Himachal Journal of Agricultural Research Vol. 29 (1&2) : 35-42, 2003
Performance studies of some garlic (Allium sativum L.) clones
Yudhvir Singh and Ramesh Chand
Department of Vegetable Science & Floriculture
CSK H.P. Krishi Vishvavidyalaya, Palampur
Abstract
Performance of thirty varieties/clones of garlic (Allium sativum L.) was evaluated during Rabi season 2001-2002. Results revealed that Agrifound Parvati produced significantly maximum bulb yield followed by BJ-1 and GHC-1.
Introduction
Garlic is the second most important cultivated Allium after onion and used as a spice, flavouring agent and pharmaceutical preparations. It is a good foreign exchange earner crop as large quantities of garlic are exported every year. As this crop is propagated only vegetatively by division of the ground bulbs into bulblets called cloves, it is inevitable to have maximum number of clones and their thorough evaluation for different traits. Evidence of hybridity exists even at chromosomal level. Existence of this natural variation even in respect of the plant parts that is economically important suggests the possibility of improvement in garlic. Once quantitatively and qualitatively superior clones are identified, their maintenance through vegetative propagation is assured. Therefore, the present investigations were undertaken to select clones having high bulb yield with large sized cloves per bulb.
Materials and Methods
To study the performance of different clones, an experiment was conducted at the Experimental farm of Department of Vegetable Science and Floriculture CSK HPKV, Palampur during Rabi season of 2001-2002. The experiment was laid out on 25th day of September, 2001 with thirty diverse clones of garlic, replicated thrice in randomized block design. Each clone was planted by dibbling in a plot size of 1 x 1 meter with a spacing of 20 x 10 cm between and within rows, respectively. Thus there were 50 plants in each plot. Recommended cultural operations were carried out to ensure a healthy crop growth and development. Observations were recorded on ten randomly selected plants in each replication for all the characters. Yield was recorded after curing the bulbs in shade for a week in order to obviate the moisture variation. For per cent dry matter 100 g samples of cloves were kept in oven at 60°C and dried, till weight of cloves became constant. TSS was measured with Hand Refractometer. The data were analysed statistically according to the method outlined by Panse and Sukhatme (1984).
Results and Discussion
The clones of garlic varied with regard to placement of bulbils and colour of scale of cloves. The bublils formation was absent in Agrifound Parvati, GHC-1 and BJ-I. In clones viz., G-313, G-1, G-50, G-I(B), K. local (A) and HPG-7, bulbils were formed at the top in an umble whereas, bulbils were formed at the centre of pseudostem in the remaining clones. Clove scale colour was fully white in clones viz., G-4, G-41, HPG-1, VLG-8, G-50, HPG-7, G-313 and G-1 (B) and it was fully purple in HPG-9, PG-1 (A), FG-1, HPG-8, HPG-10, HPG-4 and Sel. 360 (B) white, it was purple- white mixed in the remaining clones. Since fully white or purple-white mixed colour is preferred over fully purple colour, none of the clones having fully purple clove scale colour produced bulbils at the top in an umble.
The data exhibited significant variation in different clones for different characters (Table 1). Plant height was maximum (77.20 cm) in HPG-12 which was at par with HPG-3 and DG-I. The smallest plants (57.73 cm) were measure in G-4 which were at par with PG-1(A). Maximum number of leaves per plant (11.10) was noted in GHC-1 which was at par with Agrifound Parvati and minimum leaves per plant (7.20) was recorded in K. local (A) which was at par with VLG-8 and PG-I(A). Leaf length (46.26 cm) was maximum in HPG-12 which was at par with HPG-13 and HPG-3. Maximum leaf breadth (2.38 cm) was recorded in BJ-1 which was at par with Agrifound Parvati and GHC-1. Bulb weight (53.17 g) was highest in Agrifound Parvati and was significantly higher to all the remaining clones. The highest polar bulb diameter (4.30 cm) was observed in HPG-12 which was at par with HPG-2 and G-41. Equatorial bulb diameter (5.53 cm) was maximum in Agrifound Parvati and at par with BJ-1 and GHC-1. The maximum number of cloves per bulb recorded was highest in K. local (B) (30.77) and was at par with HPG-1 and G-313. Average clove weight (3.63 g) was maximum in Agrifound Parvati and was at par with GHC-1. Clove length (2.70 cm) was maximum in Agrifound Parvati and GHC-1 which was at par with G-41, HPG-12, HPG-3 and BJ-1. The highest clove diameter (1.65 cm) was noticed in Agrifound Parvati which was at par with GHC-1, HPG-3 and HPG-6. Maximum number of bulbils and average weight of bulbils per plant were recorded in G-1 and HPG-6, respectively. Agrifound Parvati, BJ-1 and GHC-1 took maximum days (224) to maturity. The maximum TSS (47.75 %) was observed in HPG-4 and was at par with HPG-3. HPG-4 contained highest dry matter (45.80 %) and was at par with HPG-9, Sel. 360 (B), HPG-6, G-50 and HPG-3. The results revealed that the garlic cultivar Agrifound Parvati was significantly superior for yield of bulbs (365.83 q/ha) as compared to all other clones. The next superior cultivar was BJ-1 (238.75 q/ha) followed by GHC-1 (236.67 q/ha). The phenotypic and genotypic correlations of some quality traits
Table 1. Mean performance of garlic genotypes in relation to different horticultural traits
------
Genotype Plant No. of Leaf Leaf Bulb Polar Equatorial No. of Av. weight Clove Colve No. of Av. weight Days TSS Dry Yield
height leaves/ length breadth weight bulb bulb diam- cloves/ of clove length diameter bulbils/ of bulbils/ to (%) matter (q/ha)
(cm) plant (cm) (cm) (g) diame- eter (cm) bulb of (g) (cm) (cm) plant plant (g) maturity (%)
------
1 2 3 4 5 6 78 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
------
Agrifound64.2710.5040.432.3353.173.755.5314.303.632.701.650.000.0022440.8336.54265.83
Parvati(1.00)(1.00)
DG-173.778.8343.121.4527.503.894.5219.571.282.401.123.620.9321843.1741.93137.50
(2.15)(1.39)
G-31367.609.0337.341.1729.233.554.5528.231.022.061.045.711.0420945.5043.14146.17
(2.59)(1.42)
G-I68.578.4037.571.2230.333.584.5124.601.092.051.057.351.1920946.1742.20151.67
(2.89)(1.48)
G-5068.108.7737.541.1928.733.404.2827.631.011.981.013.450.7720945.3343.54143.67
(2.11)(1.33)
G-4164.508.0739.081.3331.674.014.3113.612.052.671.294.001.3020944.1743.30158.33
(2.23)(1.52)
VLG-868.537.9040.791.2423.273.394.0924.870.942.160.994.670.9921842.0040.96116.33
(2.38)(1.41)
Plp G-9572.238.5042.811.7328.073.884.2316.001.582.321.283.881.4121844.2541.99140.33
(2.21)(1.55)
PG-1(B)65.309.0738.551.7625.173.794.1210.472.172.341.503.701.4020942.4239.79125.83
(2.17)(1.55)
Contd.
------
1 2 3 4 5 6 78 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
------
PG-1 (A)61.007.5336.831.1425.334.004.219.462.332.531.554.801.3321846.0041.75126.67
(2.41)(1.53)
K. local (B)68.478.3741.941.2722.733.124.0130.770.671.890.805.700.7121842.3339.77113.67
(2.59)(1.31)
Sel.360(B)68.408.2742.451.4527.673.674.2520.801.252.291.133.501.2221845.6743.79138.33
(2.12)(1.49)
G-1 (B)63.809.2735.911.1923.273.254.1123.230.961.930.981.850.5320945.1743.28116.33
(1.69)(1.24)
BJ-I63.2010.0740.252.3847.633.655.2613.403.052.601.570.000.0022442.3337.63238.15
(1.00)(1.00)
G-457.737.6734.011.1624.703.844.0610.982.032.671.352.530.6320942.3341.79123.50
(1.88)(1.27)
K. local (A)63.977.2038.751.1522.873.083.9615.201.522.121.213.470.9620945.8342.93114.33
(2.11)(1.41)
HPG-I69.278.1041.201.2122.673.194.1330.670.751.980.955.500.6021843.0841.23113.33
(2.55)(1.27)
GHC-I69.1011.1043.222.3147.333.555.2012.903.482.701.600.000.0022442.8338.01236.67
(1.00)(1.00)
HPG-272.239.1042.851.8432.004.254.5515.471.832.461.364.231.8321844.5040.41160.00
(2.29) (1.67)
Contd.
------
1 2 3 4 5 6 78 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
------
HPG-374.339.7345.091.7929.674.104.499.772.432.621.615.663.0521846.7543.50148.33
(2.58)(2.01)
HPG-470.938.8043.651.5328.503.874.4117.601.522.491.195.201.7021847.7545.80142.50
(2.49)(1.64)
HPG-567.308.6041.681.6826.403.934.4215.971.452.331.314.901.7121843.0042.47132.00
(2.43)(1.65)
HPG-670.009.2041.911.5925.174.094.319.102.492.391.597.083.3421845.5043.69125.83
(2.84)(2.08)
HPG-767.438.6035.851.1628.573.434.1926.500.932.010.963.290.6120946.0042.88142.83
(2.07)(1.26)
HPG-866.378.6341.981.6529.404.124.7215.321.532.471.293.251.6221845.4241.40147.00
(2.06)(1.62)
HPG-965.337.9737.921.0820.903.644.0615.271.272.311.185.501.9520945.9244.29104.50
(2.55)(1.73)
HPG-1062.678.3040.251.3327.833.614.1815.671.622.301.223.331.1821844.0842.88139.17
(2.08)(1.48)
HPG-1169.539.0342.731.8729.963.894.5113.072.012.551.464.232.8221842.1741.59149.82
(2.29)(1.94)
HPG-1277.209.0346.261.7831.674.304.8110.472.732.631.533.671.8521843.6740.24158.33
(2.16)(1.69)
Contd.
------
1 2 3 4 5 6 78 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
------
HPG-1370.509.9745.371.9029.614.074.4213.332.062.491.572.460.8521842.6739.17148.03
(1.86)(1.34)
Range57.73-7.20-34.01-1.08-20.90-3.08-3.96-9.10-0.67-1.89-0.80-0.00 -0.00 -209-40.83-36.54-104.50-
(1.00)(1.00)
77.2011.1046.262.3853.174.305.5330.773.632.701.657.35 -3.34 -22447.7545.80265.83
(2.89)(2.08)
Grand mean 67.728.7940.581.5329.373.734.4117.471.762.351.28(2.16)(1.48)215.6044.2341.73146.78
SE(d)2.3160.3791.6530.0821.7270.1430.2081.2850.1050.0890.0360.0800.0180.8760.8071.1748.541
CV (%)4.1895.2964.9896.5637.2014.6845.7869.0127.354.6693.4124.5751.4890.4972.2353.4457.127
CD (P=0.05)4.640.763.310.163.460.290.422.570.210.180.070.160.041.751.612.3517.10
Values in the parenthesis represent transformed values ( x+1)
with yield are presented in table 2. Association of days to maturity with yield was positive and significant, whereas, dry matter exhibited significant negative association with yield . Dry matter (%) showed significant and negative association
with days to maturity and significant and positive with TSS (%).These findings are in broad conformity with the findings of Thakur et al. (1984); Kohli and Mahajan (1993); Singh and Singh (1999) and Saraf et al. (2000).
References
Kaul, A.K., Gohil, R.N. and Langer, A. 1979. Prospectus of breeding improvement garlic in the light of its genetic and breeding systems. Euppytica 28 : 457-264.
Kohli, U.K. and Nutan Mahajan, 1993. Yield performance and correlation studies in garlic - A note. HaryanaJournal of Horticultural Sciences 22 (2) : 163-165.
Panse, V.G. and Sukhatme, P.V. 1984. Statistical Methods for Agricultural Workers. Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi.
Saraf, R.K., Kurmvanshi, S.M., Sharma, R.S. and Parihar, M.S. 2000. Relative performance of garlic (Allium sativum L.) varieties in Vindhyan Plateau of Madhya Pradesh. Crop Research 19(1): 149-151.
Singh, J.P. and Singh, S.B. 1999. Evaluation of different selections/varieties of garlic for yield and some yield contributing parameters, Crop Research 18 (2) : 216-217.
Thakur, J.C., Bhathal, G.S., Gill, S.P.S. and Jarnail Singh 1984. Genetic variability and heritability studies in garlic (Allium sativum Linn). Punjab Vegetable Grower 19: 41-46