in Biosciences

Volume 11 Number 28 July, 2018

Trendsin

Biosciences

Dheerpura Society for Advancement of Science and Rural Development

Online version available at www.trendsinbiosciencesjournal.com

An International Journal

Print : ISSN 0974-8431Online : ISSN 0976-2485NAAS Score : 3.94

Dheerpura Society for Advancement of Science and Rural Development

Branch Office : Bhopal (M.P.) 462 001, India

Trendsin

BiosciencesAn International Journal

Print : ISSN 0974-8431Online : ISSN 0976-2485NAAS Score : 3.94

Online version available at www.trendsinbiosciencesjournal.com


Dheerpura Society for Advancement of Science and Rural Development(Reg. No. 01/01/01/16715/06)

The Dheerpura Society for Advancement of Science and Rural Development was founded on 28 July, 2006 with the followingobjectives

1. To promote research and development in agriculture, life sciences through publishing journal, organizing seminarsetc.

2. To make people environmental conscious

3. To work for human development in society

4. To work for uplifting of rural masses and their development

Membership

Membership to the society is open to all individuals / institutions interested in society’s objective by becomingordinary life, institutional, corporate members against payment of membership fee.

Membership fee Indian (Rs.) Foreign (US$)

Ordinary (Annual) 3,000 200

Life member 10,000 1,000

Institutional 15,000 1,500

Corporate member 20,000 2,000

Renewal of annual membership should be done in January each year; if the membership is not received by 15February, the membership would stand cancelled. Membership fee should be drawn in favour of Dheerpura Society forAdvancement of Science and Rural Development, Bank Name - State Bank of India, Account Name - ADVANCE IN LIFESCIENCE, Account No - 36633511238, CURRENT ACCOUNT, Branch Name - Idgah Hills & City - Bhopal,, Branch Code- 30422 & IFSC CODE - SBIN0030422 // MICR CODE - 462002081 on the following address. In case of out stationcheque an extra amount of Rs. 50/- may be paid as clearance cheque. For e-banking add Rs. 25/-.

Individual Institutional Single article

Version INDIAN in Rs./issue

FOREIGN in US$/issue

INDIAN in Rs.

FOREIGN in US$

INDIAN in Rs.

FOREIGN in US$

*Print /Number **6000* 50 6000 250 150 10

**Online 500 25 3000 250 150 25

Author’s Contribution : Rs. 1700/paper (for single author) and Rs. 800/paper for additional authors (Depends on Numberof Authors in manuscript). **Same for SAARC countries only soft copy.

Trends in Biosciences abstracted in CABI Abstract, U.K.

Subscription Rates for 2018

Trends in BiosciencesA International Scientific Journal

www.trendsinbiosciencesjournal.com

International Advisory BoardDr. A. Coomans, Ex-Professor, State University of Ghent, BelgiumDr. Randy Gaugler, Director, Centre for Vector Biology, Rutgers University, USADr. S.B. Sharma, Director, Plant Security, South Perth, AustraliaDr. Zahoor Ahmad, Professor, Jubail Industrial College, Saudi Arabia

Advisory BoardDr. G.N. Qazi, Vice Chancellor, Jamia Hamdard University, New DelhiDr. A.S. Ninawe, Advisor, Deptt. of Biotechnology, New DelhiDr. I. Ahmad, Ex-Director, Department of Science & Technology, New DelhiDr. N.P. Singh, Coordinator, AICRP Chickpea, IIPR, KanpurDr. Masood Ali, Ex-Director, Indian Institute of Pulses Research (IIPR), KanpurDr. H.S. Gaur, Vice-Chancellor, Sardar Vallabbhai Patel Agricultural University, Meerut

Editorial BoardFounder Editor : Late (Dr.) S.S. Ali, Ex-Emeritus Scientist, Indian Institute of Pulses Research (IIPR), KanpurEditor in Chief : Dr. R. Ahmad, Ex – Principal Scientist, Indian Council of Agricultural ResearchDr. Erdogan Esref HAKKI, Department of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, Selcuk University Konya TurkeyDr. S. K. Agarwal, Principal Lentil Breeder, ICARDA, MoraccoDr. B.B. Singh, Assistant Director General Oilseed & Pulses, ICAR, New DelhiDr. Absar Ahmad, Senior Scientist, National Chemical Laboratory, PuneDr. Raman Kapoor, Head, Dept. of Biotechnology, Indian Sugarcane Research Institute, LucknowDr. Rohini Karunakaran, Senior Lecturer, Unit of Biochemistry, Faculty of Medicine, AIMST University, MalaysiaDr.P.S.Srikumar, Associate Professor, Unit of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine, AIMST University, MalaysiaDr. S.K. Jain, Coordinator, AICRP Nematode, IARI, New DelhiDr. Sanjeev Gupta, Coordinator, MULLaRP, IIPR, KanpurDr. Naimuddin, Sr. Scientist (Plant Pathology), IIPR, KanpurDr. Rashid Pervez, Sr. Scientist, Indian Institute of Spices Research, Khozicod, KeralaDr. Badre Alam, Associate Prof. Gorakhpur University, U.P.Dr. Veena B Kushwaha, Associate Professor, Department of Zoology, DDU Gorakhpur University, GorakhpurDr. Shabbir Ashraf, Assoc. Professor, Dept. of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agril. Sciences, Aligarh Muslim University, AligarhPatil Ranjit Sambhaji, Assistant Professor, Department of Agricultural Economics, Lokmangal College of Agriculture, Wadala

N. SolapurUma Kant Sharma, Lecturer, Department of Biochemistry, Ranveer Rananjay Post Graduate College, AmethiAjaz A.wani, Professor, Department of zoology, Govt. Degree College, Doda, Jammu & KashmirMohan Barsu Narkhede, Professor, Department Of Social Science, Water & Land Management Institute, AurangabadPrashant Bhausaheb Kardile, Professor, Department Of Agricultural Botany, Dadasaheb Patil College Of Agriculture,

Dahegaon, AurangabadHarshada Pankaj Deshmukh, Assistant Professor, Faculty Of Agriculture, Water & Land Management Institute (Walmi),

Aurangabad, Maharashtra

http://www.trendsinbiosciencesjournal.com

REVIEW PAPER

1. Role of Secondary Metabolites in Defense Mechanisms of Plants 3511G. Mahadevaswamy and G. Vijayalakshmi

2. Effect of Gamma Irradiation on Degradation of Pesticide Residues in Fruits and Vegetables 3519Jigisha Pargi and H. G. Bhatt

RESEARCH PAPERS

3. Development and Evaluation of Autoclavable Lab Scale Fermenter 3524R. Navarasam, N. Karpoora Sundara Pandian, B. Dhanalakshmi and M. Abdul Riyas

4. Gene Action and Combining Ability Estimates Using Cytoplasmic Male Sterile Lines to Develop 3527Pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) MILLSP.] hybridsP.K. Patel, D.A. Chauhan, A.B. Patil and M.B. Patel

5. Export Performance of Onion 3534S.A. Jagatap, S.M. Perne and A.D. Darandale

SHORT COMMUNICATION

6. Standardization/optimization of High Quality DNA Isolation Protocal by using CTAB Method 3538Thombare Devidas, Perween Sabiha, Prasad Archana and Verulkar Satish

7. Impact of Organic Farming on Soil Health 3541R. R. Sisodiya, A. R. Kaswala, Pramod Kumar Dubey, P. D. Golakiya and P. S. Patel

Instructions to the Authors

Subscription Order Form

Trends in Biosciences

CONTENTS


Trends in Biosciences 11(28), Print : ISSN 0974-8431, 3511-3518, 2018

REVIEW PAPER

Role of Secondary Metabolites in Defense Mechanisms of PlantsG. MAHADEVASWAMY AND G. VIJAYALAKSHMI

Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth,Rahuri, Ahmednagar, Maharashtraemail: [email protected]

In natural systems, plants face a plethora ofantagonists and thus posses a myriad of defense and haveevolved multiple defense mechanisms by which they areable to cope with various kinds of biotic and abiotic stress.Generally, it is difficult to assign a change in the physiologyof metabolism of the crop to a specific stress factor asnormally a complex variety of various stress factors affectsthe plant simultaneously. However, there are inter-connections that exist between distinct and opposingsignaling response pathways for defense againstpathogens and insect herbivores and there also appear tobe multiple response pathways invoked, depending on thespecific stress context (Kusnierczyk et al., 2007). Besidesantimicrobial nature, some of which are performed and someof which induced by infection. There are various othermodes of defense include the construction of polymericbarriers to pathogen penetration and the synthesis ofenzymes that degrade pathogen cell wall (Hammond et al.,1996). In addition, plants employ specific recognition andsignalling systems enabling the rapid detection of pathogeninvasion and initiation of vigorous defensive responses(Schaller et al., 1996).

Plant defense against pathogensEven though they lack an immune system, plants are

surprisingly resistant to diseases caused by the fungi,bacteria, viruses, and nematodes. Some defenses areinduced by herbivore attack or microbial infection. Defensesthat are produced only after initial herbivore damagetheoretically require a smaller investment of plant resourcesthan defenses that are always present, but they must beactivated quickly to be effective.

After being infected by a pathogen, plants deploy abroad spectrum of defenses against invading microbes. Acommon defense is the hypersensitive response, in whichcells immediately surrounding the infection site die rapidly,depriving the pathogen of nutrients and preventing itsspread. After a successful hypersensitive response, a smallregion of dead tissue is left at the site of the attemptedinvasion, but the rest of the plant is unaffected. Thehypersensitive response is often preceded by theproduction of reactive oxygen species. Cells in the vicinityof the infection synthesize a burst of toxic compoundsformed by the reduction of molecular oxygen, includingthe superoxide anion (O2•), hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) andthe hydroxyl radical (•OH). An NADPH-dependent oxidaselocated on the plasma membrane (Figure 1) is thought toproduce O2•–, which in turn is converted to •OH and H2O2.

The hydroxyl radical is the strongest oxidant of these

Fig 1. Many modes of anti-pathogenic defence are induced by infection. Fragments of pathogen molecules calledelicitors initiate a complex signalling pathway leading to the activation of defence responses.

mailto:[email protected]

3512 Trends in Biosciences 11 (28), 2018

active oxygen species and can initiate radical chainreactions with a range of organic molecules, leading to lipidperoxidation, enzyme inactivation, and nucleic aciddegradation (Lamb and Dixon 1997). Active oxygen speciesmay contribute to cell death as part of the hypersensitiveresponse or act to kill the pathogen directly.

Many species react to fungal or bacterial invasion bysynthesizing lignin or callose. These polymers are thoughtto serve as barriers, walling off the pathogen from the restof the plant and physically blocking its spread. A relatedresponse is the modification of cell wall proteins. Certainproline-rich proteins of the wall become oxidatively cross-linked after pathogen attack in an H2O2-mediated reaction(Bradley et al. 1992). This process strengthens the walls ofthe cells in the vicinity of the infection site, increasing theirresistance to microbial digestion. Most of the R genes arethought to encode protein receptors that recognize andbind specific molecules originating from pathogens. Thisbinding alerts the plant to the pathogen’s presence Thisbinding alerts the plant to the pathogen’s presence. Thespecific pathogen molecules recognized are referred to aselicitors. Within a few minutes after pathogen elicitors havebeen recognized by an R gene, complex signaling pathwaysare Within a few minutes after pathogen elicitors have beenrecognized by an R gene, complex signaling pathways areset in motion that lead eventually to defense responses(see Figure 1). A common early element of these cascadesis a transient change in the ion permeability of the plasmamembrane. R gene activation stimulates an influx of Ca2+and H+ ions into the cell and an efflux of K+ and Cl– ions.The influx of Ca2+ activates the oxidative burst that mayact directly in defense (as already described), as well assignaling other defense reactions. Other components ofpathogen-stimulated signal transduction pathways includenitric oxide, mitogen-activated protein (MAP) kinases,calcium-dependent protein kinases, jasmonic acid, andsalicylic acid.

Secondary metabolitesPlants produce a large and diverse array of organic

compounds that appear to have no direct functions ingrowth and development i.e. they have no generallyrecognised roles in the process of photosynthesis,respiration, solute transport, translocation, nutrientassimilation and differentiation. They have a very restricteddistribution than primary metabolites in the whole plantkingdom i.e. they are often found only in one plant speciesor a taxonomically related group of species. Highconcentrations of secondary metabolites might result in amore resistant plant. Their production is thought to becostly and reduces plant growth and reproduction (Mazidet al., 2011).

Important ecological functions of Secondarymetabolites in plants:• Provides protection against herbivores and

pathogens.• They serve as attractants (smell, color, taste) for

pollinators and seed dispersing animals.• They function as agents of plant-plant competition

and plant-microbe symbiosis.

Classification of secondary metabolitesPlant secondary metabolites can be divided into three

chemically distinct groups: terpenes, phenolics, andnitrogen- containing compounds.

TERPENESThe terpenes, or terpenoids, constitute the largest

class of secondary products, which are generally insolublein water. They are biosynthesized from acetyl-CoA orglycolytic intermediates. All terpenes are derived from theunion of five-carbon elements that have the branchedcarbon skeleton of isopentane.

Terpenes are classified by the number of five-carbonunits they contain, although extensive metabolicmodifications can sometimes make it difficult to pick outthe original five-carbon residues. Ten-carbon terpenes,which contain two C5 units, are called monoterpenes; 15-carbon terpenes (three C5 units) are sesquiterpenes; and20-carbon terpenes (four C5 units) are diterpenes. Largerterpenes include triterpenes (30 carbons), tetraterpenes (40carbons), and polyterpenoids ([C5]n carbons, where n > 8).

There Are Two Pathways for Terpene BiosynthesisTerpenes are biosynthesized from primary metabolites

in at least two different ways. In the well-studied mevalonicacid pathway, three molecules of acetyl-CoA are joinedtogether stepwise to form mevalonic acid (Figure 2). Thiskey six-carbon intermediate is then pyrophosphorylated,decarboxylated, and dehydrated to yield isopentenyldiphosphate (IPP2). IPP is the activated five-carbon buildingblock of terpenes. Recently, it was discovered that IPP alsocan be formed from intermediates of glycolysis or thephotosynthetic photosynthetic carbon reduction cycle viaa separate set of reactions called the methylerythritolphosphate (MEP) pathway that operates in chloroplastsand other plastids( Lichtenthaler, 1999). Although all thedetails have not yet been elucidated, glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate and two carbon atoms derived from pyruvateappear to combine to generate an intermediate that iseventually converted to IPP.

Terpenes Defend against Herbivores in Many PlantsTerpenes are toxins and feeding deterrents to many

plantfeeding insects and mammals; thus they appear toplay important defensive roles in the plant kingdom. Forexample, the monoterpene esters called pyrethroids thatoccur in the leaves and flowers of Chrysanthemum speciesshow very striking insecticidal activity. Both natural andsynthetic pyrethroids are popular ingredients in commercialinsecticides because of their low persistence in theenvironment and their negligible toxicity to mammals.

Many plants contain mixtures of volatilemonoterpenes and sesquiterpenes, called essential oils thatlend a char acteristic odor to their foliage. Peppermint, lemon,basil, and sage are examples of plants that contain essentialoils. The chief monoterpene constituent of peppermint oilis menthol; that of lemon oil is limonene (Figure 3). Essential

MAHADEVASWAMY and VIJAYALAKSHMI, Role of Secondary Metabolites in Defense Mechanisms of Plants 3513

Fig. 2. Outline of terpene biosynthesis. The basic 5-carbon units of terpenes are synthesized by two differentpathways. The phosphorylated intermediates, IPP and DMAPP, are combined to make 10-carbon, 15-carbonand larger terpenes.

oils have well-known insect repellent properties. They arefrequently found in glandular hairs that project outwardfrom the epidermis and serve to “advertise” the toxicity ofthe plant, repelling potential herbivores even before theytake a trial bite.

Monoterpenes and sesquiterpenes, which are found

in glandular hairs that project outward from the epidermisand serve as repellent against herbivores (Figure 4).

These substances repel ovipositing herbivores andattract natural enemies, including predatory and parasiticinsects that kill plant-feeding insects and so help minimizefurther damage.


Among the nonvolatile terpene antiherbivorecompounds are the limonoids, a group of triterpenes (C30)well known as bitter substances in citrus fruit. Perhaps themost powerful deterrent to insect feeding known isazadirachtin (Figure 5A), a complex limonoid from the neemtree (Azadirachta indica) of Africa and Asia. Azadirachtinis a feeding deterrent to some insects at doses as low as 50parts per billion, and it exerts a variety of toxic effects.

The phytoecdysones, first isolated from the commonfern, Polypodium vulgare, are a group of plant steroidsthat have the same basic structure as insect moltinghormones (Figure 5B). Ingestion of phytoecdysones byinsects disrupts molting and other developmentalprocesses, often with lethal consequences.

PHENOLIC COMPOUNDSPlants produce a large variety of secondary products

that contain a phenol group—a hydroxyl functional groupon an aromatic ring:

Fig. 3. Structures of limonene (A) and menthol (B).

Fig. 4. Monoterpenes and sesquiterpenes arecommonly found in glandular hairs on the plantsurface.

Fig. 5. Structure of two triterpenes, azadirachtin (A), and á-ecdysone (B), which serve as powerful feeding deterrentsto insects.


These substances are classified as phenoliccompounds. Plant phenolics are a chemically heterogeneousgroup of nearly 10,000 individual compounds: Some aresoluble only in organic solvents, some are water-solublecarboxylic acids and glycosides, and others are large,insoluble polymers. Many serve as defense compoundsagainst herbivores and pathogens. Others function inmechanical support, in attracting pollinators and fruitdispersers, in absorbing harmful ultraviolet radiation, or inreducing the growth of nearby competing plants.

Biosynthesis of Plant PhenolicsPlant phenolics are biosynthesized by several

different routes and thus constitute a heterogeneous groupfrom a metabolic point of view. Two basic pathways areinvolved the shikimic acid pathway and the malonic acidpathway (Figure 6). The shikimic acid pathway participatesin the biosynthesis of most plant phenolics. The malonicacid pathway, although an important source of phenolicsecondary products in fungi and bacteria, is of lesssignificance in higher plants.

The shikimic acid pathway converts simplecarbohydrate precursors derived from glycolysis and thepentose phosphate pathway to the aromatic amino acids.

The most abundant classes of secondary phenoliccompounds in plants are derived from phenylalanine. This

reaction is catalyzed by phenylalanine ammonia lyase (PAL),perhaps the most studied enzyme in plant secondarymetabolism. Reactions subsequent to that catalyzed by PALlead to the addition of more hydroxyl groups and othersubstituents. Trans-cinnamic acid, p-coumaric acid, andtheir derivatives are simple phenolic compounds calledphenylpropanoids because they contain a benzene ring:

and a three-carbon side chain. Several transcriptionfactors have been shown to regulate phenolic metabolismby binding to the promoter regions of certain biosyntheticgenes and activating transcription. Some of these factorsactivate the transcription of large groups of genes (Jin andMartin 1999).

Types of phenolic compoundsCoumarins: They are simple phenolic compounds,widespread in vascular plants. They derived from theshikimic acid pathway, common in bacteria, fungi and plantsbut absent in animals. Also, they are a highly active groupof molecules with a wide range of antimicrobial activityagainst both fungi and bacteria (Brooker et al., 2008). It isbelieved that these cyclic compounds behave as naturalpesticidal defense compounds for plants and they representa starting point for the exploration of new derivatives

Fig. 6. Plant phenolics are biosynthesized in several different ways. In higher plants, most phenolics are derived atleast in part from phenylalanine, a product of the shikimic acid pathway.


possessing a range of improved antifungal activity.Ligin: It is a highly branched polymer of phenyl-propanoidgroups, formed from three different alcohols viz., coniferyl,coumaryl and sinapyl which oxidized to free radicals (ROS)by a ubiquitous plant enzyme-peroxidase, reactssimultaneously and randomly to form monomeric units inlignin vary among species, plant organs and even layers ofa single cell wall. Its physical toughness deters feeding byherbivorous animals and its chemical durability makes itrelatively indigestible to herbivores and insects pathogens.Lignifications block the growth of pathogens and are afrequent response to infection or wounding (Hatfield andVermerris 2001).Flavonoids: One of the largest classes of plant phenolic,perform very different functions in plant system includingpigmentation and defense. Two other major groups offlavonoids found in flowers are flavones and flavonolsfunction to protect cells from UV-B radiation because theyaccumulate in epidermal layers of leaves and stems andabsorb light strongly in the UV-B region while letting visible(PAR) wavelengths throughout uninterrupted (Lake et al.,2009).Tannins: They are included under the second category ofplant phenolic polymers with defensive properties.. Thedefensive properties of tannins are generally attributed totheir ability to bind proteins. Protocatechllic andchlorogenic acids probably have a special function indisease resistance of certain plants. They prevent smudgein onions, a disease caused by the fungus Colletotrichumcircinans and prevent spore germination and growth ofother fungi as well (Mayer, 1987).

Nitrogen and Sulphur Containing CompoundsA large variety of plant secondary metabolites have nitrogenin their structure. Included in this category are such well-known antiherbivore defenses as alkaloids and cyanogenicglycosides, which are of considerable interest because oftheir toxicity to humans and their medicinal properties. Mostnitrogenous secondary metabolites are biosynthesized fromcommon amino acids.

TypesAlkaloids: The alkaloids are a large family of more than15,000 nitrogen- containing secondary metabolites foundin approximately 20% of the species of vascular plants. Thenitrogen atom in these substances is usually part of aheterocyclic ring, a ring that contains both nitrogen andcarbon atoms. As a group, alkaloids are best known fortheir striking pharmacological effects on vertebrate animals.Alkaloids are usually synthesized from one of a few commonamino acids—in particular, lysine, tyrosine, and tryptophan.Several different types, including nicotine and its relatives(Figure 7), are derived from ornithine, an intermediate inarginine biosynthesis.

The role of alkaloids in plants has been a subject ofspeculation for at least 100 years. Alkaloids were oncethought to be nitrogenous wastes (analogous to urea anduric acid in animals), nitrogen storage compounds, or growthregulators, but there is little evidence to support any ofthese functions. Most alkaloids are now believed tofunction as defenses against predators, especially mammals,because of their general toxicity and deterrence capability.

Fig. 7. Examples of alkaloids, a diverse group of secondary metabolites that contain nitrogen, usually as part of a heterocyclic ring


Cyanogenic Glycosides: They constitute a group of N-containing protective compounds other than alkaloids,release the poison HCN and usually occur in members offamilies viz., Graminae, Rosaceae and Leguminosae (Seigler,1991). They are not in themselves toxic but are readilybroken down to give off volatile poisonous substanceslike HCN and H2S when the plant is crushed; their presencedeters feeding by insects and other herbivores such assnails and slugs.

The breakdown of cyanogenic glycosides in plantsis a two-step enzymatic process. Species that makecyanogenic glycosides also make the enzymes necessaryto hydrolyze the sugar and liberate HCN:1. In the first step the sugar is cleaved by a glycosidase,

an enzyme that separates sugars from other moleculesto which they are linked (Figure 8).

2. In the second step the resulting hydrolysis product,called an á-hydroxynitrile or cyanohydrin, candecompose spontaneously at a low rate to liberate]HCN. This second step can be accelerated by theenzyme hydroxynitrile lyase.

Glucosinolates: A second class of plant glycosides, calledthe glucosinolates, or mustard oil glycosides, break downto release volatile defensive substances. Found principallyin the Brassicaceae and related plant families, glucosinolatesgive off the compounds responsible for the smell and tasteof vegetables such as cabbage, broccoli, and radishes.

The release of these mustard-smelling volatiles fromglucosinolates is catalyzed by a hydrolytic enzyme, calleda thioglucosidase or myrosinase, that cleaves glucose fromits bond with the sulfur atom (Figure 9). The resultingaglycone, the nonsugar portion of the molecule, rearrangeswith loss of the sulfate to give pungent and chemicallyreactive products, including isothiocyanates and nitriles,

depending on the conditions of hydrolysis. These productsfunction in defense as herbivore toxins and feedingrepellents. Like cyanogenic glycosides, glucosinolates arestored in the intact plant separately from the enzymes thathydrolyze them, and they are brought into contact withthese enzymes only when the plant is crushed.

PhytoalexinsThese are chemically diverse group of secondary

metabolites with strong antimicrobial activity thataccumulate around the site of infection. Phytoalexinproduction appears to be a common mechanism of resistanceto pathogenic microbes in a wide range of plants. However,different plant families employ different types of secondaryproducts as phytoalexins. For example, isoflavonoids arecommon phytoalexins in the legume family, whereas inplants of the potato family (Solanaceae), such as potato,tobacco, and tomato, various sesquiterpenes are producedas phytoalexins.

Phytoalexins are generally undetectable in the plantbefore infection, but they are synthesized very rapidly aftermicrobial attack because of the activation of newbiosynthetic pathways. The point of control is usually theinitiation of gene transcription. Thus, plants do not appearto store any of the enzymatic machinery required forphytoalexin synthesis. Instead, soon after microbialinvasion they begin transcribing and translating theappropriate mRNAs and synthesizing the enzymes de novo(Kombrink and Somssich, 1995).

CONCLUSION AND FUTURE PROSPECTSPlants have evolved multiple defense mechanisms

against microbial pathogens and various types ofenvironmental stress. Besides anti-microbial secondarymetabolite, some of which are performed and some of which

Fig. 8. Enzyme-catalyzed hydrolysis of cyanogenic glycosides to release hydrogen cyanide. R and R2 representvarious alkyl or aryl substituents. For example, if R is phenyl, R2 is hydrogen, and the sugar is thedisaccharide â-gentiobiose, the compound is amygdalin

Fig. 9. Hydrolysis of glucosinolates to mustard-smelling volatiles. R represents various alkyl or aryl substituents


are induced by infection. Today, advanced tools aredemanded to investigate the correct correlation between Nand S fertilization and crop resistance management. In anumber of previous research articles and review papers, ithave shown that the N and S containing secondarymetabolites are influenced by optimum supply of N and Sand their good nutrition can enhance the capability of aplant to cope with biotic and abiotic stress.

The identification of the mechanisms causingSystemic Induced Resistance will be an important milestonefor sustainable agricultural production, as the use offungicides could then be minimized or eliminated. Thus,SIR may become an important strategy for efficientlycombating with pathogens in organic forming system.Therefore, additional research in area of natural pesticidesdevelopment is needed in current scenario. In the long term,it will probably be possible to generate gene cassettes forcomplete pathways, which could then be used forproduction of valuable defensive secondary metabolites inbioreactors or for metabolic engineering of crop plants. Thiswill improve their resistance against herbivores andmicrobial pathogens as well as various environmentalstresses.

LITERATURE CITEDBradley, D. J., Kjellborn, P. and Lamb, C. J., 1992, Elicitor and

wound induced oxidative cross linking of a proline rich plant cellprotein: A novel rapid defence response. Cell, 70: 21-30.

Brooker, N., Windorski, J. and Blumi, E., 2008, Halogenatedcoumarins derivatives as novel seed protectants. Communicationin Agriculture and Applied Biological Sciences, 73(2): 81-89.

Hammond-Kosack, K. E. and Jones, J. D. G., 1996, Resistance genedependent plant defence responses. Plant Cell, 8: 1773-1791.

Hatfield, R. and Vermerris, W., 2001, Lignin formation in plants.The dilemma of linkage specificity. Plant Physiol., 126: 1351–1357.

Jin, H. and Martin, C., 1999, Multifunctionality and diversity withinthe plant MYB-gene family. Plant Mol. Biol., 41: 577–585.

Kombrink, E. and Somssich, I. E., 1995, Defense responses of plantsto pathogens. Adv. Bot. Res., 21: 1–34.

Kusnieczyk, A., Winge, P., Midelfart, H., Armbruster, W. S., Rossiter,J. T. and Bones, A. M., 2007, Transcriptional responses ofArabidopsis thaliana ecotypes with different glucosinolateprofiles after attack by polyphagous Myzus persicae andoligophagous Brevicoryne brassicae. Journal of ExperimentalBotany, 58(10): 2537-2552.

Lake, J. A., Field, K. J., Davey, M. P., Beerling, D. J. and Lomax, B.H., 2009, Metabolomic and physiological responses revealmulti-phasic acclimation of Arabidopsis thaliana to chronicUV radiation. Plant, cell & envirnment, 32(10): 1377-1389.

Lamb, C. and Dixon, R. A., 1997, The oxidative burst in plantdisease resistance. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol.,48: 251–275.

Lichtenthaler, H. K., 1999, The 1-deoxy-D-xylulose-5-phosphatepathway of isoprenoid biosynthesis in plants. Annu. Rev. PlantPhysiol. Plant Mol. Biol., 50: 47–65.

Mayer, A. M., 1987, Polyphenol oxidases in plants – recent progress.Phytochemistry, 26:11–20.

Mazid, M., Khan, T. A. and Mohammad, F., 2011, Role of secondarymetabolites in defense mechanisms of plants. Biol. and Medicine,3 (2): 232-249.

Schaller, A. and Ryan, C. A., 1996, Systemin- a polypeptide signal inplants. Bioessays, 18: 27-33.

Seigler, D. S., 1991, Secondery metabolites and plant systematic.Conn EE (ed), The biochemistry of plants, Vol 7. Seconderyplant products. Plenum, New York and London, pp: 139-176.

Received on 25-06-2018 Accepted on 15-07-2018


REVIEW PAPER

Effect of Gamma Irradiation on Degradation of Pesticide Residues in Fruits andVegetablesJIGISHA PARGI1 AND H. G. BHATT2

1College of Food Processing Technology and Bio-Energy, AAU, Anand, Gujarat2Dept. of Food Safety and Testing, College of Food Processing Technology and Bio-Energy, AAU, Anand, Gujaratemail: [email protected]

ABSTRACTFruits and Vegetables have nutritional characteristics,which are supportive in growth of human body. To preventthem from infestation by insects and pests, variouspesticides are used. These include herbicides, insecticidesand fungicides. But these pesticides induce harmfuleffects on human body upon consumption. These effectscan be hypothyroidism, breast cancer, Alzheimer’sdisease, etc. The gamma radiation is effective tool todegrade such harmful pesticides and also kill the microbespresent in the fruits and vegetables. This review alsoprovides information on the possibility of application ofirradiation for improving shelf-life and quality of fruitsand vegetables through various storage conditions.

Keywords Gamma irradiation, pesticides residues,shelf-life

Vegetables enclose priceless nutritionalcharacteristics, which are supportive in repairing andappropriate growth of human body. Conversely, they canalso be a source of toxic contaminants that are formulatedto control pests in crops known as pesticides [1].Contamination of crops and environment is directlyassociated to agro-chemical applications, industrial anddomestic discharges [2]

.

Pesticides can be herbicides, insecticides andfungicides depending on the target pests. Based on thecomposition and mode of action, insecticides are furtherclassified into organophosphate, organochlorine,carbamates, pyrethroids, and neonicotinoids. Amongvarious pesticide classes, organophosphorus pesticide(OPPs) group is the most widely used class of agriculturalpesticides to increase world food production [3, 4].

Pesticide residues in food and crops are a direct resultof the application of pesticides to crops growing in thefield, and to a lesser extent from pesticide residues remainingin the soil [5].

Persistent chemicals can be magnified through thefood chain and have been detected in products rangingfrom meat, poultry, and fish, to vegetable oils, nuts, andvarious fruits and vegetables [6].

The application of pesticide is widely used for grainsbefore harvest and after harvest to protect the grains fromdamage or loss. Cultivation and storage of grains oftenrequire an intensive use of pesticides, which may then befound in grains and in foods prepared from them [7]. Cerealgrains are treated with pesticides, includingorganophosphates, carbamate, synthetic pyrethroids and

insect growth regulators, both in storages and prior toshipment in order to prevent insect infestation [8].

The most consumed pesticides for vegetables, fruitsand food grains in India include endosulfan, mancozeb,phorate, methyl parathion, monocrotophos, cypermethrin,isoproturon, chlorpyrifos, malathion, carbendazim,butachlor, quinalphos, copper oxychloride, and dichlorvos(Source: http://indiaforsafefood.in).

In India, Food Safety and Standards Authority ofIndia sets the maximum residue limits for pesticides in crops,foods, vegetables and fruits [9].

A study in Nigeria on organochlorine pesticideresidues in cereal grains showed the presence of aldrin,dichloran, dieldrin, endrin, endosulfan, heptachlor epoxide,dichloro-diphenyl trichloroethane lindane, methoxychlor,and mirex [10]. A study in Pakistan on pesticide residue ofcereals showed that wheat contained the highestconcentration of tested pesticides than maize and rice andmaize contained a much higher concentration of pesticidesthan rice [11]. The insecticide residues reported in marketsamples of grapes were acephate, methamidophos,chlorpyriphos, monocrotophos and quinalphos [12].

Gamma irradiation becomes an important technologyin food industry, including preservation of a variety of fruitsand vegetables (Cast, 1996) [13].

The effects of gamma radiation on fruits and vegetablesRadiation process is one of the most powerful AOPs

(advanced oxidation processes), where irradiation with abeam of accelerated electrons or gamma radiation isemployed for the decomposition of various pollutants likepesticide residues. The food irradiation was investigatedby many scientists, but limited studies focused on the effectof gamma irradiation on degradation of pesticide residuesbelow MRLs (maximum residue limits) (Cin and Kroger, 1982)[14].

Gamma radiation is used for pesticide degradationfrom different types of vegetables. Many of the samplescontained pesticides, and 6-7% samples had residual levelsabove the maximum residue levels determined by the WorldHealth Organization. Three carbamates (carbaryl,carbofuran, and pirimicarb) and six organophosphates(phenthoate, diazinon, parathion, dimethoate,phosphamidon, and pirimiphos-methyl) were detected ineggplant samples; the highest carbofuran level detectedwas 1.86 mg/kg, while phenthoate was detected at 0.311mg/kg. Gamma radiation decreased pesticide levelsproportionately with increasing radiation doses. Diazinon,chlorpyrifos, and phosphamid on were reduced by 40–48%,35–43%, and 30–45%, respectively, when a radiation


http://indiaforsafefood.in).


strength of 0.5 kGy was utilized. However, when theradiation dose was increased to 1.0 kGy, the levels of thepesticides were reduced to 85–90%, 80–91% and 90–95%,respectively. This study revealed that pesticide residuesare present at high amounts in vegetable samples and thatgamma radiation at 1.0 kGy can remove 80–95% of somepesticides (chowdhary, 2014) [15].

Susheela et al., (1997) [16] found no significant loss ofsugar and ascorbic acid contents in three-quarter ripe andfully ripe pineapple fruit (Ananas comosus) irradiated at0.15 kGy. The latter after having been irradiated at 0.05, 0.1,and 0.15 kGy and stored at 25–29æ%C with 90–97% relativehumidity was shown to maintain their texture better thanthe controls. The maximum tolerable dose was approximately0.25 kGy.

Wang and Chao (2003) [17] investigated the irradiationeffects on dehydration characteristics and quality of apples(Fuji apple). They found that the vitamin C content ofapples, the dehydration rate, and the rehydration ratio weregreatly affected by irradiation dose (1.5, 4.5, 5, and 6 kGy).It was shown that the greater the dose, the higher thedehydration rate, the less the vitamin C content, and thelower the rehydration ratio.

Rubio et al., (2001) [18] studied the effects of irradiation(0.50, 0.75, and 1.00 kGy) on the vitamin C content of lettuce(Lactuca sativa), cabbage (Brassica oleracea), and celery(Apium graveolens). There was a marked difference in thenatural total ascorbic acid content of the vegetables studiedwith cabbage showing the highest. Irradiation did notdecrease these initial concentrations, and in the case ofcabbage, it actually increased them.

For lettuce, cabbage, and celery the initial ascorbicacid content was 2.357, 3.085, and 0.549 mg/100 g,respectively and after irradiation was 2.036, 5.018, and 0.616mg/100 g, respectively irradiated with 1.00 kGy.

Drake et al., (1999) [19] found that titratable acidity(TA) of “Gala” apples was reduced at irradiation doses of0.60 kGy and above. On the other hand, no loss of TA dueto the irradiation dose was evident, for “Fuji” or “GrannySmith” apples.

Thomas et al., (1971) [20] found that in varieties FillBasket bananas and Red bananas irradiated in the preclimacteric stage with 0.25 and 0.40 kGy doses, the contentsof reducing sugars on ripening showed close agreementwith that of non-irradiated fruits. However, in GaintCavendish variety, irradiated (0.35 kGy) fruits recordedlower sugar than in control. When analyzed at yellow skincolor stage indicating that hydrolysis of starch to sugarhad not progressed.

Mitchell et al., (1990) [21] found that in red capsicumsCv.Five Star irradiated at 75 and 300 Gy. Carotene levelsdecreased with increasing irradiation dose, but the changewas not statistically significant. No significant effect wasfound in the carotene levels in mangoes Cv. KensingtonPride irradiated at 75, 300 and 600Gy. It is concluded thatmangoes and capsicums can be irradiated at doses optimalfor disinfestation without significant loss of carotene.

Prakash et al., (2000 a) [22] compared the effects of 0.5and 1.0 kGy gamma irradiation on microbial and sensory

characteristics of diced celery to conventional treatmentssuch as acidification, blanching and chlorination. Controlsamples surpassed aerobic microbial counts of 10 cfu/gand irradiated celery did not exceed 10 cfu/g in contrast in22, 19, 12 and 8 days of storage. Sensory shelf life of the 1.0kGy treated celery was 29 days compared to 22 days forcontrol, chlorinated and 0.5 kGy and 15 days for the acidifiedand blanched celery.

Prakash et al., (2000, b) [23] found that in cut romainelettuce irradiation at 0.35 kGy decreased aerobic plate countsby 1.5 logs and yeast and mould counts by 1 log; thesedifferences were maintained throughout the 22 day storage.Irradiation at 0.15 kGy caused smaller reduction in microbialcounts. Ten percent loss in firmness was observed at 0.35kGy, while other sensory attributes such as color, generationof off-flavor and appearance of visual defects were notaffected.

De Figueiredo et al., (2014) [24] investigated that theeffect of gamma irradiation on functional constituents onpapaya fruits cv. Golden. Fruits were harvested intomaturation 1 degree (stage) and irradiated with 0.8 kGy(Cobalt 60 source-MSD Nordion irradiator), and then storedat 24 ± 2°C. Total carotenoids and vitamin C contents wereevaluated in the pulp fruits, in the 5, 7 e 9th days post-harvest by a reversed-phase and ion exclusion column by ahigh performance liquid chromatography. Resultsdemonstrated that the irradiation induced alterations in thetotal carotenoids and vitamin C levels. In conclusion, thepresent data provide evidence that the irradiated papaya,did not impair reduce these nutritional characteristics.

Majeed et al., (2014) [25] evaluated that the gammairradiation doses 0.5, 1.0 and 1.5 kGy for their effect on shelflife and chemical attributes of Strawberry (Fragariaxananassa) cv. Corona stored for nine days at roomtemperature. Berries irradiated with 1.0 and 1.5 kGy showedsignificantly prolonged storage life (5.75 and 7.75, daysrespectively) when compared to non-irradiated control fruits(3.25 days). Non-radiated fruit samples showed maximumdecay (94.5 %) and weight loss (58 %) at 9th day of storage;however, irradiation significantly reduced these two qualityparameters especially at higher doses which correspondedto lower weight loss and fruit decay. Neither radiationtreatment nor storage period had significant effect on totalsoluble solids, titratable acidity and pH of fruits. Resultsindicated that radiation doses 1.0 and 1.5 kGy might beused as consumers’ acceptable doses for shelf life extension,minimum weight loss and decay, without affecting thechemical quality of strawberry.

The effects of gamma irradiation on theMicrobiological quality

Pesticide fate in the environment is affected bymicrobial activity. Some pesticides are readily degraded bymicro-organisms, others have proven to be recalcitrant. Adiverse group of bacteria, including members of the generaAlcaligenes, Flavobacterium, Pseudomonas andRhodococcus, metabolize pesticides. Microbial degradationdepends not only on the presence of microbes with theappropriate degradative enzymes, but also on a wide rangeof environmental parameters (Aislabie, 1995) [26] .

PARGI and BHATT, Effect of Gamma Irradiation on Degradation of Pesticide Residues in Fruits and Vegetables 3521

Wang et al., (2006) [27] measured and analyzed theenzyme activity in Golden Empress cantaloupe juice after60Co irradiation. Enzyme activity determination revealedthat lipoxygenase was the easiest one to be inactivated byirradiation, followed by polyphenoloxidase and peroxidase.However, all three enzymes remained active even at 5 kGy.

Afify et al., (2013) [28] studied the possibility ofstimulating Trichoderma spp with low dose gamma radiationfor biodegradation of Oxamyl pesticides. Fungi strainscapable for biodegradation of oxamyl are identified asTrichoderma spp., including T. harzianum, T. viride,Aspergillus niger, Fusarium oxysporum and Penicilliumcyclopium. The results indicated that Trichoderma spp.used Oxamyl as source of carbon and nitrogen andpossesses enzyme(s), which acts on amide and ester bondin Oxamyl structure. Degradation of oxamyl was 72.5%within 10 days of incubation by T. harzianum strain.

Song et al., (2006) [29] studied that the radiationsterilization of fresh vegetable juice, and the effectivenessof g irradiation for inactivating Salmonella typhimuriumand Escherichia coli in the carrot and kale juice wasinvestigated. D10 values of S. typhimurium in the carrotand kale juice were 0.4457±0.004 and 0.4417±0.006 kGy, whilethose of E. coli were 0.3017±0.005 and 0.2997±0.006 kGy.The test organisms (inoculated at 107 cfu/ml) were eliminatedby irradiation at 3 kGy.

Al-Suhaibani and Al-Kuraieef (2016) [30] studied thatthe effect of gamma radiation on the assessment of microbialquality of Spinach. Spinach was treated by using three dosesof gamma radiation, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5 and 2.0KGy. The results ofmicrobial quality revealed that radioactive transactionshave led to a significant reduction (indicate level ofsignificant p< o.o5) in E.coli, total number of Bacteria, yeastsand fungi.

Zhang et al., (2006) [31] studied that the effects ofirradiation on microorganisms and physiological quality offresh-cut lettuce were evaluated during storage at 4oC.Thetotal bacterial counts on fresh-cut lettuce irradiated with1.0kGy were reduced by the order of 2.35 Log CFU/g, andthe total coliform group were lowered to less than 30 MPN(most probably number)/100 g. The polyphenol oxidaseactivity of fresh-cut lettuce was significantly inhibited byirradiation. In addition, the loss of vitamin C of fresh-cutlettuce irradiated with 1.0kGy was significantly (a = 0.05)lower than that of non-irradiated. The best treatment ofmaintaining quality of fresh-cut lettuce appeared to be 1.0kGy irradiation.

The effects of storage conditionsSrinu et al., (2015) [33] reported in their experiment that,

Irradiation of sapota fruits with 0.2 kGy gamma radiationsand stored at 15°C for 20 days increased the post-harvestlife 100% of sapota fruits by 26 days over control 5 days,lower doses of gamma radiation without affecting fruitquality. Higher doses of irradiation 0.8 kGy exhibitedbrownish spots after 3 days of storage on surface of thefruits.

Salunkhe and Desai, (1984) [34] stated that exposure ofsapotas fruit to gamma irradiation at 0.1 KGY extendedstorage life by 3–5 days at 26.7 C and 15 days at 10°C

temperatures without any effect on ascorbate content.Khalil et al., (2009) [35] reported that for citrus fruits

with doses of 0.25 and 0.5 kGy stored at room temperaturefor 42 days, their acidity and ascorbic acid values werehigher for the oranges irradiated at 0.5 kGy. Their weightloss decreased and total soluble solid (TSS) increased duringstorage period.

Verde et al., (2013) [36] studied that the evaluate effectsof gamma radiation on raspberries in order to assessconsequences of irradiation. Freshly packed raspberries(Rubus idaeus L.) were irradiated in a (60) Co source atseveral doses (0.5, 1, or 1.5 kGy). Bioburden, total phenoliccontent, antioxidant activity, physicochemical propertiessuch as texture, color, pH, soluble solids content, andacidity, and sensorial parameters were assessed before andafter irradiation and during storage time up to 14 d at 4°C.

Zhang et al., (2014) [37] studied that was the effects ofCo-60 gamma irradiation on the nutrient composition ofcitrus (Shatang mandarin); selected fruits were divided intodifferent groups and each group was irradiated at 0.0, 0.2,0.3, 0.4, 0.5, and 0.6, respectively. And then the treated fruitswere stored at 4æ%C and the nutrient composition wasstudied in the following days. The results showed that theshelf-life could be extended when fruits were irradiated inthe dose range of 0.2– 0.4 kGy, while most un-irradiatedcitrus decayed by 15 days. It also turned out that the citrusirradiated at 0.5 and 0.6 kGy were fully decayed within 45days of refrigerated storage.

Yadav and Patel (2014) [38] reported that the experimentwas arranged from the 2008 and 2010 with 16 treatmentcombinations of irradiation dose (that is, 0.00, 0.20, 0.40,and 0.60 kGy) and stored at different storage temperaturesviz., ambient at 27 ± 2°C and 60 to 70% RH, 9°C and 90%RH, 12°C and 90% RH, and Control atmospheric storage(12°C, O2 2%, CO2 3% and RH 90%). The fruits were exposedto gamma radiation from the source of 60Co. The two yearscollective data indicated that, the significantly minimumpercent reduction in physiological loss in weight, reducedripening percent, increased marketability of fruits, maximumtotal soluble solids, total and reducing sugars, and ascorbicacid content and minimum acidity were noted in 0.40 kGygamma rays irradiated fruits stored at 12°C as compared tothe other irradiated or un-irradiated fruits stored at ambientcondition and other storage environment.

Harmful Effects of Pesticides in Fruits and VegetablesThere are many health issues linked to pesticide

exposure. Generally, insecticides and fungicides are moretoxic to humans than herbicides (2,4 D and Atrazine arehuge exceptions to this). Many insecticides are neurotoxinsand act on insects and humans in much the same way.Because they’re toxic to your nervous system, exposure tothem is linked to Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s.

Fungicides are often applied near harvest time toprevent mold during transport. They are classified asendocrine disruptors and carcinogens. Exposure tofungicides has also been linked to hypothyroidism andbreast cancer. Some herbicides, such as atrazine, may causecancer, reproductive or developmental effects, andendocrine system effects.


Chlorpyrifos, used on corn, cranberries, brusselssprouts, and broccoli, can have harmfulneurodevelopmental effects on fetuses and on youngchildren. Research also ties the chemical to attention deficitproblems, tremors, and autism.

2,4-D is an endocrine disrupter that interferes withthyroid hormones. It’s also linked to risk factors for acutemyocardial infarction and type-2 diabetes and poor semenquality. Cancer risks include non-Hodgkin lymphoma inpeople.

Glyphosate exposure can affect your health in a bunchof different ways. It is also an endocrine disruptor, itdamages DNA, causes cell death and kills the beneficialbacteria in your gut.

And here’s something to ponder - Neither the FDAnor the USDA has tested food for glyphosate (the activeingredient in Roundup). Even though it’s the world’s mostwidely used herbicide, and testing by academics, consumergroups and other countries has shown residues of thisweed killer in food.

As commercial farming slowly gained popularity overorganic farming, the natural methods were replaced withthe ones using chemicals for fertilizers, pesticides and weedkillers. The promise of higher yield in a shorter period oftime is the selling point of these chemicals. But heavyreliance on chemicals is starting to take its toll on the vastfarmlands and on the people’s health. Fruits and vegetablesare highly nutritious and form as key food commodity inthe human consumption. They are highly perishable due totheir low shelf life. These food commodities are reported tobe contaminated with toxic and health hazardous chemicals.

But now a days, this process is widely used by theIndian farmers or the fruit vendors for ripening of manyfruits like mango, banana, papaya, plums, sapota, apples,avocados, melons, peaches, pears, and tomatoes,pineapples, dates, etc. and vegetables that are heavily-ladenwith pesticides include lettuce, spinach, peppers, celery,potatoes, carrots, cucumbers, green beans, cauliflower,tomatoes, sweet potatoes, eggplant, broccoli andmushrooms. Among all of these, celery and lettuce containthe most pesticides while broccoli and eggplants containthe least amounts [39].

LITERATURE CITEDMarwat, S. K., Khan, M. A., Ahmad, M., Zafar, M., Rehman, F. and

Sultana, S., 2009. Vegetables Mentioned in the Holy Qura’n andhadith and Their Ethno-medicinal Studies in Dera Ismail Khan,N.W.F.P., Pakistan, Pakistan Journal of Nutrition., 8, 530.

Bhattacharya, B., Sarkar, S. K. and Mukherjee, N. 2003.Organochlorine pesticide residues in sediments of a tropicalmangrove estuary, India: implications for monitoring.Environment International, 29, 587.

Baig, S. A., Akhtera, N. A., Ashfaq, M. and Asi, M. R. 2009.Determination of the Organophosphorus Pesticide in Vegetablesby High-Performance Liquid Chromatography. American-Eurasian Journal Agriculture Environment Science., 5, 513.

Sharmaa, D., Nagpala, A., Pakadeb, Y. B. and Katnoria, J. K. 2010.Analytical methods for estimation of organophosphoruspesticide residues in fruits and vegetables: a review. Talanta, 82,1077.

Puri, P. 2014. Food safety assurance through regulation of agricultural

pesticide use in India: perspectives and prospects. Journal LifeScience, 3(2), 123-127.

Crinnion, W. J. 2009. Chlorinated pesticides: threats to health andimportance of detection. Alternative Medicine Review, 14(4),347-359.

Vela, N., Perez, G., Navarro, G. et al., 2007. Gas chromatographicdetermination of pesticide residues in malt, spent grains, wort,and beer with electron capture detection and mass spectrometry.Journal of AOAC International, 90(2), 544-549.

Collins, D. A. 2006. A review of alternatives to organophosphoruscompounds for the control of storage mites. Journal of StoredProducts Research, 42(4), 395-426.

Handford, C. E., Elliott, C. T., Campbell, K. 2015. A review of theglobal pesticide legislation and the scale of challenge in reachingthe global harmonization of food safety standards. IntegratedEnvironmental Assessment and Management, 11(4), 525-536.

Ogah, C. O., Coker, H. B., Adepoju-Bello, A. A. 2011.Organophosphate and carbamate pesticide residues in beans frommarkets in Lagos State, Nigeria. Journal of Innovative Researchin Engineering Science, 2(1), 50-59.

Zia, M. S., Khan, M. J., Qasim, M., Rehman A. 2009. PesticideResidue in the Food Chain and Human Body inside Pakistan.Journal of the Chemical Society of Pakistan, 31(2), 284-291.

Reddy, J. D., Rao, N. B., Sultan, A. M. 2000. Insecticide Residues inmarket samples of grape berries. Pesto, 16 (9), 17-22.

Cast, 1996. Radiation pasteurization of food. Council for AgriculturalScience and Technology, Ames, Iowa. Issue paper No. 7.

Cin, D. A., and Kroger, M. 1982. Effects of Various Kitchen HeatTreatments, Ultraviolet Light, and Gamma Irradiation on MirexInsecticide Residues in Fish. A publication of the Institution offood technologists, 47(2), Pages 350-354.

Chowdhury, M. A. Z., Jahan, I., Karim, N., Mohammad, K. A. 2014.Determination of Carbamate and Organophosphorus Pesticidesin Vegetable Samples and the Efficiency of Gamma-Radiation inTheir Removal. Hindawi Publishing Corporation. Bio-MedResearch International. Article ID 145-159, pages 9.

Susheela, K., Damayanti, M. and Sharma, G. J. 1997. Irradiation ofAnanas comosus: Shelf life improvement, nutritional qualityand assessment of genotoxicity. Biomedical Letters, 56(223–224), 135–144.

Wang, J. and Chao, Y., 2003. Effect of 60Co irradiation on dryingcharacteristics of apple. Journal of Food Engineering, 56, 347–351

Rubio, T., Araya, E., Avendado, S., Lopez, L., Espinoza, S. J., andVargas, M. 2001. Effect of ionizing radiation on fresh vegetablesartificially contaminated with Vibrio Cholerae. vibrio infectionfrom consumption of raw seafood and fresh produce. IAEA-TECDOC-1213.

Drake, S. R., Sanderson, P. G. and Neven, L. G. 1999. Response ofapple and winter pear fruit quality to irradiation as a quarantinetreatment. Journal of Food Processing and Preservation, 23(3),203–216.

Thomas, P., Dharkar, S. K., and Sreenivasan A. 1971. Effect ofgamma irradiation on the post harvest physiology of five bananavarieties grown in India. Journal of Food Science, 36, 243-247.

Mitchell, G. E., Mc Lauchalan, R. L., Beattie, T. R., Banos, C. andGillen, A. A. 1990. Effect of gamma irradiation on the carotenecontent of mangoes and red capsicums. Journal of Food Science,55 (4), 1185-1186.

Prakash, A., Guner, A. R., Caporaso, F. and Folye, D. M. 2000a.Effects of low dose gamma irradiation on the shelf life andquality characteristics of cut Romaine lettuce packaged undermodified atmosphere. Journal of Food Science 65(3), 549-

PARGI and BHATT, Effect of Gamma Irradiation on Degradation of Pesticide Residues in Fruits and Vegetables 3523

553.Prakash, A., Inthajak, P., Huibergtse, Caporaso, F. and Foley, D. M.

2000 b. Effects of low dose gamma irradiation and conventionaltreatments on shelf life and quality characteristics of diced celery.Journal of Food Science, 65(6), 1070-1075.

De Figueiredo, S. G., Silva-Sena, G. G., de Santana, E. N., dos Santos,R. G., Neto, J. O., de Oliveira, C. A. 2014. Effect of GammaIrradiation on Carotenoids and Vitamin C Contents of PapayaFruit (Carica papaya L.) Cv.Golden. Journal of Food Processing& Technology, 5, 337.

Majeed, A., Muhammad, Z., Majid, A., Shah, A. H. and Hussain, M.2014. impact of low doses of gamma irradiation on shelf life andchemical quality of strawberry (fragaria xananassa) cv. ‘corona’.The Journal of Animal & Plant Sciences, 24(5), Page-1531-1536.

Aislabie, J. and Lloyd-Jones, G. 1995. A review of bacterial-degradation of pesticides. Australian Journal of Soil Research,33(6), 925-942.

Wang, Z., Ma, Y., Zhao, G., Liao, X., Chen, F., Wu, J., Chenand, J.,Hu, X. 2006. Influence of gamma irradiation on enzyme,microorganism, and flavor of cantaloupe (Cucumis melon L.)juice. Journal of Food Science, 71(6), 215–220.

Afify, M. R., Abo-El-Seoud, M. A., Ibrahim, G. M., Helal, I. M. M.,and Kassem B. W. 2013. Stimulating of Biodegradation ofOxamyl Pesticide by Low Dose Gamma Irradiated Fungi. JournalPlant Pathology Microbiology, 4, 9.

Song, H., Kim, D., Jo, C., Lee, C., Kim, K., Byun, M. 2006. Effectof gamma irradiation on the microbiological quality andantioxidant activity of fresh vegetable juice. Food Microbiology,23, pp-372–378.

Al-Suhaibani, A. and Al-Kuraieef, A. 2016. The effects of Gammairradiation on the Microbiological quality, Sensory evaluationand Antioxidant activity of Spinach. International Journal ofChemTech Research, 9(6), pp 39-47.

Zhang, L., Lu, Z., Lu, F., Bie, X. 2006. Effect of gamma irradiationon quality-maintaining of fresh-cut lettuce. Food Control, 17,pp 225–228.

Fonseca, S. C., Oliveira, F. A. R., Brecht, J. K. (2002). Modellingrespiration rate of fresh fruits and vegetables for modifiedatmosphere packages: a review. Journal of Food Engineering,52, 99-119.

Srinu, B., Bhagwan, A., Babu, J. D. 2015. Effect of combination ofpolypropylene packaging and irradiation on shelf life of sapotafruit stored at low temperature. Environments and ecology, 33,pp-1672-1675.

Salunkhe, D. K. and Desai, B. B. 1984. Postharvest biotechnologyof fruits, volume II. CRC Press, Boca Raton, 387-396.

Khalil, S. A., Hussain, S., Khan, M. and Khattak, A. B. 2009. Effectsof gamma irradiation on quality of Pakistani blood red oranges(Citrus sinensis L. Osbeck). International Journal of FoodScience and Technology, 44 (5), 927–931.

Verde, S. C., Trigo, M. J., Sousa, M. B., Ferreira, A., Ramos, A. C.,Nunes, I., Junqueira, C., Melo, R., Santos, P. M., Botelho, M. L.2013. Effects of gamma radiation on raspberries: safety andquality issues. Journal Toxicology Environment Health A: CurrentIssues, 76(4-5), 291-303.

Zhang, k., Deng1, Y., Fu1, H., Weng, Q. 2014. Effects of Co-60gamma-irradiation and refrigerated storage on the quality ofShatang mandarin. Food Science and Human Wellness, 3, 9–15.

Yadav, M. K. and Patel, N. L. 2014. Optimization of irradiation andstorage temperature for delaying ripening process andmaintaining quality of Alphonso mango fruit (Mangifera indicaL.). African Journal of Agricultural Research,. 9(5), pp. 562-571.

Shiurkar, G. B., Lal, N., Sinha, K. and Markam, V. K. 2018. HarmfulEffects of Pesticides in Fruits and Vegetables. Biotech articles.http://www.nontoxicforhealth.com/pesticides-in-fruits.html


http://www.nontoxicforhealth.com/pesticides-in-fruits.html

3524 Trends in Biosciences 11 (28), 2018Trends in Biosciences 11(28), Print : ISSN 0974-8431, 3524-3526, 2018

Development and Evaluation of Autoclavable Lab Scale FermenterR. NAVARASAM*, N. KARPOORA SUNDARA PANDIAN, B. DHANALAKSHMI AND M. ABDUL RIYAS

Food Technology, Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences UniversityCollege of food and Dairy Technology, Koduveli, Chennai*email : [email protected]

ABSTRACTA lab scale autoclavable fermenter was developed withworking capacity of 3L out of the total volume of 4 L for theproduction of red wine from local variety of grapes andevaluated in the developed fermenter by changing thetemperature and speed of the agitator to study the favorableconditions for fermentation. The temperature ranges of28, 30 and 32°C and the agitator speed of 0, 100 and 200rpm were set to evaluate the developed fermenter in termsof alcohol recovery in per cent. Fermentation initiated withbrewer’s yeast of 2% at the fermentation temperature of28°C resulted in the maximum yield of 12.4 per cent alcoholfrom the grape must in the developed fermenter.Fermentation at 30 and 32°C were yielded comparativelylow, lost some colour and stuck fermentation results. Itwas also produced raisin like falvour instead of wine fruityflavor. Variations in the agitator speed at the fermentationtemperature of 28°C did not show any significant effect onthe alcohol recovery. Hence, it was decided to conductfermentation at 28°C without any agitation in thefermenter.

Keywords Lab scale autoclavable fermenter, grapewine, alcohol recovery, temperature, (RPM)roatation per minute.

Grapes (Vitis spp.) are economically important fruitspecies in the world primarily for wine production. In India,total area of grapes cultivation was 88,000 ha with annualproduction of 24, 54,000 metric tons during the year 2014-15 (Kumar et al., 2017). The conversion of grape juice towine is a biotechnological process. Wine making beginswith the collection and crushing of grapes. There are twotypes of wine namely white wine and red wine. The sugarfermentation phase is dominated primarily bySaccharomyces cerevisiae, a yeast that has beenextensively studied in wine production. It was the firsteukaryotic organism to have its genome sequenced (Goffeauet al., 1996) and widely used in wine fermentationindustrially. There are two kinds of wine productions suchas red and white wine.

Tesfaye et al. (2000) used a laboratory scale fermentercomprised of a cylindrical concave bottom glass culturevessel of 5 litre capacity with a height-to-diameter ratio of2:1, an air supply system with air filters and inlet pipe withsparger ring, a refrigeration system with cold water toprevent loss of volatile components, electrical heater jacket230V and cooling system of the vessel with simple waterbath, stirrer with 6-bladed disc impellers, Pt-100 pH-electrode, pO2-electrode, sensor for temperaturemeasurement Pt-100, measurement and control systemmicro-DCU 300, stirrer speed control MCU-200 and dosing

pump-300. Ferreira et al. (2010) has stated that fermentationefficiency is also directly related to the stress resistance,i.e. the ability of yeasts to respond efficiently to a changingenvironment and unfavorable growth conditions (Bauerand Pretorius 2000).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Development of fermenterFermenter was developed for the purpose of

conducting preliminary studies on grape wine productionunder the controlled conditions. A 4 L capacity autoclavableglass fermenter was developed by assembling the followingaccessories:

1. Body - Borosilicate glass 2. Top - SS 316L 3. Seal - Silicon lip seal 4. Turbine - 3 No’s 5. Total volume - 4.3 L 6. Agitator - 180 W

The borosilicate container (make: Borg) of 4 L capacitywas fitted with top lid made up of stainless steel 316 L. Thelid was attached with port facilities such as sample port,CO2 outlet, cooling water in and out, pH probe port andthermometer port.

Evaluation of developed fermenterUnder the anaerobic condition, 3 L volume of grape

must fermentation was carried out and evaluated bychanging the temperature and rpm of impellers provided inthe fermenter. The temperature of 28, 30 and 32°C weremaintained in different period of time interval. In that latercases, slight change in colour due to high temperature andstuck fermentation results. Hence, it found that 28°C wasthe optimum temperature for red wine making in the smallscale fermenter. Revolution of agitator was varied viz., 0,100, 200 rpm at 28°C to study the impact of agitation on thefermentation of grape must. At the end of fermentationsediment settled at the bottom of fermenter were removedand clear wine was collected and the amount of alcoholrecovery was studied.

Flowchart of steps in the winemaking is presented inFig-1

pH meter :- 0 to 14

Thermometer :- 0-100°C

Agitator :- 100 to 1000 rpm


NAVARASAM et al., Development and Evaluation of Autoclavable Lab Scale Fermenter 3525

Selection of wine grapes (Mature and undamagedgrapes)

Grape berries washed and crushed (Manually underhygienic conditions)

Grape skins and seeds were remaining in juice for

extraction of colour and phenolic compounds (keptovernight for aerobic fermentation)

Adjust TSS 22°B by adding cane sugar

Addition of Culture (2%)

Fermenter at 28°C

Filtration using filters

Racking and Siphoning

Clarification(Filter / muslin cloth)

Deacidification by slight heating

Bottling and storage

Fig. 1. Methodology

(According BIS Standards- https://archive.org/details/gov.in.is.7058.2005)

(a) (b) (c)

(d) (e) (f)Plate 1. Wine making

a) Grapes, b) Blanching, c) grape must, d) fermeneter, e) Brewer’s Yeast, f) wine


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Development of FermenterA lab scale fermenter was developed with working

capacity of 3 L out of 4 L total volume. The fermenter wasprovided with stainless steel with provision for ports toaccommodate agitator, pH probe, cold water inlet and outletand thermometer. The rated power for agitator was 180 Wwith provision to change the speed of impeller. The mainpurpose of the fermenter was to study the suitableparameters that favour the fermentation positively.

Evaluation of developed fermenterStudies were conducted in the developed fermenter

by changing the temperature and speed of the agitator tostudy the favorable conditions for fermentation. Thetemperatures varied at 28, 30 and 32 °C and the agitator rpmwas set 0, 100 and 200. It was found from table 4.1 thattemperature changes had significant effect on the alcoholrecovery at 1 per cent level of interval. The highest meanalcohol recovery of 12.4 per cent was noticed at thefermentation temperature of 28°C whereas highertemperatures showed low alcohol recovery. Hence, it wasdecided to conduct the study on fermentation afterpretreatments at 28°C. Considering the intervention ofagitator speed on the fermentation, the rpm levels were set0, 100 and 200 in the developed fermenter at the fermentationtemperature of 28 °C. It was again noticed from the table 4.1that variation in the agitator speed did not have anysignificant effect on the alcohol recovery. Hence, it wasdecided not to give any agitation during fermentation afterpretreatments of the grape must at 28°C.

Table 1. Evaluation of developed fermenter

Independent variables Dependent variables Temperature(ºC) Alcohol recovery (%) Mean

28 12.4 12.4±0.07c

30 11.5 11.5±0.09b

32 11 11±0.06a

F-value 90.600** RPM Alcohol recovery (%) Mean

0 12 12±0.04a

100 12 12±0.06a

200 11.9 11.9±0.04a

F-value 1.412NS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors acknowledge the help provided by theDepartment of Food Plant Operations, College of Food andDairy Technology and Department of Dairy Science,Madras Veterinary College and TRPVB, Madhavaram,TANUVAS for utilizing the lab facilities for red wineproduction and analysis.

LITERATURE CITEDA.O.A.C. 1995.Official methods of analysis , 16th

Edition.Association of official analytical Chemists, WashingtonD.C., U.S.A.

Amerine, M. A and R. E. Kunkee, 1968.Microbiology ofwinemaking.Annual Reviews in Microbiology, 22(1): 323-358.

Amerine, M. A. and C.S. Ough, 1980. Methods for analysis of mustsand wines.

Benito, Á.,F. Calderón, F. Palomero and S. Benito, 2015. CombineUse of Selected Schizosaccharomycespombe andLachanceathermotolerans Yeast Strains as an Alternative tothe Tradit ional Malolactic Fermentation in Red WineProduction. Molecules, 20 (6): 9510-9523.

Chandrashekhar, H. and J. V. Rao, 2010.An Overview of fermenterand the design considerati

Goffeau, A., B. G.Barrell,H.Bussey,R. W.Davis,B.Dujon,H.Feldmannand E. J. Louis, 1996. Life with 6000 genes. Science, 274(5287):546-567.

Joshi, V., V.Kumar, M. K.Debnath, S. Pattanashetti, M. T.VariathandS. Khadakabhavi, 2014. Assessing quality of blended wineprepared from white and red varieties of Grape (VitisviniferaL.). International Journal of Agricultural and FoodScience, 5(1):1612.

Pretorius, I. S. and M. G. Lambrechts, 2000. Yeast and its importanceto wine aroma: a review. South African Journal of Enology andViticulture, 21(1): 97-129.

Tambe, T. B., Y. S.Kaduand S. P. Patil, 2008. Studies on biochemicalproperties of wine and must of various grape varieties. AsianJournal of Horticulture, 3(1): 144-148.



Gene Action and Combining Ability Estimates Using Cytoplasmic Male Sterile

Lines to Develop Pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) MILLSP.] hybrids

P.K. PATEL, D.A. CHAUHAN, A.B. PATIL AND M.B. PATEL

Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, N. M. College of Agriculture,

Navsari Agricultural University, Navsari, Maharashtra

email : [email protected]

ABSTRACT

Evaluation of 25 F1 hybrids were involving five CMS lines

and five testers in line × tester fashion, data recorded on

twelve agronomical characters. The estimation of gca

effects for parents indicated that among females, ICP-

2098A was good general combiner for yield and yield

attributing traits, whereas in males ICPL-87119 was good

general combiner for yield and yield attributing

characters. In the crosses viz., ICP-2210A x ICPL-87119

and ICP-2098A x ICPL-87119 were the best specific

combinations for seed yield per plant and its attributing

character.

Keywords Combining ability, Pigeon pea, Cytoplasmic

male sterility.

Pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.] is a short-

lived perennial member of family Fabaceae and it is

invariably cultivated as annual crop. Pigeonpea is an often

cross pollinated (20-70%) crop with 2n = 2x = 22 diploid

chromosome number (Saxena et al., 1990). Pigeonpea is a

hardy, widely adapted and drought tolerant crop. Pigeonpea

is grown worldwide on 5.2 m ha land in about 50 countries

and 77 % of its area is in India (Anonymous, 2013). At

present, pigeonpea is cultivated on 4.4 million ha area with

2.89 million tones production with a productivity 655 kg/ha

during year 2010-11 (Anonymous, 2013). Gujarat grows

pigeonpea on around 2.77 Lakh hectares with an annual

production and productivity of 2.73 Lakh tones and 986

kg/ha, respectively (Anonymous, 2013). Pigeonpea is a rich

source of proteins, carbohydrates and certain vital minerals

useful for health (Gopalan et al 1971). Protein content of

commonly grown pigeonpea cultivars ranges between 17.9

g and 24.3 g per 100 g for whole grain samples and between

21.1 g and 28.1 g per 100 g for split grains (Salunkhe et al.

1986). Combining ability analysis is a powerful tool to

discriminate good as well as poor combiner and selecting

out appropriate parental material and at the same time

provide information about nature of gene action involved

in the inheritance of various traits.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The crossing programme was carried out using 5

females and 5 males pollination at pulse research station,

Navsari during late kharif - 2014, 25 crosses were obtained

in line x tester mating design. The experiment was laid out

in a Randomized Block Design with three replications during

Kharif-2015. Each entry was planted in a single row

consisting of 10 plants in each row with a spacing 90 x 20

cm. Five competitive plants were randomly selected and

tagged excluding border plants to minimize border effects.

Observations on tagged plants except days to 50 per cent

flowering and days to maturity (plot basis) were recorded

on the following twelve characters and mean values over

five plants were subjected to statistical analysis.The

variation among the hybrids was partitioned further into

sources attributed to general combining ability and specific

combining ability components in accordance with the

procedure suggested by Kempthorne (1957).


The genetic variances were estimated from the

analysis of variance for combining ability for twelve different

characters studied in the present investigation and its

results are presented in Table-1. The analysis of variance

for combining ability revealed that mean sum of squares

due to females were found significant for days to maturity,

100-seed weight and harvest index. Whereas for males,

significant mean sum of squares were noticed for days to

50% flowering, days to maturity, plant height, pods per

plant, pod length, 100-seed weight, harvest index and

protein content. Highly significant mean sum of squares

due to females x males were observed for all the characters

except seed yield per plant. General combining ability (gca)

variances for females (ó2f) were observed significant for

days to maturity, 100-seed weight and harvest index.

Similarly, general combining ability (gca) variances for males

(ó2m) were found significant for all characters except primary

branches per plant, seeds per pod and pollen fertility.

General combining ability (gca) variances for females (ó2f)

were observed significant for days to maturity, 100-seed

weight and harvest index. Similarly, general combining

ability (gca) variances for males (ó2m) were found significant

for all characters except primary branches per plant, seeds

per pod and pollen fertility. Variances estimates due to

general combining ability (ó2gca) were observed to be

significant for all characters except pollen fertility. Similarly,

the estimates of variance due to specific combining ability

(ó2sca) were observed highly significant for all characters.

The ratio of s2gca / s2sca revealed that the characters like

days to 50 per cent flowering, primary branches per plant,

pods per plant, pod length, seeds per pod, seed yield per

plant, protein content and pollen fertility manifested less

3528 Trends in Biosciences 11 (28), 2018T

ab

le 1

.M

ean

sq

uare

s d

ue

to G

ener

al a

nd

Sp

ecif

ic c

om

bin

ing a

bil

ity for

dif

fere

nt ch

ara

cter

s in

pig

eon

pea

So

urc

e o

f

Va

ria

tio

ns

DF

D

ay

s to

50

%

flo

wer

ing

Da

ys

to

ma

turi

ty

Pla

nt

hei

gh

t

Pri

ma

ry

bra

nch

e

s p

er

pla

nt

po

ds

per

pla

nt

Po

d

len

gth

See

ds

per

po

d

10

0-

seed

wei

gh

t

See

d

yie

ld p

er

pla

nt

Ha

rv

est

ind

ex

Pro

tein

con

ten

t

Po

llen

fert

ilit

y

Rep

lica

tio

n

2

10

.17

4

2.0

4

12

.41

0

.43

29

8.6

9

0.2

1

0.1

2

0.2

1

98

.91

8

.10

2.6

1

2.0

7

Hyb

rid

s

24

1

69

.16

**

8

28

.69

**

2

43

6.5

7*

*

12

.26

**

39

36

.19

**

2

.45

**

0.9

8 *

*

9.0

6**

2

49

4.0

3

39

8.6

4*

*

14

.85

**

60

.07

**

Fem

ales

4

7

6.6

1

76

8.4

3*

11

21

.60

1

3.1

8

42

36

.48

0

.78

0

.62

11

.69

*

33

90

.06

5

03

.13

**

1

5.5

6

48

.08

Mal

es

4

49

8.2

5*

3

30

1.6

7**

1

03

35

.88

**

1

9.5

6

10

25

9.4

9*

8.5

0*

*

2.2

2

27

.32

**

5

86

9.5

2

16

05

.97

**

3

1.9

0*

86

.33

Fem

ale

x M

ale

16

1

10

.03

**

2

25

.52

**

7

90

.49

**

1

0.2

1*

*

22

80

.29

**

1

.36

**

0.7

6 *

*

3.8

4**

1

42

6.1

4

70

.69

*

10

.40

**

56

.50

**

Err

or

4

8

18

.30

6

4.4

0

12

5.9

5

0.6

3

48

9.7

0

0.1

5

0.0

5

0.9

2

13

9.3

6

30

.96

0.8

6

5.5

6

σ2 F

3.9

5

47

.15 *

6

5.0

15

5

0.8

2

25

6.0

3

0.0

4

0.0

4

0.7

2 *

2

15

.47

3

1.0

9 *

*

0.9

4

2.9

3

σ2 M

32

.06

*

21

6.0

3 *

*

67

9.3

0 *

*

1.2

5

65

7.5

6 *

0

.55

**

0

.15

1.7

6 *

*

38

0.7

6 *

1

04

.62

**

2.0

2 *

5

.48

σ2 g

ca

18

.00

**

1

31

.59

**

37

2.1

5 *

*

1.0

4 *

4

56

.79

**

0.2

9 *

*

0.0

9 *

1

.24

**

29

8.1

1 *

*

67

.86 *

*

1.4

8 *

*

4.2

0

σ2 s

ca

30

.91

**

5

4.7

8 *

*

21

4.7

0 *

*

3.1

4 *

*

62

8.0

7 *

*

0.4

0 *

*

0.2

3 *

*

1.0

0 *

*

42

2.6

8 *

*

11

.34 *

2

.98

**

1

7.4

3 *

*

σ2 g

ca

/σ

2 s

ca

0.5

8

2.4

0

1.7

3

0.3

3

0.7

2

0.7

3

0.0

4

1.2

4

0.7

1

5.9

8

0.5

0

0.2

4

* S

ignif

ican

t at

5 %

lev

el,

*

* S

ignif

ican

t at

1 %

lev

el

PATEL et al., Gene Action and Combining Ability Estimates Using Cytoplasmic Male Sterile Lines to Develop Pigeonpea 3529

Tab

le 2

.E

stim

ati

on

gen

eral c

om

bin

ing a

bil

ity (G

CA

) ef

fect

s of p

are

nts

for

vari

ou

s ch

ara

cter

s in

pig

eon

pea

Paren

ts

Days

to

50%

flow

eri

ng

Days

to

matu

rit

y

Pla

nt

hei

gh

t

Pri

mary

bra

nch

es

per

pla

nt

pod

s p

er

pla

nt

Pod

len

gth

See

ds

per

pod

100-

seed

wei

gh

t

See

d

yie

ld p

er

pla

nt

Harv

est

ind

ex (

%)

Prote

in

con

ten

t

(%)

Poll

en

ferti

lity

(%)

Lin

es

ICP

-2210A

-2

.05

-6.6

0 *

*

5.3

2

0.4

8 *

19.6

8 *

*

0.1

5

0.0

2

0.1

3

8.2

8 *

3.1

9 *

0.6

4 *

1.3

0 *

ICP

-2199A

-0

.72

-1.7

3

-3.6

4

-1.5

6 *

*

1.4

3

-0.1

7

0.1

8 *

*

-0.2

8

-18.7

2 *

*

-2.8

4

-1.1

3 *

*

-0.0

5

ICP

-2198A

0.4

8

4.8

0 *

-2

.15

-0.1

2

-20.0

7 *

*

0.0

9

0.0

2

0.1

1

-2.3

7

-4.8

0 *

*

-0.5

1

-2.8

0 *

*

ICP

-2188A

3.6

8 *

*

9.8

0**

-11.0

0 *

*

0.3

6

-13.4

9 *

-0

.30 *

*

-0.3

4 *

*

-1.2

1 *

*

-7.6

7 *

-4

.21 *

*

-0.4

1

-0.2

2

ICP

-2098A

-1

.39

-6.2

6 *

*

11.4

7 *

*

0.8

4 *

*

12.4

4 *

0.2

2 *

0.1

1 *

1.2

3 *

*

20.4

9 *

*

8.6

6 *

*

1.4

1 *

*

1.7

7 *

*

SE

(gj)

1.0

7

2.0

2

3.1

2

0.2

3

5.1

4

0.1

0

0.0

5

0.2

3

3.2

5

1.5

6

0.3

1

0.5

3

SE

(gi-

gj)

1.5

2

2.8

6

4.4

2

0.3

2

7.2

7

0.1

4

0.0

8

0.3

3

4.5

9

2.2

1

0.4

4

0.7

5

Test

ers

ICP

L-8

7119

-6.1

2 *

*

-13.8

6 *

*

23.5

9 *

*

0.6

0 *

32.9

0 *

*

0.8

9 *

*

0.4

1 *

*

1.4

7 *

*

19.1

9 *

*

9.6

5 *

*

1.7

5 *

*

2.0

0 *

*

ICP

R-4

544

3.9

4 *

*

14.7

3 *

*

-31.4

3 *

**

-1.4

8 *

*

-19.0

8 *

*

-0.9

9 *

*

-0.3

0 *

*

-1.1

4 *

*

-23.4

7 *

*

-8.1

4 *

*

0.4

2

-0.4

1

ICP

R4543

-2.9

8 *

*

-7.0

0 *

*

10.1

5 *

*

1.0

8 *

*

6.4

8

-0.1

3

-0.2

6 *

*

0.3

2

6.1

5

3.1

7 *

-2

.14 *

*

-2.8

8 *

*

ICP

R-4

502

7.9

4 *

*

17.2

6 *

*

-24.6

7 *

*

-0.9

6 *

*

-32.9

6 *

*

-0.3

4 *

*

-0.2

8 *

*

-1.6

4 *

*

-18.3

4 *

*

-13.4

6 *

*

0.5

5

-1.5

5 *

*

ICP

R-4

531

-2.7

8 *

-1

1.1

3 *

*

22.3

5 *

*

0.7

6 *

*

12.6

6 *

0.5

7 *

*

0.4

3 *

*

0.9

9 *

*

16.4

6 *

*

8.7

8 *

*

-0.5

9

2.8

4 *

*

SE

(gj)

1.0

7

2.0

2

3.1

2

0.2

3

5.1

4

0.1

0

0.0

5

0.2

3

3.2

5

1.5

6

0.3

1

0.5

3

SE

(gi-

gj)

1.5

2

2.8

6

4.4

2

0.3

2

7.2

7

0.1

4

0.0

8

0.3

3

4.5

9

2.2

1

0.4

4

0.7

5

3530 Trends in Biosciences 11 (28), 2018T

ab

le 3

.E

stim

ati

on

of sp

ecif

ic c

om

bin

ing a

bil

ity (sc

a) ef

fect

s of h

yb

rid

s fo

r vari

ou

s ch

ara

cter

s in

pig

eon

pea

* S

ign

ific

ant at

5 %

lev

el, *

* S

ign

ific

ant at

1 %

lev

el

Sr

.

No

.

Hy

br

id

Da

ys t

o

50

%

flo

we

rin

g

Da

ys t

o

ma

tur

ity

Pla

nt

he

igh

t

Pr

ima

ry

br

an

ch

es

pe

r p

lan

t

po

ds p

er

pla

nt

Po

d

len

gth

Se

ed

s

pe

r p

od

10

0-s

ee

d

we

igh

t

Se

ed

yie

ld p

er

pla

nt

Ha

rv

est

ind

ex

(%)

Pr

ote

in

co

nte

nt

(%)

Po

lle

n

fer

tili

ty

(%)

1

ICP

-22

10

A x

IC

PL

-87

11

9

-2.2

8

-2.4

7

11

.65

1

.52

**

-5

.24

-0

.03

0

.46

**

0

.61

1

4.5

9 *

2

.08

0

.97

2

.87

*

2

ICP

-22

10

A x

IC

PR

-45

44

-0

.28

0

.67

-1

.05

1

.36

**

-1

2.8

5

0.0

8

-0.5

5 *

*

0.0

4

-8.6

4

0.4

0

0.1

7

0.8

1

3

ICP

-22

10

A x

IC

PR

-45

43

4

.52

-2

.53

-2

1.2

7 *

*

-3.8

8 *

*

8.7

3

-0.1

3

-0.1

8

-0.1

3

-13

.99

3

.02

0

.23

-5

.43

**

4

ICP

-22

10

A x

IC

PR

-45

02

-2

.35

3

.13

8

.98

-0

.16

1

2.2

2

0.2

1

0.1

2

0.1

6

10

.19

-0

.44

-0

.72

-0

.22

5

ICP

-22

10

A x

IC

PR

-45

31

0

.39

1

.20

1

.70

1

.16

*

-2.8

6

-0.1

4

0.1

5

-0.6

8

-2.1

5

-5.0

7

-0.6

5

1.9

7

6

ICP

-21

99

A x

IC

PL

-87

11

9

9.3

2 *

*

5.2

7

-14

.46

*

-0.6

-3

5.6

4 *

*

-0.5

5 *

-0

.29

*

-1.7

7 *

*

-30

.86

**

-7

.96

*

-0.1

3

-2.8

0 *

7

ICP

-21

99

A x

IC

PR

-45

44

-7

.34

**

5

.40

3

.71

-0

.56

3

2.0

7 *

*

0.5

7 *

-0

.23

-1

.19

*

8.2

0

2.2

2

0.6

5

0.8

7

8

ICP

-21

99

A x

IC

PR

-45

43

-8

.54

**

-7

.47

2

.35

3

.40

**

-2

3.2

2 *

-0

.09

0

.78

**

1

.84

**

2

3.8

3 *

*

-2.0

7

0.3

6

0.8

1

9

ICP

-21

99

A x

IC

PR

-45

02

4

.92

*

-9.1

3 *

9

.87

-0

.48

3

8.9

3 *

*

0.7

0 *

*

0.1

0

1.1

9 *

-0

.00

-2

.61

1

.40

4

.38

**

10

IC

P-2

19

9A

x I

CP

R-4

53

1

1.6

5

5.9

3

-1.4

8

-1.7

6 *

*

-12

.14

-0

.62

**

-0

.35

**

-0

.06

-1

.15

1

0.4

2 *

*

-2.2

8 *

*

-3.2

6 *

*

11

IC

P-2

19

8A

x I

CP

L-8

71

19

-1

.41

-1

.67

3

.42

0

.04

0

.45

0

.90

**

-0

.30

*

0.7

4

17

.16

*

5.5

7*

-2

.55

**

-4

.67

**

12

IC

P-2

19

8A

x I

CP

R-4

54

4

3.9

2

-7.8

7

12

.33

0

.88

-4

.44

-0

.88

**

0

.32

**

1

.14

*

-30

.29

**

-3

.49

-0

.11

-0

.99

13

IC

P-2

19

8A

x I

CP

R-4

54

3

1.7

2

18

.60

**

-1

1.1

7

-0.3

6

-13

.06

-0

.35

-0

.30

*

-0.7

5

9.9

5

-4.2

7

-1.0

5

1.7

8

14

IC

P-2

19

8A

x I

CP

R-4

50

2

-1.1

5

-2.7

3

-16

.38

*

-1.0

4 *

-3

.57

-0

.55

*

-0.5

1 *

*

-1.4

6 *

*

-6.8

5

2.0

2

1.0

5

-2.6

3 *

15

IC

P-2

19

8A

x I

CP

R-4

53

1

-3.0

8

-6.3

3

11

.81

0

.48

2

0.6

2

0.8

9 *

*

0.7

9 *

*

0.3

4

10

.03

1

.17

2

.67

**

6

.51

**

*

16

IC

P-2

18

8A

x I

CP

L-8

71

19

-2

.68

0

.73

-1

1.7

6

-1.9

2 *

*

25

.56

*

-0.6

0 *

*

-0.2

6 *

-0

.78

-1

5.9

8 *

-0

.78

-1

.15

2

.66

*

17

IC

P-2

18

8A

x I

CP

R-4

54

4

5.6

5 *

4

.87

-1

8.9

8 *

*

0.1

2

-21

.98

-0

.28

0

.58

**

-0

.69

1

1.0

1

-2.3

4

0.9

3

-2.1

9

18

IC

P-2

18

8A

x I

CP

R-4

54

3

2.7

9

-3.0

0

39

.45

**

0

.68

0

.66

0

.45

*

-0.0

9

-0.0

4

-25

.52

**

0

.21

1

.41

*

0.1

2

19

IC

P-2

18

8A

x I

CP

R-4

50

2

-10

.41

**

-8

.00

4

.31

2

.20

**

1

3.9

5

0.7

1 *

*

0.4

7 *

*

0.6

9

31

.88

**

4

.79

0

.65

5

.53

**

20

IC

P-2

18

8A

x I

CP

R-4

53

1

4.6

5

5.4

0

-13

.04

-1

.08

*

-18

.20

-0

.28

-0

.69

**

0

.82

-1

.38

-1

.89

-1

.85

*

-6.1

2 *

*

21

IC

P-2

09

8A

x I

CP

L-8

71

19

-2

.95

-1

.86

7

11

.15

0

.96

1

4.8

7

0.2

8

0.3

9 *

*

1.2

1 *

1

5.0

9 *

2

.09

2

.85

**

1

.93

22

IC

P-2

09

8A

x I

CP

R-4

54

4

-1.9

5

-3.0

67

3

.99

-1

.80

**

7

.19

0

.51

*

-0.1

1

0.7

0

19

.72

**

3

.21

-1

.64

*

1.5

0

23

IC

P-2

09

8A

x I

CP

R-4

54

3

-0.4

8

-5.6

-9

.37

0

.16

2

6.8

9 *

0

.11

-0

.19

-0

.92

5

.74

3

.10

-0

.95

2

.71

*

24

IC

P-2

09

8A

x I

CP

R-4

50

2

8.9

8 *

*

16

.73

**

-6

.78

-0

.52

-6

1.5

4 *

*

-1.0

7 *

*

-0.1

8

-0.5

7

-35

.21

**

-3

.76

-2

.37

**

-7

.06

**

25

IC

P-2

09

8A

x I

CP

R-4

53

1

-3.6

1

-6.2

1

.01

1

.20

*

12

.58

0

.15

0

.10

-0

.41

-5

.34

-4

.64

2

.10

**

0

.90

26

S

.E(S

ij)±

2

.40

4

.52

6

.98

0

.50

1

1.4

9

0.2

2

0.1

2

0.5

2

7.2

6

3.4

9

0.7

0

1.1

8

27

S

.E(S

ij-

Sk

l) ±

3

.40

6

.39

9

.88

0

.71

1

6.2

5

0.3

0

0.1

7

0.7

4

10

.27

4

.94

0

.99

1

.67

28

S

.E(S

ij-

Sik

) ±

3

.72

7

.00

1

0.8

2

0.7

8

17

.80

0

.33

0

.19

0

.81

1

1.2

5

5.4

1

1.0

8

1.8

3


Table 4. Summarized account of gca effects of parents for different characters in pigeonpea

Parents

Days to

50%

flowering

Days to

maturity

Plant

height

Primary

branches

per plant

pods

per

plant

Pod

length

Seeds

per

pod

100-

seed

weight

Seed

yield

per

plant

Harvest

index

(%)

Protein

content

(%)

Pollen

fertility

(%)

Lines

ICP-2210A A G A G G A A A G G G G

ICP-2199A A A A P A A G A P A P A

ICP-2198A A P A A P A A A A P A P

ICP-2188A P P P A P P P P P P A A

ICP-2098A A G G G G G G G G G G G

Testers

ICPL-87119 G G G G G G G G G G G G

ICPR-4544 P P P P P P P P P P A A

ICPR4543 G G G G A A P A A G P P

ICPR-4502 P P P P P P P P P P A P

ICPR-4531 G G G G G G G G G G A G

than unity, which indicated that preponderance of non-

additive genetic variance for inheritance of these characters.

The findings are in confirmation with Khorgade et al. (2000),

Sekhar et al. (2004), Baskaran and Muthiah (2007), Kumar

et al. (2009), Shobha and Balan (2010), Gupta et al. (2011),

Bharate et al. (2011), Thiruvengadam and Muthiah (2012),

Patel et al. (2013), Arbad et al. (2013), Yamanura et al. (2014),

Pandey et al. (2014), Patil et al. (2014), Saroj et al. (2014) in

pigeonpea. Days to maturity, plant height, 100-seed weight,

harvest index manifested more than unity which indicated

that preponderance of additive genetic variance for

inheritance of this characters.

Estimation of General and Specific Combining Ability

Effects

The estimates of general combining ability (gca) effect

of ten parents including five females and five males and

specific combing ability of twenty five hybrids are presented

in Table-2 and Table-3, respectively.

General Combining Ability Effects

The parents were classified as good, average and

poor combiners based on estimates of general combining

ability effects (Table-4).The gca effects of ICPL-87119

parents revealed to be good general combiner for all the

characters. The gca effects of ICPR-4531 parents revealed

to be good general combiner for all the characters except

average combiner for protein content. An overall appraisal

of gca effects of parents revealed that ICP-2210A, ICP-

2098A, ICPL-87119 and ICPR-4531 were found good general

combiner for seed yield per plant. Thus, ICP-2210A, ICP-

2098A, ICPL-87119 and ICPR-4531 may be useful in future

breeding programme as parent to combine the yields and

its contributing traits in the hybrid. Similarly, parents ICPL-

87119, ICPR-4543 and ICPR-4531 showed significant gca

effects in negative direction for days to 50 per cent flowering,

hence these parents can be used in future breeding

programme for development early pigeonpea materials.

Specific Combining Ability Effects

Comparative study of most promising hybrids having

high sca effects for seed yield per plant along with gca

effects of parents involved in the crosses showed in table-

5 indicated that the sca effects of hybrids involved G x G, A

x G and G x A gca effects of parents. Based on estimation of

sca effects the crosses viz., ICP-2210A x ICPL-87119 and

ICP-2098A x ICPL-87119 registered high and significant sca

effects for seed yield per plant and also possessed high

sca effects for at least one yield contributing

component.Such combination may be useful for isolating

superior Hybrids.

The cross combination ICP-2210A x ICPR-4531, ICP-

2098A x ICPR-4543, ICP-2098A x ICPR-4531 and ICP-2210A

x ICPR-4543 showing low sca effect and poor combiner

indicating that heterosis of these hybrid is might be exhibited

due to major role of additive variances. This combination

may be useful for isolating the desired transgressive

segregant by checking the restoring ability of cross

combination in every generation of transgressive

segregants.

With specific combining ability and general


Table 5. A summary table showing the best per se performance along

Characters Best specific combination Per se

performance

SCA gca effects of the

parents involved

Days to flowering

ICP-2210A x ICPL-87119 76.33 -2.28 A X G

ICP-2210A x ICPR-4531 79.00 4.52 A X G

ICP-2098A x ICPR-4531 79.00 -3.61 A X G

Days to maturity

ICP-2098A x ICPR-4531 134.00 -6.2 G X G

ICP-2210A x ICPL-87119 134.67 -2.47 G X G

ICP-2210A x ICPR-4531 138.00 1.20 G X G

Plant height (cm)

ICP-2210A x ICPL-87119 220.07 11.65 A X G

ICP-2210A x ICPR-4531 218.33 1.70 A X G

ICP-2098A x ICPL-87119 216.27 11.15 G X G

Branches per plant

ICP-2098A x ICPR-4531 11.80 1.20 * G X G

ICP-2210A x ICPL-87119 11.60 1.52 ** G X G

ICP-2098A x ICPL-87119 11.60 0.96 G X G

Pods per plant

ICP-2210A x ICPL-87119 322.40 -5.24 G X G

ICP-2210A x ICPR-4531 322.27 -2.86 G X G

ICP-2098A x ICPL-87119 317.53 14.87 G X G

Pod length (cm)

ICP-2210A x ICPL-87119 7.62 -0.03 A X G

ICP-2210A x ICPR-4531 7.61 -0.14 A X G

ICP-2098A x ICPL-87119 7.58 0.28 G X G

Seeds per pod

ICP-2210A x ICPL-87119 5.07 0.46 ** A X G

ICP-2210A x ICPR-4531 5.03 0.15 A X G

ICP-2098A x ICPL-87119 4.84 0.39 ** G X G

100-seed weight (g)

ICP-2210A x ICPR-4531 12.97 -0.68 A X G

ICP-2210A x ICPL-87119 12.84 0.61 A X G

ICP-2098A x ICPL-87119 12.65 1.21 * G X G

Seed yield per plant (g)

ICP-2210A x ICPL-87119 162.83 14.59 * G X G

ICP-2210A x ICPR-4531 160.61 -2.15 G X G

ICP-2098A x ICPL-87119 158.30 15.09 * G X G

Harvest index (%)

ICP-2210A x ICPL-87119 47.22 2.08 G X G

ICP-2210A x ICPR-4531 46.36 -5.07 G X G

ICP-2098A x ICPL-87119 45.54 2.09 G X G

Protein content (%)

ICP-2210A x ICPL-87119 21.64 0.97 G X G

ICP-2098A x ICPR-4531 21.20 2.10 ** G X A

ICP-2210A x ICPR-4531 21.18 -0.65 G X A

Pollen fertility (%)

ICP-2210A x ICPL-87119 94.65 2.87 * G X G

ICP-2210A x ICPR-4531 94.56 1.97 G X G

ICP-2098A x ICPL-87119 94.22 1.93 G X G


combining ability effects of the parents involved in the

combination for different characters in pigeonpea

LITERATURE CITED

Anonymous 2013. Departmeny of agriculture and cooperation,

Available at: http:www.dacnet.nic.in (Accessed: 15th December

2014).

Arbad, S. K.; Madrap, I. A. and Jadhav, P. 2013. Combining ability

for yield and yield contributing characters in pigeonpea.

International J. Agric. Sci., 9(1): 252-255.

Baskaran, K. and Muthiah, A. R. 2007. Studies on combining ability

in pigeonpea {Cajanus ajan(L.) Millsp.}. Legume Res., 30(1):

67 ·69.

Bharate, B. S.; Wadikar, P. B.; and Ghodke, M. K. 2011. Studies on

combining ability for yield and its components in pigeonpea.

Journal of Food Legumes., 24(2): 148-149.

Gopalan, C.; Ram Sastri, B. V. and Balasubramanian S. C. 1971.

Nutritive Values of Indian Foods.,National Institute of Nutrition

(NIN), Hyderabad, India, 204p.

Gupta, D. K.; Acharya, S. and Patel, J. B. 2011. Combining ability

and heterosis studies in pigeonpea using A2 cytoplasm from

Cajanus scarabaeoides as source of male sterility. Journal of

Food Legumes, 24(1): 58-64.

Kempthorne, O. 1957. An Introduction to Genetic Statistics, John

Wiley and sons, New York, pp.458-471.

Khorgade, P. W.; Wankhade, R. R.; and Wanjari, K.B. 2000.

Combining ability analysis in pigeonpea using male sterile lines.

Indian J. Agric. Res., 34(2): 112-116.

Kumar, C. V.; Sreelakshmi, C. H. and Verma, K. P. 2009. Studies on

combining ability and heterosis in pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan

L.]. Legume Res., 32(2): 92-97.

Pandey, P.; Tiwari, D.; Pandey, V. R. and Yadav, S. 2014. Studies on

gene action and combining ability of cytoplasmic-genic male

sterile hybrids in pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.].

Australian J. Crop Sci., 8(5): 814-821.

Patel, S. R.; Nizama, J. R.; Botve, R. R.; Chauhan, D. A. and Patel, A.

I. 2013. Combining ability analysis in pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan

(L.) Millsp.]. AGRES – An International e-Journal., 2(4): 428-

433.

Patil, S. B.; Hingane, A. J.; Sameerkumar, C. V.; Myer, M. and Saxena,

K. B. 2014. Combining ability studies of pigeonpea cytoplasmic

male sterile lines with an obcordate leaf marker. J. Plant Breeding

and Crop Sci., 6(7): 84-90.

Salunkhe, D. K.; Chavan, J. K. and Kadam, S. S. 1986. Pigeonpea as

important food source. CRC Critical Review Food Sci. and

Nutrition, 23(2): 103-141.

Saroj S. K.; Singh, M. N. and Singh, T. 2014. Combining ability,

heterosis and inbreeding depression analysis for using CMS lines

in long duration pigeonpea. International J. of Res. Studies in

Biosciences (IJRSB)., 2(10):7-15.

Saxena, K. B.; Singh, L. and Gupta, M. D. 1990. Variation for natural

out-crossing in pigeonpea.Euphytica, 46:143–148.

Sekhar, M. R.; Singh, S. P.; Mehra, R. B. and Govil, J. N. 2004.

Combining ability and heterosis in early maturing pigeonpea

[Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.] hybrids. Indian J. Genet. and Plant

Breeding., 64(3): 212–216.

Shobha, D. and Balan, A. 2010. Combining ability in CMS/GMS

based pigeonpea hybrids [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.]. Madras

Agric. J., 97 (1-3): 25-28.

Thiruvengadam, V. and Muthiah, A. R. 2012. Combining ability

analysis for yield and its components in pigeonpea using genetic

male sterile lines. Journal of Food Legumes, 25(3): 171-174.

Yamanura,; Lokesha R; Dharmaraj, P. S.; Muniswamy, S. and Diwan,

J. R. 2014. Estimation of heterosis, combining ability and gene

action in pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.]. Electronic

Journal of Plant Breeding., 5(2): 173-178.



Export Performance of OnionS.A. JAGATAP1, S.M. PERNE2 AND A.D. DARANDALE3

College of Agriculture,Sonai, Taluka Newasa District Ahmednagar, Maharashtraemail [email protected] ; [email protected]; [email protected]

ABSTRACTIndia is a traditional exporter of Onion. Immediately afterindependence in 1951-52. The country was exporting over5000 tones of onion stared expanding, rapidly during thesixties and reached a peak level of 427 thousand tones in1996-97. Over the years there has been a progressiveincrease in the export of onion from India. Being atraditional exporter India exported 1783820MTof onionduring 2008-09 with total value of 283428 Rs. lakh whichis record quantity after the export was canalized throughNAFED. The major export destinations of onion areBangladesh, Malaysia, UAE, Srilanka and Nepal.Until1998 onion exports from the country was canalized throughthe National Agricultural Co-operative MarketingFederation of India (NAFED). After 1998 other 12canalising agency were added by government of India foronion export. In a view of the above, the study wasundertaken with the following objectives.1. To study thegrowth in export of onion. 2. To study the instability inexport of onion 3. To examine the export competitivenessof onion.The study of growth in export of onion was studiedby using exponential function. The instability in exportwas studied by coefficient of variation and cuddy and dellinstability index. To study of export competitiveness NPC(Nominal protection coefficient) was used. Theperformance of exports with respect to growth in quantity,(8.32) value(14.94), and unit price (6.11) of export of onionshowed positively significant. Cuddy and Dell's instabilityindex showed that onion has high instability in export interms of quantity (67.07%), value (108.12%) and unitvalue (36.29). The NPC for Onion is 0.57%. Thus exportcompetitiveness indicated that there is wide scope forincreasing the export of onion.

Key words Export, Performance, Onion

India is second largest producer of vegetables in theworld after China. The production of vegetables in the Indiahas touched 129077 thousands MT in the year 2007-08.Indiais emerging as major producer of the vegetables whichprovide a remunerative means for diversification of land ofimproving productivity and returns. India has about 7981thousand hectares of land under the vegetables crops whichshare 38.7 percent to total land under the horticultural crops.(Horticultural database-2009). The production of vegetablescrops share 60.1percent to the total production ofhorticultural crops with the productivity of 16.2 thousandsMT per hectare.

Export of fresh vegetables from India has beenincreasing. Main vegetable exports from India are to southeast Asia and middle East ,except cucumber and gherkin.Onion is traditional export item followed by the Tomato

,Potato ,Cucumber ,Ghirkin .The export volume of freshvegetables 1670186.29 MT with the value of 182752.21 ‘Lakh in 2008-09.

India is a traditional exporter of Onion. Immediatelyafter independence in 1951-52.the country was exportingover 5000 tones of onion stared expanding, rapidly duringthe sixties and reached a peak level of 427 thousand tonesin 1996-97.Over the years there has been a progressiveincrease in the export of onion from India. Major exportingvarieties are Big - Pusa Red, Agrifound Light Red, N-2-4-1Agrifound Dark Red, N-53, Nasik Local, Bellary Red, etc.Small – Agrifound Rose, Bangalore Rose, Podisa, Multore,Nattu etc. India exported 1783820MTof onion during 2008-09 with total value of 283428 ‘ lakh which is record quantityafter the export was canalized through NAFED. The majorexport destinations of onion are Bangladesh, Malaysia,UAE, Srilanka and Nepal.

Objectives of studyIn a view of the above, the study was undertaken

with the following objectives.1. To study the growth in export of onion.2. To study the instability in export onion.3. To examine the export competitiveness of onion.

MATERIALS AND METHODSThe study was based on secondary data on export of

onion in terms of quantity, value and unit value which werecollected from the APEDA, NHRDF, NHB, USDApublications and Directorate General of CommercialIntelligence and Statistics, Government of India. The datacollected for the period of 1990-91 to 2009-10.divided intotwo sub periods (i. e.1990-91 to 1999-2000 and 2000-01 to2009-10).

Analytical Technique

Growth in export of onionTo study the growth in export of onion in terms of

quantity ,value and unit value compound growth rate wasestimated with the help of exponential function as follows.

Y = abt

Where,Y = Dependent variable for which growth rate was

estimateda = Interseptb = Regression coefficientt = timeCompound growth rate is estimated from the fitted

exponential regression parameter b.Compound growth rate(r) =[Antilog (log b) –1] x 100Instability in export of onion.




JAGATAP et al., Export Performance of Onion 3535

In order to study the variability in the export of onion,coefficient of variation and “Cuddy and Della’s instabilityindex” was used as the measures of variability.

The coefficient of variation (CV) was calculated bythe formula.

C.V (%) = —————— x 100 XWhere, C.V. = Coefficient of variation = Standard deviation

(X – X) 2

= ———————— n_X = Arithmetic mean

Cuddy and Dell index Coefficient of variation defined above does not take

trend components prevailing in time series data. In order tohave meaningful measures of instability, coefficient ofvariation is modified as proposed Cuddy and Dell.

The formula suggested by Cuddy and Dell (1978) wasused to compute the degree of variation around the trend.

Standard deviation Index of instability = ———————— x 100 x 1 – R2

MeanWhere,R2 is the coefficient of determinationExport competitivenessCompetitiveness is the objective of a nation to grown

successfully to maintain its share world trade. The exportcompetitiveness was studied using:

Pd

NPC = ———————— Pb

Where, NPC = Nominal protection coefficientPd = Domestic price of commodityPb = International price or Border price or reference

priceThe Wholesale price of Bombay market was taken for

onion, and potato as a domestic price.When there is no protection given to the commodity

its domestic price is equal to its border price and NPC isequal to 1. NPC more than one indicates that protection isgiven to the commodity and there for trade liberalizationwould reduce the domestic price: conversely NPC is lessthan one indicates that commodity is taxed and liberalizationwould raise the domestic price. (Tamanna Chaturved andChaurasia, 1999)


Growth of Onion ExportThe performance of onion exports with respect to

growth in quantity, value and unit value of export wasexamined for the period from 1990-91 to 2009-10 using anexponential growth model. The results are presented in Table1.

The performance of Indian onion with respect ofgrowth in quantity exhibited as positive growth rate of 8.32per cent annum, which was statistically significant at 1 percent level of significance while the export value recordedcomparatively higher annual growth rates at 14.94 per centwhich was statistically significant at 1 percent levelsignificance. Onion represent lower annual growth rate inper unit value which was 6.11 per cent per annum. Theregression coefficients were statistically significant at 1 percent level.

During the first period, the growth rate of exportquantity ,was negative i.e. -0.25 percent per anum whichwas non significant while as the growth rate of value andunit price of onion were 9.39 per cent and 9.68 per cent perannum respectively which was significant at 5 percent and1 percent level significance respectively. However thegrowth of export quantity during this period was negativeand non significant. This indicates that the export of onionwas decreasing during first period. In the second period,the growth rate of export quantity was positive andsignificant. The growth rate was 19.1 percent. The growthrate of export of onion in terms of value and per unit pricewas 26.08 percent and 5.94 per cent per annum respectively.

Table 1. Compound growth rates of quantity, value, unitprices onion exports from India. (1990-91 to2009-10)

Period Qty. Value Unit Price

1 Period – I (1991 -2000)

-0.25

9.39**

9.68***

2. Period – II (2001-2010)

19.01***

26.08***

5.94**

3. Overall Period (1991-2010)

8.32***

14.94***

6.11***

*** Significant at 1%** Significant at 5%* Significant at 10 %

Export Instability of onionIt could be seen from table 2 .1 that the quantum of

onion exported exhibited less variability with coefficient ofvariation at 19.65 per cent during first period while it washighest in the overall period with coefficient of variation at67.07 per cent during second period it was 52.22 per cent. .


As regards the export earning it terms of valuesshowed highest instability in the overall period with 108.12of coefficient of variation. when compared with first andsecond period study. The coefficient variation in first andsecond period was 29.89 per cent and 75.86 per centrespectively.

In terms of unit prices of exported onion, thecoefficient variation was 36.29 per cent during overall periodwhich was higher than first period and second period. Infirst period the coefficient of variation was 29.23 per centwhile during second period, the coefficient of variation .was 23.12 per cent.

In general export quantity and unit price witnessedlower instability as compared to export value.

Table 2. Coefficient of variation in exports of Onion(1990-91 to 2009-10).

Table 3. Cuddy and Dell’s instability indices for exportof Onion.(1991-2000 to 2001-10).

Cuddy and Dell’s Instability index for selectedvegetables exports

The coefficient of variation measures the absolutevariation while coefficient of instability, which is also calledas instability index measures the variation around the trend.It is close approximation of the average year-to-yearpercentage variation adjusted for trend. Thus the variationround the trend are more pronounced that the absolutevariation. The instability index computed using “Cuddy-Dells” instability index, are presented in Table .

OnionIt could be seen from table 2.2 the instability index of

onion for overall period in terms of quantity, value, and unitprice were 37.20 percent, 36.05 percent and 12.97 percentrespectively.

The quantum of onion exported exhibited lessvariability with coefficient of variation at 14.57 during secondperiod while it was highest it was highest in the overallperiod with coefficient of variation at 37.20 percent .duringfirst period it was 19.64 percent. As regard export earningsin terms of values showed highest instability in the overallperiod with 36.05 percent of coefficient of variation whencompared with first and second period study. Thecoefficient of variation in first and second period was17.27per cent and 19.25 per cent respectively.

In terms of unit prices of exported onion, thecoefficient of variation was 12.97 during overall period .Thehighest instability was noticed in second period at 14.08percent of coefficient of variation. The coefficient ofvariation during the first period was 9.17 percent.

Period Qty. Value Unit price

1 Period – I (1991-2000)

19.64 17.27 9.17

2 Period – II (2001-2010)

14.57 19.75 14.08

3 Overall Period (1991-2010)

37.20 36.05 12.97

Export competitiveness of onion exports

In the study, NPC as a measure of assess incompetitiveness was used as it measures the degree ofprotection to the domestically produced commodities NPCis generally estimated and presented in Table 3.

Table 4. Nominal protection coefficient (NPC) of Indianvegetables (2001 to 2010)

Table 3 revealed that nominal protection coefficientfor onion average was much below than unity (0.57%). Theresult showed that Indian onion prices were about 43 %per cent lower than world prices depicting moderatecompetitiveness of onion in international market. Thenominal protection coefficient ranges from 0.33 % to0.90%.The NPC highest in 2009(0.90%) and lowest in 2002and 2005(0.33%).

NPC for onion under exportable hypothesis remainedbelow one throughout the study period. This indicates thatthere was wide scope for increasing the export onion.

CONCLUSIONThe overall growth rate of export of onion in terms

quantity exhibited a positive and significant growth rate of8.32 per cent per annum, where as the export value variedcomparatively higher annual growth rate at 14.94 per centper annum. The growth rate of unit price showed positiveand significant growth rate of 6.11 percent. This indicatesthat onion export was increasing in India over the period oftime.

Period Qty. Value Unit price

1 Period – I (1991-2000)

19.65 29.18 29.23

2. Period – II (2001-2010)

52.22 75.86 23.12

3 Overall Period (1991-2010)

67.07 108.12 36.29

Sr.No. Year Onion

1. 2001 0.71

2. 2002 0.33

3. 2003 0.38

4. 2004 0.61

5. 2005 0.33

6. 2006 0.40

7. 2007 0.85

8. 2008 0.53

9. 2009 0.90

10. 2010 0.65

Average 0.57

JAGATAP et al., Export Performance of Onion 3537

The coefficient of variation for onion over the entireperiod in terms of quantity, value and per unit value were67.07,108.12,36.29 percent per anum which indicate higherinstability in value. In general export quantity and unit priceshows low insta The cuddy and dell instability index forexport of onion for overall period in case of quantity, valueand unit price was 37.20,36.05 12.97 percent respectively.

The average NPC for onion was less than (0.57) meansthe crop was export competitive.

This indicated that there was wide scope forincreasing the export of onion.

Until 1998 onion exports from the country wascanalized through the National Agricultural Co-operativeMarketing Federation of India (NAFED). In the year 1998the Govt. of India felt that only Nafed was not sufficient towork as a canalizing agency & then the Govt. of India hasappointed other 12 canalizing agencies (except NAFED)for onion export. Also earlier the onion export was restrictedby the Govt. of India (GOI) and controlled through singlecanalizing agency & therefore the export was not reachedto its potential. Due to increase in production of onion inthe country led by Maharashtra for decontrol of exports.Considering this demand, the Govt. of India has removed

all the quantity restrictions on onion export from 09/05/2003.

Thus the study shows that there is increase in exportof onion by increasing 12 canalising agency and removalof quality restrictions and there is scope for increasing onionexport.

LITERATURE CITEDAPEDA :Agricultural and Processed Product and Export

Development AuthorityNHB: National horticulture BoardNHRDF:National Horticulture Resorce Development fedarationShrinivasmurthy, D. and, K.V.Subramanyam. 1999. Growth and

instability in export of onion from India. Indian J. Agril. Mktg.13(3): 21-27

Siddayya and AtteriB.R (2011) Export competitiveness of freshfruits and vegetables under cost compliance, Internat.res.j. aric.Eco.and Stat:15-18

USDA: United State Department of AgricultureVedamurthy K.B. and Vijay Laxmi Pandey. 2010. Performance and

competitiveness of India’s onion exports. Indian J. Agril. Mktg.24(1)87-95

Wadkar 2003.Export competitiveness of Indian cutflowers. IndianJ. Agril. Mktg. (conf.Spl).17:180



SHORT COMMUNICATION

Standardization/optimization of High Quality DNA Isolation Protocal by usingCTAB MethodTHOMBARE DEVIDAS*, PERWEEN SABIHA, PRASAD ARCHANA AND VERULKAR SATISH

Department of Plant Molecular Biology and Biotechnology,College of Agriculture Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidylaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh*email : [email protected]

ABSTRACTThe rice is important food in world population need toimproved crops and food productivity. DNA based breedingselection is much more reliable other than traditionalbreeding methods. Howere, mangroves and salt marshspecies are known to synthesize a wide spectrum ofpolysaccharides and polyphenols including ûavonoids andother secondary metabolites which interfere with theextraction of genomic DNA. The extraction of DNA is oftenthe most time consuming and laborious step in high-through put molecular genetic analysis. This study a rapidand reliable cetyl trimethylammonium bromide (CTAB)protocol suited specifically for extracting genomic DNAfrom rice plants. The purity of extracted DNA was excellentas evident by A260/A280 ratio ranging from 1.78 to 1.84and A260/A230 ratio was good quality and yieldassessments, electrophoresis was done of all DNA samplesin 0.8% agarose gel, stained with Ethidium Bromide andbands were observed in gel documentation system.

Key words DNA extraction, high-throughput PCR,marker assisted selection, gene mapping

Rice has become an important food for the people allover the world. The world population is rapidly growingday by day, researchers are trying to improve riceproduction. Therefore, scientists have started to usebreeding program based on molecular marker fordevelopment of new variety. Another major goal of breedingprograms is investigate genetic diversity and relationshipsamong breeding lines in rice. So many factors areresponsible for shearing of DNA during isolation andextraction time. DNA degration due to endonucleases isone such problem for the isolation and puriûcation of highmolecular weight DNA from rice plant, which directly orindirectly interfere with the enzymatic reactions.

The extraction of DNA from plant tissue can varydepends on the ege of plant material used. Any mechanicalmeans of breaking down the cell wall and membranes toallow access to nuclear material. Several researchers haveattempted to eliminate the use of hazardous chemicals,expensive kits, equipment, and labour-intensive steps forhigh throughput DNA extraction. In most cases this involvesthe use of liquid nitrogen flash freezing followed by grindingthe frozen tissue with a mortar and pestle. Liquid nitrogenis difficult to handle and it is dangerous in an openlaboratory environment such as a classroom. For this reasonwe have modified a very simple plant DNA extractionprotocol to use fresh tissue. The protocols and results arepresented here.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Plant materialsRice seeds were germinated in an incubator for 2 to 3

days. After germinating the seeds were sowed into paddyfields in the department of Plant Molecular Biology andBiotechnology IGKV, Raipur. C. G.

Reagents1. Micro-centrifuge tubes2. Mortar and Pestle3. Absolute Ethanol (ice cold)4. 70 % Ethanol (ice cold)5. 55 °C water bath6. Chloroform: Iso Amyl Alcohol (24:1)7. Autoclaved Water (sterile)8. Agarose9. 6x Loading Buffer10. 1x TBE solution11. Agarose gel electrophoresis system12. Ethidium Bromide solution.

CTAB Buffer5 g CTAB and 20.35 g NaCL were dissolved in 200 ml

double distilled water. Later 25 ml 1 M tris HCL and 10 ml 0.5M EDTA was added and stirred vigorously on a magneticstirrer. Volume was made up to 250 ml and stored at roomtemperature. 20 ul/ 20 ml 2- mercaptoethanol was addedprior to used.

1 M Tris pH 8.0Dissolve 121.1 g of Tris base in 800 ml of H2O. Adjust

pH to 8.0 by adding 42 ml of concentrated HCL. Allow thesolution to cool to room temperature before making thefinal adjustments to the pH. Adjust the volume to 1 L withH2O. Sterilize using an autoclave.

TE Buffer (100 ml)10 mM Tris (pH 8.0) (Use 1 M stock)2 mM EDTA (Use 0.5 M stock)

5x TBE buffer54 g Tris base27.5 g boric acid20 ml of 0.5M EDTA (pH 8.0)Make up to 1L with water. To make a 0.5x working

solution, do a 1:10 dilution of the concentrated stock.


DEVIDAS et al., Standardization/optimization of High Quality DNA Isolation Protocal by using CTAB Method 3539

Sample Name Nucleic acid Unit Ratio 260/280 Sample-1 2012.3 ng/ul 1.95 Sample-2 1216.5 ng/ul 1.85 Sample-3 500.1 ng/ul 1.83 Sample-4 637.4 ng/ul 1.86 Sample-5 450.2 ng/ul 1.82 Sample-6 400.3 ng/ul 1.76

RNase A

Stock solutions1. 10 mM Tris HCL (pH 7.5)2. 15 mM Nacl

1 % Agarose gel1 g Agarose dissolved in 100 ml TBE

CTAB Method

Procedure1. Cut leaves to small pieces in a mortar and pestle; add

1 ml of CTAB buffer (Add 500 ul more CTAB ifrequired) to CTAB add 1% PVP (1g in 100ml) andBeta-mecaptoethanol 1 ul/ml of buffer.

2. Transfer homogenate to 2 ml tubes; incubate at 65 °Con water bath for 15-20 minutes.

3. Allow to cool & then add 700 ul of Chloroform: IsoamylAlcohol (CIA-24:1) shake vigorously to mixed andleave for another 10 minutes.

4. The contents were shaken by hands intermittentlyand kept at room temperature for 15minutes.

5. Then tubes were centrifuge at 14,000 rpm for 5 minutesand collect the supernatant in fresh 1.5 ml Eppendorftube

6. Add double volume of 100% chilled Iso-Propanol andmix it by inverting the tube & Incubate for 1 hr at -20°C or 4 °C over night.

7. The sample was centrifuge for 10 min at 14000 rpm at5 0C. & Wash the pellet with 70% ethanol & Centrifuge

it for 3 min (14000 rpm), decant the ethanol8. Pallets were dissolved in 200 ul of TE buffer and add

1 ml of absolute ethanol.9. Then again centrifuge at 14000 rpm at 5 0C for 3 minutes.10. DNA pellet was air dried for 30 minutes then dissolved

in 50-100 ul of TE buffer.11. Proceed for DNA quantification.

DNA QuantificationThe DNA concentration was quantified using a Nano

Drop Spectrophotometer and some statistical analysis wasperformed to investigate the optimum age and EDTAconcentration among all the treatments. The quality ofgenomic DNA was determined in ratio absorbance of A260/A280 range of 1.85 (Table.1) is the good qulity of DNAusing NanoDrop reading.

DNA Concentration and QualityThe concentration and quality of extracted rice DNA

were confirmed by using 0.8% (w/v) agarose gel.

Agarose Gel1. Cast a 0.8 % (w/v) regular agarose gel in 1X TBE2. Place 2 µL of extracted DNA and 3 µL loading dye.3. Run the gel for 30 min. at 65v.4. Stain gel and view result.

RESULT AND DISCUSIONPlant genomic DNA extraction did not show promising

results for mangroves and salt marsh species as evident by

Table 1. DNA concentration by using Nano Drop Spectrophotometer

Fig. 1. Preparation of genomic DNA by CTAB buffer.

Genomic DNA


the presence of sticky polysaccharides in the pellet andsheared band in the agarose gel. We encountered so manydifficulties from the first step of cell lysis to DNA separationin the supernatant and subsequent reactions when theCTAB DNA extraction method.

The highly viscous and sticky pellets were difficult tohandle and brownish pellet indicated contamination byphenolic compounds in your sample. Therefore, highconcentration of â-mercaptoethanol was use in protocolfor good and high quality DNA extraction by using CTABmethod.

The success of the optimized extraction method inobtaining high quality genomic DNA from rice plants. Theaddition of NaCl at concentrations higher than 0.5 M, alongwith CTAB is known to remove polysaccharides duringDNA extraction procees.

CONCLUSSIONA simple, safe, reliable and cost effective CTAB

method of DNA extraction that provides high quality DNAisolation from mangroves and salt marsh plants containinghigh concentrations of polysaccharide and polyphenoliccompounds. The resulting optimized CTAB protocol forwithout used of liquid nitrogen with good quality andquantity of genomic DNA extraction for sequencing

purpose. This method is recommded of low technologylaboratories for high throughput sample preparationsuitable for various molecular study.

LITERATURE CITEDChen W Y, Bao J S, Zhou X S, Shu Q Y. 2005. A simplified rice DNA

extraction protocol for PCR analysis. Chin J Rice Sci, 19(6):561–563. (in Chinese with English abstract).

Chuan, S.U.N., HE, Y.H., Gang, C.H.E.N., RAO, Y.C., ZHANG,G.H., GAO, Z.Y., Jian, L.I.U., JU, P.N., Jiang, H.U., GUO, L.B.and Qian, Q.I.A.N., 2010. A simple method for preparation ofrice genomic DNA. Rice Science, 17(4), pp.326-329.

S. Porebski, L. G. Bailey, and B. R. Baum, “Modification of a CTABDNA extraction protocol for plants containing highpolysaccharide and polyphenol components,” Plant MolecularBiology Reporter, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 8–15, 1997.

Sahu, S.K., Thangaraj, M. and Kathiresan, K., 2012. DNA extractionprotocol for plants with high levels of secondary metabolitesand polysaccharides without using liquid nitrogen andphenol. ISRN Molecular Biology, 2012.

Xin, Z. and Chen, J., 2012. A high throughput DNA extractionmethod with high yield and quality. Plant Methods, 8(1), p.26.

Yari, H., Emami, A., Khosravi, H.R.M. and Pourmehdi, S., 2013.Optimization of a rapid DNA extraction protocol in rice focusingon age of plant and EDTA concentration. Journal of Medicaland Bioengineering 2(3).



SHORT COMMUNICATION

Impact of Organic Farming on Soil HealthR. R. SISODIYA, A. R. KASWALA, PRAMOD KUMAR DUBEY, P. D. GOLAKIYA AND P. S. PATEL

Department of Agricultural Chemistry and Soil Science,ASPEE College of Horticulture and Forestry,Navsari Agricultural University, Navsariemail : [email protected]

ABSTRACTThe most important challenge in India has been to produceenough food for the growing population. In the recent yearsoil fertility and productivity has been decline due to lowerused of organic manures, intensive farming and higherused of fertilizer, pesticides, and other chemicals. Thehigh-yielding varieties are being used with infusion ofirrigation water, fertilizers, or pesticides. This helped thecountry develop a food surplus as well as contributing toconcerns of soil health, environmental pollution, pesticidetoxicity, and sustainability of agricultural production.Scientists and policy planners are, therefore, reassessingagricultural practices which relied more on biologicalinputs rather than heavy usage of chemical fertilizers andpesticides. Organic farming can provide quality foodwithout adversely affecting the soil’s health and theenvironment; however, a concern is whether large-scaleorganic farming will produce enough food for India’s largepopulation. Certified organic products including allvarieties of food products including basmati rice, pulses,honey, tea, spices, coffee, oilseeds, fruits, cereals, herbalmedicines, and their value-added products are produced inIndia. Non edible organic products include cotton,garments, cosmetics, functional food products, body careproducts, and similar products. The production of theseorganic crops and products is reviewed with regard tosustainable agriculture in northern India.

Keywords Impact, Organic Farming, Soil Health

Organic farming is a method in which encourages thesustainable agriculture by locally available resources toenhance the biological cycle in the nature. It is seeks toavoid the use of chemical fertilizer, pesticides, herbicides.As of March 2014, India had 4.72 million ha under an organiccertification process, including 0.6 million ha of cultivatedagricultural land and 4.12 million ha of wild harvest collectionforest area (National Horticulture Board 2016). The mainaim of organic farming is the minimum use of off-farmresources, production of nutritious and quality food, controlof soil and water pollution and management of soil health.

Nutrient management with different organic sources:The main principles of organic farming is managing

soil health, healthy soil lies healthy plant. Well balancedphysical, chemical or biological property easily enhancedby organic farming. The chemical like fertilizer, pesticides,insecticides, growth regulators and herbicides are veryharmful for soil biological property. There is wide range ofnutrient supplement which are permitted in organic farming

that correct deficiency or imbalance of nutrient.The supplement nutrient supply over period of time

to enhance and maintenance of biological cycle. Thenutrient supplement additives like FYM, compost,vermicompost, nadep compost and also liquid formulationlike biofertilizer, panch-gavya, jivamrit, amritpani, vermiwash.Mulching is a method of covering the soil with layer ofbiomass. Mulching materials like weeds, paddy straw orwheat straw, rice husk, groundnut husk, coconut coir,banana leaves, mulching suppress the weed growth,reduced evaporation and maintained soil moisture, humusformation and slowly release of nutrient, supply food formicroorganism, increase biological activity, reduce crustformation, maintained soil temperature and increaseearthworm activity.

Effect of Organic Nutrition on soil fertilityIncorporation of organic matters has been shown an

a great effect to improve soil structure and water retention,increase infiltration rates and decrease bulk density. Thiskind of fertilization may improve the physical and biologicalproperties of the soil and may serve as a source of mineralnutrients. Organic manure is generally applied to maintainsoil health and sustainability in intense cropping systems.The organic matter after decomposition release macro andmicronutrients to the soil solution, which becomes availableto the plants, resulting in higher uptake. Organic farmingwas capable of sustaining higher crop productivity andimproving soil quality and productivity by manipulatingthe soil properties on long term basis. The organic farmingpractices led to an increase in the organic carbon, solublephosphorus, exchangeable potassium, and pH and alsothe reserve pool of stored nutrients and maintainedrelativity stable EC level.

Organic manure would have improved the soilphysical condition and increased nutrient availabilityresulting in a better vegetative growth and increased yield.The better growth and development of plants withapplication of farm yard manure might be due to increasedavailability of nitrogen as well as other required nutrientsto the plants throughout the fruiting season. This may bedue to increased vegetative and reproductive growth ofplant and better nutrient supply with the application ofFYM. It not only adds organic matter and macro and micronutrients to soil but also improves the physico-chemicalproperties of soil and hence provides better conditions forplant growth and development.

The addition of carbonaceous materials such as straw,wood, bark, sawdust, or corn cobs helped the compostingcharacteristics of manure. These materials reduced water



content and raised the C: N ratio. However, under Indianconditions, joint composting of the manure slurries withplant residues was more viable and profitable than itsseparate composting. Use of FYM and green manuremaintained high levels of Zn, Fe, Cu, and Mn in rice-wheatrotation. Organic farming improved organic matter contentand labile status of nutrients and also soil physicochemicalproperties. The decline in soil reaction might be due toorganic compounds added to the soil in the form of greenas well as root biomass which produced more humus andorganic acids on decomposition.

Application of organic matter improves soil healthby improving the physico-chemical and biological activitiesand biofertilizer was found to enhance the rate ofmineralization and availability of the nutrients, furtherenhancing plant growth.

Effect of organic matter on nutrient supplying power ofsoil:

The FYM is capable of supplying adequate macroand micro plant nutrients to the crop during whole cropperiod and make available more nutrients to the plant fromsoil with solubilization effect of plant nutrients leads toincreased uptake of nutrients. Many researchers reportedthat in an organically managed field activity of earth wormis higher than in inorganic agriculture. In the biodegradationprocess earthworms and microbes work together andproduce vermicompost, which is the worm fecal matter withworm casts. Vermicompost provided macro elements suchas N, P, K, Ca, and Mg and microelements such as Fe, Mo,Zn, and Cu.

Due to narrower range of C/N ratios of organic manure,application of organic manure hastens the mineralizationrate, which in turn increases the mineralizable N content insoil. Solubilization of phosphorus to make it available toplants is the most important aspects of fertilizer managementin fruit trees. Due to low initial fertility status of orchardsoils of semiarid regions, application of organic manuremay be fruitful as it releases phosphate ions from soil ionexchange sites and increases their concentration in soilsolution. Organic manure is also rich in severalmicroorganisms that produce a number of organic acidsespecially humic acid and oxalic acid, which facilitates thesolubilization of bound phosphorus and potassium in soil.

The contribution of non-symbiotic nitrogen fixingmicroorganisms to the supply of fixed nitrogen in agriculturalsoils and natural ecosystems is well recognized.Microorganisms including Azotobacter as non-symbioticnitrogen fixers and other bacteria are continuously beingisolated from various ecosystems and their performance inthe laboratory and field conditions are assessed. Many

experiments in greenhouses and in field conditions haveshown that several crops respond positively to microbialinoculation. Enhancement and maintenance of soil fertilitythrough microorganisms will be an important issue in futureagriculture. Hence, several beneficial microorganisms caneffectively be used as a chemical fertilizer alternative tominimize the application of inorganic fertilizers.

Effect of Organic Nutrition on Soil BiologicalProperties:

Compost contains bacterial, actinomycetes, andfungi; hence, a fresh supply of humic material not onlyadded microorganisms but also stimulated them. Besides,compost played an important role in control of plantnematodes and in mitigating the effect of pesticides throughsorption. Sorption is the most important interaction betweensoil/organic matter and pesticides and limits degradationas well as transport in soil.

Transformation of nutrients in soil is an enzymemediated biochemical process facilitated by a group ofmicroorganisms. Application of organic matter increasesnutrient content enhances soil respiration and differentenzymatic activities and activates microorganisms in soildemonstrated that the presence of several enzymes inorganic matter ultimately lead to improvement in health ofthe soil. Composting material added plenty of carbon andthus increased heterotrophic bacteria and fungi in soil andfurther increased the activity of soil enzymes responsiblefor the conversion of unavailable to available form ofnutrients.

Microbial communities are important for thefunctioning of the ecosystem both in relation to directinteractions with plants and with regard to nutrient andorganic matter cycling. Application of microbial inoculantscontributes significantly to the soil surface ecosystem bytheir organic acid secretions in decomposing soil organicmatter, nutrient chelation, fixation and hormonal action.Agricultural practices have had an impact on soil bio-physiochemical properties. Densities of bacteria, protozoa,nematodes, and arthropods in soils under organic farmingwere higher than under conventional farming.

CONCLUSIONSThe present study reveals that application of organic

and biofertilizer are more beneficial for quality productionand improve soil properties and soil health. Therefore, thisapproach can be spread among farmers to improve the soilhealth and production.

LITERATURE CITEDDatabase of National Horticulture Board, 2016. Ministry of

Agriculture, Govt. of India.


AUTHOR INDEX

Archana, Prasad 3538

Bhatt, H. G. 3519

Chauhan, D.A. 3527

Darandale, A.D. 3534

Devidas, Thombare 3538

Dhanalakshmi, B. 3524

Dubey, Pramod Kumar 3541

Golakiya, P. D. 3541

Jagatap, S.A. 3534

Karpoora, N. 3524

Kaswala, A. R. 3541

Mahadevaswamy, G. 3511

Navarasam, R. 3524

Pandian, Sundara 3524

Pargi, Jigisha 3519

Patel, M.B. 3527

Patel, P. S. 3541

Patel, P.K. 3527

Patil, A.B. 3527

Perne, S.M. 3534

Riyas, M. Abdul 3524

Sabiha, Perween 3538

Satish, Verulkar 3538

Sisodiya, R. R. 3541

Vijayalakshmi, G. 3511

Instruction to the Authorswww.trendsinbiosciencesjournal.com

The journal of Trends in Biosciences is essentially devoted to the publication of original research papers on allaspects of biosciences. All papers and short communication submitted to Trends in Biosciences must be unpublishedoriginal works. The manuscripts in English should be in a finished form and typed on one side of A4 size paper and doublespaced throughout with ample margins. Pages should be numbered consecutively beginning from the title page.

Research Papers: Each full length of research papers should be covered within 1500 words including tables and illustrations.Short communication should be within 175 words including tables, figures and references, in case of exceeding the limit,payment has to be made for extra materials by the authors. Correct language is the responsibility of the author. No editingor materials changes at the proof stage will be permitted. While short communication will have only title, authors name,address and e-mail followed by text and references. In case of full length paper authors should have the followingheadings.

Title : The title to be typed in capital and small letters, author names (all capital) and affiliation (capital and small letterswith italics fonts). Give e-mail address in italic fonts also. Manuscript must confirm to the journal style (see latest issue)

ABSTRACT : The abstract should indicate the main findings of the papers and typed in bold, single space. It should benot more than 150 words. The abstract should be typed before the main text and intended ca. 2cm to the right of it.

Key words 5-6 key words in italics should be given.

Tables and figures : Table should be descriptive without and references to the text with heading in bold letters. Each tableshould be typed on a separate sheet. Figures whether line drawing or graph should be of good quality. Legends to figuresshould be given on a separate sheet. Tables and figures should be numbered consequently in Arabic numerals (Table 1.,Table 2., Fig.1., Fig.2.- 3) can be identified on the back by name (s) of the author(s).

Introduction : This should be brief and related to aim of the study. The review of the literature should be pertinent to thetheme of the paper. Extensive review and unnecessary details of earlier work should be avoided. Heading “introduction”should not be written.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: When methods are well known, citation of the standard work is sufficient. All measurementshould be in metric units.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The result should be supported by brief and adequate tables, graphs and charts, whereverneeded.

LITERATURE CITED: In the text, references should be cited as follows: two authors (Ali, and Pervez, 2005), three or moreauthors (Gaugler, et al., 2001). All references made in the text must be listed under LITERATURE CITED at the end of thetext. References should be listed alphabetically by the authors, followed by the year of the publication. Journal titlesshould be cited in full and in italics, while for books the place of the publication should precede the name of thepublisher,Example Strong, D.R. 2002. Population of entomopathogenic nematodes in food webs. In: EntomopathogenicNematology,(ed.Randy Gaugler) CAB International, ix + 387. pp. 225-240.Fox, P.C. and Atkinson, H.J. 1984. Glucosephosphate isomerase polymorphism in field population of the potato cyst nematode, Globedera rostochiensis and G.pallida. Annals of Applied Biology, 104(1):503-506.

Submission of Manuscript: The manuscript can be submitted for publication through our websitewww.trendsinbiosciencesjournal.com webpage - Online Article Submission or through email [email protected].

Copyright: copyright © of all papers published in Trends in Biosciences, acceptance of manuscript for Trends in Biosciences,automatically transfers the copyright to Trends in Biosciences The use of trade name or a propriety product does notconstitute a guarantee of the product by the author (s) or the society and does not simply its approval to the exclusion ofthe products that may be suitable.

http://www.trendsinbiosciencesjournal.com


Subscription Order Form

Name : ………………………………………………………………..............................................................

Designation : ………………………………………………………………..............................................................

Organization : ………………………………………………………………………….................................................

Mailing Address : ………………………………………………………………………….................................................

City ............................................................................ State ..........................................................................

Pin .............................................................................. Country ..........................................................................

Phone ........................................................................ Mobile ...........................................................................

E-mail ........................................................................ Fax ...................................................................................

Subscription period January- December (Year)

Annual Subscription Rates for 2018 :

Author’s Contribution : Rs. 1700/paper (for single author) and Rs. 800/paper for additional authors.** Same for SAARC,countries only soft copy

Terms and Conditions:

1. Online subscription includes online access

2. Print subscription is volume based where as online subscription is Calendar year based

3. Online subscription includes current subscription + Back Files (for last two years)

4. For Online & Print Subscription contact at

Dr. R. AhmadEditor in ChiefFlat no B-1 , Ivory -6 Apartment, Kohefiza,Bhopal- 462001 , M.P., IndiaPH- 09826550460, 09919388690E-mail: [email protected] should be in favour of “Trends in Biosciences”(State Bank of India, Kalyanpur, Kanpur, U.P.Branch Code 01962, A/c No. 31575871348)

Kindly Note :For prompt delivery and communication please provide e-mail ID, mobile no. and complete contact details with pincode.

Individual Institutional Single article Version INDIAN

in Rs./issue FOREIGN

in US$/issue INDIAN

in Rs. FOREIGN

in US$ INDIAN

in Rs. FOREIGN

in US$ *Print /Number 6000* 50 6000 200 50 10 **Online 500 50 2500 200 150 25


Date post:	21-Feb-2022
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	10 times
Download:	0 times

in Biosciences

Documents