Seed morphology, quality traits and imbibition behaviour study of atypical lentil (Lens culinaris Medik.) from Rajasthan, India

  • Kuldeep TripathiEmail author
  • Padmavati G. Gore
  • Anjula Pandey
  • Rakesh Bhardwaj
  • Neeta Singh
  • Gautam Chawla
  • Ashok Kumar
Research Article


An atypical morphotype of lentil (Lens culinaris Medik.) was identified during mega germplasm characterization programme at ICAR-National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources, New Delhi undertaken during rabi 2017–2018. On the basis of the comparative evaluation of lentil morphotype with two distinct subspecies, viz., L. culinaris subsp. macrosperma and L. culinaris subsp. microsperma, this atypical morphotype was classified under the latter subspecies. Based on comparative study with selected accessions for seed morphology, quality traits and physiology, this accession was identified with very distinct and prominent funiculus on the seed coat, higher rate of water uptake and nutritional traits (rich in sugar, starch, protein and minerals). Present studies identified this germplasm as unique type that deserves for the detailed study to explore its genetic resource potential.


Characterization Funiculus Lentil Morphotype Rajasthan 



We thank Director, ICAR-NBPGR for his support and encouragement in undertaking this work. We are grateful to Dr Ashutosh Sarker, Co-ordinator for South Asia & China Regional Program & Food Legume Breeder, ICARDA for constructive suggestions during the preparation of the manuscript. We wish to place on record the great efforts and contributions of technical and field staff in carrying out this work successfully.


Study was conducted by using the institutional funding resources from ICAR-NBPGR, New Delhi.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest on the content of manuscript and study undertaken.

Research involving human participants and informed consent

a clear expression of consent was obtained from the farmers/ informants who participated in discussion and provided feedback on elaborating the purpose of research study; they provided information on undertaking data on knowledge resource.


  1. Abbo S, Rachamim E, Zehavi Y, Zezak I, Lev-Yadun S, Gopher A (2011) Experimental growing of wild pea in Israel and its bearing on Near Eastern plant domestication. Ann Bot 107:1399–1404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abbo S, Pinhasi van-Oss R, Gopher A, Saranga Y, Ofner I, Peleg Z (2014) Plant domestication versus crop evolution: a conceptual framework for cereals and grain legumes. Trends Plant Sci 19:351–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Agbo GN, Hosfield MA, Uebersax MA, Klomparens K (1987) Seed microstructure and its relationship to water uptake in isogenic lines and a cultivar of dry beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Food Microstruct 6:91–102Google Scholar
  4. Apak R, Guclu K, Ozyurek M, Karademir SE (2004) A novel total antioxidant capacity index for dietarypolyphenols, vitamin C and E, using their cupric ion reducing capability in the presence of neocuproine: the CUPRAC method. J Agric Food Chem 52:7970–7981CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ayeh KO, Lee Y, Ambrose MJ, Hvoslef-Eide AK (2011) Growth, seed development and genetic analysis in wild type and def mutant of Pisum sativum L. BMC Res Notes 4:489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baker RT, Bridges TL, Bragg LH (1985) The pleurograms and seed surface patterns of some Mimosoideae (Leguminosae) genera. Scanning Electron Microsc II:803–809Google Scholar
  7. Bayoumi TY (2008) Genetic diversity among lentil genotypes for drought tolerance. J Agric Invest 3:25–35Google Scholar
  8. Bragg LH (1983) Seed coat of some Lupines species. Scanning Electron Microsc IV:1739–1745Google Scholar
  9. Bridges TL, Bragg LH (1983) Seed coat comparisons of representatives of the subfamily Papilionoideae (Leguminosae). Scanning Electron Microsc IV:1731–1737Google Scholar
  10. Cardador MA, Loarca PGL, Oomah BD (2002) Antioxidant activity in common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). J Agric Food Chem 50(24):6975–6980CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chachalis D, Smith ML (2000) Imbibition behaviour of soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merrill] accessions with different testa characteristics. Seed Sci Technol 28(2):321–331Google Scholar
  12. Corner EJH (1976) The seed of dicotyledons, vols 1 and 2. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  13. DuBois M, Gilles KA, Hamilton JK, Rebers PA, Smith F (1956) Colorimetric method for determination of sugars and related substances. Anal Chem 28:350–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Duenas M, Hernandez T, Estrella I (2002) Phenolic composition of the cotyledon and the seed coat of lentils (Lens culinaris L.). Eur Food Res Technol 215:478–483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Duenas M, Estrella I, Hernandez T (2004) Occurrence of phenolic compounds in the seed coat and the cotyledon of peas (Pisum sativum L.). Eur Food Res Technol 219:116–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hughes JS, Swanson BG (1986) Microstructure of lentil seeds (Lens culinaris). Food Microstruct 5(2):241–246Google Scholar
  17. Hyde EOC (1954) The function of the hilum in some Papilionaceae in relation to ripening of the seed and the permeability of the testa. Ann Bot 18:241–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. ISTA (2015) International rules for seed testing. 1:19-8 (276). Bassersdorf, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  19. Karaki T, Watanabe Y, Kondo T, Koike T (2012) Strophiole of seeds of the black locust acts as a water gap. Plant Species Biol 27:226–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Khazaei H (2014) Leaf traits associated with drought adaptation in faba bean (Vicia faba L.). University of Helsinki, Finland, pp 15Google Scholar
  21. Kikuchi K, Koizumi M, Ishida N, Kano H (2006) Water uptake by dry beans observed by micro-magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Bot 98:545–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Korban SS, Coyne DP, Weihing JL (1981) Evaluation, variation, and genetic control of seed coat whiteness in dry beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). J Am Soc Hortic Sci 166:575–579Google Scholar
  23. Kyle JH, Randall TE (1963) A new concept of the hardseed character in Phaseolus vulgaris L, and its use in breeding and inheritance studies. Am Soc Hort Sci 83:461–475Google Scholar
  24. Ladizinsky G (1998) Plant evolution under domestication. Kluwer, DordrechtCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lersten NR, Gunn CR (1982) Testa characters in tribe Vicieae, with notes about tribes Abreae, Cicereae and Trifolieae (Fabaceae). Technical bulletin no. 1667, US Department of Agriculture, USDA, pp 1–40Google Scholar
  26. Lush WM, Evans LT (1980) The seed coats of cowpeas and other grain legumes-structure in relation to function. Field Crops Res 3:267–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Maass BL (2006) Changes in seed morphology, dormancy and germination from wild to cultivated hyacinth bean germplasm (Lablab purpureus: Papilionoideae). Genet Resour Crop Evol 53:1127–1135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mahajan RK, Sapra RL, Srivastava U, Singh M, Sharma GD (2000) Minimal descriptors for characterization and evaluation of agri-horticultural crops (part I). National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  29. Martinez CJ, Loarca Pina G, Ortiz GD (2003) Antimutagenic activity of phenolic compounds, oligosaccharides and quinolizidinic alkaloids from Lupinus campestris seeds. Food Addit Contam 20:940–948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McDonald MB, Vertucci CW, Roos EE (1988) Soybean seed imbibition: water absorption by seed parts. Crop Sci 28:993–997CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Meyer CJ, Steudle E, Peterson CA (2007) Patterns and kinetics of water uptake by soybean seeds. J Exp Bot 58:717–732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Moradi R, Alizadeh Y, Nezami A, Eshghizadeh HR (2013) Study of lentil (Lens culinaris Medik.) seed size on germination and seedling properties in drought stress condition. Iran J Field Crops Res 11(3):39Google Scholar
  33. Nygaard DF, Hawtin GC (1981) Production and trade uses. In: Webb C, Hawtin GC (eds) Lentils. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Slough, pp 7–14Google Scholar
  34. Ranathunge K, Shao S, Qutob D, Gijzen M, Peterson CA, Bernards MA (2010) Properties of the soybean seed coat cuticle change during development. Planta 23:1171–1188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sefa-Dedeh S, Stanley DW (1979) The relationship of microstructure of cowpeas to water absorption and dehulling properties. Cereal Chem 56(4):379–386Google Scholar
  36. Singleton VL, Orthofer R, Lamuela RM (1999) Analysis of total phenols and other oxidation substances by means of Folin–Ciocalteu reagent. Methods Enzymol 299:152–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Smykal P, Vernoud V, Blair MW, Soukup A, Thompson RD (2014) The role of the testa during development and in establishment of dormancy of the legume seed. Front Plant Sci 5:351Google Scholar
  38. Solh F (1980) Classification of large and small seeded lentils by seed weight. Lens 7:23Google Scholar
  39. Summerfield RJ (2012) World crops: cool season food legumes: a global perspective of the problems and prospects for crop improvement in pea, lentil, fababean and chickpea, vol 5. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  40. Tickoo J, Sharma B, Mishra S, Dikshit H (2005) Lentil (Lens culinaris) in India: present status and future perspectives. Indian J Agric Sci 75(9):539–562Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ICAR-National Bureau of Plant Genetic ResourcesNew DelhiIndia
  2. 2.ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research InstituteNew DelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations