Biochemical Genetics

, Volume 56, Issue 3, pp 188–209 | Cite as

Relationship of Parental Genetic Distance with Heterosis and Specific Combining Ability in Sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) Based on Phenotypic and Molecular Marker Analysis

  • Sarita K. Pandey
  • Tapash Dasgupta
  • Abhishek Rathore
  • Anilkumar Vemula
Original Article


The genetic distance analysis for selection of suitable parents has been established and effectively used in many crops; however, there is dearth of conclusive report of relationship of genetic distance analysis with heterosis in sesame. In the present study, an attempt was made to estimate the associations of genetic distances using SSR (GDSSR), seed-storage protein profiling (GDSDS) and agro-morphological traits (GDMOR) with hybrid performance. Seven parents were selected from 60 exotic and Indian genotypes based on genetic distance from clustering pattern based on SSR, seed-storage protein, morphological traits and per se performance. For combining ability analysis, 7 parents and 21 crosses generated from 7 × 7 half diallel evaluated at two environments in a replicated field trial during pre-kharif season of 2013. Compared with the average parents yield (12.57 g plant−1), eight hybrids had a significant (P < 0.01) yield advantage across environments, with averages of 26.94 and 29.99% for better-parent heterosis (BPH) and mid-parent heterosis (MPH), respectively, across environments. Highly significant positive correlation was observed between specific combining ability (SCA) and per se performance (0.97), while positive non-significant correlation of BPH with GDSSR (0.048), and non-significant negative correlations with GDMOR (− 0.01) and GDSDS (− 0.256) were observed. The linear regressions of SCA on MPH, BPH and per se performance of F1s were significant with R2 value of 0.88, 0.84 and 0.95 respectively. The present findings revealed a weak association of GDSSR with F1’s performance; however, SCA has appeared as an important factor in the determination of heterosis and per se performance of the hybrids. The present findings also indicated that parental divergence in the intermediate group would likely produce high heterotic crosses in sesame.


GCA Heterosis Genetic distances SCA Sesame SSR 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

10528_2017_9837_MOESM1_ESM.docx (39 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 39 kb)


  1. Arunachalam V, Bandyopadhyay A, Nigam SN, Gibbons RW (1984) Heterosis in relation to genetic divergence and specific combining ability in groundnut (Arachishypogaea L.). Euphytica. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baker RJ (1978) Issues in diallel analysis. Crop Sci 18:533–536. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Banerjee PP, Kole PC (2009) Analysis of genetic architecture for some physiological characters in sesame (Sesamum indicum L.). Euphytica 168(1):11–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Banerjee P, Kole P (2010) Heterosis, inbreeding depression and their relationship with genetic divergence in sesame (Sesamum indicum L.). Acta Agronomica Hungarica. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bernardo R (1992) Relationship between single-cross performance and molecular marker heterozygosity. Theor Appl Genet 83(5):628–634CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Betran FJ, Ribaut JM, Beck D, De Leon DG (2003) Genetic diversity, specific combining ability, and heterosis in tropical maize under stress and nonstress environments. Crop Sci 43(3):797–806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bhat KV, Babrekar PP, Lakhanpaul S (1999) Study of genetic diversity in Indian and exotic sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) germplasm using random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) markers. Euphytica 110(1):21–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bhattacharya U, Pandey SK, Dasgupta T (2014) Identification of EST-SSRs and FDM in sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) through data mining. Sch J Agric Sci 4:60–69Google Scholar
  9. Bisht IS, Bhat KV, Lakhanpaul S, Biswas BK, Pandiyan M, Hanchinal RR (2004) Broadening the genetic base of sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) through germplasm enhancement. Plant Genet Resour 2(03):143–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dikshit UN, Swain D (2000) Genetic divergence and heterosis in sesame. Indian J Genet Pl Br 60(2):201–212Google Scholar
  11. Fan XM, Zhang YD, Yao WH, Bi YQ, Liu L, Chen HM, Kang MS (2014) Reciprocal diallel crosses impact combining ability, variance estimation, and heterotic group classification. Crop Sci 54:89–97. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Geleta LF, Labuschagne MT, Viljoen CD (2004) Relationship between heterosis and genetic distance based on morphological traits and AFLP markers in pepper. Plant Breed 123(5):467–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Griffing B (1956) Concept of general and specific combining ability in relation to diallel crossing system. Aust J Biol Sci 9:463–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hallauer AR (1999) Temperate maize and heterosis. In: Coors JG, Pandey S (eds) The genetics and exploitation of heterosis in crops. American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, Madison, pp 353–361Google Scholar
  15. Hallauer AR, Miranda Filho JB (1988) Quantitative genetics in maize breeding, 2nd edn. Iowa State University Press, Ames, IAGoogle Scholar
  16. Huang M, Chen LY, Chen ZQ (2015) Diallel analysis of combining ability and heterosis for yield and yield components in rice by using positive loci. Euphytica 205(1):37–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hung HY, Holland JB (2012) Diallel analysis of resistance to fusarium ear rot and fumonisin contamination in maize. Crop Sci 52(5):2173–2181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jaccard P (1908) Nouvellesrecherche ´s sur la distribution florale. Bull Soc Vaud Sci Nat 44:223–270Google Scholar
  19. Jan HU, Rabbani MA, Shinwari ZK (2011) Assessment of genetic diversity of indigenous turmeric (Curcuma longa L.) germplasm from Pakistan using RAPD markers. J. Med. Plants Res. 5:823–830Google Scholar
  20. Kang MS (1994) Applied quantitative genetics. M.S. Kang, Baton RougeGoogle Scholar
  21. Krystkowiak K, Adamski T, Surma M, Kaczmarek Z (2009) Relationship between phenotypic and genetic diversity of parental genotypes and the specific combining ability and heterosis effects in wheat (Triticumaestivum L.). Euphytica 165(3):419–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Laemmli UK (1970) Cleavage of structural proteins during the assembly of the head of bacteriophage T4. Nature. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lowry OH, Rosebrough NJ, Farr AL, Randall RJ (1953) Protein measurement with the folin-phenols reagent. Jr Biol Chem 193:265–275Google Scholar
  24. Lu H, Myers GO (2011) Combining abilities and inheritance of yield components in influential upland cotton varieties. Aust J Crop Sci 5:384–390Google Scholar
  25. Ndhlela T, Herselman L, Semagn K, Magorokosho C, Mutimaamba C, Labuschagne MT (2015) Relationships between heterosis, genetic distances and specific combining ability among CIMMYT and Zimbabwe developed maize inbred lines under stress and optimal conditions. Euphytica 204(3):635–647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Oliveira KM, Laborda PR, Garcia AAF, Zagatto-Paterniani MEAG, Souza AP (2004) Evaluating genetic relationships between tropical maize inbred lines by means of AFLP profiling. Hereditas 140(1):24–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pandey SK, Das A, Rai P, Dasgupta T (2015) Morphological and genetic diversity assessment of sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) accessions differing in origin. Physiol Mol Bio Plants 21(4):519–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ramalingam J, Nadarajan N, Vanniyarajan C, Rangasamy P (1997) Combining ability studies involving CMS lines in rice. Oryza 34:4–7Google Scholar
  29. Rohlf FJ (2000) NTSYS-pc ver 2.11, Exter Software, Setauket, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. Rohlf FJ (2005) NTSYS-pc: numerical taxonomy and multivariate analysis system, version 2.20, applied biostatistics, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. Saghai-Maroof MA, Soliman KM, Jorgensen RA, Allard RW (1984) Ribosomal DNA spacer-length polymorphisms in barley: Mendelian inheritance, chromosomal location, and population dynamics. Proc Natl Acad Sci 81:8014–8018CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Saravanan S, Nadarajan N (2003) Combining ability studies in sesame. Crop Res 25:319–324Google Scholar
  33. SAS Institute Inc. 2015. SAS/STAT® 14.1 user’s guide. Cary, NCGoogle Scholar
  34. Saxena KB, Sawargaonkar SL (2014) First information on heterotic groups in pigeonpea [Cajanuscajan (L.) Millsp.]. Euphytica 200(2):187–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Shieh GJ, Thseng FS (2002) Genetic diversity of Tainan-white maize inbred lines and prediction of single cross hybrid performances using RAPD markers. Euphytica 124:307–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Solanki ZS, Gupta D (2003) Variability and character association among quantitative characters of sesame. J Oilseeds Res 20:276–277Google Scholar
  37. Solanki ZS, Singh I, Rajpurohit TS, Ahuja DB (2006) Combining ability and heterosis for stem and root rot and leaf webber/capsule borer in sesame. Indian J Agric Sci 1(1–2):171–174Google Scholar
  38. Wang L, Yu S, Tong C, Zhao Y, Liu Y, Song C, Li D (2014) Genome sequencing of the high oil crop sesame provides insight into oil biosynthesis. Genome Biol 15(2):1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Weir BS (1990) Genetic data analysis. Methods for discrete population genetic data. Sinauer Associates, Inc., SunderlandGoogle Scholar
  40. Yao WH, Zhang YD, Kang MS, Chen HM, Liu L, Yu LJ, Fan XM (2013) Diallel analysis models: a comparison of certain genetic statistics. Crop Sci 53(4):1481–1490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Zhang Q, Gao YJ, Maroof MS, Yang SH, Li JX (1995) Molecular divergence and hybrid performance in rice. Mol Breed 1(2):133–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Zhang Y, Kang MS (1997) DIALLEL-SAS: A SAS program for Griffing’s diallel analyses. Agron J 89(2):176–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sarita K. Pandey
    • 1
    • 2
  • Tapash Dasgupta
    • 2
  • Abhishek Rathore
    • 1
  • Anilkumar Vemula
    • 1
  1. 1.International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid TropicsPatancheruIndia
  2. 2.Department of Genetics and Plant BreedingInstitute of Agricultural Science, Calcutta UniversityKolkataIndia

Personalised recommendations