Professional Documents
Culture Documents
IJPBCS
Vol. 4(2), pp. 197-204, June, 2017. www.premierpublishers.org. ISSN: 2167-0449
Research Article
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.
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
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)
Correlation and Path Analysis of Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) Genotypes in Ethiopia
Yusuf et al. 200
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
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
Correlation and Path Analysis of Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) Genotypes in Ethiopia
Yusuf et al. 204
Correlation and Path Analysis of Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) Genotypes in Ethiopia