Breeding and identification of promising Mauritius x Kew pineapple hybrids with high heterosis for fruit and plant traits
Keywords:
Ananas comosus, Crop improvement, Heterobeltiosis, Selection index, Standard heterosis, Variety evaluationAbstract
Leading cultivars of pineapple Mauritius and Kew were hybridized and 25 hybrids were evaluated under open field conditions using randomized block design with two replications. Performance of the female parent cum check variety Mauritius, male parent Kew and check variety in Kerala state, India, Amritha, were also evaluated and compared. Based on the performance, heterobeltiosis, average heterosis and standard heterosis over two check varieties, in each hybrid, for 10 plant growth traits and 24 fruit traits, were calculated. For fruit weight, hybrid H35 had the highest heterobeltiosis and standard heterosis over Amritha whereas H62 had highest standard heterosis over Mauritius and average heterosis. For pulp weight, hybrid H17 had the highest values for all heterosis parameters. For TSS, hybrid H62 had the highest heterobeltiosis and other parameters were highest in H43. For days to attain physiological maturity, crown weight, peel weight and acidity, H27, H30, H77 and H43 respectively were lowest in all heterosis parameters. Based on the selection criterion [Σ average heterosis (fruit weight, TSS, pulp weight) – Σ average heterosis (crown weight, peel weight, eye profile, eye relative surface, time taken for physiological maturity, acidity)]developed using the average heterosis values for desirable and undesirable fruit traits, six hybrids H66, H17, H59, H43, H70 and H35 were identified for further evaluation. The identified hybrids also satisfied the requirements infruit weight (≥1.0 kg), pulp weight (≥750.58 g), TSS (≥14.49 ο Brix), days to attain physiological maturity (≤185.70 days), crown weight (≤305.50 g), peel weight (≤159.27 g) and acidity (≤1.05).References
Achigan-Dako, E.G., Adjé, C.A., N’Danikou, S., Hotegni, N.V.F., Agbangla, C., and Adam Ahanchédé, A., 2014. Drivers of conservation and utilization of pineapple genetic resources in Benin. SpringerPlus 3: 273. https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-3-273
Adje, C.A.O., Achigan-Dako, E.G., d’Eeckenbrugge, G.C., Yedomonhan, H., and Agbangla, C., 2019. Morphological characterization of pineapple (Ananas comosus) genetic resources from Benin. Fruits 74(4): 167-179.
AOAC, 2000. Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International, Association of Official Analytical Chemists, 17th Ed, Gaithersburg, Md. Association of Official Analytical Chemists Intl.
Bartholomew, D.P., 1977. Inflorescence development of pineapple (Ananas comosus [L.] Merr.) induced to flower with ethephon. Bot. Gaz. 138(3): 312-320.
Benega, R., Cisneros, A., Hidalgo, M., Martínez, J., Arias, E., Arzola, M., Carvajal, C. and Isidrón, M., 1999. Hybridization in pineapple results and strategies to save time for obtaining and releasing new hybrid varieties for growers. Pineapple News 6: 12-14.
Bhowmik, G. and Bhagabat, A., 1975. Self-incompatibility studies in pineapple (Ananas comosus L.). Indian Agric. 19: 259-265.
Brat, P., Hoang, L.N.T., Soler, A., Reynes, M. and Brillouet, J.M., 2004. Physicochemical characterization of a new pineapple hybrid (FLHORAN41 cv.). J. Agric. Food Chem., 52(20): 6170-6177.
Brewbaker, J.L. and Gorrez, D.D., 1967. Genetics of self‐incompatibility in the monocot genera, Ananas (pineapple) and Gasteria. Am. J. Bot. 54 (5, Part 1): 611-616. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1537-2197.1967.tb10684.x
Cabot, C., 1992. Origin, phylogeny and evolution of pineapple species. Fruits 47: 25-32.
Cabral, J.R.S., Ledo, C.D.S., Cardas, R.C., and Junghans, D.T. 2009. Characters variation in pineapple hybrids obtained by different crosses. Rev. Bras. Frutic. 31(4): 1129-1134.
Cabral, J.R.S., Souza, A.D.S., Matos, A.P.D. and Caldas, R.C., 2003. Effects of self-pollination in pineapple cultivars. Rev. Bras. Frutic. 25(1): 184-185.
Chan, Y.K., 1991. Evaluation of F1 populations from a 4×4 diallel in pineapple and estimation of breeding values of parents. MARDI Res. J. 19: 159-168.
Chan, Y.K. and Lee, H.K. 1999. Performance of F1 pineapple hybrids selected for early fruiting. J. Trop. Agric. Food Sci. 27: 1-8.
Coppens d'Eeckenbrugge, G., Duval, M.F. and Van Miegroet, F., 1992. Fertility and self-incompatibility in the genus Ananas. In: Proc. First International Pineapple Symposium, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, 2-6 November 1992, pp. 45-52.
Dhurve, L., Kumar, K.A., Bhaskar, J., Sobhana, A., Francies, R.M. and Mathew, D., 2021. Wide variability among the ‘Mauritius’ somaclones demonstrates somaclonal variation as a promising improvement strategy in pineapple (Ananas comosus L.). Plant Cell Tiss. Org. Cult. 145(3): 701-705. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11240-021-02022-5
Ecostatkerala, 2020. Agricultural Statistics 2017-18. Department of Economics and Statistics, Government of Kerala, India, p.17. http://www.ecostat.kerala.gov.in/index.php/agriculture
Firoozabady, E. and Gutterson, N., 2003. Cost-effective in vitro propagation methods for pineapple. Plant Cell Rep. 21:844-850 doi:10.1007/s00299-003-0577-x
Hadiati, S., Yuliati, S., and Soemargono, A., 2011. Evaluation of qualitative and quantitative characters of pineapple hybrids resulted from crossing between Cayenne and Queen. J. Agric. Bio. Sci. 6(1): 32-38.
Hassan, A., Othman, Z., and Siriphanich, J., 2011. Pineapple (Ananas comosus L. Merr.). In: Postharvest Biology and Technology of Tropical and Subtropical Fruits, Mangosteen to White Sapote, Yahia, E.M. (Ed.) ISBN 978-0-85709-090-4, Woodhead Publishing, pp 194-217, 218e doi:10.1533/9780857092618.194
IBPGR, 1991. Descriptors for Pineapple, International Board for Plant Genetic Resources, Rome, Italy, ISBN 978-92-9043-199-2, 41p.
Kishore, K., Rupa, T.R. and Samant, D., 2021. Influence of shade intensity on growth, biomass allocation, yield and quality of pineapple in mango-based intercropping system. Sci. Hortic. 278: 109868. doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2020.109868
Laufer, B. 1929. The American plant migration. Sci. Mon. 28: 239-259.
Rasmusson, D.C., 1987. An evaluation of ideotype breeding. Crop Sci. 27: 1140-1146.
Sanewski, G.M., 2009. The effect of different levels of inbreeding on self-incompatibility and inbreeding depression in pineapple. Acta Hortic. 822: 63-70.
Sanewski, G.M., 2018. The history of pineapple improvement. In: Ming, R. (Ed.), Genetics and Genomics of Pineapple, Plant Genetics and Genomics: Crops and Models 22, p. 87-96. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00614-3_7
Sen, S.K., 2001. Pineapple. In: Fruits of India: Tropical and Subtropical, Ed. Bose, T.K., Naya Prakash, Culcutta.
Souza, F.V.D., Cabral, J.R.dos S. de Souza, E.H. Silva, M.de J., Santos, O.S.N., and Ferreira, F.R. 2009. Evaluation of F1 hybrids between Ananas comosus var. ananassoides and Ananas comosus var. erectifolius. Acta Hortic. 822: 79-84.
Van de Poel, B., Ceusters, J., and De Proft, M.P. 2009. Determination of pineapple (Ananas comosus, MD-2 hybrid cultivar) plant maturity, the efficiency of flowering induction agents and the use of activated carbon. Sci. Hortic. 120(1): 58-63.
Van Overbeek, J. and Cruzado, H.J., 1948. Note on flower formation in the pineapple induced by low night temperatures. Plant Physiol. 23(3): 282-285. doi: 10.1104/pp.23.3.282
Viana, E.D.S., Reis, R.C., Jesus, J.L.D., Junghans, D.T., and Souza, F.V.D., 2013. Physico-chemical characterization of new hybrids pineapple resistant to fusariosis. Ciência Rural 43(7): 1155-1161.
Wang, R.H., Hsu, Y.M., Bartholomew, D.P., Maruthasalam, S. and Lin, C.H., 2007. Delaying natural flowering in pineapple through foliar application of aviglycine, an inhibitor of ethylene biosynthesis. HortScience 42(5): 1188-1191.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright © 2001-11 Kerala Agricultural University. Some rights reserved. This journal and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by the Kerala Agricultural University and the following terms and conditions apply to their use; Photocopying Single photocopies of single articles may be made for personal use as allowed by national copyright laws. Permission of the publisher and payment of a fee is required for all other photocopying including multiple or systematic copying, copying for advertising or promotional purposes, resale, and all forms of document delivery. Permission may be sought directly from the Editor, Journal of Tropical Agriculture, Department of Agronomy, College of Horticulture,, Kerala Agricultural University, KAU PO, Thrissur 680 656, Kerala, India. (Phone: +91-487-2438325; Fax +91-487-2371040; E-mail: editor.jta@kau.in. Derivative works Subscribers may reproduce tables of contents or prepare lists of articles including abstracts for internal circulation within their institution. Permission of the Publisher is required for resale or distribution outside the institution. Permission of the Publisher is required for all other derivative works, including compilations and translations. Notice No responsibility is assumed by the Publisher for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products, liability, negligence, or otherwise, or from any use of any methods, products, instructions or ideas contained in the material herein.