TAMMAN' A NEW PROMISING VARIETY OF CHICKPEA DEVELOPED FOR RAINFED AREAS OF PUNJAB.

Byline: G. Rabbani, J. Iqbal, M. A. Tariq, T. Hussain, G. Shabbir and A. Hussain

Keywords: Rainfed, Kabuli, Chickpea, Tamman and Drought tolerant.

INTRODUCTION

Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) is a crop of temperate regions having its origin in south-eastern Turkey, from where its cultivation extended to the other countries of the globe. Process of variety development has been very helpful in increasing the production of different crops (Shabbir et al., 2011). Efforts for crop improvements have made adaptation of this crop possible to warmer subtropical areas. There are two very common types of chickpea i.e., "Kabuli" and "Desi". Desi types are most common in Asia, some parts of Australia and Africa, whereas, Kabuli types are generally cultivated in Europe and America (Zali and Sabaghore, 2011). They contain areas with temperate climate. The northern parts of our province also have areas with mild temperate climate. These areas have good potential for the successful cultivation of Kabuli types.

So there is a dire need to focus the attention to develop Kabuli varieties which may eventually be helpful to accomplish the goal of self-sufficiency in the production. Chickpea is one of the significant plant origin protein sources and its consumption is continuously increasing as a substitute for animal protein especially in the vegetarian diets (Zali and Sabaghore, 2011; Kristensen et al., 2016). Besides being a good source of protein for feed, it is a good rotational crop and improves soil fertility (Goa and Ashamo, 2016).

India is the major producing country of chickpea in terms of area as well as production having an average yield of 782.4Kg/ha. Pakistan ranks second in its production in terms of area and production. Punjab has the major contribution of chickpea production in Pakistan with the highest share in area and production (77% and 83%, respectively) among the provinces (Anonymous, 2010-11). In Punjab, major production comes from the rain fed tract, where it is being cultivated on 89% of the total chickpea area in the Punjab with 84% of the production (Ali et al., 2011). There is a dire need for development of high yielding varieties of chickpea in order to get the increased farm income and improve livelihood for betterment of the growers (Khattak et al., 2007). Use of improved and high yielding seed with better management practices can help increase per acre yield of chickpea in low intensity zone (Abbas et al., 2017).

Yield may considerably be improved through development of varieties having preferred combinations of yield related characters (Shafiq et al., 2011). In this perspective, a high yielding variety (Thal, 2006) having moderate resistance to blight has earlier been released for arid area of the Punjab (Arshad et al., 2008).

In general, Kabuli chickpeas have low grain yield due to scarcity of productive cultivars and non-availability of varieties with resistance against various abiotic and biotic stresses. Non availability of good quality seed is another contributing factor in this regard. Among the fungal diseases, chickpea wilt is a serious issue particularly in the rain fed areas that causes the wilting of plants (Mahmood et al., 2011). The aim of current study was to develop a Kabuli chickpea variety for Northern Punjab which is first one its kind in Potohar. The new chickpea variety "Tamman" has the ability to overcome these problems due to its important genetic characters like higher yield, drought tolerance and disease resistance, hence has been released for commercial cultivation in the arid areas of Punjab. This paper illustrated the breeding history of the "Tamman" variety, which was approved by Punjab Seed Council for its cultivation on large scale in the rain fed areas.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Procedure adopted by Naeem-ud-Din et al. (2009) was followed for varietal development process. An elite line of Kabuli chickpea (6KCC-122) was selected from Chickpea International Fusarium Wilt Nursery-2005-06 of the ICARDA at Barani Agricultural Research Institute (BARI), Chakwal. It was a promising progeny of single plant that had parentage/pedigree Flip-03-134c/Flip-98-52c x Flip-98-41c. Evaluation of its performance was carried out in different replicated yield trials along with check varieties. Screening for disease and insect resistance was done under rain fed conditions during period from 2006 to 2012.The breeding history of "Tamman" variety is shown in Table1. All the yield trials were conducted according to randomized complete block design. Spacing between plants and rows were kept at 10 and 30 cm, respectively. All standard agronomic cultural practices were followed to conduct various nurseries and yield trials. Recommended fertilizer doses were applied.

Field trials were conducted on sandy loam soil. Data were recorded for different plant traits in various experiments and analyzed statistically using software Statistix 8.1.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A: Yield Performance Trials: Chickpea (Kabuli) preliminary, regular and micro yield trial was performed during the years 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09, respectively at research area of the BARI, Chakwal. National Uniform Yield Trials were performed during 2009-10 and 2010-2011. Spot examination was performed during 2011-12. Then its case was submitted to expert sub-committee for approval. Finally it was approved by Punjab Seed Council for general cultivation. Table 2 shows the significant differences (P<0.05) among the varietal means for seed yield in preliminary yield trial of chickpea (Kabuli). Among the tested genotypes, 6KCC-122 had the highest seed yield of 734 Kg/ha. It was followed by 6KCC-114, which gave a seed yield of 685 Kg/ha. In comparison with check varieties, 6KCC-122 gave 66% and 84% higher seed yield than that of Noor-91 and CM-2000 respectively.

Likewise, 6KCC-122 produced a seed yield that was 13% and 28% higher as compared with the check varieties CM-2000and Noor-91, respectively in regular chickpea yield trial as shown in Table3. As far as micro chickpea yield trial is concerned, on an average, 6KCC-122 gave 32 % and 61% higher yield than that of check varieties viz., CM-2000 and CM-2008 (Table 4). These results are similar to earlier findings of Moucheshi et al. (2010) and Arshad et al., (2008) who also reported substantial increase in seed grain yield of newly developed varieties compared to standard check varieties.

B: Regional Adaptability Trials: National Uniform Yield Trials of Chickpea (Kabuli) were conducted during 2009-10 and 2010-11. Genotype 6KCC-122 was observed to have higher yield than that obtained in case of check varieties. During the two years, data obtained from 15 locations showed that 6KCC-122 gave 4%, 7% and 34% higher average yield than that of the varieties CM-2008, Noor-2009 and Noor-91, respectively (Table 5, 6 and 7). Results regarding the cooperative yield trial obtained from seven locations depicted that 6KCC-122, on an average gave the highest yield i.e., 1719 Kg/ha. On the other hand, CM-2008 and Noor-2009 gave a yield 1634 Kg/ha and of 1708 Kg/ha, respectively (Table 8).

Average yield performance of 6KCC-122 at 28 locations showed that itgave4%, 19%, 34% and 26% higher yield than that of standard cultivars, Noor-2009, CM-2008, CM-2000 and Noor-91, respectively (Table9). Earlier researchers like Yadav et al., 2010 and Alwawi et al., 2009 also reported increase in yield performance and higher adaptability of newly developed chickpea genotypes under studies in all environments owing to their broader genetic make-up.

C: Agronomic Trials: In the agronomic trial conducted during 2001-12 at BARI, Chakwal, and the highest yield of 1550Kg/ha was produced by the elite line 6KCC-122 when planting was done on 15th October. It was followed by the yield of the same genotype giving a production of 1360 Kg/ha when planted on 1st November (Table10). So the best time for its sowing will be from 10 October to 25th October. Detopping effect of Mepiquat Chloride application was tested on the chickpea production under irrigated conditions. Mepiquat chloride (MC), which is a gibberellin acid inhibitor, inhibits cell elongation and restricts overgrowth in plants (Polat et al., 2017). The study was carried out at Agronomic Research Institute, Faisalabad during 2011-12. The genotype 6KCC-122 gave better response to application of Mepiquat Chloride as shown in Table 11.

To optimize the fertilizer requirements, 6KCC-122 was tested at ten fertility levels during 2010-11 and 2011-12 on sandy loam soil with 5.3 mg/Kg available phosphorus and 0.5% organic matter at BARI, Chakwal. Based on two years study performance, 6KCC-122 showed better response to the fertilizer dose of 25-90-30 NPK Kg/ha (Table12) due to its inherent potential.

D: Plant Protection Trials: Screening trial against Fusarium Wilt was conducted in the Plant Pathology Laboratory of BARI, Chakwal during 2007-08 and at Pathology Research Institute, Faisalabad during 2011-12. The results obtained from both the laboratories are given in Table 13 and Table 14. Results regarding screening of chickpeas against Fusarium Wilt show that 6KCC-122 (Tamman) remained at par with the check varieties; CM-2008 and Noor-91. Screening against insect pests was conducted at the Entomological Research Institute Faisalabad during 2011-12. Results showed the resistance of 6KCC-122 resistant to gram pod bore (Table 15). Chaudhry et al.(2006); Shah et al., 2009 and Shafiq et al.(2011) also affirmed the similar deduction for resistance of chickpea varieties against Fusarium Wilt.

Distinctive characteristics of the new Kabuli chickpea variety "TAMMAN": The newly developed Kabuli chickpea variety "Tamman" has bushy type plants having light green color and medium sized leaves. Plants are semi erect in growth habit, while they mature uniformly (Figure 1and2). Under rain-fed conditions, it comes to flowering in 140 to 142 days and reaches the maturity in 180-185 days. Plants of Taman variety have large number of primary as well as secondary branches and number of pods. Its seed is medium bold and 100 grain weight is 31 g. This variety has an average yield of 1756Kg/ha (Table16). Tamman has also been proved a disease resistant and drought tolerant variety.

Table-1: Breeding history of Tamman (6KCC-122).

Year###Pedigree###Remarks

2005-06###Flip-03-134c/Flip-98-52cxFlip-98-41c###Selection from Fusarium Wilt Nursery (ICARDA)

2006-07###6KCC-122###Preliminary Yield Trial

2007-08###6KCC-122###Regular Yield Trial

###Screening against Fusarium Wilt Trial

2008-09###6KCC-122###Micro Yield Trial

2009-10###6KCC-122###National Uniform Yield Trial (9 locations) Rank 1st

2010-11###6KCC-122###National Uniform Yield Trial (6 locations) Rank 3rd

###Fertilizer Requirement Trial

###Cooperative Yield Trial (7 locations) Rank 1st

2011-12###6KCC-122###Sowing date Trial

###Fertilizer Requirement Trial

###Screening against Fusarium Wilt Trial

###Screening against insect pests

###Effect of growth retardant and Detopping on Chickpea Trial

Table-2: Seed yield of various Kabuli chickpea genotypes during 2006-07 in preliminary yield trial.

###Sr. No.###Genotypes###Seed yield (Kg/ha)

###1###6KCC-122###734

###2###6KCC-114###685

###3###6KCC-121###537

###4###6KCC-115###515

###5###6KCC-118###507

###6###6KCC-112###485

###7###Noor-91(c)###441

###8###CM-2000(c)###400

###9###6KCC-113###289

###10###6KCC-117###259

###11###6KCC-120###244

###12###6KCC-116###205

###13###6KCC-119###178

LSD(0.05)###94.99

CV %###13.37

Yield of 6KCC-122 increase/decrease(%) over checks###Noor-91=66%

###CM-2000=84%

Table-3: Seed yield of various Kabuli chickpea genotypes during 2007-08 in regular yield trial.

###Sr. No.###Entries###Seed yield (Kg/ha)

###1###6KCC-122###2548

###2###6KCC-115###2474

###3###6KCC-108###2381

###4###6KCC-121###2292

###5###CM-2000(c)###2256

###6###6KCC-114###2173

###7###Noor-91(c)###1996

###8###6KCC-105###1990

###9###6KCC-103###1975

###LSD (0.05)###390

###CV (%)###7.3

###Yield of 6KCC-122 increase/decrease(%) over checks###CM-2000=13%

###Noor-91=28%

Table-4: Seed yield of various Kabuli chickpea genotypes during 2008-09 in micro yield trial

###Sr.No###Genotypes###Seed yield (Kg/ha)

###1###6KCC121###1479

###2###6KCC122###1407

###3###6KCC114###1360

###4###6KCC108###1202

###5###6KCC115###1183

###6###CM-2000(c)###1069

###7###CM-2008(c)###874

###LSD(0.05)###107

###CV %###4.93

###Yield of 6KCC-122 increase/decrease(%) over checks###CM-2000=32%

###CM-2008=61%

Table-5: Yield performance of 6KCC-122 (Kg/ha) at different locations during 2009-10 in NUYT.

Sr.###Entry Name###BARI###NIAB,###ARI,###AZRI,###BARS,###ARI,###BARS,###AZRI,###AARI,###Mean

No.###CKL###FSD###Karak###DIK###Sakrand###Quetta###F.Jang BKR###FSD

1###6KCC-122###2187###1488###440###2596###772###1481###235###110###568###1097

2###CM-2008(c)###2319###1370###417###2512###966###1088###211###213###379###1053

3###73111-1###1764###1102###713###2996###1078###764###292###251###215###1019

4###K-6006###2097###1599###301###1942###794###1134###220###338###458###987

5###K-6054###1896###1399###289###1817###759###949###246###146###329###870

6###Noor-91(c)###1708###1184###231###1694###950###810###195###127###472###819

7###6KCC-121###1757###1004###569###1446###752###949###237###163###229###790

8###CH 76/02###2055###1047###333###1587###665###694###283###59###318###782

9###Rabat###1667###641###537###2094###1050###440###291###96###83###767

10###CH 38/00###1924###1090###268###1189###842###694###285###150###263###745

Table-6: Yield performance of 6KCC-122 (Kg/ha) at different locations during 2010-11 in NUYT.

Sr. No.###Entry Name###NARC###BARI,###AZRI,###NIAB,###AARI,###ARI,###Mean

###ISD###CKL###BKR###FSD###FSD###Quetta###(Kg/ha)

1###60062###2100###1840###3282###2092###1576###630###1920

2###NCS-0709###2548###1819###2428###2410###1222###810###1873

3###6KCC-122###2386###2028###2431###2216###961###771###1799

4###60054###1766###1257###3277###2160###1565###736###1794

5###CC121/00###2680###1604###2392###2558###900###569###1784

6###CM1528/03###2315###1236###2247###2694###1282###690###1744

7###Noor-2009(c)###3171###1701###1859###1460###1120###806###1686

8###CM1529/03###1728###1688###2359###2344###910###808###1639

Table-7: Average yield performance of 6KCC-122 in NUYTs at 15 different locations.

Year###Locations###Seed Yield (Kg/ha)

###6KCC-122###Noor-91(c)###CM-2008 (c)###Noor-2009 (c)

2009-10###9###1097###819###1053###-

2010-11###6###1799###-###-###1686

Average###1448###819###1053###1686

Year Wise Yield of 6KCC-122###34###4###7

Increase/Decrease (%)over Checks.

Table-8: Yield performance of 6KCC-122 (Kg/ha) in cooperative yield trial at seven different locations.

S. No.###Genotypes###PRI,###NIAB,###GBRSS,###BARI,###RARI,###ORSS,###AZRI,###Av.

###FSD###FSD###Kohat###CKL###BWP###Piplan###BKR###Yield

1###6KCC-122###2535###2688###1701###708###1181###2743###468###1719

2###K-06006###3369###2562###2014###528###1458###1545###559###1719

3###CM956/06###2574###2224###1493###576###1389###3299###476###1719

4###Noor-2009(c)###2517###2591###1667###569###1319###2813###482###1708

5###K-08003###3638###2172###1806###361###1250###2118###478###1689

6###K-06005###3017###2399###2083###521###1389###1753###522###1669

7###K-08004###3344###2376###1632###521###764###2118###494###1607

8###CM-2008(c)###2419###2206###1424###639###1250###3021###482###1634

9###CM770/06###2694###2298###1736###493###1389###2188###508###1615

10###K-08001###3281###2149###1944###313###1458###1510###519###1596

11###CM739/06###2271###2495###1563###549###1389###2378###460###1586

12###K-08020###2792###2199###1840###694###833###2031###448###1548

13###CM759/06###2320###2510###1389###646###694###2674###507###1534

14###K-08002###2939###2351###1875###549###1042###1406###463###1518

15###K-08023###3239###2024###1701###639###278###1962###523###1481

16###CM64/06###2194###2282###1181###563###903###2431###532###1441

17###CM579/06###2225###2527###1493###556###903###1632###491###1404

18###CM601/06###1974###2280###1250###361###833###2101###472###1324

Table-9: Average yield performance of 6KCC-122 in 28 locations.

###Name of###No. of

###Year###6KCC-122###Noor-91###CM-2000###CM-2008###Noor-2009

###Trial###Locations

2006-07###PYT###1###734###441###400###-###-

2007-08###RYT###1###2548###1996###2256###-###-

2008-09###MYT###1###1407###-###1069###874###-

2009-10###NUYT###9###1097###819###-###1053

2010-11###NUYT###6###1799###-###-###-###1686

2011-12###CPT###7###1719###-###-###1634###1708

2011-12###SDT###1###1550###-###-###-###-

2010-12###FT###2###1326###-###-###-###-

MEAN###1755.90###1085.33###1242.00###1187.00###1697.00

Yield of 6KCC-1222 increase/decrease (%) over###34###26###19###4

Checks

Table-10: Seed yield (Kg/ha) as influenced by various sowing dates of 6KCC-122.

Cultivar###Sowing Dates* (Yield in Kg/ha)

###15th Sept###1st Oct###15th Oct###1st Nov###15st Nov

6KCC-122###1320###1120###1550###1360###970

Table-11: Effect of growth retardant and detopping on yield of Chickpea (Kabuli) 6KCC-122.

###Grain Yield (Kg/ha)

Treatments###R1###R2###R3###Mean

Control###1222###1556###1333###1370

Mepiquat chloride application @25 g a.i ha-1 at 60 days after sowing###1444###1333###1778###1518

Mepiquat chloride application @25 g a.i ha-1 at 75 days after sowing###1556###1889###1333###1593

Mepiquat chloride application @25 g a.i ha-1 at 60 and 75 days after sowing###1667###1444###1444###1518

Detopping 75 days after sowing###1222###1556###1889###1556

Table-12: Seed yield as affected by different levels of fertilizers

###Sr. No.###Fertilizer Levels (Kg/ha)###Genotypes Yield (Kg/ha)

###N###P2O5###K2O###6KCC-122###6KCC-122###Mean

###2010-11###2011-12

###1###0###0###0###941###556###749

###2###0###60###30###1029###681###855

###3###12.5###60###30###1091###702###897

###4###25###60###30###1083###914###999

###5###37.5###60###30###1091###943###1017

###6###25###0###30###1116###1007###1062

###7###25###30###30###1336###1010###1173

###8###25###90###30###1519###1132###1326

###9###25###60###0###1347###1050###1199

###10###25###60###60###1164###950###1057

###Varieties###Fertilizer###Interaction

###-----------------------###-----------------------###------------------------

###LSD (0.05) =###49###26###44

###CV%###=###4.8

Table-13: Screening of chickpea genotypes against Fusarium wilt during 2007-08 at Barani Agricultural Research Institute, Chakwal.

###Sr. No.###Entry Name###Severity0-5%###Sr. No.###Entry Name###Severity0-5%

###1###6KCC-103###2.67###6###6KCC-121###2.67

###2###6KCC-105###1.00###7###6KCC1-22###2.00

###3###6KCC-108###1.33###8###Noor-91###1.33

###4###6KCC-114###2.00###9###CM-2000###1.33

###5###6KCC-115###1.33

###LSD (0.05)###1.03

###LSD (0.01)###1.42

Note: 0 -Immune,###1-10 - Highly Resistant and 11-20 -Resistant

Table-14: Screening of gram genotypes against Fusarium Wilt during 2011-12 at Pathology Research Institute, Faisalabad.

###Sr. No.###Name of Variety / Line###Level of resistance / susceptibility

###1###6KCC-122###Resistance

###2###Thal-2006 (check)###Susceptible

Table-15: Screening of Gram Genotypes against Insect Pests during 2011-12at Entomology Research Institute, Faisalabad

###Sr. No.###Genotypes###Gram Pod Borer

###(% Infestation)

###1###6KCC-122 (Gram)###6.79

###2###Noor-2009 (Gram)###7.09

###LSD @ 0.05%###N.S

Table-16: The important characteristics of the new Kabuli chickpea variety "Tamman" and check varieties Noor-2009 and CM-2008 on average basis.

Characteristics###Tamman###Noor-2009###CM-2008

Days to 50% flowering###140+-3###141+-6###145+-5

Days to maturity###180+-5###185+-8###184+-6

Main stem length(cm)###60+-3###63+-3###58+-3

No of primary branches/plant###5+-1###3+-1###3+-1

No. of secondary Branches/plant###9+-2###5+-2###6+-2

Pod length (cm)###3+-1###2+-1###2+-1

Pods/plant###75+-5###59+-6###38+-5

Grains / pod###2###2###2

100 grain weight (gm)###31+-1###29+-2###23+-2

Average yield (Kg/ha)###1756###1697###1187

Conclusion: Due to the distinct characters and inherent potential of the elite line "6KCC-122" the Punjab Seed Council (PSC) approved as a Kabuli chickpea variety "Tamman" for general cultivation in the arid tract of Punjab. Cultivation of this variety on commercial scale will not only augment the production but it will also grasp more prices in the market by virtue of its whitish creamy seed color as compared to CM-2008 and CM-2000 (Figure 3).

REFERENCES

Abbas, M., I. Mahmood, A. Bashir, T. Mahmood, M.A. Mahmood and S. Hassan (2017). Economics of chickpea production and empirical investigation of its yield determinants in low intensity zone of Punjab, Pakistan. J. Agric. Res., 55(2): 409-416.

Ali, Q., M. Ahsan, I. Khaliq, M. Elahi, M. Shahbaz, W. Ahmed and M. Naees (2011). Estimation of genetic association of yield and quality traits in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Int. Res. J. Plant Sci. 2(6): 166-169.

Alwawi, H., M. Moulla and W. Chouman (2009). Genotype-environment interaction and genetic parameters in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) landraces. Middle-east J. Sci. Res. 4(3): 231-236.

Anonymous (2010). Agricultural Statistics of Pakistan 2010-11. Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock (Economic Wing) Islamabad, Pakistan.

Arshad, M., M. Aslam and M. Sharif (2008). Performance of "Thal 2006" a high yielding and disease resistant variety of chickpea. J. Agric. Res. 46 (2): 117-124.

Chaudhry, M.A., F. Muhammad and M. Afzal (2006). Screening of chickpea germplasm against Fusarium wilt. J. Agric. Res. 44: 307-312.

Goa, Y. and M. Ashamo (2016). Yield performance and adaptation of desi chick pea varieties in selected districts of South Ethiopia. Intl. J. Res. 4(3): 33-41.

Khattak, G.S., S. M. Ashraf, R. Zamirand and I. Saeed (2007). High yielding desi chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)Variety "NIFA-2005". Pak. J. Bot. 39(1): 93-102.

Kristensen, M.D., N. T. Bendsen, S. M. Christensen, A. Astrup and A. Raben (2016). Meals based on vegetable protein sources (beans and peas) are more satiating than meals based on animal protein sources (veal and pork) - A randomized crossover meal test study. Food and Nutr. Res. 60: 1-9.

Mahmood, K., M. Saleem and M. Ahsan (2011). Inheritance of resistance to Fusarium wilts in chickpea. Pak. J. Agri. Sci. 48(1): 55-58.

Moucheshi, A.S., B. Heidari and A. Dadkhodail (2010). Genetic variation and agronomic evaluation of chickpea cultivars for grain yield and its components under irrigated and rain fed conditions. Iran Agri. Res. 28(2): 39-50.

Naeem-ud-Din, A. Mahmood, G.S.S. Khattak, I. Saeed and M.F. Hasan (2009). High yielding groundnut variety "Golden". Pak. J. Bot., 41 (5):2217-2222.

Polat, T., H. Ozer, E. Ozturkk and F. Sefaoglu (2017). Effects of mepiquat chloride application on non-oilseed sunflower. Turk. J. Agric. For., 41: 472-479.

Shabbir, G., M. Aftab, A. Mahmood, M.K. Nawaz Shah and N.M. Cheema (2011). Chakwal Sarson: A new high yielding rapeseed variety. Pak. J. Agric. Res. 24(1-4): 14-18.

Shafiq, M., M.S. Akhtar, M. Naveed, A.A. Khan and N. Muhammad (2011). Punjab-2008, A high yielding and wilt resistant chickpea variety for irrigated and rain fed areas. J. Agric. Res., 49(1): 19-26.

Shah, T.M., B.M. Atta., J.I. Mirza and M. A. HAQ (2009). Screening of chickpea (Cicer arietinum) induce mutants against Fusarium wilt. Pak. J. Bot. 41: 1945-1955.

Yadav, S.S., A.K. Verma, A.H. Rizvi, D. Singh, J. Kumar and M. Andrews (2010). Impact of genotype x environment interactions on the relative performance of diverse groups of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)cultivars. Arch. Agro. Soil Sci.. 56 (1): 49-64.

Zali, H. and S.H. Sabaghore (2011). Genetic variability and interrelationship among agronomic traits in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) genotypes. Crop Breeding J., 1(2): 127-132.

Article Details

Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Publication:	Pakistan Journal of Science
Geographic Code:	9PAKI
Date:	Sep 30, 2018
Words:	4187
Previous Article:	INFLUENCE OF NARINGENIN ON PERFORMANCE, MEAT QUALITY AND ANTIOXIDANT STATUS OF BROILERS.
Next Article:	TRACE MODEL FOR CYCLIC BEHAVIOR IN WIRELESS LANS.