Euphytica

, Volume 136, Issue 3, pp 333–339 | Cite as

Inheritance of fiber quality and lint yield in a chemically mutated population of cotton

  • Andy D. Herring
  • Dick L. Auld
  • M. Dean Ethridge
  • Eric F. Hequet
  • E. Bechere
  • Cary J. Green
  • Roy G. Cantrell
Article

Abstract

The narrow germplasm base of the upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.), grown on the Texas high plains historically, has limited improvement of fiber quality. Chemical mutagenesis and subsequent selection have helped the development of lines with improved fiber quality in cultivars adapted to this region. This study was conducted to determine the inheritance of improvements in fiber quality. M3 lines with divergent fiber properties of micronaire, length, and strength were selected from a population of Paymaster HS 200 treated with 3% v/v ethyl methanesulfonate (EMS) for two hours. The 115 selected lines of M4 and M5 generation were evaluated for fiber quality and lint yield. Regression of the M4 and M5 on the M3 generation, as well as the M5 on the M4 was used to generate narrow sense heritability coefficients. Significant variations were observed between the mutant lines in all generations except for lint yield in the M5 (1997). The highest heritability estimates were found in fiber length (h2= 0.29** to 0.46**). Micronaire and strength showed intermediate heritability estimates of h2= 0.14 to 0.19, while lint yield had a very low heritability estimate of h2= 0.03. Fiber length and strength were correlated (r= 0.58** to 0.46**) in all the three generations. The mutants identified in these studies have the potential to improve fiber quality of upland cotton without introducing alien genes that may reduce adaptation to short growing season production regions.

cotton inheritance chemical mutagenesis fiber quality yield 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Auld, D. L., E. Bechere, M. D. Ethridge, W. D. Becker, E. Hequet & R. G. Cantrell, 2000. Registration of TTU 202-1107B and TTU 271-2155-C mutant germplasm lines of upland cotton with improved fiber quality. Crop Sci. 40: 1835–1836.Google Scholar
  2. Auld, D. L., M. D. Ethridge, J. K. Dever & P. A. Dotray, 1998. Chemical mutagenesis as a tool in cotton improvement. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Prod. Res. Conf. Memphis, TN. Vol. 1:550–552.Google Scholar
  3. Basal, H. & C. W. Smith, 1997. The association of fiber quality pa-rameters and lint yield components in F3 derived F4 progeny of two upland cotton populations. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Prod. Res. Conf. Memphis, TN. Vol. 1: 478–479.Google Scholar
  4. Bowman, D. T., O. L. May & S. D. Calhoun, 1996. Genetic base of upland cotton cultivars released between 1970 and 1990. Crop Sci. 36: 577–581.Google Scholar
  5. Cantrell, R. G. & A. Escabado, 1997. Genetics of fiber strength. Proc Beltwide Cotton Prod. Res. Conf. Memphis, TN. Vol. 2: 1627.Google Scholar
  6. Cotton Incorporated, 2000. Final Report–Fiber Quality. http://www. cottoninc.com.Google Scholar
  7. Gibson, P. T., 1996. Correcting for inbreeding in parent-offspring regression estimate of heritability with non-additive and genotype x environment effects present. Crop Sci. 36: 594–600.Google Scholar
  8. Green, C. C. & T. W. Culp, 1988. The inheritance and relationship of yield and fiber properties and the implications to a cotton breeding program. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Prod. Conf. Memphis, TN. Vol. 1:131.Google Scholar
  9. Keim, K. R. & J. E. Quisenberry, 1983. Inheritance of fiber quality in a semi-dwarf composite population of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) Proc. Beltwide Cotton Prod Res Conf Memphis, TN. Vol. 1: 108.Google Scholar
  10. Kloth, R. H, 1998. Analysis of commonality for traits of cotton fiber. J. Cotton Sci. 2: 17–22.Google Scholar
  11. Konoplya, S. P., V. N. Fursov, A. A. Drushkov & G. N. Nuryeva, 1974.Google Scholar
  12. Heritability of several quantititve characters in cotton. Soviet Genetics 10: 1462–1464.Google Scholar
  13. Latimer, S. L., T. P. Wallace & D. S. Calhoun, 1996. Cotton Breeding: High volume instrument versus conventional fiber quality testing. Proc Beltwide Cotton Prod Res Conf Memphis, TN. Vol. 3: 1681.Google Scholar
  14. May, O. L. & G. M. Jividen, 1999. Genetic modification of cotton fiber properties as measured by single-and high volume instruments. Crop Sci. 39: 328–333.Google Scholar
  15. Meredith, W. R., Jr, 1984. Quantitative genetics. p. 131–150. In: C. F. Lewis (eds.), Cotton Agronomy Monograph No. 24. ASA, CSSA, and SSSA. Madison, WI.Google Scholar
  16. Naivar, K. S, 1996. Fiber quality parameters and within-boll yield components of Gossypium arboreum. Putative mutant lines. M. S. Thesis. Texas A & M University. 71 p. 339Google Scholar
  17. Nyquist, W. E, 1991. Estimation of heritability and prediction of se-lection response in plant populations. Critical Rev Plant Sci 10: 235–322.Google Scholar
  18. Raffat, M, 1995. Effect of seed irradiation on genetic variability and recombination of some economic yield components in Egyptian Cotton. Proc Beltwide Cotton Prod Res Conf Memphis, TN pp.492–498.Google Scholar
  19. Raffat, M. A. A, 1998a. Some features of Egyptian Cotton after chemical mutagens treatment. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Prod Res Conf Memphis, TN. Vol. 1: 586–590.Google Scholar
  20. Raffat, M. A. A, 1998b. Studies on induced variability in Egyptian Cotton. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Prod. Res. Conf. Memphis, TN. Vol. 1: 522–556.Google Scholar
  21. SAS Institute, Inc., 1992. SAS/STAS Users Guide of Version 7— Fifth Edition. SAS Institute, Inc. Gary, N. C.Google Scholar
  22. Simongulyan, N. G. & Z. A. M. Kosba, 1975. Heritability and genetic correlations in cotton. Soviet Genetics 11: 19–23.Google Scholar
  23. Smith, C. W. & G. G. Coyle, 1997. Association of fiber quality pa-rameters and within boll yield components in upland cotton. Crop Sci. 37: 1775–1779.Google Scholar
  24. Somerville, C. R. & J. Browse, 1991. Plant lipids: mutants, metabolism, an membranes. Science 252: 80–87.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andy D. Herring
    • 1
  • Dick L. Auld
    • 2
  • M. Dean Ethridge
    • 3
  • Eric F. Hequet
    • 3
  • E. Bechere
    • 2
  • Cary J. Green
    • 2
  • Roy G. Cantrell
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Animal ScienceTexas A&M University, College StationUSA
  2. 2.Department of Plant and Soil ScienceTexas Tech UniversityLubbockUSA
  3. 3.Textile Research CenterTexas Tech UniversityLubbockUSA
  4. 4.Cotton IncorporatedUSA

Personalised recommendations