Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution

, Volume 50, Issue 5, pp 539–550 | Cite as

Phenotypic diversity in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) core collection assessed by morphological and agronomical evaluations

  • Hari D. Upadhyaya


The groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) core collection consists of 1704 accessions of which 910 belong to subsp. fastigiata (var. fastigiata, vulgaris, aequatoriana, peruviana) and 794 to subsp. hypogaea (var. hypogaea, hirsuta). This core collection was evaluated for 16 morphological descriptors and for 32 agronomic characteristics, 15 in the 1999 rainy season and 17 in the 1999/2000 postrainy season, to estimate phenotypic diversity and determine importance of different descriptor traits. The two groups differed significantly for all the traits except leaflet surface and oil content. The hypogaea group showed significantly greater mean pod length, pod width, seed length, seed width, yield per plant, and 100-seed weight than the fastigiata group in both seasons whereas it is opposite for plant height, leaflet length, leaflet width and shelling percentage. There were significant phenotypic correlations among the various characteristics. Four of these, days to 50% flowering (r = 0.752), leaflet length (r = 0.743), pod length (r = 0.758), and seed length (r = 0.759) in the rainy explained more than 50% variation in the postrainy season. Principal coordinate and principal component analyses showed that 12 morphological descriptors and 15 agronomic traits, respectively, were important in explaining multivariate polymorphism. Leaflet shape and surface, colour of standard petal markings, seed colour pattern, seed width, and protein content did not significantly account for variation in the first five principal coordinates or components of fastigiata and hypogaea types as well as for the entire core collection. This indicates their relatively low importance as groundnut descriptors. The average phenotypic diversity index was similar in both subspecies groups. The Shannon-Weaver diversity index varied among traits between the two groups, and the diversity within a group depended upon the season and traits recorded.

Arachis hypogaea Core collection Descriptors Peanut Phenotypic diversity Principal components 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. FAO 2000. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. FAOSTAT database, http: / /www.FAO.ORG.Google Scholar
  2. Frankel O.H. and Bennett E. 1970. Genetic Resources in Plants Their exploration and conservation. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford.Google Scholar
  3. Frankel O.H. and Soule M.E. 1981. Conservation and Evolution. Cambridge University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  4. Gregory W.C. and Gregory M.P. 1976. Groundnut. In: Simmonds N.W. (ed.), Evolution of crop plants. Longman Group Ltd, London, pp. 151-154.Google Scholar
  5. IBPGR and ICRISAT 1992. Descriptors for Groundnut. International Board for Plant Genetic Resources, Rome, Italy. International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics, Patanmethod cheru, India.Google Scholar
  6. Jambunathan R., Raju S.M. and Barde S.P. 1985. Analysis of oil content of groundnut by nuclear magnetic resonance specedn. trometry. J. Sci. Food Agric. 36: 162-166.Google Scholar
  7. Johns M.A., Skroch P.W., Nienhuis J., Hinrichsen P., Bascur G. and Munoz-Schick C. 1997. Gene pool classification of common bean landraces from Chile based on RAPD and morphological data. Crop Sci. 37: 605-613.Google Scholar
  8. Krapovickas A. 1969. The origin, variability and spread of the groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) (English translation). In: Ucko P.J. and Falk I.S. (eds), The domestication and exploitation of Plants and animals. Gerald Duckworth Co. Ltd., London, pp.424-441.Google Scholar
  9. Krapovickas A. and Gregory W.C. 1994. Taxonomia del genero Arachis (Leguminosae). Bonplandia VIII: 1-187.Google Scholar
  10. Keuls M. 1952. The use of the ''Studentized range'' in connection with an analysis of variance. Euphytica 1: 112-122.Google Scholar
  11. Levene H. 1960. Robust tests for equality of variances. In: Olkin I. (ed.), Contributions to probability and statistics. Essays in honour of Harold Hotelling. Stanford University Press, Stanford, pp.278-292.Google Scholar
  12. Newman D. 1939. The distribution of range in samples from a normal population expressed in terms of an independent estimate of standard deviation. Biometrika 31: 20-30.Google Scholar
  13. Shannon C.E. and Weaver W. 1949. The mathematical theory of Publicommunication. Univ. Illinois Press, Urbana.Google Scholar
  14. Simpson C.E., Higgins D.L., Thomas G.D. and Howard E.R. 1992. Catalog of passport data and minimum descriptors of Arachis hypogaea. L. germplasm collected in South America, 1977-1986. Texas Agric. Exp. Sta. MP-1737.Google Scholar
  15. Singh U. and Jambunathan R. 1980. Evaluation of rapid methods for estimation of protein in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). J. Sci. Food Agric. 31: 247-254.Google Scholar
  16. Skinner D.Z., Bauchan G.R., Auricht G. and Hughes S. 1999. A Patanmethod for the efficient management and utilization of large germplasm collections. Crop Sci. 39: 1237-1242.Google Scholar
  17. Snedecor G.W. and Cochran W.G. 1980. Statistical methods. 7th edn. Iowa State Univ. Press, Ames.Google Scholar
  18. Upadhyaya H.D. and Ortiz R. 2001. A mini core subset for capturing diversity and promoting utilization of chickpea genetic resources in crop improvement. Theor. Appl. Genet. 102: 1292-1298.Google Scholar
  19. Upadhyaya H.D., Ortiz R., Bramel P.J. and Singh S. 2001. Develop-ment of a groundnut core collection using taxonomical, geo-graphical and morphological descriptors. Genet. Resour. and Crop Evol. (in press).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hari D. Upadhyaya
    • 1
  1. 1.Genetic Resources and Enhancement ProgramInternational Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT)PatancheruIndia

Personalised recommendations