 lines of tomato for the role of trichomes for resistance against fruit borer (Helicoverpa armigira). Int. J. Biosci., 12(4), 181-187.
Copyright © 2018 by the Authors. This article is an open access article and distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) license.