Advertisement

Cereal Research Communications

, Volume 36, Issue 4, pp 561–570 | Cite as

Determination of Selection Criterions for Sweet Corn Using Path Coefficient Analyses

  • A. OktemEmail author
Article

Abstract

Path analysis appears to be the best method in biological and agronomic studies to determine the major selection criteria. The objective of this study was to evaluate path coefficients both direct and indirect, for sweet corn. The research was carried out during 2003 and 2004 in Sanliurfa, Southeastern Turkey. Ten sweet corn genotypes were used as the crop materials. Fresh ear yield was statistically significant and positively correlated with single ear weight, ear length and ear diameter. Ear length gave a highest direct positive effect on fresh ear yield, followed by single ear weight. Plant height and stem diameter had negative direct effect on fresh ear yield. Direct effects of ear length, single ear weight, plant height and stem diameter on fresh ear yield were 42.3%, 31.3%, 31.0% and 17.7%, respectively. Path analyses revealed that the ear length and single ear weight as the primary; ear diameter, kernel number of ear and leaf number as the secondary characteristics that can be taken into consideration as the important yield components and selection criteria for sweet corn.

Keywords

sweet corn path analysis correlation direct and indirect effects fresh ear yield 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Altinbas, M., Algan, N. 1993. Relationships among yield, yield characteristics and quality parameters in hybrid corn (in Turkish). Anadolu 3(1):40–62.Google Scholar
  2. Bhatt, G.M. 1973. Significance of path coefficient analysis determining the nature of character association. Euphytica 22:89–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bross, D. 1982. Direct and indirect association of five factors with infant mortality. Am. J. Epidemiol. 115:78–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dawod, K.M., Mohammed, A. 1989. Estimates of heritability and path coefficient analysis for some characters in maize. Mesopotamia Journal of Agriculture 21(4):243–254.Google Scholar
  5. Dewey, D.R., Lu, K.H. 1959. A correlation and path analysis of components of crested wheat grass seed production. Agron. J. 51:515–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Duncan, O.D. 1975. Introduction to Structural Equation Models. Academic Press, New York, p. 180.Google Scholar
  7. El-Nagouly, O.O., Abul-Fadl, M.A., Ismail, A.A., Khamis, M.N. 1983. Genotypic and phenotypic correlations and path analysis in maize and their implications in selections. Agronomy Abstracts, Madison, Wisconsin, U.S.A., pp. 62–63.Google Scholar
  8. Garcia del Moral, L.F., Ramos, J.M., Garcia del Moral, M.B., Jimenez-Tejada, M.P. 1991. Ontogenetic approach to grain production in spring barley based on path-coefficient analysis. Crop Sci. 31:1179–1184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gebeyehou, G., Knott, D.R., Baker, R.J. 1982. Relationships among durations of vegetative and grain filling phases, yield components, and grain yield in durum wheat cultivars. Crop Sci. 22:287–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Guler, M., Adak, M.S., Ulukan, H. 2001. Determining relationships among yield and some yield components using path coefficient analysis in chickpea. European Journal of Agronomy 14:161–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jatimliansky, J.R., Urrutia, M.I., Arturi, M.J. 1988. Path analysis in dry matter production and flint type maize. Maize-Genetics-Cooperation-Newsletter, No. 62, 73.Google Scholar
  12. Korkut, Z.K., Baser, I., Bilir, S. 1993. Researches in correlation and path coefficients in durum wheat (in Turkish). Makarnalék Bugday ve Mamulleri Sempozyumu, 30 Kasim-3 Aralik, pp. 183–187, Ankara.Google Scholar
  13. Li, W., Yan, Z.H., Wei, Y.M., Lan, X.J., Zheng, Y.L. 2006. Evaluation of genotype × environment interactions in Chinese spring wheat by the AMMI model, correlation and path analysis. J. Agronomy & Crop Sciences 192:221–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Malhotra, V.V., Khehra, A.S. 1986. Genotypic variation and covariation in indigenous germplasm of maize. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 56(12):811–816.Google Scholar
  15. Miller, D.A., Williams, J.C., Robinson, H.F., Comstock, K.B. 1958. Estimates of genotypic and environmental variances and covariances in upland cotton and their implication in selection. Agron. J. 50:126–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mo, H.D., Hu, X.H., Lo, Y.Q. 1986. Genetics analysis of quantitative characters of maize. Journal of Jiangsu Agricultural College 7(1):1–8.Google Scholar
  17. Nie, N.H., Hull, C.H., Jenkins, J.G., Steinbrenner, K., Bent, D.H. 1975. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. Mcgraw-Hill Inc., Toronto, p. 675.Google Scholar
  18. Oktem, A., Ulger, A.C., Colkesen, M. 1998. Determination using path analysis of relationships between the characters of maize cultivars in Harran Plain conditions. J. Agric. Fac. Cukurova University 13(3):135–144.Google Scholar
  19. Oktem, A., Simsek, M., Oktem, A.G. 2003. Deficit Irrigation Effects on Sweet Corn (Zea mays saccharata Sturt) With Drip Irrigation System in A Semi-Arid Region. I. Water-Yield Relationship. Agricultural Water Management 61(1):63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Onder, M., Babaoglu, M. 2001. Interactions amongst grain variables in various dwarf dry bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cultivars. J. Agronomy & Crop Sciences 187:19–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Parh, D.K., Hamid, M.A., Rahman, M.H., Talukder, M.Z.I. 1988. Correlation path coefficient and selection indices in open-pollinated maize. Bangladesh Journal of Agriculture 13(2):69–74.Google Scholar
  22. Patel, M.P., Shelke, D.K. 1984. A path coefficient analysis in forage maize cultivars. Journal of Maharashtra Agricultural Universities 9(3):342–343.Google Scholar
  23. Pham, D.Q., Szundy, T. 1991. Correlations between some yield components and grain yield of maize S-2 families and their hybrid (in Hungarian). Növénytermelés 40(3):203–210.Google Scholar
  24. Rodriguez, D.J., Angulo-Sánchez, J.L., Rodríguez-García, R. 2001. Correlation and path coefficient analyses of the agronomic trait of a native population of guayule plants. Industrial Crops and Products 14(2):93–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sade, B., 1994. Correlation and path analyses between yield and some yield components in hybrid corn varieties (in Turkish). S.Ü. Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi 5(7):28–39.Google Scholar
  26. Sarawgi, A.K., Rastogi, N.K., Soni, D.K. 1997. Correlation and path analysis in rice accessions from Madhya Pradesh. Field Crops Research 52:161–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Seker, H., Serin, Y. 2004. Explanation of relationship between seed yield and some morphological traits in smooth bromegrass (Bromis inermis Leyss.) by path analysis. European Journal of Agronomy 21:1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sing, H., Kuldeep, S. 1987. Correlation and path coefficient analysis of yield components in maize. Haryana Agricultural University Journal of Research 17(1):64–67.Google Scholar
  29. Ssargo, F., Speijer, P.R., Coyne, D.L., Waele, D.D. 2004. Path analysis: a novel approach to determine the contribution of nematode damage to east African highland banana (Musa spp. AAA) yield loss under two crop management practices in Uganda. Field Crops 90:177–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tyagi, A.P., Pokhariyal, G.P., Odongo, O.M. 1988. Correlation and path analysis for yield components and maturity traits in maize. Maydica 33(2):109–119.Google Scholar
  31. Yagbasanlar, T., Ozkan, H. 1995. Correlation and path coefficient analysis for ear characters in Triticale under Mediterranean climatic conditions. J. Agronomy & Crop Sciences 174:297–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Walton, P.D. 1980. The production characteristics of Bromus inermis Leyss and their inheritance. Adv. Agron. 1:341–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Williams, W.A., Jones, M.B., Demment, M.W. 1990. A concise table for path analysis statistics. Agron. J. 82:1022–1024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wong, L.J., Yap, T.C. 1982. Genetic variability, correlations and path coefficient analysis of a maize composite. MARDI Res. Bull. 10:1–9.Google Scholar
  35. Wright, S. 1929. Path coefficients and path regressions: alternative complementary concepts. Biometric 16:189–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Xu, Z.B. 1986. Influence of major characters of maize on the productivity of individual plants. Ningxia Agricultural Science and Technology 5:26–27.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Field Crops, Faculty of AgricultureUniversity of HarranEyyubiye, SanliurfaTurkey

Personalised recommendations