Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T02:13:22.586Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A study of interaction of additive, dominance and epistatic gene effects with micro- and macro-environments in two tomato triple test crosses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

R. P. Singh  and
S. Singh
R. P. Singh
Affiliation:
Department of Botany, Shri Guru Ram Rai College, Dehradun, India
S. Singh
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Breeding, Haryana Agricultural University, Hissar, India
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Sixty families of each of two tomato triple test crosses (S 120 × EC 61747 and EC 31513 × Pusa Ruby) were raised in completely randomized blocks in two replications with two fertilizer levels. Perkins & Jinks' (1971) analysis was used to detect and measure the interactions of additive, dominance and epistatic effects of genes with micro- and macro-environments for flowering time, maturity period, number of branches, final height, number of locules, number of fruits per plant, yields per plant and weight per fruit. Additive and dominance gene effects were almost equally sensitive to micro- and to macro-environments. The j and l type epistasis was more sensitive to the environments than the i type epistasis.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 103 , Issue 1 , August 1984 , pp. 53 - 57
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Chahal, G. S. & Jinks, J. L. (1978). A general method of detecting the additive, dominance and epistatic variation that inbred line can generate using a single tester. Heredity 40, 117–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jinks, J. L. & Perkins, J. M. (1970). A general method for the detection of additive, dominance and epistatic components of variation. III. F2 and backcross population. Heredity 25, 419–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jinks, J. L., Perkins, J. M. & Breese, E. L. (1969). A general method of detecting additive, dominance and epistatic variation for metrical traits. II. Application to inbred lines. Heredity 24, 45–57.Google Scholar
Jinks, J. L. & Virk, D. S. (1977). A modified triple test cross analysis to test and allow for inadequate testers. Heredity 39, 165–170.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kearsey, M. J. & Jinks, J. L. (1968). A general method of detecting additive, dominance and epistatic variation for metrical traits. I. Theory. Heredity 23, 403–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perkins, J. M. & Jinks, J. L. (1971). Analysis of genotype × environment interaction in triple test cross data. Heredity 26, 203–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pooni, H. S., Jinks, J. L. & Jayasekara, N. E. M. (1978). An investigation of gene action and genotype × environment interaction in two crosses of Nicotiana rustica by triple test cross and inbred lines analysis. Heredity 41, 83–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, S. (1979). A study of genotype × environment interaction in three barley triple test crosses. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 92, 319–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, S. (1980). Detection of components of genetic variation and genotype × environment interaction in spring wheat. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 95, 67–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar