You are on page 1of 8

International Journal of Plant Breeding and Crop Science

IJPBCS
Vol. 4(2), pp. 197-204, June, 2017. www.premierpublishers.org. ISSN: 2167-0449

Research Article

Correlation and Path Analysis of Groundnut (Arachis


hypogaea L.) Genotypes in Ethiopia
Zekeria Yusuf1, Habtamu Zeleke2, Wassu Mohammed2, Shimelis Hussein3, Arno Hugo4
1BiologyDepartment, Haramaya University, Dire Dawa, Ethiopia.
2Schoolof Plant Science, Haramaya University, Dire Dawa, Ethiopia.
3Department of Crop Science, University of Kwazulu-Natal, Durban, Republic of South Africa.
4Department of Food Science, University of Free State, Bloemfontein, Republic of South Africa.

Sixteen groundnut genotypes (including local check) were evaluated for quantitative
parameters. The crop was sown during 2015 Ethiopian wet season in four locations. The
experiment was laid out in Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications.
Twelve agromorphological characters were evaluated and the covariance, coheritability,
phenotypic, genotypic and environmental correlations and also the direct and indirect effects of
the component variables on grain yield/ha were estimated. The results indicated that genotypic
correlations were higher than the phenotypic and environmental ones. The grain yield/ha
presented positive and significant genetic correlation with PWP, SWP and 100SW. Path analysis
based on genotypic and phenotypic correlations showed that direct effects were generally lower
than indirect effects on the grain yield showing that no best character contributes to GY/ha.
Instead, characters like NMP, PWP, SWP, 100SW, NSPOD and AGBP should be recommended
for groundnut breeding for increasing GY/ha.

Key Words: groundnut, genetic, phenotypic correlations, agromorphological characters.

INTRODUCTION

The plant breeder's role of identifying the individual crops only a relative importance of the direct and indirect
that simultaneously meet the desirable traits is not easy, effects of these factors. Solution raised for this limitation
because several of these traits are positive or negatively is to perform a path analysis, because it unfolds the
associated. The associations between the traits of estimated correlations into direct and indirect effects
interest in plant breeding are evaluated by means of (Falconer and Mackay, 1996).
phenotypic, genotypic and environmental correlations.
Phenotypic correlations are directly estimated from the
mean phenotypic values in the field, being, therefore, the
result of genetic and environmental causes. The
genotypic correlation, contrastingly, corresponds to the
genetic part of the phenotypic correlation and is used to *Corresponding Author: Zekeria Yusuf, Email Address:
guide breeding programs because of its inheritable zakoyusuf@yahoo.com, Biology Department, Haramaya
nature (Cruz, 2001; Falconer and Makay, 1996; Hallauer University, Dire Dawa, Ethiopia.
and Miranda, 1981). However, the correlation Co-authors: zakoyusuf@yahoo.com (Z. Yusuf),
coefficients, nonetheless their high utility in the wubeno@yahoo.com (H. Zeleke), wasmoha@yahoo.com
quantification of the size and direction of factors or (W. Mohammed),shimelish@ukzn.ac.za (S. Hussein),
effects in the determination of complex characters, offer HugoA@ufs.ac.za (A. Hugo)
Correlation and Path Analysis of Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) Genotypes in Ethiopia
Yusuf et al. 198

In light of such justifications, this research intended to the GCOVxy


Coheritability =
identify traits that contribute to grain yield in groundnut; to PCOVxy
pcovxy p(xy) +GE(xy) +e(xy)
be used as selection criteria in breeding programs of this rp(xy) = =
crop, in order to meet the demands of the producers and (PVx .PVy ) 2 2 2 2 2 2
G(x) + GE(x) + e(x) . G(y) + GE(y) + e(y)

the agroindustry sector. Gcovxy Ecovxy


rg(xy) = ; re(xy) =
(GVx .GVy ) (EVx .EVy )

Where, 2g(x,y) or gxgy = genetic covariance of


MATERIALS AND METHODS
characters x and y, 2p(x, y) or pxpy is phenotypic
The experiment was carried out across four locations viz covariance for characters x and y, exey= environment
Babile, Fedis, Hirna and Mechara in 2015 growing covariance of character x and y, rp(xy) = phenotypic
season in Ethiopia under rain fed condition. The correlation, rg(xy) = genetic correlation, re(xy) =
experimental materials consisted of sixteen groundnut environmental correlation, PCOVXY = Phenotypic
genotypes including locals and varieties which were covariance between characters X and Y, PV X =
released by EIAR between 1976 to 2012. The treatment Phenotypic variance of X, PVY = Phenotypic variance of
consisted of sixteen groundnut genotypes with three Y, GCOVXY = Genotypic covariance between characters
replications in four locations and was planted in a X and Y, GVX = Genotypic variance of X, GV Y =
randomized complete block design (RCBD) so that the Genotypic variance of Y, ECOVXY = Environmental
total number of treatments was being16genotypes x 3 covariance between characters X and Y, EVX =
replications x 4 locations=192. Each entry was planted in Environmental variance of X and EVY = Environmental
a plot having 2 rows of 3-meter length. The spacing variance of Y; GE(xy) and GE(xy) are the estimated
between rows and plants was 60cm and 15cm genotype x environment and experimental error
respectively. Each row had 12 plants. Two seeds were covariances between traits x and y; while 2 GE and 2 e
planted in each hole after emergence one of it was are the estimated genotype x environment and
removed. The spacing between plots was 1m. The net experimental error variances respectively. Confidence
plot size was 5.4m 2. Following land preparation, intervals for genetic correlation coefficients are
groundnut seeds were planted and the treatments were constructed as rz(0.05) e , where z(0.05) is the value from
being looked after for recommended agronomic practices the standardized normal distribution table at p=0.05 and
including weeding, hoeing, fertilizer application and the e is the standardized error correlation coefficient (Iqbal
necessary plant protection measures. et al., 2007). Estimated correlation coefficients were
Data were recorded for 12 agromorphological characters regarded as significantly different from zero if their 95%
viz. plant height (PH, cm), number of mature pods per confidence intervals did not include zero (Holland et al.,
plant (NMP), number of primary branches per plant 2003).
(NBP), above ground biomass per plant (AGBP, g), pod The direct and indirect effect of yield related traits on
weight per plant (PWP, g), number of seeds per yield per plot will be analyzed through path coefficient
plant(NSP), seed weight per plant (SWP, g), shell analysis. This analysis will be computed as suggested by
percentage (SHP%), 100 seed weight (100SW, g), Dewey and Lu (1959) with the following formula: rij =
Harvest index (HI%), number of seeds per pod (NSPOD), Pij+ rikpkj
grain yield per hectare (GY, kg/ha). The pods from entire Where: rij= mutual association between the independent
plot were harvested and immature pods were removed. (i) and dependent character (j) as measured by the
The mature pods were air dried, cleaned and weighed. correlation coefficient. Pij= component of direct effects of
The data were recorded on five randomly selected plants independent character (i) and dependent character (j) as
in each entry or replication. Random samples of 100 measured by the path coefficient and,
seeds were used to record 100 seed weight. Shelling rikpkj= summation of components of indirect effect of a
percentage was determined according to Misra et al. given independent character (i) on the given dependent
(2000) as: character (j) via all other independent character (k). The
kernel weight(g)
Shelling percent= x100. residual effect will be estimated by the formula:
pod weight (g)
Harvest index was calculated as: = 1 2 Where: R2= Pij rij
SWP pij =component of direct effects of the independent
HI = x100
total dry biomass weight character (i) and dependent character (j) as it has been
The estimated genetic rg(xy) and phenotypic measured by the path coefficient; rij =mutual association
rp(xy) correlations between traits x and y (Holland, 2006) between the independent character (i) and dependent
are given by: E (MSPV) = exey + r gxgy ; E (MSPe) = character (j) as it was measured by the correlation
exey coefficient. The phenotypic and genetic covariance and
gxgy =
MSPvMSPgxe correlation coefficients among pairs of traits were
re computed across locations using SAS version 9.2
PxPy = gxgy + exey candisc procedures (SAS, 2011).
Correlation and Path Analysis of Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) Genotypes in Ethiopia
Int. J. Plant Breed. Crop Sci. 199

Table 1. Phenotypic (Lower diagonal) and genotypic (Upper diagonal) covariance matrix (G-matrix)

Trait PH NMPP NBP AGBP PWP SWP NSP SHP 100SW HI NSPod GY
PH 9.31 3.15 31.71 -3.16 5.35 10.44 -0.646 -5.94 -7.74 -0.051 36.18
NMP 16.94 16.96 92.77 12.84 27.02 47.08 -3.63 -30.88 -18.64 -1.15 1494.25
NBP 1.61 21.31 48.85 12.78 8.94 6.31 -5.47 13.91 -8.45 -0.467 939.85
AGBP 88.15 174.55 56.16 64.51 41.05 7.01 -48.11 54.26 -93.70 -2.80 2900.96
PWP -6.66 104.10 12.17 163.39 19.61 -5.64 -0.97 68.87 -0.285 -0.707 3090.62
SWP 46.13 66.24 14.70 147.43 15.51 19.04 8.13 21.93 4.25 -0.473 2241.54
NSP 6.42 156.93 20.40 62.41 132.45 59.48 9.78 -49.05 2.52 -0.310 881.42
ShP 3.38 -3.72 -6.94 -56.31 -2.28 19.06 12.62 4.38 20.57 0.262 791.63
100SW 8.67 -32.49 6.14 97.94 73.82 42.31 -65.21 7.81 14.69 -0.366 4547.34
HI -17.14 -10.52 -8.75 - 17.23 2.32 34.22 26.16 11.44 0.515 982.15
150.97
NSPod -0.486 -1.162 - -4.10 -0.302 -1.10 0.752 0.265 -1.10 0.910 -49.19
0.337
GY 784.78 2430.46 952.2 5038.7 5071.2 3668.6 2032.5 1413.3 5817.7 1123.6 -
664.95
Where PH: plant height; NMPP: number of mature pod per plant; NBP: number of branches per plant; AGBP: above ground biomass per plant;
PWP: pod weight per plant; SWP: seed weight per plant; NSP: number of seeds per plant; SHP: shelling percent; 100SW: 100 seed weight; HI:
harvest index; NSPOD: number of seeds per pod; GY: grain yield (kg/ha)

RESULT AND DISCUSSION The results of genotypic and phenotypic correlation


coefficient between all pairs of characters as shown in
The most common way to represent the pattern and Table 3. Majority of pairs of highly heritable traits, were
magnitude of the genetic basis of a series of traits is the also correlated similarly at both phenotypic and genotypic
genetic variancecovariance matrix, also known as the levels. These close consistency of phenotypic and
G-matrix. G -matrix is extremely useful for predicting the genotypic correlation coefficients result from that the
response to selection over the short term. Genetic phenotypic means of genotypes for highly heritable traits
variancecovariance matrix accounts for genetic are close to their unobservable genotypic values
covariance as well as predicting the indirect response to (genotypic effects). Therefore, correlations between
selection on one trait from selection on another trait. If the phenotypic means and genotypic values for highly
genetic covariance between two traits is different from heritable traits have similar pattern. The results of the
zero, selection on one trait will affect response to present study illustrate well empirically the known genetic
selection on the other (Guillaume and Whitlock, 2007). and statistical theory by Searle (1961), Falconer and
According to the present result (Table 1), the highest Mackay (1996).
phenotypic and genotypic covariances were observed
between GY and AGBP; GY and PWP indicating The obtained results indicate a positive and significant
significant contribution of these characterss to increase genotypic correlation (rG) between the GY and PWP,
grain yield in groundnut (correlated response). High SWP and 100SW and evidence a common genetic action
values of genetic and/or phenotypic covariance between between these traits, which makes easier the selection
two traits may represent a high level of variation (genetic, since the process will be done using any of them. The
phenotypic or both) between two traits. High values of positive and significant genetic correlations between
genetic variation in breeding programs can be very useful PWP and SWP with GY; and 100SW with GY can also
(Farshadfar et al., 2013). be considered as important, since they suggest that a
The upper diagonal of Table 2 has the co-heritability selection by GY affects directly the increase or decrease
values for pairs of characters. The range of co-heritability of the PWP and 100SW. The result from phenotypic
was from -14.2 (between NBP and SHP) to 0.93 correlation coefficient (Table 3) was shown that grain
(between 100SW and NSPOD). All characters have yield exhibited positive and significant association with
shown medium to high coheritability with GY. Positive most of agromorphological characters studied except for
coheritability estimate was observed between GY and all plant height (PH), number of seeds per plant (NSP) and
the agro-morphological traits in the present study. This harvest index (HI). Among the characters, the strongest
suggests that selection of either of the characters would positive and significant phenotypic correlations with GY
simultaneously affect the GY positively. were observed between 100SW, PWP, SWP, NBP, NMP,

Correlation and Path Analysis of Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) Genotypes in Ethiopia
Yusuf et al. 200

Table 2. Co-heritability estimates between the traits under study

Trait PH NMP NBP AGBP PWP SWP NSP SHP 100SW HI NSPOD GY(kg/ha)
PH 0.88 0.91 0.90 0.90 0.52 0.74 0.76 0.90 0.79 0.84 0.81
NMP 0.90 0.87 0.62 0.67 0.74 0.81 0.85 0.74 0.69 0.81
NBP 0.91 0.83 0.79 0.82 -14.2 0.92 0.81 0.83 0.85
AGBP 0.76 0.74 0.88 0.87 0.90 0.85 0.84 0.85
PWP 0.62 0.19 0.61 0.83 0.69 0.35 0.78
SWP 0.49 0.58 0.83 0.72 0.35 0.81
NSP 0.51 0.68 0.68 0.45 0.64
SHP 0.89 0.84 0.80 0.81
100SW 0.88 0.93 0.91
HI 0.87 0.89
NSPOD 0.76

where PH: plant height; NMP: number of mature pod per plant; NBP: number of branches per plant; AGBP: above ground biomass per plant; PWP:
pod weight per plant; SWP: seed weight per plant; NSP: number of seeds per plant; SHP: shelling percent; 100SW: 100 seed weight; HI: harvest
index; NSPOD: number of seeds per pod; GY: grain yield (kg/ha).

Table 3. Genotypic (lower off-diagonal) and Phenotypic correlation coefficients (upper off-diagonal) of 12 yield and yield related
traits

Trait PH NMP NBP AGBP PWP SWP NSP ShP 100SW HI NSPod GY
PH 1 0.21** 0.06 0.49** -0.073 0.48 0.06 0.07 0.09 -0.34** -0.30** 0.17
NMPP 0.33 1 0.35** 0.43** 0.51** 0.31** 0.64** -0.03 -0.15 -0.09 -0.33** 0.24**
NBP 0.29 0.63** 1 0.42** 0.18 0.21** 0.25** -0.19** 0.09 -0.24** -0.28** 0.28**
AGBP 0.48 0.56 0.77 1 0.36** 0.31** 0.11 -0.24** 0.21** -0.61** -0.52** 0.22**
PWP -0.14 0.22 0.58 0.47 1 0.06 0.48** -0.02 0.31** 0.14 -0.08 0.44**
SWP 0.3 0.61 0.54 0.4 0.54 1 0.21** 0.15 0.17 0.02 -0.26** 0.30**
NSP 0.42 0.76** 0.27 0.05 -0.11 0.49 1 0.09 -0.23** 0.23** 0.16 0.15
ShP -0.04 -0.1 -0.4 -0.55 -0.03 0.35 0.3 1 0.06 0.39** 0.12 0.23**
100 SW -0.13 -0.27 0.32 0.2 0.74 0.31 -0.49 0.07 1 0.09 -0.26** 0.49**
HI -0.38 -0.37 -0.44 -0.79** -0.01 0.14 0.06 0.78** 0.18 1 0.41** 0.18
NSPod -0.08 -0.73** -0.78** -0.75** -0.54 -0.48 -0.22 0.32 -0.14 0.46 1 -0.32**
GY 0.02 0.33 0.55 0.27 0.83** 0.80** 0.22 0.34 0.63** 0.31 -0.49 1

Where PH: plant height; NMPP: number of mature pod per plant; NBP: number of branches per plant; AGBP: above ground biomass per
plant; PWP: pod weight per plant; SWP: seed weight per plant; NSP: number of seeds per plant; SHP: shelling percent; 100SW: 100 seed
weight; HI: harvest index; NSPOD: number of seeds per pod; GY: grain yield (kg/ha).

SHP and AGBP. On the other hand, strong negative produces an increase in those characters significantly
phenotypic correlations were found between AGBP and associated with grain yield. The phenotypic correlation
HI, AGBP and NSPOD. Grain yield was negatively (rP), genotypic correlation (rG) and environmental
correlated only with number of seeds per pod (NSPOD) correlation (rE), between the variables show a smaller
at all genotypic, environmental and phenotypic levels. phenotypic correlation than the genetic correlation, which
Similar observations were reported by Vange and Maga, implies environmental effect suppressed the association
(2014) and Zaman et al. (2011). at phenotypic levels, indicating that both environmental
and genotypic correlations in those cases act in same
The magnitudes of the positive phenotypic and genetic direction and finally maximize their expression at
correlation suggest that the selection by grain yield phenotypic level and, therefore, there is an effect of the
Correlation and Path Analysis of Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) Genotypes in Ethiopia
Int. J. Plant Breed. Crop Sci. 201

Table 4. Environmental correlation coefficients

Trait PH NMP NBP AGBP PWP SWP NSP ShP 100SW HI NSPod GY(kg/ha)
PH 0.15 -0.08 0.50** -0.05 0.53** -0.04 0.12 0.32** -0.33** -0.45** 0.26**
NMP 0.15 0.35 0.63** 0.25** 0.63** -0.004 -0.04 0.11 -0.04 0.17
NBP 0.14 0.003 0.13 0.27** -0.08 -0.25** -0.04 0.17 0.04
AGBP 0.33** 0.31** 0.15 -0.07 0.23** -0.46** -0.33** 0.18
PWP -0.01 0.61** -0.02 0.08 0.22** 0.14 0.29**
SWP 0.16 0.11 0.16 -0.02 -0.22** 0.19
NSP 0.03 -0.13 0.32** 0.32** 0.13
ShP 0.06 0.17 0.01 0.18
100SW -0.05 -0.45** 0.31**
HI 0.37** 0.06
NSPOD -0.17

Where PH: plant height; NMPP: number of mature pod per plant; NBP: number of branches per plant; AGBP: above ground biomass
per plant; PWP: pod weight per plant; SWP: seed weight per plant; NSP: number of seeds per plant; SHP: shelling percent; 100SW:
100 seed weight; HI: harvest index; NSPOD: number of seeds per pod; GY: grain yield (kg/ha).

environmental factors and/or of the non-additive factors indirect effect of SWP through NMP, PWP, NSP, 100SW
that negatively affect the level of real association and NSPOD was found to be greater than direct effect of
between the characters under study. This result in SWP on GY, indicating indirect selection of high yielding
accordance with the work of Espitia et al. (2008) and genotype(s) through NMP, PWP, NSP, 100SW, and
Zaman et al. (2011). High positive associations were also NSPOD is effective. In a similar manner, the direct effect
obtained between nut yield and number of nuts/plant, of the 100SW on the GY is less than the indirect effect
number of secondary branches/plant and kernel size had of 100SW through PWP and SWP on GY; in this case,
been reported by Tripathi (1974) which supported the the correlation value is attributed to the indirect effect of
present findings. the 100SW and SWP character on GY. In this situation
Environmental correlation coefficient has shown that the causal indirect effect is considered for the selection
grain yield exhibited positive and significant association processes. On the other hand, PH, NBP and NSPOD
with plant height, pod weight per plant, 100 seed weight, exhibited direct negative effect on grain yield/ha. Similar
under rain fed condition. The result of correlation of grain findings were reported by Vange and Maga (2014),
yield with the studied traits at environmental correlation Yadava, et al. (1981), Makand Itai et al. (2009) in case of
coefficient level (Table 4) also similar with genotypic Bambara Groundnut.
correlation except for seed weight per plant (significant at The coefficient of determination can vary from 0 to 1.00
genotypic level) and plant height which is significant for and indicates that the proportion of variation in the scores
environmental correlation but not significant at genotypic can be predicted from the relationship between two
level. The fact that, correlation of PH at genotypic and variables. The coefficient of determination (R2 ) in the
phenotypic levels not significant showing PH is largely path analysis for rG indicates that 75% of the grain
influenced by environment. variability was explained by the variables PH, NMP, NBP,
Genotypic correlation coefficients were partitioned by AGBP, PWP, SWP, NSP, SHP, 100SW, HI and NSPOD,
using method of path analysis to find out the direct and which is a good fit for the model and shows the
indirect effects of yield contributing traits towards the importance of explaining these characters in the GY
grain yield. From the path analysis for genotypic definition. Similar work was reported by Santander et al.
correlation (Table 5), it was revealed that small positive (2013).
direct effect was observed for most of the characters that The significant and positive phenotypic correlation
could be due to weaker correlation of causative coefficient between NMP and GY (Table 6) is explained
characters with GY(the effect). The indirect effect of PWP in large proportion by indirect effects of PWP and
through NMP, SWP, 100SW and NSPOD was found to NSPOD than for the direct effects of the NMP character;
be greater than direct effect of PWP on GY, indicating this indicates that the significant and direct correlation
indirect selection of high yielding genotype(s) through between NMP and GY is due, in large proportion, to the
NMP, SWP, 100SW, and NSPOD is effective. The indirect influence through PWP and NSPOD. The

Correlation and Path Analysis of Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) Genotypes in Ethiopia
Yusuf et al. 202

Table 5. Path Analysis based on Genotypic correlations, direct effect (bold) diagonal, indirect effects (off diagonal)

Trait PH NMP NBP AGBP PWP SWP NSP SHP 100SW HI NSPOD GY(corrl)
PH -0.029 0.100 -0.080 0.024 -0.038 0.059 0.075 -0.007 -0.031 -0.076 0.025 0.022
NMP -0.274 0.011 -0.429 0.069 0.156 0.297 0.337 -0.042 -0.163 -0.182 0.550 0.330
NBP -0.093 0.182 -0.025 0.036 0.155 0.098 0.045 -0.063 0.073 -0.083 0.224 0.549
AGBP -0.933 0.997 -1.23 0.001 0.782 0.451 0.050 -0.554 0.286 -0.915 1.34 0.275
PWP 0.0930 0.138 -0.323 0.048 0.012 0.215 -0.040 -0.011 0.363 -0.003 0.339 0.831**
SWP -0.157 0.291 -0.226 0.030 0.238 0.011 0.136 0.094 0.115 0.042 0.227 0.801**
NSP -0.307 0.506 -0.159 0.005 -0.068 0.209 0.007 0.113 -0.258 0.025 0.148 0.221
ShP 0.019 -0.039 0.138 -0.036 -0.012 0.089 0.070 0.012 0.023 0.201 -0.126 0.339
100SW 0.175 -0.332 -0.352 0.040 0.835 0.241 -0.351 0.050 0.005 0.144 0.175 0.630**
HI 0.228 -0.200 0.214 -0.069 -0.003 0.047 0.018 0.237 0.077 0.010 -0.247 0.312
NSPod 0.002 -0.012 0.0118 -0.002 -0.009 -0.005 -0.002 0.003 -0.002 0.005 -0.479 -0.489
R2 =0.75
R=0.86
h2 =1-R2 =0.26
Where PH: plant height; NMPP: number of mature pod per plant; NBP: number of primary branches per plant; AGBP: above ground biomass per
plant; PWP: pod weight per plant; SWP: seed weight per plant; NSP: number of seeds per plant; SHP: shelling percent; 100SW: 100 seed weight;
HI: harvest index; NSPod: number of seeds per pod; GY: grain yield (kg/ha), R2 : coefficient of determination, h=residual effect.

Table 6. Path analysis based on phenotypic correlations, direct effect (bold) diagonal, indirect effects (off diagonal)

Trait PH NMPP NBP AGBP PWP SWP NSP ShP 100SW HI NSPOD GY(corrl)
PH -0.001 0.060 -0.076 0.085 -0.045 -.0.018 0.007 0.005 0.025 -0.031 0.160 0.170
NMP -0.022 0.004 -1.01 0.168 0.696 -0.026 0.164 -0.005 -0.095 -0.019 0.382 0.237**
NBP -0.002 0.075 -0.047 0.054 0.081 -0.006 0.021 -0.010 0.018 -0.016 0.111 0.279**
AGBP -0.116 0.616 -2.66 0.001 1.09 -0.058 0.065 -0.082 0.287 -0.277 1.35 0.221**
PWP 0.009 0.368 -0.576 0.157 0.007 -0.006 0.138 -0.003 0.217 0.032 0.010 0.441**
SWP -0.060 0.234 -0.695 0.142 0.104 -0.0004 0.062 0.028 0.124 0.004 0.361 0.303**
NSP -0.008 0.554 -0.965 0.060 0.886 -0.023 0.001 0.018 -0.191 0.063 -0.248 0.147
ShP -0.005 -0.013 0.328 -0.054 -0.015 -0.007 0.013 0.001 0.023 0.048 -0.087 0.232**
100SW -0.011 -0.115 -0.290 0.094 0.494 -0.017 -0.068 0.011 0.003 0.021 0.364 0.486**
HI 0.022 -0.037 0.414 -0.145 0.115 -0.001 0.036 0.038 0.034 0.002 -0.30 0.178
NSPod 0.001 -0.004 0.016 -0.004 -0.002 0.0004 0.001 0.0004 -0.003 0.002 -0.330 -0.323**
R2 =0.901
R=0.949
h2 =1-R2 =0.099
where PH: plant height; NMPP: number of mature pod per plant; NBP: number of primary branches per plant; AGBP: above ground biomass per plant;
PWP: pod weight per plant; SWP: seed weight per plant; NSP: number of seeds per plant; SHP: shelling percent; 100SW: 100 seed weight; HI:
harvest index; NSPOD: number of seeds per pod; GY: grain yield (kg/ha), R2 : coefficient of determination, h=residual effect.

significant phenotypic correlation coefficient between explained in larger proportion by indirect effects of NMP,
NBP and GY is explained by indirect effects of NSPOD PWP and NSPOD than for the direct effects of the AGBP
than for the direct effects of the NBP character; this character; this indicates that the significant and direct
indicates that the significant and direct correlation correlation between AGBP and GY is due to the indirect
between NBP and GY is due to the indirect influence influence through NMP, PWP and NSPOD. The
through NSPOD. The Significant and positive phenotypic Significant and positive phenotypic correlation coefficient
correlation coefficient between AGBP and GY is between PWP and GY is explained in larger proportion
Correlation and Path Analysis of Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) Genotypes in Ethiopia
Int. J. Plant Breed. Crop Sci. 203

by the indirect effects of NMP, AGBP, NSP and 100SW REFERENCES


than for the direct effects of the PWP character, this
indicates that the significant and direct correlation Cruz C (2001). Programa GENES. Versao Windows.
between PWP and GY is due to the indirect influence Aplicativo computacional em gentica eestatstica.
through NMP, AGBP, NSP and 100SW. Ediciones Universidade Federal de Vicosa. Vicosa,
MG, Brasil. 648 p.
The Significant and positive phenotypic correlation Espitia M, Aramendiz H, Cadena J (2008).
coefficient between SWP and GY is explained in larger Correlacionesyanlisisdesendero en
proportion by indirect effects of NMP, AGBP, 100SW and algodnGossypium hirsutum L. en el Caribe
NSPOD than for the direct effects of the SWP character; colombiano. Rev. Fac. Nac. Agron.61(1):4325 - 4335.
this indicates that the significant and direct correlation Falconer D, and Mackay T (1996). Introduction to
between SWP and GY is due, in large proportion, to the quantitative genetics.4th edition. Prentice Hall, New
indirect influence through NMP, AGBP, 100SW or Jersey, EE. UU. 464 p.
NSPOD. The Significant and positive phenotypic Farshadfar E (2010). New discussions in biometrical
correlation coefficient between SHP and GY is explained genetics vol 1. Islamic Azad University of Kermanshah
in larger proportion by indirect effects of NBP than for the press (in Farsi).
direct effects of the SHP character; this indicates that the Guillaume F, Whitlock MC (2007). Effects of migration on
significant and direct correlation between SHP and GY is the genetic covariance matrix. Evolution 61(10):2398-
due, in larger proportion, to the indirect influence through 2409.
NBP. The Significant and positive phenotypic correlation Holland JB (2006). Estimating genotypic correlations and
coefficient between 100SW and GY (rp=0.486) is their standard errors using multivariate restricted
explained in larger proportion by indirect effects of PWP maximum likelihood estimation with SAS proc MIXED.
and NSPOD than for the direct effects of the 100SW Crop Sci. 46:642-654.
character; this indicates that the significant and direct Holland JB, Nyquist WB, and Cervantes-Martinez CT
correlation between 100SW and GY is due to the indirect (2003). Estimating and interpreting heritability for plant
influence through PWP and NSPOD. The result is breeding: An update. Plant Breed. Rev. 22.
comparable with the report by Vange and Maga (2014). Hallauer A, and Miranda J (1981). Quantitative genetics
The path analysis based on genotypic correlation in the in maize breeding. lowa State University Press, Ames,
present study shows that selection for yield trait is IA. 468p.
effective through NMP, PWP, SWP, 100SW, NSP, Makand Itai, Pangirayi Tongooma, Rosalia Madamba,
NSPOD, AGBP, NSP and NBP. The result is comparable David Icishahayo, John Derera (2009). Path coefficient
with the report by Santander et al. (2013). The coefficient analysis of Bambara Groundnut pod yield components
of determination (R2 ) in the path analysis for phenotypic at four planting dates. Res.J.of Agric. and
correlation indicates that 90% of the GY variability was Biol.Sci., 5(3): 287-292.
explained by the variables PH, NMP, NBP, AGBP, PWP, Misra JB., Ghosh PK, Dayal D, Mathur RS (2000).
SWP, NSP, SHP, 100SW and NSPOD which is a good fit Agronomic, nutritional and physical characteristics of
for the model and shows the importance of the explaining some Indian groundnut cultivars. Indian J. Agric. Sci.
variables in the GY definition. The result is in accordance 70: 741746.
with the report by Espitia et al. (2008). Santander LKL, Callejo FA, Burbano TCL, Alvarado
DED (2013). Genetic Correlations, Phenotypic,
Environmental and Path Analysis in Tree Tomato
(Cyphomandra betacea cav. sendt). ACTA
CONCLUSION
AGRONOMOCA. 62(3):217-224.
SAS Institute (2011). SAS enterprise guide, Version 9.2.
In the present study genotypic correlation showed that
SAS Inst., Cary, NC, USA.
yield contributing characters PWP, SWP and 100SW
Searle, SR, Casella G, McCullock CE (1992). Variance
were highly significant positive correlation with kernel
components. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
yield per hectare. While all yield contributing characters
Vange T, and Maga TJ (2014). Genetic Characterization
except for PH, NSP and HI showed significant phenotypic
and Path Coefficient Analysis in Ten Groundnut
correlation with kernel yield per hectare. the path analysis
Varieties (Arachis hypogaea L.) Evaluated in the
showed that kernel yield per hectare mainly affected by
Guinea Savannah Agroecological Zone. Afr. J. Agri.
characters like PH, NMP, NBP, AGBP, PWP, SWP, NSP,
Res. 9(25):1932-1937.
SHP, 100SW and NSPOD. Thus breeding for yield traits
Tripathi HP (1974). Correlation studies in spreading
in groundnut should be based on these characters.
groundnut. Oilseed Journal. 4:28-32.

Correlation and Path Analysis of Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) Genotypes in Ethiopia
Yusuf et al. 204

Yadava TP, Kumar, P, and Yadava AK (1981).


Correlation and path analysis in groundnut. Haryana
Agric. Univ. J.of Res., 11(2):169-71.
Zaman MA, Tuhina-Khatun, M, Ullah MZ, Moniruzzamn
M, and Alam KH (2011). Genetic Variability and Path
Analysis of Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). The
Agriculturists, 9(1 and 2): 29-36.

Accepted 19 April, 2017

Citation: Yusuf Z, Zeleke H, Mohammed W, Hussein S,


Hugo A (2017). Correlation and Path Analysis of
Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) Genotypes in Ethiopia
International Journal of Plant Breeding and Crop Science
4(2): 197-204.

Copyright: 2017 Yusuf et al. This is an open-access


article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted
use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original author and source are cited.

Correlation and Path Analysis of Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) Genotypes in Ethiopia

You might also like