Summary
Based on morphological diversity, cultivated groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) is classified into two subspecies (fastigiata and hypogaea) and further into four botanical types (Spanish bunch, Valencia, Virginia bunch and Virginia runner). In a cross between two Spanish cultivars belonging to ssp. fastigiata, a true breeding variant (Dharwad early runner) sharing some characters of both the subspecies was isolated. The variant, on mutagenesis with ethyl methane sulphonate (EMS) yielded a very high frequency of mutants resembling all four botanical types. Some of the mutants produced germinal reversions to Dharwad early runner in later generations indicating genetic instability. While most of the revertants bred true, some of the mutants continued to segregate, wherein each botanical group of mutants produced all other botanical types. A detailed analysis of the breeding behaviour of mutants revealed several unusual features (such as homozygous mutations, mutation outbursts, segregation distortions, somatic mutations and multiple character mutations) that could not be explained through conventional mutation theory. In the light of these findings, the role of mutations in evolutionary differentiation of the crop and the probable mode of their origin have been discussed.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ashri, A., 1972. Mutations and physiological reaction to several chemical mutagens in peanuts, Arachis hypogaea. In. Proc. FAO/IAEA, pp. 253–264. Latin American study group on induced mutations and plant improvements, Bs. Aires, Argentina 16–20. Nov. 1970. Vienna, Austria.
Burr, B. & F.A. Burr, 1981. Transposable elements and genetic instabilities in crop plants. Stadler Symp. 13: 115–128.
Charlesworth, B., P. Sniegowski & W. Stephan, 1994. The evolutionary dynamics of repetitive DNA in eukaryotes. Nature 371: 215–220.
Doebley, J.F. & J.F. Wendel, 1989. Application of RFLP's to plant systematics. In: To Helientiaris & B. Burr (Eds). Current communications in molecular biology-development and application of molecular markers to problems in plant genetics. pp. 57–68. CSH Lab., New York.
Gibbons, R. W., A.H. Bunting & J. Smartt, 1972. The classification of varieties of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Euphytica 21: 78–85.
Gottlieb, L.D., 1984. Genetics and morphological evolution in plants. Am. Nat. 123: 681–709.
Gowda, M.V.C., H.L. Nadaf & K. Giriraj, 1989. A new growth habit variant of taxonomical importance in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Int. Arachis Newslett. 6: 6.
Gowda, M.V.C. & H.L. Nadaf, 1992. Induced mutants of taxonomical importance in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Int. Arachis Newslett. 12: 9–11.
Green, M.M., 1988. Mobile DNA elements and spontaneous gene mutation: In: Eukaryotic transposable elements as mutagenic agents. Banbury Report 30: 41–50. CSH Lab., New York.
Gregory, W.C., A. Krapovickas & M.P. Gregory, 1980. Structure, variation, evolution and classification in Arachis. In: R.J. Summerfield & A.H. Bunting (Eds). Advances in Legume Science. pp. 469. Royal Botanical Gardens, Kew, England.
Halward, T.M., H.T. Stalker, E.A. Larue & G. Kochert, 1991. Genetic variation detectable with molecular markers among unadapted germplasm resources of cultivated peanut and related wild species. Genome 34: 1013–1020.
Hilu, K.W., 1983. The role of single gene mutations in the evolution of flowering plants. Evol. Biol. 26: 97–128.
Husted, L., 1936. Cytological studies on the peanut, Arachis II. Chromosome number, morphology, behaviour and their application to the problem of the origin of the cultivated forms. Cytologia 7: 396–423.
Kochert, G., T. Halward, W.D. Branch & C.E. Simpson, 1991. RFLP variability in peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) cultivars and wild species. Theor. Appl. Genet. 81: 565–570.
Krapovickas, A., 1968. The origin, variability and spread of the groundnut (Arachis hypogaea). In: P.J. Ueko & J.S. Falk (Eds). The domestication and exploitation of plants and animals. pp. 427–441. Greald Duckworth Co. Ltd. London.
Krapovickas, A., 1973. Evolution of the genus Arachis. In: R. Moav (Ed). Agricultural Genetics-Selected Topics. pp. 135–151 John Wiley & Sons, New York, USA.
Larkin, P.J., S.L.A. Payan, R.T.S. Bretell & W.R. Scowcroft, 1984. Heritable somaclonal variation in wheat. Theor. Appl. Genet. 67: 443–455.
Lim, J.K., 1979. Site-specific instability in D. melanogaster; The origin of the mutation and cytogenetic evidence for site specificity. Genetics 93: 681.
McClintock, B., 1978. Mechanisms that rapidly reorganize the genome. Stadler Symp. 10: 25–47.
Mouli, C., D.M. Kale & S.H. Patil, 1979. Sequential flowering large pod Trombay groundnuts (Abst.). In: Symposium on the Role of Induced Mutations in Crop Improvement. pp. 27. Hyderabad, India.
Nevers, P., N.S. Shepherd & H. Saedler, 1986. Plant transposable elements. Adv. Bot. Res. 12: 103–203.
Norden, A.J., 1973. Breeding of the cultivated peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). In: (Symp.) Peanuts-Culture and Uses. pp. 175–208. American Peanut Research and Education Association, Oklahoma.
Patil, S.H., 1966. Mutations induced in groundnut by X-rays. Indian J. Genet. 26 A: 485.
Prasad, M.V.R., 1989. Genetic differentiation in Arachis hypogaea L. In: S.A. Farook & I.A. Khan (eds). Recent Advances in Genetics and Cytogenetics. pp. 53–55. Premier Publishing House, Hyderabad, India.
Qui, Q.S., W. Hu & F. Shen, 1994. Mutation breeding in China: Achievements and prospects in groundnut. Int. Arachis Newslett. 14: 11–12.
Singh, A.K., 1986a. Utilization of wild relatives in the genetic improvement of Arachis hypogaea L. 7. Autotetraploid production and prospects in interspecific breeding. Theor. Appl. Genet. 72: 164–169.
Singh, A.K., 1986b. Utilization of wild relatives in the genetic improvemet of Arachis hypogaea L. 8. Synthetic amphidiploids and their importance in interspecific breeding. Theor. Appl. Genet. 72: 433–439.
Singh, A.K., 1988. Putative genome donors of Arachis hypogaea (Fabaceae); evidence from crosses with synthetic amphidiploids. Pl. Syst. Evol. 160: 143–151.
Singh, A.K. & J.P. Moss, 1984. Utilization of wild relatives in the genetic improvement of Arachis hypogaea L. 5. Genome analysis in section Arachis and its implications in gene transfer. Theor. Appl. Genet. 68: 355–364.
Smartt, J., 1960. Genetic instability and out-crossing in groundnut variety manipintar. Nature 186: 1070–1071.
Smartt, J., W.C. Gregory & M.P. Gregory, 1978a. The genomes of Arachis hypogaea L. I. Cytogenetic studies of putative genome donors. Euphytica 27: 665–675.
Smartt, J., W.C. Gregory & M.P. Gregory, 1978b. The genomes of Arachis hypogaea L. II. The implications in interspecific breeding. Euphytica 27: 677–680.
Smartt, J., 1990. Grain legumes-evolution and genetic resources. pp. 30–84. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Stalker, H.T., 1982. Cytological relationship among varieties of Arachis hypogaea L. Proc. Am. Peanut Res., Educ. Soc. 14: 72.
Stalker, H.T., J.S. Dhesi, D.C. Parry & J.H. Hahn, 1991. Cytological and interfertility relationships of Arachis, section Arachis. Amer. J. Bot. 78: 238–246.
Wessler, S.R., 1988. Phenotypic diversity mediated by the maize transposable elements Ac and SPm. Science 249: 399–405.
Wynne, J.C. & T.A. Coffelt, 1982. Genetics of Arachis hypogaea L. In: H.E. Pattee & C.T. Young (Eds). Peanut Science and Technology. pp. 50–94. APRES, Yoakum/Ty.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gowda, M.V.C., Nadaf, H.L. & Sheshagiri, R. The role of mutations in intraspecific differentiation of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Euphytica 90, 105–113 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00025166
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00025166