19.04.2013 Views

Variability studies of some important breeding traits in sweet ... - hr

Variability studies of some important breeding traits in sweet ... - hr

Variability studies of some important breeding traits in sweet ... - hr

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Genetika, oplemenjivanje bilja i sjemenarstvo<br />

thickness, only population V<strong>in</strong>ga is dist<strong>in</strong>ctly significant superior to the control landrace<br />

Cristal. In other populations, the pulp is th<strong>in</strong>ner, <strong>in</strong> 9 cases hav<strong>in</strong>g the statistic assurance. If<br />

fruit pulp weight is determ<strong>in</strong>ed, more populations are superior to the control. The most<br />

valuable is population Temereşti I. concern<strong>in</strong>g mentioned quality <strong>traits</strong>, studied<br />

populations are not so valorous due to th<strong>in</strong> pulp which is not desirable for fresh<br />

consumption or process<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

Seed production is not a yield component, but it may have an impact <strong>in</strong> multiplication<br />

process <strong>of</strong> this species. High quantity <strong>of</strong> seed <strong>in</strong> fruit can be unfavorable for pulp<br />

development s<strong>in</strong>ce the plant directs the nutrients to the seeds <strong>in</strong>stead to the pulp. In<br />

comparison to the control landrace Cristal, most <strong>of</strong> the populations presented higher seed<br />

number, and superior weight. Such a situation is typical for wild and extensive forms.<br />

Inferior values were not registered <strong>in</strong> comparison to the control.(table 3.)<br />

Table 3 Results regard<strong>in</strong>g quality <strong>traits</strong> and seed production <strong>in</strong> studied local landraces<br />

Pulp thickness<br />

(cm)<br />

Pulp weight (g) Seed number/fruit<br />

Seed<br />

weight/fruit (g)<br />

No. Genotype<br />

Diff.<br />

Diff.e<br />

Diff.<br />

Diff.<br />

Mean Signifi- Mean Signifi- Mean Signifi- Mean Significancecancecancecance<br />

1 Cristal 0,55 Control 161,00 Control 44,90 Control 1,01 Control<br />

2 Gelu 0,47 -0,08 171,42 10,42 45,97 1,07 0,89 -0,12<br />

3 Aldeşti 0,52 -0,03 232,90 71,90** 62,29 17,39* 1,50 0,49***<br />

4 Seleuş 0,48 -0,07 166,12 5,12 38,59 -6,31 1,21 0,20<br />

5 Cut<strong>in</strong>a 0,48 -0,07 294,60 133,60*** 71,73 26,83*** 1,81 0,80***<br />

6 Şimian 0,40 -0,15 00<br />

285,09 124,09*** 53,27 8,37 1,86 0,85***<br />

7 Altr<strong>in</strong>gen 0,51 -0,04 204,00 43,00 58,03 13,13 0,82 -0,19<br />

8 Satch<strong>in</strong>ez 0,40 -0,15 00<br />

214,66 53,66* 31,47 -13,43 0 1,46 0,45**<br />

9 Temereşti I 0,61 0,06 238,66 77,66** 94,17 49,27*** 1,48 0,47**<br />

10 Temereşti II 0,45 -0,10 201,66 40,66 50,56 5,66 1,28 0,27<br />

11 Juliţa 0,46 -0,09 216,16 55,16* 52,91 8,01 1,29 0,28<br />

12 Şiria 0,45 -0,10 273,83 112,83*** 72,42 27,52*** 1,40 0,39**<br />

13 Girişu de Criş 0,53 -0,02 195,66 34,66 38,25 -6,65 1,03 0,02<br />

14 Fiziş 0,48 -0,07 241,60 80,60** 58,36 13,46* 1,44 0,43**<br />

15 Tomnatic 0,46 -0,09 209,66 48,66 61,62 16,72* 1,46 0,45**<br />

16 R<strong>in</strong>ei I 0,48 -0,07 218,33 57,33* 56,82 11,92 1,18 0,17<br />

17 Ceica 0,38 -0,17 00<br />

235,00 74,00** 34,27 -10,63 1,37 0,36*<br />

18 Cenad 0,44 -0,11 0<br />

333,28 172,28*** 44,60 -0,30 2,19 1,18***<br />

19 Bel<strong>in</strong>ţ I 0,34 -0,21 000<br />

223,20 62,20* 23,93 -20,97 **<br />

1,10 0,09<br />

20 Bel<strong>in</strong>ţ II 0,41 -0,14 0<br />

229,83 68,83* 35,84 -9,06 0,94 -0,07<br />

21 Tăgădău 0,63 0,08 220,00 59,00* 57,62 12,72 0,97 -0,04<br />

22 Ohaba Lungă 0,41 -0,14 0<br />

235,66 74,66** 28,94 -15,96 0<br />

1,48 0,47**<br />

23 V<strong>in</strong>ga 0,71 0,16** 279,80 118,80*** 63,64 18,74*** 1,68 0,67***<br />

24 BecicherecuMic 0,63 0,08 247,33 86,33** 61,67 16,77* 1,47 0,46**<br />

25 Buteni 0,48 -0,07 182,40 21,40 42,79 -2,11 1,01 0,00<br />

26 Pordeanu 0,44 -0,11 0<br />

231,20 70,20** 26,43 -18,47 0<br />

1,13 0,12<br />

27 Dudeştii Vechi 0,46 -0,09 228,85 67,85* 34,64 -10,26 1,04 0,03<br />

28 Ches<strong>in</strong>ţi 0,65 0,10 212,00 51,00 38,62 -6,28 0,87 -0,14<br />

29 Rieni II 0,39 -0,16 00<br />

225,66 64,66* 27,90 -17,00 0<br />

1,38 0,37*<br />

LSD5%=0.11cm; LSD5%=51.98 g; LSD5%=13.29; LSD5%=0.29 g;<br />

LSD1%=0.15cm; LSD1%=68.91g; LSD1%=17.62; LSD1%=0.38 g;<br />

LSD0.1%=0.19cm LSD0.1%=88.92 g. SD0.1%=22.74 LSD0.1=%=0.49g<br />

Conclusions<br />

1. Studied collection is valorous <strong>in</strong> <strong>breed<strong>in</strong>g</strong> processes for fruit size. Landraces with big<br />

fruits are recommended for cultivations <strong>in</strong> provenience area, be<strong>in</strong>g adapted to specific<br />

climatic conditions. Among evaluated populations, Temereşti I and Şiria are<br />

44. <strong>hr</strong>vatski i 4. međunarodni simpozij agronoma<br />

353

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!