Skip to main content
PMC home page
Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences logoLink to Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences
. 2021 Jun 10;28(10):5714–5719. doi: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2021.06.006

Grain yield and correlated traits of bread wheat lines: Implications for yield improvement

Muhammad Irfan Ullah a, Shahzadi Mahpara a,⁎, Rehana Bibi b, Rahmat Ullah Shah c, Rehmat Ullah d, Sibtain Abbas a, Muhammad Ihsan Ullah e, Aziza M Hassan f, Ahmed M El-Shehawi f, Marian Brestic g, Marek Zivcak g, Muhamad Ifnan Khan a,⁎
PMCID: PMC8459068  PMID: 34588882

Abstract

Global wheat yields are suffering due to differences in regional climatic conditions and soil fertility. Plant breeders are continuously working to improve the yield per unit area of wheat crop through selecting superior lines as parents. The screening and field evaluation of available lines allow the selection of superior ones and subsequently improved varieties. Therefore, heritable distinctions among 33 bread wheat lines for yield and related attributes were assessed under field conditions. The experiment included thirty lines and three check varieties. Data relating to different plant characteristics was collected at maturity. Significant differences were recorded for yield and related traits of tested wheat lines and check varieties. Wheat lines V6, V12 and V20 proved better with reduced number of days to reach anthesis and other desirable traits compared to check varieties. Days to start heading had strong correlation with spike length and number of spikelets spike-1. Flag leaf area had positive relationship with peduncle length and yield related traits. The 1000-garin weight and grain yield were also correlated with each other. It is concluded that V6, V10 and V20 proved better for all studied traits than the rest of the lines. Therefore, these lines could be used in wheat breeding program as parents to improve yield.

Keywords: Correlation, Heritable variability, Coefficient of variation, Grain yield, Wheat

1. Introduction

Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) is regarded as a major crop among cereals and integral part of daily diet in different geographic regions of the world. Wheat contains gluten protein available in the form of bread. In cereal crops, this protein is found in wheat and to small extent in triticale and rye. Wheat is utilized to make flour for confectionery foods, bread and brunch cereal. It has numerous uses, good storage quality and nutritive value; thus, accepted as a major foodstuff for one third global population (Sleper and Poehlman, 2006). Wheat yield can be increased by 25% through development of abiotic and biotic stresses tolerant genotypes (Gill et al., 2004). Genotypes × environment interaction play a vital role in yield and quality improvement in wheat (Amanuel et al., 2018, Johansson et al., 2020, Nehe et al., 2019). Wheat is a strategic and major cereal crop around the globe. Wheat provides ~55 and 20% carbohydrates and calories, respectively (Aravind and Prasad, 2005).

Wheat contains proteins, essential minerals, lipids and vitamins. Approximately 1.2 billion people rely on wheat for protein in the developing countries. The demand of wheat will increase by 60% in these areas by 2050. Wheat is cultivated on 219 million hectares representing 15.4% of the total arable land in the world. All other crops have lesser cultivation area than wheat. Nonetheless, it is cultivated in all countries of the world where climate is suitable for its production (Mateo-Sagasta et al., 2018). Wheat is cultivated as a major cereal crop in Pakistan. Wheat contributes 1.6% towards GDP of Pakistan and shares of 8.9% to the value added in agriculture. It was cultivated on an area of 8.74 million hectares with total production of 25.195 million tons during 2019 (GOP, 2019).

Grain yield is a quantitatively inherited trait readily affected by environment. Adverse environmental conditions and abiotic stresses negatively affect grain yield, causing serious economic consequences. Hence, better hereditary of wheat genotype is inevitable for higher yields under favorable and non-favorable agro-ecological conditions (Baranski, 2015, Mahpara et al., 2012, Reynolds and Borlaug, 2006). Numerous studies have indicated that yield can be enhanced through improvement in source-sink association (Foulkes et al., 2011, Lawlor and Paul, 2014). Adapting improved varieties and suitable planting dates are compulsory for improving wheat productivity. Utilizing improved wheat varieties could significantly enhance yield. Various new varieties of wheat have been developed in Pakistan; however, there is still space for the development of more high yielding varieties. About 35 to 50% of wheat yield improvement has been attained through the introduction of newly-developed genotypes (Sabri et al., 2020). The yield can be evaluated through its related traits, like number of productive tillers, spike length, 1000-grain weight and number of spikelets per spike etc. (Li et al., 2020). Genetic makeup of a variety is expressed under favorable environmental conditions; however, could differ in stressful environments (Foulkes et al., 2011, Li et al., 2020).

Genetic variability in wheat varieties and their F1 hybrids has been observed for different traits, including flag leaf area, plant height and increase in leaf area improved grain yield. (Ibrahim, 2019, Mahpara et al., 2018a) found that wheat yield was dependent on plant height, number of tillers per plant and dry weight. Similarly, increase in number of tillers per plant and other yield related traits improved wheat yield in different studies observed hereditary variation in seven wheat parents during an experiment on RAPD markers for estimation of genetic diversity (Awaad, 2021, Kiss et al., 2021, Mahpara et al., 2017b). (Tariq et al., 2020) worked on sixty-three wheat genotypes and found maximum genetic divergence for anti-oxidant enzymes and phenolic compounds.

An efficient selection of parent material is vital for success of breeding program. Therefore, this study was conducted to estimate inherent variability in growth and yield related of different wheat lines under agro-climatic conditions of Dera Ghazi Khan, Pakistan. The promising wheat lines sorted during the experiment would be exploited in advanced wheat breeding programs to improve yield per unit area in Pakistan.

2. Materials and methods

This experiment was executed at Farmer’s field near Ghazi University, Dera Ghazi Khan, Pakistan. Experimental materials were collected from different sources in Punjab province, Pakistan (Table 1).

Table 1.

List of different wheat lines and check varieties used in the experiment.

Code Line Code Line Code Line
V1 6039 V12 29SAWSN11-12/54 V23 7-63-0944
V2 7-63-0949 V13 ZA1 V24 228
V3 29SAWSN11-12/60 V14 ZA2 V25 WN-2
V4 2 Kco 50 V15 ZA4 V26 7-62-0925
V5 29SAWSN11-12/101 V16 ZA6 V27 8965
V6 29SAWSN11-12/57 V17 Line 2 V28 9268
V7 BK 129 V18 Line 1 V29 7-59-873
V8 7-63-0951 V19 7-56-0806 V30 7-65-0989
V9 7-59-866 V20 9945 V31 Galaxy-13*
V10 7-61-0918 V21 Fsd-82 V32 Ujala-2015*
V11 7-62-0936 V22 WN 153 V33 Lasani-2008*
Open in a new tab
*

Check varieties used in the experiment.

Soil pH for the experimental site was 7–7.5. Thirty wheat lines and three check varieties were sown in randomized compete block design (RCBD) with three replications. All agronomic practices were kept optimum for all lines and check varieties. Data relating to number of days to spike emergence, flag leaf area, peduncle length and plant height, days taken to maturity, spike length, number of productive tillers/plant, spikelets/spike, number of grains/plant, 1000-grain weight and grain yield/pant were randomly collected from each line at maturity.

2.1. Statistical analysis

The collected data on various traits were analyzed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The normality and homogeneity of variance in the data were tested prior to ANOVA. The data were normally distributed; therefore, the analysis was conducted on original data. Least significant difference (LSD) test at 5% probability was used as post-hoc test to separate the means where ANOVA indicated significant differences (Steel and Torrie, 1960)..

2.2. Components of variance

Genotypic as well as phenotypic variances were computed according to (Garbade et al., 2019, Sodini et al., 2018). Correlation analysis among yield and yield-related traits was performed as suggested by (Kwon and Torrie, 1964). Heritability was calculated following (Burton and Devane, 1953). Genetic advance (%) was assessed through the formula recommended by (Johnson et al., 1955, Riaz et al., n.d.).

3. Results & Discussion

3.1. Analysis for variance

Existence of genetic variation is a crucial step in crop breeding programs aimed at producing new varieties with improved yield potential and consistency of yield under diverse climatic conditions. Mean squares for various yield-related traits indicated significant differences among tested lines and check varieties (Table 2).

Table 2.

Means squares for various plant traits of 33 wheat lines.

Traits Replication Wheat lines Error CV (%)
Number of days to heading 43.97 2.98** 1.83 2.36
Flag leaf area 26.66 1036.21** 0.31 0.69
Peduncle length 0.36 65.35** 0.34 2.00
Plant height 0.87 17.79** 2.65 2.44
Days to reach maturity 15.98 4.11** 2.56 1.35
Spike length 16.95 478.4** 0.01 0.92
Number of productive tillers per plant 66.33 106.76** 0.01 1.71
Number of spikelets per spike 330.06 231.91** 0.06 1.71
Number of grains per spike 114.38 730.56** 0.19 1.00
1000-grain weight 460.8 1156.29** 0.04 0.46
Grain yield per plant 261.33 14517.1** 0.01 0.45
Open in a new tab

The results for genetic variation for grain yield and related traits is in agreement with the findings of several earlier studies (Cooper et al., 2013, Hussain et al., 2004, Mahpara et al., 2017b, Mahpara et al., 2018a). studied the impact of environment germination and growth of wheat. They concluded that genotypes significantly altered the number of days taken for heading, spike length, plant stature, number of productive tillers per plant and grain yield (Kamaran et al., 2019). also found presence of genotypic variability in four varieties and F1 hybrids in wheat following 4 × 4 diallel fashion.

3.2. Mean performance

Days to start heading is an important plant trait to find whether crop is early maturing. Wheat line V10 and V20 took the lowest number of days to start anthesis. Likewise, V11, V19, V22 and V23 followed V10 and V20 and took comparatively lesser number of days to spike emergence than the rest of the lines (Table 3). An earlier study found that wheat variety taking less number of days for heading is categorized early maturing (Siyal et al., 2020, Takumi et al., 2020, Tiwari et al., 2019).

Table 3.

Mean values for various yield related traits of different wheat lines and check varieties included in the study.

Lines Days to heading Flag leaf area (cm2) Peduncle length (cm) Plant height (cm) Days to maturity Spike length (cm) Number of fertile tillers/plant Number of spikelets/spike Number of grains/spike 1000-grain weight (g) Grain yield per plant (g)
V1 57.5 bcd 77.935 j 29.53 ef 66.01 hij 115.5 fgh 7.77 m 6.4 de 12.5 e 36.5 f 39.5 g 9.1 s
V2 57.5 bcd 86.296 g 28.47 fg 64.95 ijk 116.5 efgh 10.17 e 7.15 c 16 c 48 c 47.5 c 13.3 k
V3 60.5 a 85.043 h 29.47 ef 62.32 kl 117.5 defgh 9.46 g 6.5 d 14.5 d 42.5 d 43.5 d 10.5 mn
V4 56.5 cde 90.222 e 30.55 de 60.31 l 116.5 efgh 8.47 j 5.5 fg 14.5 d 42.5 d 43.5 d 11.3 l
V5 57.5 bcd 88.201 f 28.49 fg 64.34 jk 117 defgh 8.85 i 6.3 e 12 e 36 f 39.5 g 9.4 r
V6 56.5 cde 106.439 a 32.58 bc 65.99 hij 119.5 bcde 11.14 bc 8 a 18.5 b 54.5 b 49.5 b 24.3 b
V7 58.5 abc 65.615 o 26.52 hi 62.59 kl 120 bcd 8.22 kl 6.3 e 12.5 e 36.5 f 39.5 g 9.1 s
V8 57.5 bcd 73.375 kl 28.59 fg 60.5 l 116.5 efgh 9.23 h 7.4 b 14 d 41 e 43 e 10.3 op
V9 56.5 cde 53.657 q 24.49 j 65.28 ijk 117 defgh 7.16 n 5.3 hi 10.5 f 30.5 g 35.5 h 7.3 u
V10 54 e 73.975 k 27.47 gh 60.61 l 115 gh 9.25 h 5.3 hi 14.5 d 42 d 43.5 d 10.1 pq
V11 55.5 ed 65.531 o 28.65 fg 70.38 def 116.5 efgh 8.85 i 5.3 hi 12.5 e 36.5 f 39.5 g 9.3 r
V12 57.5 bcd 93.462 d 33.51 b 80.55 a 115 gh 10.15 e 5.35 gh 16.5 c 48.5 c 47.5 c 21.4 d
V13 58.5 abc 69.789 m 25.55 ij 75.4 bc 117.5 defgh 8.28 k 5.3 hi 12.5 e 36.5 f 39.5 g 10.4 no
V14 58.5 abc 72.765 l 26.62 hi 64.5 jk 117.5 defgh 8.29 k 5.35 gh 12.5 e 36.5 f 41 f 10.3 op
V15 59.5 ab 77.718 j 27.62 gh 72.49 cd 123.5 a 8.06 l 5.3 hi 12.5 e 36.5 f 39.5 g 10.2 pq
V16 56.5 cde 52.831 q 21.12 k 64.49 jk 123.5 a 7.1 n 5.25 hi 10.5 f 30.5 g 35 i 7.3 u
V17 55.5 ed 63.985 p 24.59 j 69.07 efgh 121 abc 8.24 k 5.35 gh 12.5 e 36.5 f 39.5 g 10.3 op
V18 57.5 bcd 68.306 n 25.53 ij 72.52 cd 118.5 bcde 9.1 h 5.25 hi 12 e 36.5 f 39.5 g 10.6 m
V19 55.5 ed 81.63 i 28.62 fg 76.38 b 118 cdefg 7.17 n 5.15 i 10.5 f 30.5 g 35.5 h 7.7 t
V20 54.5 e 94.989 bc 36.76 a 69.35 defg 114 h 12.33 a 7.0 c 20.5 a 60.5 a 53.5 a 25.3 a
V21 56 cde 87.646 f 33.74 b 71.43 de 121.5 ab 10.3 e 5.25 hi 16.5 c 48.5 c 47.5 c 21.2 e
V22 55.5 ed 78.013 j 28.44 fg 66.3 ghij 119 bcde 9.43 g 5.5 fg 14.5 d 42.5 d 43.5 d 11.3 l
V23 55.5 ed 95.257 bc 32.7 bc 64.41 jk 118.5 bcde 11.25 b 5.3 hi 18.5 b 54.5 b 49.5 b 19.4 g
V24 56.5 cde 81.818 i 29.51 ef 62.5 kl 118.5 bcde 10.79 d 5.25 hi 16.5 c 48.5 c 47.5 c 16.6 i
V25 58.5 abc 77.514 j 28.43 fg 64.46 jk 120 bcd 11 c 5.3 hi 18.5 b 54.5 b 49.5 b 21.7 c
V26 59.5 ab 81.743 i 29.54 ef 65.2 ijk 120 bcd 10.15 e 5.3 hi 16.5 c 48.5 c 47.5 c 19.4 g
V27 60.5 a 87.579 f 31.52 cd 65.41 ijk 120 bcd 10.98 c 5.35 gh 18.5 b 54.5 b 49.5 b 19.3 g
V28 59.5 ab 94.489 cd 33.55 b 64.47 jk 119.5 bcde 10.25 e 5.15 i 16.5 c 48.5 c 47.5 c 19.3 g
V29 58.5 abc 77.628 j 30.46 de 59.91 l 118.5 bcdef 9.83 f 5.5 fg 16 c 48.5 c 47.5 c 15.3 j
V30 58.5 abc 64.022 p 25.48 ij 62.4 kl 114.5 h 10.26 e 5.3 hi 16.5 c 48.5 c 47.5 c 16.7 i
V31 56.5 cde 94.632 bc 33.28 b 68.03 fghi 117.5 defgh 11.08 bc 5.65 f 18.5 b 54.5 b 49.5 b 20.3 f
V32 55.5 ed 95.63 b 33.7 b 66.46 ghij 115.5 fgh 11.25 b 5.3 hi 18.5 b 55 b 49.5 b 24.3 b
V33 57.5 bcd 86.162 gh 30.58 de 68.27 efghi 117.5 defgh 10.15 e 5.5 fg 16.5 c 36.5 f 39.5 g 10.5 mn
Open in a new tab

Means sharing the same letter within a column are statistically non-significant.

Flag leaf area had a key role in photosynthesis; thus, larger leaf area is desirable in wheat. Mean values for flag leaf area indicated that V6 (106.4 cm2) and V23 (95.3 cm2) lines had the highest flag leaf area, whereas the lowest was noted for check varieties (Table 3). Due to increase in leaf area of these lines, plants had increased amount of photosynthates, which increased grain yield per plant. Thus, V6 and V10 lines performed best in this regard. Some researchers also worked on flag leaf area of wheat and found that flag leaf area played a key role in improving grain yield of wheat (Luo et al., 2018, Ma et al., 2020, Zhao et al., 2018).

Significant variation was noted for peduncle length among tested lines and check varieties. The lines V6, V12 and V20 had higher peduncle length values than check varieties. Increase in peduncle length of wheat genotypes has been observed by (Bilgrami et al., 2018, Farooq et al., 2018, Ojha and Ojha, 2020).

Semi-dwarf stature is a desirable trait in wheat as it provides not only resistance to lodging but also develops the mechanism to utilize nitrogenous fertilizer efficiently. Most of the tested lines exhibited medium stature like V6, V12 except V11 (70.4), V12 (80.6 cm), V13 (75.4 cm), V15 (72.5 cm), V17 (69.1 cm), V18 (72.5 cm), V19 (76.4 cm), V20 (69.4) and V21 (71.4), whereas minimum value for plant height was observed for V29 (59.9 cm).(Siyal et al., 2020, Zhao et al., 2018) reported that medium statured genotypes had higher grain yield than tall statured genotypes.

Early maturity is preferable trait in most crop plants. Data regarding days to maturity indicated that V20 (114 days) took minimum mean days to reach maturity. Similarly, V1 (116 days), V10 and V12 (115 days each) also took lesser number of days to reach maturity compared with check varieties. Similar findings have been observed by (Siyal et al., 2020) who confirmed that days to reach maturity play a role in wheat yield.

Spike length is the most important yield component in wheat as increased spike length would have more number of spikelets per spike and subsequently higher grain yield. In this experiment, the line V20 produced longer spikes than check varieties. Likewise, genotypes V23 (11.3 cm) and V6 (11.1 cm) also had higher values for spike length (Table 3). (Mahpara et al., 2017a) also reported similar results and confirmed that enlarged spike length contributed to increase grain yield in wheat.

Number of productive tillers per plant contributes directly towards yield. Results indicated that V6 (8 tillers per plant) produced more productive tillers than check varieties. Likewise, V2 and V20 (7 tillers each) also had higher number of productive tillers per plant. Many researchers also worked on wheat crop and found that increased number of productive tillers along with other yield components increased grain yield of wheat crop (Abdelkhalik, 2019, Liu et al., 2019, Mahpara et al., 2017a, Mahpara et al., 2018a).

Number of spikelets per spike plays a crucial role in enhancing grain yield of wheat crop. The line V20 (20) produced maximum number of spikelets per spike followed by V6, V23 and V25. Many researchers have confirmed that increased number of spikelets increased grain yield (Philipp et al., 2018, Sakuma and Schnurbusch, 2020, Würschum et al., 2018).

Higher numbers of grains per spike are important trait directly linked with grain yield of wheat. Data regarding number of grains per spike indicated that V20 and V6 had the highest number of grains/spike. Likewise, V23, V25 and V27 also had higher number of grains/spike. These results coincided with findings of different researchers who reported that number of grains per spike augment grain yield of wheat crop (Sakuma and Schnurbusch, 2020, Wolde et al., 2019)

Mean values of 1000-grain weigh revealed that V20 had the highest (53.5 g) value. Similarly, V6, V23 and V25 also had maximum 1000-grain weight. (Bilgrami et al., 2018, Kamaran et al., 2019) concluded that increased 1000-grain weight directly contributed to enhanced grain yield.

Data pertaining to grain yield/plant indicated that V20 (25.3) produced maximum grain yield, followed by V6 (24.3 g). Likewise, V25 (21.7 g), V12 (21.4 g), V26 (19.4 g), V23 (19.4 g), V27 (19.3 g) and V28 (19.3 g) followed for grain yield. These findings endorsed the results presented by (Mahpara et al., 2018b, Mahpara et al., 2017a).

3.3. Interrelationship between grain yield and related components

Association between different traits and grain yield can be explored by correlation analysis (Table 4). Correlation analysis indicated that days to start heading had significant positive link with spike length (0.042*) only. Flag leaf area had significant and positive genotypic and phenotypic association with peduncle length (0.899**, 0.883**), spike length (0.699, 0.698), spikelets per spike (0.724, 0.720), grains per spike (0.699**, 0.697**), 1000-grain weight (0.693**, 0.691**) and grain yield per plant (0.665**, 0.664**), respectively. Peduncle length had significant genotypic and phenotypic connection with spike length (0.759**, 0.748**), spikelets/spike (0.787**, 0.773**), grains/spike (0.762**, 0.750**), 1000-grain weight (0.760**, 0.745**) and grain yield per plant (0.774**, 0.763**), correspondingly. Significant positive relationships at genotypic and phenotypic levels were noted between grain yield and related traits, including spike length, number of spikelets/spike, grains/spike and 1000-grain weight. Genotypic as well as phenotypic correlation for number of spikelets/spike indicated that spikelets per spike increased number of grains per spike.

Table 4.

Genotypic (above diagonal) and phenotypic (below diagonal) correlation coefficient between various plant traits in different wheat genotypes.

Traits Days to start heading Flag leaf area Peduncle length Plant height Days to reach maturity Spike length Number of productive tillers per plant Number of spikelets per spike Number of grains per spike 1000-grain weight Grain yield per plant
Days to start heading −0.037 −0.154 −0.130 0.176 0.042* 0.179 0.002* −0.009 0.025 −0.025
Flag leaf area −0.03 0.899** 0.085 −0.087 0.699** 0.248* 0.724** 0.699** 0.693** 0.665**
Peduncle length −0.091 0.883** 0.119 −0.084 0.759** 0.059 0.787** 0.762** 0.760** 0.774**
Plant height −0.113 0.079 0.112 0.132 −0.105 −0.304* −0.145 −0.155 −0.180 0.079
Days to reach maturity 0.084 −0.05 −0.04 0.090 −0.028 −0.190 −0.001 0.016 −0.026 0.104
Spike length −0.035 0.698** 0.748** −0.104 −0.006 0.055 0.972** 0.946** 0.940** 0.891**
Number of productive tillers per plant 0.082 0.244* 0.054 −0.284* −0.164 0.052 0.040 0.057 0.066 −0.132
Number of spikelets per spike −0.019 0.720** 0.773** −0.124 0.008 0.965** 0.041 0.968** 0.957** 0.912**
Number of grains per spike −0.012 0.697** 0.750** −0.147 0.016 0.943** 0.058 0.965** 0.991** 0.935**
1000-grain weigh 0.018 0.691** 0.745** −0.170 −0.020 0.938** 0.066 0.953** 0.990** 0.921**
Grain yield per plant −0.015 0.664** 0.763** 0.074 0.083 0.889** −0.131 0.908** 0.933** 0.920**
Open in a new tab
**

Highly significant at P = ≤0.01

*

Significant at P = ≤.

Grain yield/plant had highly significant positive link with 1000-grains weight. These assessments are in agreement with findings concluded by several earlier studies (Bede and Petrović, 2006, Bilgin et al., 2011, Ibrahim, 2019). All of these studies reported significant variation among all parameters of wheat. Similar findings were reported by (Bilgrami et al., 2018, Khayatnezhad et al., 2010, Okuyama et al., 2005).

3.4. Components of variability and heritability

Effectiveness of a plant-breeding program depends on genetic variation in the existing germplasm. Therefore, diverse heritability, heritable advance, genetic and phenotypic co-efficient of variation in yield and yield components were found in wheat for most of the studied traits as listed in Table 5. Days to start heading had medium heritability (49.75%) and low genetic advance mean (3.42), GCV (2.35) and PCV (3.33), which exhibited the role of non-additive heritable effect. Findings of this study are in accordance with (Kaur et al., 2021, Kumar et al., 2020) who found that days taken for heading also possessed medium heritability. Direct selection of wheat variety based on this trait will not be effective; thus, indirect selection will be effective.

Table 5.

Genotypic coefficient of variation (GCV), phenotypic coefficient of variation (PCV), heritability (%) and genetic advance (%) for various plant traits in wheat.

Traits GCV PCV h2 (%) G.A (%)
Days to start heading 2.35 3.33 49.75 3.42
Flag leaf area 15.84 15.86 99.82 32.61
Peduncle length 11.35 11.52 96.98 23.03
Plant height 7.09 7.5 89.35 13.8
Days to reach maturity 1.68 2.16 60.84 2.71
Spike length 14.27 14.3 99.58 29.33
Number of productive tillers per plant 12.43 12.55 98.14 25.38
Number of spikelets per spike 18.48 18.56 99.14 37.9
Number of grains per spike 19.11 19.14 99.72 39.32
1000-grain weight 11.29 11.3 99.82 23.24
Grain yield per plant 38.45 38.5 99.98 79.21
Open in a new tab

Here; GCV = genotypic coefficient of variation; PCV = phenotypic coefficient of variation; h2 = broad sense heritability and GA = genetic advance.

Similarly, days to reach maturity also had medium heritability (60.84%) and low genetic advance (2.71%), GCV (1.68) and PCV (2.71). Grain yield/plant showed maximum value of heritability (99.98%), genetic advance (79.21%), GCV (38.45) and PCV (38.50), and signifying additive gene act involvement in the constitution of traits. The elevated value of heritability in grain yield depends upon selection of those traits having increased heritability.

Many researchers working on heritability of wheat reported different results as they reported low heritability for yield (Arya et al., 2017, Tripathi et al., 2011), while (Mahpara et al., 2018a) observed significant heritability. Similarly, high heritability was noticed for number of grains per spike (99.72%) followed by spike length (99.58%), spikelets per spike (99.14%) and peduncle length (96.98%) with genetic advance of 39.32, 29.33, 37.90 and 23.03%, respectively. Similarly, spike length and plant height are more heritable having high to medium genetic advance. Flag leaf area contributed much in yield and possessed high heritability. All the studied attributes were quantitatively inherited. Mode of their inheritance is complex due to involvement of many genes for each trait. Some morphological traits are more heritable than yield components. Estimates of heritability were found high for days taken to heading, relatively elevated in grain weight, plant height and productive tillers and low for spikelets/spike, grains/spike and yield (Mahpara et al., 2008). (Tripathi et al., 2011) also found moderate genotypic and phenotypic variances for days taken to heading, while plant height and days taken for maturity possessed high genotypic and phenotypic variances. Similarly, findings of (Bartaula et al., 2019, Jamil et al., 2017, Mofokeng et al., 2020, Uzma et al., 2017) were also in agreement with results in this manuscript as he found that most of yield related traits possessed moderate genotypic and phenotypic variances and high heritability with increased genetic advance .

4. Conclusion

Results indicated that the line V20 proved better for some morphological attributes, grain yield and yield-related traits. Similarly, V6, V12 and V20 lines seemed suitable on the basis flag leaf area, plant height, spike length, days to reach maturity, number of spikelets/spike, number of productive tillers/plant and grain yield/plant. Thus, wheat production can be enhanced if these selected lines could undergo the process yield trials for selection as varieties as well as further wheat breeding program at national level.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the projects VEGA 1/0589/19 and APVV-18-0465. The current work was funded by Taif University Researchers Supporting Project number (TURSP-2020/76), Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia.

Footnotes

Peer review under responsibility of King Saud University.

Contributor Information

Shahzadi Mahpara, Email: smahpara@gudgk.edu.pk.

Muhamad Ifnan Khan, Email: mifnan@gudgk.edu.pk.

References

  1. Abdelkhalik S.A.M. Assessment of some genetic parameters for yield and its components in four bread wheat crosses using six parameter model. Egypt. J. Plant Breed. 2019;23:719–736. [Google Scholar]
  2. Amanuel M., Gebre D., Debele T. Performance of bread wheat genotypes under different environment in lowland irrigated areas of Afar Region, Ethiopia. African J. Agric. Res. 2018;13:927–933. [Google Scholar]
  3. Aravind P., Prasad M.N.V. Zinc mediated protection to the conformation of carbonic anhydrase in cadmium exposed Ceratophyllum demersum L. Plant Sci. 2005;169:245–254. [Google Scholar]
  4. Arya V.K., Singh J., Kumar L., Kumar R., Kumar P., Chand P. Genetic variability and diversity analysis for yield and its components in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Indian. J. Agric. Res. 2017;51 [Google Scholar]
  5. Awaad H.A. Performance and Genetic Diversity in Water Stress Tolerance and Relation to Wheat Productivity Under Rural Regions. Mitigating Environ. Stress. Agric. Sustain. Egypt. 2021:63–103. [Google Scholar]
  6. Baranski M. Arizona State University; 2015. The Wide Adaptation of Green Revolution Wheat. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Bartaula S., Panthi U., Timilsena K., Acharya S.S., Shrestha J. Variability, heritability and genetic advance of maize (Zea mays L.) genotypes. Res. Agric. Livest. Fish. 2019;6:163–169. [Google Scholar]
  8. Bede M., Petrović S. Genetska varijabilnost roditelja-uvjet uspješnom oplemenjivanju pšenice. Sjemenarstvo. 2006;23:5–11. [Google Scholar]
  9. Bilgin O., Korkut K.Z., Başer I., Dağlioğlu O., Öztürk İ., Kahraman T., Balkan A. Genetic variation and inter-relationship of some morpho-physiological traits in durum wheat (Triticum durum (L.) Desf.) Pak. J. Bot. 2011;43:253–260. [Google Scholar]
  10. Bilgrami S.S., Fakheri B.A., Razavi K., Mahdinezhad N., Tavakol E., Ramandi H.D., Ghaderian M., Shariati J.V. Evaluation of agro-morphological traits related to grain yield of Iranian wheat genotypes in drought-stress and normal irrigation conditions. Aust. J. Crop Sci. 2018;12:738–748. [Google Scholar]
  11. Burton G.W., Devane de E.H. Estimating heritability in tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea) from replicated clonal material 1. Agron. J. 1953;45:478–481. [Google Scholar]
  12. Cooper J.K., Ibrahim A.M.H., Rudd J., Hays D., Malla S., Baker J. Increasing hard winter wheat yield potential via synthetic hexaploid wheat: II. Heritability and combining ability of yield and its components. Crop Sci. 2013;53:67–73. [Google Scholar]
  13. Farooq M.U., Cheema A.A., Ishaaq I., Zhu J. Correlation and genetic component studies for peduncle length affecting grain yield in wheat. Int. J. Adv. Appl. Sci. 2018;5:67–75. [Google Scholar]
  14. Foulkes M.J., Slafer G.A., Davies W.J., Berry P.M., Sylvester-Bradley R., Martre P., Calderini D.F., Griffiths S., Reynolds M.P. Raising yield potential of wheat. III. Optimizing partitioning to grain while maintaining lodging resistance. J. Exp. Bot. 2011;62:469–486. doi: 10.1093/jxb/erq300. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Garbade S.F., Shen N., Himmelreich N., Haas D., Trefz F.K., Hoffmann G.F., Burgard P., Blau N. Allelic phenotype values: a model for genotype-based phenotype prediction in phenylketonuria. Genet. Med. 2019;21:580–590. doi: 10.1038/s41436-018-0081-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Gill S., Loprinzi C.L., Sargent D.J., Thomé S.D., Alberts S.R., Haller D.G., Benedetti J., Francini G., Shepherd L.E., Francois Seitz J. Pooled analysis of fluorouracil-based adjuvant therapy for stage II and III colon cancer: who benefits and by how much? J. Clin. Oncol. 2004;22:1797–1806. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2004.09.059. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Go, P., 2019. Economic survey of Pakistan.
  18. Hussain N., Abid M., Raza I. Response of wheat (Triticum aestivum) to phosphorus in the presence of Farmyard manure. Indus J. Plant Sci. 2004;3:298–302. [Google Scholar]
  19. Ibrahim A.U. Genetic variability, Correlation and Path analysis for Yield and yield components in F6 generation of Wheat (Triticum aestivum Em. Thell.) IOSR J. Agric. Vet. Sci. 2019;12:17–23. [Google Scholar]
  20. Jamil A., Khan S., Sayal O.U., Waqas M., Ullah Q., Ali S. Genetic variability, broad sense heritability and genetic advance studies in bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) germplasm. Pure Appl. Biol. 2017;6:538–543. [Google Scholar]
  21. Johansson Eva, Branlard Gérard, Cuniberti Marta, Flagella Zina, Hüsken Alexandra, Nurit Eric, Peña Roberto Javier, Sissons Mike, Vazquez Daniel. Wheat Quality For Improving Processing And Human Health. Springer International Publishing; Cham: 2020. pp. 171–204. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  22. Johnson H.W., Robinson H.F., Comstock R.E. Estimates of genetic and environmental variability in soybeans 1. Agron. J. 1955;47:314–318. [Google Scholar]
  23. Kamaran, S., Khan, T.M., Bakhsh, A., Hussain, N., Mahpara, S., Manan, A., Chattha, W.S., Jilani, T.A., Sherani, J., Iqbal, M., 2019. Assessment of morphological and molecular marker based genetic diversity among advanced upland cotton genotypes. Pakistan J. Agric. Sci. 56.
  24. Kaur A., Chhuneja P., Srivastava P., Singh K., Kaur S. Evaluation of Triticum durum–Aegilops tauschii derived primary synthetics as potential sources of heat stress tolerance for wheat improvement. Plant Genet. Resour. 2021:1–16. [Google Scholar]
  25. Khayatnezhad M., Zaefizadeh M., Gholamin R., Jamaati-e-Somarin S. Study of genetic diversity and path analysis for yield in durum wheat genotypes under water and dry conditions. World Appl. Sci. J. 2010;9:655–665. [Google Scholar]
  26. Kiss T., Balla K., Cseh A., Berki Z., Horváth Á., Vida G., Veisz O., Karsai I. Assessment of the genetic diversity, population structure and allele distribution of major plant development genes in bread wheat cultivars using DArT and gene-specific markers. Cereal Res. Commun. 2021:1–9. [Google Scholar]
  27. Kumar P., Solanki Y.P.S., Singh V. Genetic Variability and Association of Morpho-physiological Traits in Bread Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) Curr. J. Appl. Sci. Technol. 2020;95–105 [Google Scholar]
  28. Kwon S.H., Torrie J.H. Heritability and interrelationship among traits of two soybean populations. Crop. Sci. 1964;4:196–198. [Google Scholar]
  29. Lawlor D.W., Paul M.J. Source/sink interactions underpin crop yield: the case for trehalose 6-phosphate/SnRK1 in improvement of wheat. Front. Plant Sci. 2014;5:418. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2014.00418. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Li J., Wen S., Fan C., Zhang M., Tian S., Kang W., Zhao W., Bi C., Wang Q., Lu S. Characterization of a major quantitative trait locus on the short arm of chromosome 4B for spike number per unit area in common wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) Theor. Appl. Genet. 2020;133:2259–2269. doi: 10.1007/s00122-020-03595-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Liu C., Khodaee M., Lopes M.S., Sansaloni C., Dreisigacker S., Sukumaran S., Reynolds M. Multi-environment QTL analysis using an updated genetic map of a widely distributed Seri× Babax spring wheat population. Mol. Breed. 2019;39:1–15. [Google Scholar]
  32. Luo F., Deng X., Liu Y., Yan Y. Identification of phosphorylation proteins in response to water deficit during wheat flag leaf and grain development. Bot. Stud. 2018;59:1–17. doi: 10.1186/s40529-018-0245-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Ma J., Tu Y., Zhu J., Luo W., Liu H., Li C., Li S., Liu J., Ding P., Habib A. Flag leaf size and posture of bread wheat: genetic dissection, QTL validation and their relationships with yield-related traits. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2020;133:297–315. doi: 10.1007/s00122-019-03458-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Mahpara S., Ali Z., Ahsan M. Combining ability analysis for yield and yield related traits among wheat varieties and their F1 hybrids. Int. J. Agri. Biol. 2008;10:599–604. [Google Scholar]
  35. Mahpara S., Ali Z., Rehmani M.I.A., Iqbal J., Shafiq M.R. Studies of genetic and combining ability analysis for some physio-morphological traits in spring wheat using 7× 7 diallel crosses. Int. J. Agric. Appl. Sci. 2017;9:33–40. [Google Scholar]
  36. Mahpara S., Farooq J., Ali Z., Petrescu-Mag I.V., Hussain F. Assessment of genetic distance among wheat genotypes through RAPD markers. Adv. Agric. Bot. 2012;4:31–35. [Google Scholar]
  37. Mahpara S., Hussain S.T., Iqbal J., Noorka I.R., Salman S. 12. Analysis of generation means for some metric plant traits in two wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) hybrids. Pure Appl. Biol. 2018;7:93–102. [Google Scholar]
  38. Mahpara, S., Hussain, S.T., Iqbal, J., Rasool, I., Salman, S., 2018b. Analysis of generation means for some metric plant traits in two wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) hybrids. Pure Appl. Biol.
  39. Mahpara S., Rehmani M.I.A., Hussain S., Iqbal J., Qureshi M.K., Shehzad M.A., Dar J.S. Heterosis for some physio-morphological plant traits in spring wheat crosses. Pure Appl. Biol. 2017;6:1103–1110. [Google Scholar]
  40. Mateo-Sagasta, J., Zadeh, S.M., Turral, H., 2018. More people, more food, worse water?: a global review of water pollution from agriculture.
  41. Mofokeng M.A., Mashilo J., Rantso P., Shimelis H. Genetic variation and genetic advance in cowpea based on yield and yield-related traits. Acta Agric. Scand. Sect. B—Soil. Plant Sci. 2020;70:381–391. [Google Scholar]
  42. Nehe A., Akin B., Sanal T., Evlice A.K., Ünsal R., Dinçer N., Demir L., Geren H., Sevim I., Orhan Ş. Genotype x environment interaction and genetic gain for grain yield and grain quality traits in Turkish spring wheat released between 1964 and 2010. PLoS One. 2019;14 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0219432. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Ojha A., Ojha B.R. Assessment of Morpho-Physiological, Yield and Yield Attributing Traits Related to Post Anthesis Drought in Wheat Genotypes Under Rainfed Condition in Rampur, Chitwan. Int. J. Appl. Sci. Biotechnol. 2020;8:323–335. [Google Scholar]
  44. Okuyama L.A., Federizzi L.C., Barbosa Neto J.F. Plant traits to complement selection based on yield components in wheat. Cienc. Rural. 2005;35:1010–1018. [Google Scholar]
  45. Philipp N., Weichert H., Bohra U., Weschke W., Schulthess A.W., Weber H. Grain number and grain yield distribution along the spike remain stable despite breeding for high yield in winter wheat. PLoS One. 2018;13 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0205452. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Reynolds M.P., Borlaug N.E. Impacts of breeding on international collaborative wheat improvement. J. Agric. Sci. 2006;144:3. [Google Scholar]
  47. Riaz, A., Tahir, M.H.N., Rizwan, M., Fiaz, S., Chachar, S., Razzaq, K., Riaz, B., Sadia, H., n.d. Developing a Selection Criterion Using Correlation and Path Coefficient Analysis.
  48. Sabri R.S., Rafii M.Y., Ismail M.R., Yusuff O., Chukwu S.C., Hasan N. Assessment of agro-morphologic performance, genetic parameters and clustering pattern of newly developed blast resistant rice lines tested in four environments. Agronomy. 2020;10:1098. [Google Scholar]
  49. Sakuma S., Schnurbusch T. Of floral fortune: tinkering with the grain yield potential of cereal crops. New Phytol. 2020;225:1873–1882. doi: 10.1111/nph.16189. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Siyal A.L., Siyal F.K., Jatt T. Yield from genetic variability of bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) genotypes under water stress condition: A case study of Tandojam, Sindh. Pure Appl. Biol. 2020;10(3):841. [Google Scholar]
  51. Sleper D.A., Poehlman J.M. Blackwell Publishing; 2006. Breeding Field Crops. [Google Scholar]
  52. Sodini S.M., Kemper K.E., Wray N.R., Trzaskowski M. Comparison of genotypic and phenotypic correlations: Cheverud’s conjecture in humans. Genetics. 2018;209:941–948. doi: 10.1534/genetics.117.300630. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Steel R.G.D., Torrie J.H. Principles and procedures of statistics. Princ. Proced. Stat. 1960 [Google Scholar]
  54. Takumi S., Mitta S., Komura S., Ikeda T.M., Matsunaka H., Sato K., Yoshida K., Murai K. Introgression of chromosomal segments conferring early heading date from wheat diploid progenitor, Aegilops tauschii Coss., into Japanese elite wheat cultivars. PLoS One. 2020;15 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0228397. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Tariq H., Awan S.I., Sabir S.M., Ilyas M. Hexaploid-Tetraploid Landraces and Wild Species of Wheat Revealed Diversity for Antioxidants and Total Phenolics. Philipp. Agric. Sci. 2020;103:29–37. [Google Scholar]
  56. Tiwari, D.N., Tripathi, S.R., Tripathi, M.P., Khatri, N., Bastola, B.R., 2019. Genetic variability and correlation coefficients of major traits in early maturing rice under rainfed lowland environments of Nepal. Adv. Agric. 2019.
  57. Tripathi S.N., Marker S., Pandey P., Jaiswal K.K., Tiwari D.K. Relationship between some morphological and physiological traits with grain yield in bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L. em. Thell.). Trends. Appl. Sci. Res. 2011;6:1037. [Google Scholar]
  58. Uzma J., Ghulam S., Tabassum M.I. Genetics of some physio-morphic traits of hexaploid wheat genotypes under rainfed conditions. J. Agric. Res. 2017;55:463–468. [Google Scholar]
  59. Wolde G.M., Mascher M., Schnurbusch T. Genetic modification of spikelet arrangement in wheat increases grain number without significantly affecting grain weight. Mol. Genet. Genomics. 2019;294:457–468. doi: 10.1007/s00438-018-1523-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. Würschum T., Leiser W.L., Langer S.M., Tucker M.R., Longin C.F.H. Phenotypic and genetic analysis of spike and kernel characteristics in wheat reveals long-term genetic trends of grain yield components. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2018;131:2071–2084. doi: 10.1007/s00122-018-3133-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. Zhao C., Bao Y., Wang X., Yu H., Ding A., Guan C., Cui J., Wu Y., Sun H., Li X. QTL for flag leaf size and their influence on yield-related traits in wheat. Euphytica. 2018;214:1–15. [Google Scholar]

Articles from Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of Elsevier

RESOURCES