Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 117

A GRO-M ORPHOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF SORGHUM (Sorghum bicolor.

(L.) Moench) LANDRACES FROM M ETEKEL ZONE,


BENSHANGUL GUM UZ REGION

M.Sc. THESIS

WASIHUN LEGESSE GETAHUN

HAW ASS A UNIVERSITY, AWASSA, ETHIOPIA

APRIL 2007
AGRO-M ORPHOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF SORGHUM (Sorghum bicolor.
(L.) M OENCH) LANDRACES FROM M ETEKEL ZONE,
BENSHANGUL GUM UZ REGION

WASIITUN LEGESSE GETAHUN

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANT SCIENCE,


AWASSA COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE, SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES
HAW ASSA UNIVERSITY, AWASSA, ETHIOPIA

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREM ENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF


M ASTER OF SCIENCE IN PLANT SCIENCES (SPECIALIZATION: AGRONOMY)

APRIL 2007
AKNOWLEDGEMENT
1 would like to express my sincere and deepest gratitude to my advisors Drs. Hussein
Mohammed and Dr. Tesfaye Tefera, for their guidance, professional assistance and valuable
criticism from the inception o f the proposal up to the final write up o f my thesis.

I want to express my gratitude to the Ethiopian Institute o f Agricultural Research (EIAR) for

supporting my M.Sc. training. The support I was offered from Pawe Agricultural Research
Center (PARC) in terms o f provision o f experimental site, conducting my experiment and
other services rendered is greatly appreciated.

My sincere acknowledgement is extended to my colleagues at PARC Alemu Terfesa, Deresse


Tilahun, Taye Haile, Mulegeta Atinaf, Tsehay Grmu, Rahel Eshetu, Fisum S/Mariam, Erimias
Legamo and Mihret Mekonnen for their help in the collection o f land race germplasm, data
collection and advice.

I would like to extend my sincere appreciation to Mekonnen Abebe, Dr. Kiros Meles,
Teramage Tesfaye, Mulugeta Tsedalu, Agdew Bekele, Yemane Tsehaye, Tamene Yohanes,
Birtukuan Fikadu and Firehiwot H/Mariam for their encouragement and support while I was
conducting my thesis research and during the writing up o f my thesis.

My sincere gratitude goes to my wife W/o AJemtsehay Eyasu, who has been handling my
family and personal affairs during my stay at Awassa and who typed this manuscript. She,
indeed, has been the backbone for my study.

Above all, my deepest thanks and gratitude goes to the Almighty God who gave me the

courage and strength to accomplish my mission. It is not possible to mention every one who,
in one way or another contributed to this work, but all o f them deserve my gratitude.

The author,
Wasihun Legesse

1
DEDICATION
This thesis is dedicated to my father Ato Legesse Getahun and my mother W/o Emuhay Kasse
for nursing me with affection and love and for their limitless support, which gave me success

in life.

II
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

PV Phenotypic variance

GV Genotypic variance

PCV Phenotypic coefficient o f variation

GCV Genotypic coefficient o f variation

CV Coefficient o f variation

h2 Heritability

GA Genetic advance in absolute units

GAM Genetic advance as percentage o f the mean

SAS Statistical Analysis System

SPSS Statistical Programme for Social Sciences

PARC Pawe Agricultural Research Center

ICRISAT International Crop Research Institute for Semi Arid Tropics

masl Meters above sea level

III
Table of Contents

Page

A C K N O W LED G EM EN T--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1

D E D IC A T IO N ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------II

LIST OF A B B R IV A T IO N S ------------------------------------------------------------------------HI

TABLE OF C O N T E N T S --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IV

LIST OF T A B L E S ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- VII

LIST OF F IG U R E S ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- IX

A P P E N D IC E S ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- X

A B S T R A C T --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- XI

1. INTRODUCTION -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1

2. LITERATURE R E V I E W ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4

2.1 Origin o f S o rghum --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4

2.2 Taxonomy o f S o rg h u m --------------------------------------------------------------------- 4

2.3 Sorghum in Ethiopia ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5

2.4 Diversity o f S o rg h u m ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 6

2.5 Variation o f Agro- Morphological Characteristics in S o rg h u m ----------------7

2.5 .1 Agronomic characters--------------------------------------------------------------- 9

2.5.2 Morphological characteristics--------------------------------------------------- 10

2.5.2.1 Leaf characters------------------------------------------------------------- 10

2 .5.2.2 Stem characters-------------------------------------------------------------11

2 .5.2.3 Head characters------------------------------------------------------------ 1 1

2 .5. 2 .4 Grain y ie ld ------------------------------------------------------------------ 12

IV
2.5.2.5 Seed characters----------------------------------------------------------13

2 . 6 Importance o f Characterization o f Landrace

G erm p la sm --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14

2.7 Association of Yield and Yield C om ponents----------------------------------- 17

2.8 Path A nalysis------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 19

2.9 Cluster A nalysis-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20

3. MATERIALS AND M E T H O D S --------------------------------------------------------------- 22

3.1 Description o f the Experimental S it e ----------------------------------------------- 22

3.2 Plant M aterials---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22

3.3 Experimental P rocedures----------------------------------------------------------------- 27

3.3.1 Design o f the experim ent--------------------------------------------------------- 27

3.3.2 D a ta C ollected----------------------------------------------------------------------- 27

3.3.2.1 Data collected on plot b a s is ---------------------------------------------27

3.3.2.2 Data collected on individual plant b a s is ------------------------- 28

3.4 Statistical A nalysis------------------------------------------------------------------------- 29

3.4 .1 Frequency o f Genotypes by qualitative traits--------------------------29

3.4.2 Analysis o f V ariance----------------------------------------------------------30

3.4.3 Estimation o f phenotypic and genotypic V ariances--------------- 3 1

3.5 Phenotypic and Genotypic Correlation C oefficients--------------------------- 33

3.6 Path Coefficient A nalysis---------------------------------------------------------------- 35

3.7 Cluster A nalysis-----------------------------------------------------------------------------36

3.8 Group Discriminant A nalysis----------------------------------------------------------- 36

4. RESULTS AND D IS C U S S IO N ------------------------------------------------------------------- 38

4 .1 Variability o f Qualitative Traits in the Landraces-------------------------------38

V
4 . 1. 1 Grain c o l o r -----------------------------------------------------------------------------38

4.1.2 Absence or presence o f a w n s --------------------------------------------------- 39

4 . 1.3 Head compactness and head shape o f the sorghum genotypes — 41

4.1.4 Glume cover and c o l o r ---------------------------------------------------------- 44

4.2 Analysis o f V ariance----------------------------------------------------------------------- 46

4.3 Estimation o f Variability P aram eters------------------------------------------------- 48

4.3.1 Ranges and m e a n s -------------------------------------------------------------------48

4.3.2 Phenotypic and genotypic variation among the genotypes---------- 51

4.3.3 Heritability estimates in braod sense------------------------------------------- 52

4.3.4 Estimates o f expected genetic a d v an c e--------------------------------------- 54

4.4 Correlation Studies------------------------------------------------------------------------ 56

4.4.1 Association o f grain yield with other characters--------------------------- 56

4.4.2 Associations o f other characters------------------------------------------------- 57

4.5 Path A nalysis-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------61

4.5 . 1 Genotypic path analysis o f grain yield/plant--------------------------------- 61

4.5.2 Phenotypic path analysis o f grain yield/plant--------------------------- 64

4.6 Cluster A nalysis------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 67

4.7 Group Discriminant A nalysis--------------------------------------------------------------75

5. SUMMARY AND C O N C L U S IO N ----------------------------------------------------------------- 85

6 . R E F E R E N C E S ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------89

7. A P P E N D IC E S --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 97

8 . B IO G R A P H Y --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 104

VI
LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 1. Description o f tested gen otypes------------------------------------------------------------------- 24

Table 2. RCBD ANOVA and expected mean s q u a re s ------------------------------------------------- 30

Table 3. Analysis o f covariance ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 33

Table 4. Analysis of variance for 20 traits in 100 sorghum genotypes--------------------- ------ 47

Table 5. The observed range o f variation in morpho- agronomic characters ----- ---------------- 49

Table 6 . Means, variance components, PCV, GCV, h“, GA, and GA % for 18

traits o f sorghum gen o ty p es--------------------------------------------------------------------53

Table 7 Estimate o f genotypic (above diagonal) and phenotypic (below diagonal)

correlation coefficient among 21 traits in 100 Sorghum genotypes grown

at Pawe in 2005 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 60

Table 8 . Genoypic direct effect (bold) and indirect effect of 8 traits

on grain yield per p la n t--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 62

Table 9. Phenotypic direct effect (bold), and indirect effect of seven traits

on grain yield per p la n t---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6 6

Table 10 . Clustering pattern of 100 sorghum genotypes------------------------------------------------- 69

Table 11 Cluster means of 1BQuantitative Traits-------------------------------------------- ----- ------ 72

Table 12. Inter D~ value of the 10 clusters of sorghum genotypes------------------------------------ 74

Table 13. Summary o f discriminant analysis for 100 sorghum genotypes using

grain c o l o r ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 76

Table 14. Group means o f 21 traits o f white, brown and red colored

sorghum genotypes stud ied-----------------------------------------------------------------------77

VII
Table 15. Variables ordered by absolute size o f correlation within function

for grain color classification o f so rg h u m ------------------------------------------------- 78

T ab lel 6 . Summary o f discriminant analysis for 100 sorghum genotypes

using head com pactness-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 80

Table 17. Group means o f 21 traits of loose, very loose and compact

headed sorghum genotypes stu d ie d ----------------------------------------------------------82

Table 18. Variables ordered by absolute size o f correlation within function for head

compactness classification----------------------------------------------------------------------83
List of figures

page

Figure 1. Frequency distribution o f grain color for 100 gen otyp es------------------------ 39

Figure 2. Frequency distribution o f awn for 100 genotypes---------------------------------- 41

Figure 3. Frequency distribution o f head compactness for 100 gen otyp es---------------43

figure 4. Frequency distribution o f head shape for 100 genotypes-------------------------43

Figure 5. Frequency distribution o f glume cover for 100 genotypes------------------------45

figure 6. Frequency distribution o f glume color for 100 genotypes------------------------- 45

Figure 7. Dendrogram o f 100 sorghum genotypes studied for 18 traits-------------------- 68

Figure 8. Classification result o f grain color using the discriminating

variables and discriminant functions------------------------------------------------------84

IX
Appendices

Page

Appendix 1. Genotype means o f 18 traits------------------------------------------------------------97

Appendix.2. 13 years mean monthly rainfall o f pawe in m m .-------------------------------- 103

X
Agro-M orphological Characterization of Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench)
LandRaces from M etekel Zone, Benshangul Guinuz Region.

BY
VVasihiin Legessc (BSc)

Research advisors:
Hussein Mohammed (PhD) - major advisor
Tesfaye Tefera (PhD) — co~ advisor

A b strac t
Ninety two sorghum genotypes collected from Metekel Zone o f Benishangul Gumuz, western
Ethiopia and 8 checks were tested in a 10 x 10 simple lattice design. The objectives o f the
study were to determine the extent and degree o f variation in morpho agronomic characters,
to evaluate the genotypes fo r yield and yield associated traits to identify superior accessions
that can be used by the breeding program. Two row plots each 5 meters long, with a spacing
o f 0.75 x 0.15 m (a plot area o f 7.5 nr) was used. Frequency distribution o f the landraces in to
different categories o f qualitative trails indicated that artificial selection that favored straight
headed genotypes with white seed and awnless glumes with straight has been practiced.
76.5% o f the accession had white seeds, 15.5% had red and 8% had brown seeds. Awn less
genotypes constituted 92.5% o f the studied material; only 7.5% had owned glumes. About
97 % o f the genotypes had straight heads; only 3% were goose headed and these are all
checks. On (he other hand no selection seems to have been practiced for head compactness.
The proportion o f loose, very loose and compact headed genotypes was 32%), 29% and 39%,
respectively. A NOVA o f 20 quantitative traits revealed the existence o f highly significant
variation among the evaluated accessions for all traits. The phenotypic and genotypic
coefficients o f variation were high ( 20%)) fo r head weight, number o f seeds head, grain
yield plant, panicle exertion and grain yield in kg ha. Iligh heri(ability in broad sense ( 70%)
was recorded fo r all (rails except leaf width (51%)) and head width (64%), lodging (37%) and
stalk borer attack (66%). High genetic advance as percent o f the mean ( 20%) was observed
fo r leaf area (24.9%), internode length (30.7%)), stalk diameter (25.6%), head width (26.6%),
head weight (42.2%)), thousand seed weight (24.85 %), stalk horer attack (25.6%) and lodging
(87.3%). When heri lability and genetic advance as percent o f the mean were simultaneously
considered both were high fo r number o f seeds plant, grain yield plant, grain yield in kg ha,
leaf area, internode length and thousand seed weigh / indicating the presence o f additive gene
effects and possibility o f a wide scope for improvement o f these traits. Genotypic and
phenotypic correlation coefficient estimates indicated that grain yield plant was strongly
associated with head weight, yield in kg ha, number o f seeds head and thousand seed weight
both at genotypic and phenotypic levels. Path coefficient analysis revealed that number o f
seeds head and thousand seeds weight are the most important traits that should be considered
during selection for high grain yield in (he sorghum genotypes studied. The clustering o f
genotypes based on 18 traits revealed (he existence o f divergence among genotypes. Ten
distinct clusters were formed. Crossing o f superior accessions from distant dusters is
expected to give high yielding progeny. Discriminant analysis showed that genotypes with
loose head and white seed are late in maturity, taller and give more yields as compared to
compact headed genotypes with red seeds indicating to the possibility o f using qualitative
trails in selecting fo r quantitative trails.

XI
1. INTRODUCTION

Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L ) Moench) is one o f the major food and feed grains o f the

world. It is used as a staple food in semi arid tropical Africa and Asia. Sorghum is adapted to a

wider range o f climatic conditions than other cereal crops and it is the most important crop in

the dry low lands where rainfall is not reliable both in amount and distribution (Brhane, 1982).

Because o f its tolerance to drought, sorghum is the crop o f choice for dry regions of the world

and in areas with low rainfall. It also withstands temporary water logging conditions and can

successfully grow in humid environment (pulse crops) (Purseglove, 1985).

Like other C 4 plants, sorghum has high yield potential comparable to rice, wheat and maize

and its yield could exceed 110 q/ha with average yields ranging from 7000 to 9000 kg/ha

where moisture is not a limiting factor (House, 1985). In Ethiopia, sorghum is a major crop

both in terms o f production and area cultivated. About 1.4 million hectares o f land is put to

sorghum production every year which contributes our 1.7 million metric tones to the national

grain production (CSA, 2004).

Sorghum is believed to have originated in the north east quadrant o f Africa, around the

Sudan/Ethiopia border (Dogget, 1988; House, 1985). Much o f the genetic variability o f the

crop is still available in the area o f its first domestication (Africa) and in regions o f early

introduction (Asia). Sorghum is the major staple cereal in Western and Northwestern parts o f

Ethiopia, a region within the area of origin/domestication o f the crop. The area is endowed

with variety o f both cultivated and wild forms o f sorghum. Ethiopia is characterized by a wide

range o f agio climatic conditions and is home to different types o f crops including sorghum.
2

There is high genetic diversity in sorghum in Ethiopia with several pockets o f geographical

isolation. The current number o f indigenous sorghum germplasms contained in the gene bank

stands at about 6000 and represents a wide array o f diversity in the major sorghum growing

areas o f Ethiopia. This could sen/e as valuable genetic base for breeding and improvement o f

the crop in the country and the world at large (Brhane, 1973). Highly desirable genetic

characteristics were identified in some o f the Ethiopian materials and were utilized in breeding

programs extensively elsewhere in the world (Melaku, 1988). The wealth o f genetic variability

in the Ethiopian germplasm has been and will continue to be useful sources o f economically

important traits.

Though it is well known that Ethiopia possess diverse forms o f sorghum (Melak Hail, 1975),

the extent and distribution o f genetic variability o f the crop in different ecologies has not been

properly studied (Melake Hail, 1988). One o f the potential areas is the Metekel zone in north

western Ethiopia. The zone lies within the area of sorghum domestication and as such is rich

in genetic diversity o f cultivated sorghum and its wild forms. Because o f its unique agro

ecological setting, warm humid climate, the area is rich with special class o f germplasm

adapted to these conditions.

In order to make any genetic advance in yield, to bring stability in tolerance to different biotic

and abiotic stresses or to effect changes in crop characteristics and meet certain consumer

requirements, a breeder usually depends on the variability that is present in this germplasm

collections. But germplasm accessions need to be evaluated, characterized and properly

documented so that well defined sets o f samples with specific combinations o f desirable traits
can easily be retrieved and used in breeding programs (Brhane, 1982).

Although very tall (4 m or above), late and difficult for harvesting, sorghum landraces from

Metekel area are tolerant to grain mould and some are tolerant to striga. Many improved

varities released for other areas often failed to adapt to Metekel condition primarily due to

high incidence o f grain mould which is associated with prolonged rainy season, high humidity

and high temperature. However, majority o f the local materials are less prone to attack by this

and other leaf diseases and hence form good sources o f resistance. Therefore, there is pressing

need to systematically evaluate and characterize these materials so that they can readily be

incorporated in the breeding program to develop varieties adapted to the area. Variability in

plant height and other characters has been observed in the landraces o f this zone. With the

intention o f getting varieties which fit to the area a large collection o f landraces was made

from this zone. This study was conducted in order to measure the level o f variation in morpho-

agronomic characteristics o f this sorghum germplasm collection.

The objectives o f the study were to:

1. Determine the extent and degree o f variability and in morpho-agronomic characters

o f the sorghum germplasm collections from north weastern Ethiopia.

2. Evaluate genotype yield and yield associated traits among the collections.

3. Identify sorghum accessions that are superior in desirable agronomic character for

use in breeding programs.


4

2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Origin of Sorghum

Ethiopia is believed to be the center o f origin and/or diversity for several globally important

crop species (Zewdie, 1994). Thirty-eight crop species have been identified with Ethiopia as

primary or secondary gene center; 11 crop species have been identified having their center o f

diversity in the country. Ethiopia is a center o f origin and/or diversity for crops such as tef

(Eragrostis tef), coffee (Coffea arabica ), barley (Hordium vulgctre), sorghum (Sorghum

bicolor ), durum wheat (Tritcum durum), noog ( Guizotici cibyssinicci), sesame (Sisamum

indicum ), caster bean (Ricinus comminus), Enset (Ensete ventiricosum) and chat ( Catha

edulis) (Zewdie, 1994).

2.2 Taxonomy of Sorghum

The genus sorghum is highly diverse and comprises five sections (Gaber, 1950). These are:

chaetosorghum, hetrosorghum, parasorghum, sorghum, and stiposorghum. According to

Harlan and de Wet (1972), section sorghum includes (1) S. hcilepense (L.) Pers., a tetraploid

(2n=40) rhizomatous perennial species, ( 2 ) S.proinquum (kunth) Hhitchc., a diploid ( 2 n= 2 0 )

rhizomatous species, and (3) S. bicolor (L.) Moench, a diploid (2n=20) annual species.

Although generally treated as predominantly self-pollinating, sorghum is a wind-pollinated

crop with an outcrossing ratio o f 5-30 % (Ell strand and Foster, 1983; Doggett, 1988). Harlan

and de Wet (1972) classified Sorghum bicolor species into five basic races (bicolor, caudatum,
5

gunea, dura and kafir) and 15 derivative races o f the basic races. All the basic races except

kafir, are present in Ethiopia (Harlan and de Wet, 1972). The classification was based on

spikelet and inflorescence morphology.

2.3 Sorghum in Ethiopia

Purseglove (1985) has tried to elucidate that the wide agroclimatic conditions o f Ethiopia has

contributed to the present biological resource o f the country. The evolutionary history o f

Ethiopian cultivated sorghum has been examined and documented (Stemler el a /., 1977).

Sorghum exists in tremendous diversity throughout the growing areas, which contain pockets

o f geographical isolation, with extremely broad and valuable genetic base for potential

breeding and improvement work in the country and the world at large. Ethiopian sorghum

germplasm is also noted worldwide as a source for useful genes such as high lysine content,

cold tolerance, good grain quality and disease and insect resistance (Doggett, 1988; Yilma,

1991).

Based on their adaptation zones within the country, cultivated sorghums are grouped in to

highland, intermediate & lowland sorghum (Alemayehu, 2003). This classification has been

made largely based on altitude, length o f growing period and amount and distribution o f

rainfall (Yilma and Abebe, 1987). Intermediate zone sorghum grows at an altitude range o f

1600-1900 masl and those o f lowlands grow in areas o f altitude less than 1600 masl.
6

The progenitors (wild sorghum) o f cultivated sorghum are widely distributed across many

African countries, including Ethiopia (Amsalu cl c i l 2000). It was further noted that wild

sorghum in Ethiopia is rapidly disappearing, largely because more and more o f its habitat is

used for agriculture, grazing, human settlement, construction, etc.

2.4 Diversity of Sorghum

There is a great diversity within the sorghum crop. This variability is partially the result o f the

interaction o f agricultural man with the crop plants (Doggett 1988). The enormous diversity

existing in the cultivated sorghum and the improvement that has been made by plant breeding

have been reported (Abebe and Yilma 1988; Ready et a\.., 1990). Brhane (1979; 1982) and

Doggett (1991) have discussed that much o f the genetic variability is still available in the areas

of the first domestication o f the crop (Africa) and the regions o f early introduction (Asia) both

in the cultivated species as well as the progenitors o f the crop. Considering the presence o f the

greatest variability o f the wild and the cultivated sorghum in the north - east quadrant o f

Africa, scientists are in agreement to accept Ethiopia as origin o f the crop. Doggett (1988) has

emphasized that greatest variability in sorghum is found in the Ethiopia -S udan region o f the

Northeast quadrant o f Africa.

The diversity in Ethiopian sorghum is a result o f the unique topographic and geographic

location o f the counti'y and its complex social history (Stemler and de Wet, 1977). In view o f

this, they have examined and documented the evolutionary history o f Ethiopian sorghum.

Similarly Engles and Hawkes (1991) have suggested that the Ethiopian sorghum may well be
7

the most valuable o f the crops grown in the country, which reflects the wide variation in the

environments in which the crop is being cultivated. Brhane and Yilma (1978) have tried to

elucidate the presence o f wide diversity o f sorghum in all regions o f Ethiopia though the level

o f diversity varies from region to region.

It was reported that the Ethiopian sorghum germplasm shows extensive variation for disease

resistance, panicle size and panicle type, seed size, seed color, plant height, maturity, grain

yield and forage yield and tillers (Brhane and Yilma, 1978; Yilma 1991). Based on these

studies many promising varieties have been identified and further used in the national

sorghum improvement program

The wide range o f environmental conditions under which sorghum is produced in Ethiopia has

given rise to tremendous range o f genetic variability (Dogget, 1988) but the indigenous

germplasms o f sorghum has been threatened due to a series o f adverse rainfall situation, which

is forcing farmers to shift to short season crops like te f (Eragroslis tef) and early maturing

uniform sorghum cultivars. Such decisions o f farmers in the process o f planting, managing,

harvesting and processing o f their crops affect genetic variability.

2.5 Variation of Agro- M orphological C haracteristics in Sorghum

Morphological, agronomical as well as biochemical and molecular parameters have been

widely used in the evaluation and study o f genetic diversity o f crops (Agong el a l ., 2 0 0 0 ).

Morphological characteristics have traditionally been used as basis for classification. Since the

early days o f taxonomy, an overwhelming reliance has been placed on morphological traits to
8

produce practical classification. Observation and studies o f phenotypic traits are the basis for

Vavilov’s determination o f centers o f diversity for various crop species. In order for the plant

genetic resource collections to be of practical value to plant breeders, characterization for

agronomic and morphological traits is imperative (Andersen and Fairbanks, 1990). Hence

morphological expressions o f any genetic constitute have been demanded for the identification

and characterization o f plant germplasm.

Diversity studies using morphological markers that are highly heritable traits such as seed

color, seed size, leaf color, flower color etc., are inexpensive, simple and rapid to score.

However they have weakness since many genes, that control many o f the traits can only be

determined at the whole plant level and only dominant alleles are visible morphologically

(Powell, 1992). Moreover, some changes to genes cannot be observed at a morphological or

physiological level because the structural difference in the gene product may not alter its

biological activity sufficiently to result in an altered phenotype (Sabir et a /., 1992). In

addition, characterization o f a large collection, particularly by agronomic traits, may be

impractical and also these traits have the disadvantage o f being influenced by environmental

factors (Andersen and Fairbanks, 1990). The pattern o f variation measured by means o f

markers, such as morphological and biochemical markers could give an insight into

evolutionary ibrces responsible for maintaining genetic variability and may also assist in

genetic resources conservation and utilization.


9

2.5.1 Agronomic characters

Doggott (1988) and House (1985) showed the presence o f substantial amount o f variability

among sorghum genotypes for different agronomic traits like field emergence, days to

maturity, time to flowering. The genes controlling duration o f growth determine the number of

leaves and the number o f nodes, produced before the plant flowers (FAO, 1972). It is well

known that the crop is grown over a wide range o f area both north and south o f the equator.

The objectives o f a breeder to increase and stabilize grain yield under rain-fed agriculture can

be achieved by matching crop duration and the length o f the growing season as determined by

soil temperature and moisture. With respect to this, the FAO (1972) emphasized that the

maturity period o f sorghum crop is determined by the interaction between genotypes,

temperature and photoperiod. The variability o f sensitivity to photoperiod among cultivars and

time to 50 % flowering is an important attribute o f grain production (ICRISAT, 1991).

According to Vanderlip (1979), time required from planting to half bloom depends on the

maturity period o f the plant and environmental conditions. Doggett (1988) has examined

aspect o f this and suggested that flowering among sorghum may spread over a period o f 6 to

15 days depending on the size o f the head, temperature and the variety. Periods o f 6 to 9

weeks after emergence are common for sorghum to begin flowering. House (1985) has

discussed that sorghum usually flowers in 55 to 70 days in warm climate but this may extend

from 30 to more than 100 days.


10

2.5.2 M orphological characteristics

2.5.2.1 L eaf characters

According to Doggett (1988) mature sorghum leaves may reach a width between 1.5 and 13

cm at widest point, while House (1985) reported this to be 10 to 15 cm. Like-wise the leaves

vary in length, ranging from 30-135 cm, usually being shorter and smaller at the top (Doggett,

1988).

Leaf area development establishes the total amount o f radiation intercepted by field crops and

this is an important determinant in assimilation, production and soil water balance. The

importance o f leaf area for grain production has been thoroughly discussed (Wilson and

Eastin, 1982). The result o f agronomic characteristics studied by Brhane and Yilma (1978) has

indicated the presence o f variability in leaf area among sorghum lines across seasons. L eaf

area per plant depends on number o f leaves, rate o f expansion, eventual size o f the plant and

senescence (Wilson and Eastin 1982).

Similarly, the leaves on the main stem may vary in number from 7 to 24 depending on

Variety (Doggett 1988). There are usually 14 to 17 and as many as 30 leaves in well and less

adapted germplasm, respectively. The number o f leaves produced is strongly related to factors

affecting panicle initiation (Wilson and Eastin 1982).


11

2.5.2.2 Stem characters

The stem is made o f a series o f alternating nodes and internodes. The stem is slender to very

stout, measuring 0.5 to 5 cm in diameter near the base, becoming narrower at the upper end

(House 1985). Similarly Doggett (1988) has recorded the basal diameter ranging from 5 mm

to 3 cm and width o f 14.5 cm has been recorded.

Sorghum varies in height, which is dependent upon the number o f nodes, which equals the

number o f leaves produced. This is a function o f the maturity length o f the plant (Doggett,

1988). It is also dependent on the internode length and all these factors contributing to height

are under separate genetic control (Casady, 1965; Doggett, 1988).

2.5.2.3 Ilead characters

The panicle in sorghum grows erect at the apex o f the culm, but may be recurved. The wild

and weedy sorghums have a rather loose panicle with spreading branches. Variation in head

width has been reported by several workers (Guiragossion and Melak Ilail 1987; House 1985;

Melakhail and Kao, 1982). Similarly sorghum varies in head length. The variation existing for

this character has been reported by Weibel and Sieglinger (1984). Melakhail and Rao (1982)

have reported head length ranging from 2.5 to 71 cm among sorghum germplasm studied at

ICRISAT Brhane and Yilma (1978) have reported the existence o f variation in head length

among Ethiopian sorghum germplasm.

Head exertion is the most important characteristic in sorghum production. Sorghum heads that

are not exerted will facilitate the development o f head diseases and insect pests and the quality
12

of the seed will be reduced. On the basis o f world sorghum germplasms Guiragossion and

Melakhail (1987) have reported head exertion ranging from 0 to 55 cm. The distribution o f

sorghum panicle compactness and shape showed clear trends in the three adaptation zones.

The compact panicle types occurred more frequently in the low land than in the intermediate

and high land, while the occurrence o f the loose types generally followed the opposite trend

(Amsalu, 2001).

2.5.2.4 Grain yield

Grain productivity is usually the primary consideration and genetic characters, environment

and cultural management influence it. The first prerequisite for high yield is a high production

o f total dry matter per unit area, which will depend on the effectiveness o f photosynthesis o f

the crop (Arnon, 1984). The total products o f photosynthesis throughout the life time o f the

crop growing in a given circumstance will depend on the size o f assimilating area, the

efficiency with which it functions and the length o f the period during which it is active. Thus,

differences in productivity between cultivars will depend to a large extent on inheritable

characteristics o f the structure and functions o f the organs involved in photosynthesis (Arnon,

1984).

Yield is a complex inherited trait controlled by many genes. Several workers have reported the

existence o f highly significant yield differences among sorghum genotypes (Miller and Yilma,

1984; and Melaku, 1991). With respect to this, Brhane (1979) reported the existence o f more

variability in yield potential in Africa than any other place. This variability is further
confirmed by Reddy et cti, (1990). Similarly the immense contribution o f Ethiopian

collections in this regard has been explained (ICRISAT, 1985).

2.5.2.5 Seed characters

Variation in seed size o f 1 to 7.5 mm has been reported (Guiragossion and Melakhail 1987;

ICRISAT, 1990; Melakhail and llao, 1982). The number o f seeds per head is the most

important yield component in case o f field crops. Working with this, Miller and Yilma (1984)

have observed yield increase of a new sorghum hybrid reflecting a significant increase in seed

number with little difference in kernel size. Similarly, Kambal and Webster (1966) indicated

that increased kernel number was primarily responsible for increased yield in sorghum

hybrids.

The apparent increase o f the frequency o f red seed color from low to high and the opposite

trend for w'hite seed color suggests that seed color might have adaptive significance. It seems

that the white grain sorghum lacks certain polyphenolic compounds that serve to protect the

sorghum grain from pre-harvest germination in humid regions in the intermediate and high

land areas, while red and brown colored seeds are rich in polyphenotic compounds (Asante,

1995).

The situation o f sorghum seems to contradict the adaptive significance o f awn in dry areas. It

is likely that the awnless character is favored in sorghum to reduce evapo-transpiration in dry

low land areas. The need for immediate photosynthetic products might be satisfied by the
14

relatively large number o f glumes on a typical sorghum panicle as compared to a typical spike

of a wheat or barley (Amsalu, 2 0 0 1 )

2.6 Im portance o f Characterization of Landrace Germplasm

Agromorphological characterization is scoring of morphological and agronomic characters

which are highly heritable and are not likely to change very much under different

environmental conditions. Generally, characterization involves the assessment of a varying

number o f descriptors ranging from morphological to biochemical. Careful characterization

and evaluation o f crop germplasm for morpho-agronomic characters is the first step in the

exploitation o f germplasms (Beuslink and Steiner 1992; Melakhail and Rao 1982; Seyfu,

1993).

The presence o f a wide range o f agro-ecological conditions in Ethiopia presents an

opportunity and a challenge for crop germplasms conservationists and plant breeders.

Collection and conservation o f sorghum germplasm was accelerated about four decades ago

because o f the danger caused to the landraces by the release o f new varieties and hybrids

(Prasad Rao & Mengesha 1980). Us adaptation to stress environment such as drought, makes

sorghum in a sense more important than other cereals (Yilma and Abebe, 1987; Yilma, 1991).

Plant genetic resources includes landraces, advanced varieties, wild relatives o f domesticated

plants, wild species, genetic stocks and cloned genes (Chang, 1992). Landraces, also known as

traditional varieties, are cultivated forms o f a crop species, which have evolved over

generations o f selections by farmers (Harlan, 1992). Landraces are characterized by high


genetic heterogeneity, good adaptation to local environment conditions and low productivity.

They are also noted as sources o f useful genes required for further increment and maintenance

o f the productivity o f modern varieties, information about the amount and distribution o f

genetic variation in germplasm collection is important for efficient management o f germplasm

collection and for effective utilization o f such materials in plant breeding.

The local community has accumulated the information as a stock within the plant varieties

selected and already in use. Sometimes this selection may have occurred hundreds or even

thousands o f years ago, but the varieties still retain some residual o f their then- existing

beneficial effects. Thus, a landrace may be conceptualized as an organism in which a series o f

beneficial selections have occurred in response to environmental stresses. The screening o f

such landraces functions as an important part of the agricultural research and development

process; that is, this stock o f information provides immediately identifiable innovation for use

in agriculture (Evenson ct ci/., 1998).

Traditional farmers have themselves survived by a process o f observing this naturally

produced information and the consequent selection and use o f the traits and characteristics that

have aided survivability. In this way, traditional plant varieties (landraces) are transformed in

to the accumulated history o f the information, which nature has generated and that farmers

have observed and used. Eventhough germplasms are major source o f crop improvement

elsewhere in the world, their exploitation in different crops is still minimal.


16

Agriculturalists must also continue to supply new forms o f resistance to pests with modern

agricultural system; otherwise modern varieties will be overwhelmed by continued selection

o f those pests. Genetic resource has value as potential solution concepts to these fundamental

problems (Evenson et ah, 1998). Identification o f desirable traits in germplasm accessions is

important for use in crop improvement, but perhaps due to limited technical and financial

capacity, the natural variability has not been sufficiently exploited to enhance sorghum

improvement.

At present, ICRISAT is the major repository for the world sorghum germplasms collection

with a total collection o f 26,564 accessions. Among donors, the most important are the

Ethiopian sorghum improvement program, which contributed a total o f 4,464, Gizera

agricultural research station, Sudan, and India (Brown, 1989). Countries like Ethiopia, India,

Sudan and Cameroon have contributed more than half o f the present world collections.

As a single gene or few major genes control most o f the desired traits, it is, thus, obvious that

growing uniform cultivars over vast areas is potentially dangerous. These cultivars are

frequently vulnerable to changing conditions such as unexpected drought or a particularly

virulent pathogen because o f their narrow genetic base (IBPGR, 1981). A breeder needs

source of genes for resistance to different stresses for better yield and for nutritive qualities

(Hawkes et a!., 1991). This source o f variation is obtained from germplasms. Besides, the role

in improving yield per se, traditional landraces and their wild relatives, through centuries o f

natural and human selection, can be expected to have acquired resistance to specific pests,
17

diseases and environmental stresses, and can therefore be used as source o f resistance in the

breeding programs.

Collection and characterization o f land races and their relatives becomes very important, in the

source o f vulnerability o f land races following the release o f new varieties and hybrids.

Several primitive landraces once abundant in parts o f Africa and Asia are now extinct.

Therefore collection and conservation o f traditional landraces and their wild relatives is o f

paramount importance (Geremew, 1993).

2.7 A ssociation of Yield and Yield Components

Correlation between characters are o f interest to determine whether selection for one trait will

have an effect on another; hence, selection could be practical on highly heritable traits that are

correlated to a more complex and less heritable trait such as yield. The inadequate knowledge

o f interrelationship among various traits and the practice o f unilateral selection for agronomic

traits frequently end up in less than optimum results in plant breeding. Correlations between

plant characters are an aspect that should be kept in mind for better planning o f selection

programs (Geremew, 1993).

In many instances, the breeder is interested in the relationship that may exist between or

among characters. To evaluate relationships, correlation analyses are used in which the values

o f two characters are analyzed on a paired basis. This means that the values for both characters

on some individual or plot are compared for relationship. According to Gomez and Gomez
18

(1984), correlation does not imply or assume any cause and effect relationship between

variables. In fact, one variable could influence the other or vise-versa or both o f them could be

influenced by some third variable. Generally, there are two causes o f correlations between

characters, namely genetic and environmental factors. Larger genotypic correlation as

compared to their respective phenotypic correlation coefficient indicates greater contribution

o f genetic factors (Iqbial, 2003).

In line with the association o f characters, Lothrop et al. (1985) have discussed that correlated

responses among plant characters are useful for predicting the effects o f selection and for

determining feasibility o f indirect selection for yield. Geremew (1993) has reported that head

weight, seeds per head, head length, head width, and 1 00 0 seed weight had a direct influence

on yield.

Bittinger et a/. (1981), by investigating the association o f characters, have reported that yield

showed highly significant positive phenotypic and genotypic correlation with panicle weight.

Both panicle and kernel weight are major components o f yield (Eckehil et cii, 1977), Several

workers have reported correlations o f morpho-agronomic characters with yield in different

crops. Eventhough these estimates are helpful in determining the components o f a complex

trait such as yield, they do not provide an exact picture o f the relative importance o f direct and

indirect influence o f each o f the component character towards this trait. This means that

correlation simply measures mutual association without regarding causation (Agdew 2006).
19

2.8 Path Analysis

Sokal and R ohlf (1981) noted that selection based on only correlation, without taking in to

consideration the interaction between the component traits, will not be possible to identify the

direct and the indirect influence o f traits on yield. Path coefficient analysis is a statistical

method for determining the magnitude and dissection o f multiple effects o f the components on

yield (Belay et a!., 1993). Moreover, it was stated that, the path coefficients are partitioned

into direct and indirect effects, so that the relative contribution o f each component character to

the end product (yield) could be assured.

Path coefficient analysis specifies the cause and measures their relative importance. Bhatt

(1973) suggested that after simple correlation analysis, path coefficient analysis should

provide a true picture o f the association between different traits. It provides an effective means

of untangling direct and indirect causes o f association and permits a critical examination o f the

specific forces acting to produce a given correlation and measures the relative importance o f

causal factors.

Path coefficient analysis is defined as a standardized partial regression, which helps in

partitioning the correlation coefficients in to direct effects (unidirectional path way p) and

indirect effects through alternate path ways (px correlation coefficients (r)), (Bhatt 1973). The

author had stressed that path coefficient analysis was useful in that it revealed the true nature

of cause and effect relationship among different characteristics. Yield is a complex trait

associated with many interrelated components. Generally, correlation coefficients show

relationships among independent characteristics and the degree o f linear relation between
20

these characteristics. Hence, path analysis is needed to clarify relationships between

characteristics deeply because correlation coefficients describe relationships in a simple

manner. Path coefficient analysis separates the direct effect from the indirect effects through

other related characters by partitioning the correlation coefficient. Path analysis is used when

we want to determine the amount o f direct and indirect effects o f the casual component on the

effect component (Dewey et al., 1959).

2.9 Cluster Analysis

Cluster analysis is a multivariate statistical analysis technique for grouping observations

(entries or environments) into classes based on the characteristics measured prior to the

analysis. This technique initially was developed and used in the area o f taxonomy for several

decades and eventually introduced to the breeding areas in early 7 0 ’s. Elements within the

same group or cluster are relatively homogeneous and elements between clusters arc relatively

heterogeneous (Welsh, 1981). Cluster analysis is also used to group genotypes into

homogeneous sets based on their response to the environments considered. To do

classification, we require some measure o f similarity or closeness or distance.

The genotypes are grouped into a number of clusters, D~ being treated as a square o f

generalized distances. The criterion used in clustering is that any two genotypes/ varieties

belonging to the same cluster show, at least on the average, smaller D~ value than those

belonging to two different clusters (Bhatt, 1970). In other worlds, if varieties v\ and v2 are

j / 2
close together and v 3 is distant from the two as shown by their generalized distance (I) = "vD ),

then vi and V2 form a cluster. Previous studies indicated that the same landraces are known by
21

different vernaculars and different landraces by the same vernacular. Hence clustering was

undertaken to classify the identical phenotype into similar groups based on their color and

vegetative measurement.
22

3. MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1. Description of the Experim ental Site

The experiment was conducted at Pawe Agricultural Research Center (PARC) in Benshangul

Gumuz National Regional State, during (he 2005 cropping season. PARC is located at about

580 km north-west o f Addis Ababa at 3 6°25 ’E longitude, 11 ° 12’N latitude and at an altitude

o f 1150 meters above sea level (masl). The area is characterized by hot humid conditions with

mean maximum and minimum temperatures o f 32 °C and 16 °C, respectively. The annual

rainfall ranges from 1500-1800 mm with five and half months long rainy season. The amount

of rainfall in May to mid October is higher than half o f the potential evapotranspiration, and

this period constitutes the growing season. During the months o f July to September the total

rainfall is higher than the full potential evapotranspiration. The total rainfall during the

growing season is about 1659 mm (Abayneh, 2003).

The soil type is l laplic Altisol, very deep (> 150 cm) and clay in texture. The pH o f the soil

ranges from 5.5 to 6.9 and subsurface soils have higher pH values than surface soils. The

organic carbon ( 2 . 8 to 0 .2 %) and total nitrogen (0.19 to 0 . 0 2 %) content o f the soil decrease

with soil depth. The cation exchange capacity ranges from 20 to 51 Cmolc Kg ' 1 (Abayneh,

2003).

3.2. Plant Materials

Ninety two sorghum landraces (Table 2), collected from Metekel Zone o f Benshangul Gumuz

and eight standard checks were included in the study. The accessions were collected in 2 00 1

and were maintained at Melkasa Agricultural Research Center. All collections were
maintained by selling five representative heads in each line. Seeds harvested from bagged

heads were trashed and bulked for storage.

Checks

The eight check varieties included in the study are released commercial cultivars

recommended for high and intermediate altitude zones in the country. Early maturing

commercial varieties were deliberately excluded due to discrepancy in maturity dates and

heavy grain molds diseases pressure on early maturing varieties.

1. Birmash, Baje and 1S9302. These varieties were released for intermediate altitude.

2. Other checks such as chiro, Al-70, ETS-639, E T S -1 176 and Muyera-1 were included just

for comparison to evaluate accessions for their performance.


Table 1. Description of tested genotypes.

NO. A c cess io n No. location A ltitu d e (m asl)


1 2001 pwcoll #012 Pawe 1100
2001 pwco!#017 Pawe 1100
I2
3 Baji C heck
4 2001 pwcoll #013 Mambuk 1200
5 2001 pwcoll #018 Pawe 1100
6 2001 pwcoll #016 Mambuk 1200
7 2001 pwcoll #011 Pawe 1100
8 2001 pwcoll #014 Pawe 1100
9 2001 pwcoll #019 Pawe 1100
10 2001 pwcoll #015 Mambuk 1200
11 2001 pwcoll #083 Debate 1400
12 2001 pwcoll #076 Mambuk 1200
13 2001 pwcoll #082 Debate 1400
14 2001 pwcoll #078 Debate 1400
15 2001 pwcoll #080 Debate 1400
16 2001 pwcoll #075 Debate 1400
17 2001 pwcoll #081 Debate 1400
18 2001 pwcoll #077 Debate 1400
19 chiro C h eck
20 2001 pwcoll #079 Debate 1400
21 2001 pwcoll #056 Pawe 1100
22 IS9302 C heck
23 2001 pwcoll #057 Mandura 1350
24 2001 pwcoll #064 Mandura 1350
25 2001 pwcoll #058 Mandura 1350
26 2001 pwcoll #061 Mandura 1350
27 2001 pwcoll #063 Mandura 1350
28 2001 pwcoll #062 Mandura 1350
29 2001 pwcoll #060 Mandura 1350
30 2001 pwcoll #059 Mandura 1350
31 2001 pwcoll #032 Pawe 1100
32 2001 pwcoll #030 Pawe 1100
33 2001 pwcoll #031 Pawe 1100
34 2001 pwcoll #034 Pawe 1100
35 AL70 C heck
36 2001 pwcoll #029 Pawe 1100
37 2001 pwcoll #033 Pawe 1100
38 2001 pwcoll #037 Pawe 1100
39 2001 pwcoll #036 Pawe 1100
Table 1. Continued

No. A c c e s s io n No. Location A ltitu d e (m asl)


40 2001 pwcoll #035 Pawe 1100
41 2001 pwcoll #051 Pawe 1100
42 2001 pwcoll #048 Pawe 1100
43 2001 pwcoll #050 Pawe 1100
44 Birmash C heck
45 2001 pwcoll #054 Pawe 1100
46 2001 pwcoll #053 Pawe 1100
47 2001 pwcoll #049 Pawe 1100
48 2001 pwcoll #055 Pawe 1100
49 2001 pwcoll #052 Pawe 1100
50 2001 pwcoll #047 Pawe 1100
I51 2001 pwcoll #039 Pawe 1100
52 2001 pwcoll #041 Pawe 1100
53 2001 pwcoll #042 Pawe 1100
54 2001 pwcoll #038 Pawe 1100
55 2001 pwcoll #043 Pawe [1100
56 2001 pwcoll #044 Pawe 1100
57 2001 pwcoll #045 Pawe 1100
58 2001 pwcoll #040 Pawe 1100
59 ETS-639 C heck 1100
60 2001 pwcoll #046 Pawe 1100
61 2001 pw coll #001 Pawe 1100
62 2001 pwcoll #008 Pawe 1100
63 2001 pwcoll #002 Pawe 1100
64 2001 pw coll #006 Pawe 1100
65 2001 pwcoll #009 Pawe 1100
66 2001 pw coll #005 Pawe 1100
67 2001 pwcoll #004 Pawe 1100
68 2001 pw coll #007 Pawe 1100
69 2001 pwcoll #010 Pawe 1100
70 2001 pwcoll #003 Pawe 1100
71 2001 pwcoll #069 Dibate 1450
72 2001 pwcoll #068 Dibate 1450
73 2001 pw coll #070 Dibate 1450
74 2001 pwcoll #065 Mandura 1350
75 2001 pw coll #074 Dibate 1450
76 2001 pw coll #066 Mandura 1350
77 2001 pwcoll #072 Dibate 1450
78 2001 pwcoll #071 Dibate 1450
79 2001 pw coll #073 Dibate 1450
Table 1. Continued

No. A c c e s s io n No. Location A ltitu d e (m asl)


80 2001 pw coll #067 Dibate 1450
81 2001 pwcoll #028 Pawe 1100
82 2001 pwcoll #020 Pawe 1100
83 2001 pwcoll #021 Pawe 1100
84 2001 pw cod #025 Pawe TlOO
85 2001 pwcoll #027 Pawe 1100
86 2001 pwcoll #024 Pawe 1100
87 2001 pw coll #026 Pawe 1100
88 ETS-1176 C h eck
89 2001 pwcoll #022 Pawe 1100
90 2001 pwcoll #023 Pawe 1100
91 2001 pwcoll #086 Bulen Low Land 1370
92 2001 pwcoll #090 Galesa 1460
93 2001 pwcoll #089 Galesa 1460
94 Muyrra-1 C heck
95 2001 pwcoll #085 Bulen Low Land 1370
96 2001 pw coll #088 Bulen Low Land 1370
97 2001 pwcoll #084 Bulen Low Land 1370
98 2001 pwcoll #092 Mankush 800
99 Murya-2 check
100 2001 pwcoll #087 Bulen Low Land 1370
27

3.3 E xp erim en tal P ro ced u res

3.3.1 Design o f the e x p erim en t and planting

The accessions were evaluated in 10 x 10 simple lattice design with two replications. The plot

size was 5 m long two rows with a spacing o f 0.75m between rows 0.15m between plants (a

plot area o f 7.5 m2). The spacing between blocks was 1.5m. During planting the seeds were

drilled in rows and at about 2 0 days alter planting thinned to 15 cm distance between plants.

lOOkg/ha DAP and 50 kg/ha Urea were applied at planting and knee height, respectively.

3.3.2 Data co llected

3.3.2.1 Data co lle c te d on plot basis

1. Days to em ergence- the number o f days from sowing to 50% emergence o f the plants.

2. Days to flowering- the number o f days from planting to when 50% o f the plants in plot

reached 50% flowering.

3. Days to maturity- the number o f days from planting to the date on which seeds on the

lower pail o f panicle formed black layer.

4. Yield per plot (gm) - weight o f grain yield taken from the two rows.

5. Head com pactness - scored by visual observations (1-3) scale and were described as loose,

very loose and compact.

6. Head shape- scored by visual observation (1-3 scale). The type o f head shapes are:

l=curved, 2=haif curved, and 3=straight.

7. Thousand seed weight - this was estimated based on weight of 250 seeds in grams drawn

randomly from bulked seeds o f five heads.


28

8. Grain color - was scored based on visual observation (1-3 scale) with white scored as ‘ 1 \

brown ‘T and red '3 '.

9. Glume color- scored based on visual observation from the plot by considering six types o f

glume color, white (1), yellow (2), brown (3), red (4), purple (5) and gray ( 6 ).

10. Glume cover - scored by visual observation o f the grain on the intact plants from the plot:

fully covered (1), half covered (2) and uncovered (3 ).

11. Number of seeds per head - was calculated from the 1000-seed weight and single head

grain weight. Using the following equation.

Seeds/head = yield/plant in gram X 1 0 0 0

1000 seed weight in gram

12. Lodging- assessed by visual observation (1-9 scale) l=free o f lodging, 5= 50% lodged

and 9= 1 0 0 % lodged.

13. Disease and insect pests - common disease and insect pests o f the area like grain mold

and stalk borer were scored using 1-9 scale (1= non infected, 9= highly infected).

3.3.2.2 Data co llected on individual plant basis

The data were collected from 5 plants randomly sampled from each plot.

1. Leaf width (cm) - width of the third leaf from the top measured at its widest part.

2 . L eaf length (cm) - the distance from the collar to the leaf tip o f the third leaf from the top.

3. Number of leaves per plant - leaves were counted from the base to tlag leaf.

4. Single leaf area (cm 2) - was calculated using the formula K x L x W. where I< is the

“adjustment factor” 0 . 747, L is length and W is the width (Stickler et cil., 1961).
5. Leaf area per plant (cm 2) - was calculated by multiplying single leaf area by the number

o f leaves per plant (Pearce cl a/., 1975).

6. Stalk diam eter (cm) - the maximum measurement was obtained by rotating the mid point

o f the internodes immediately above ground between the jaw s o f a pair o f calipers

7. Internode length (cm) - the distance from the most top node to the next node below.

8. Plant height (cm) - the distance from the base o f the stalk at ground level to the tip o f the

head.

9. Panicle exertion (cm) - the distance from the end o f the Hag leaf sheath to the base o f the

panicle.

10. Head width (cm) -th e diameter o f the head at its widest part.

11. Head length (cm) - the measurement from the base o f the panicle to the tip o f the panicle.

12. Head weight (g) - the mean weight o f the five heads randomly taken from a plot.

13. Yield per plant (g) - the average weight o f grain harvested from five random plants in a

plot.

3.4 S tatistical A n alysis

3.4.1 Frequency of genotypes for qualitative traits

The frequency distribution graph was used to show the observed variation between qualitative

traits o f the studied genotypes. For example the number o f genotypes with white seeds were

counted and changed to percentage.


30

3.4.2 A n alysis o f varian ce

The total variability present in the studied genotypes for each trait was estimated following the

standard procedures o f analysis o f variance for simple lattice design and RCBD ANOVA

(Gomeze and Gomez 1984; Rangaswamy, 1995) using SAS computer package (SAS, 2 0 0 1 ).

Since the relative efficiency o f simple lattice design over randomized complete block design

(RCBD) was low (Appendix 2), computation o f variance components that are used for the

estimation o f other parameters was conducted using RCBD ANOVA.The randomized

complete block design analysis o f variance was used to drive variance components as

structured below in Table 4 (Cochran and Cox, 1957).

Table 2 RCBD ANOVA and expected mean squares.

Mean square Expected mean

Source of variation D.f. squares

Replications (r-1 ) MSr <J %-l- gcr -R

Genotypes g-1 MSg o-2e + r<r2g

Error ( r-1)(g -1) MSe (7 2..

Total rg -1

Df -degrees of freedom, r = number of replication, and g = number of genotypes

MSr = mean square of replication. MSg = mean square of genotypes. MSe = mean square of error
RCBD ANOVA was computed using the following model.
Yy = (a + fj +gi + ejj

Where, Yij= the observation o f the i’h genotype in the j l 1 replication

(.1= the grand mean o f trait Y

ih
i> the effect of j replication

gi= the effect o f the ith genotype

Cjj = experimental error effect

3.4.3. E stim atio n o f p h e n o typ ic and g en o ty p ic v arian ce s

The variance components were estimated from the expected mean square using the random

model where the genotypes were considered as shown in Table 2 . The mean squares were

equated to their expectations for the estimation o f variance components. Based on the

estimation o f variance components, namely genotypic variance 2g). environmental variance

%) and phenotypic variance were estimated according to Falconer (1981) as:

Genotypic variance ( cr 2g) = MSg- MSe


r
Where, cr2 g= Genotypic variance

MSg = genotypic mean squares,

MSe = error mean squares

r = the number o f replications


32

( a c) ~ M S e/r ( environmental variance on genotype mean basis)

MSe = error mean square

Phenotypic variance ( o' 2p) = cr 2 g 4- a % = MSg


J*

Where, “p) = Phenotypic variance

Variability was estimated using range, standard error, phenotypic and genotypic variances and

phenotypic and genotypic coefficient o f variation. The phenotypic and genotypic coefficients

o f variation were calculated according to the method suggested by Burton (1953) as:

0 X 100

pcv = ( Y... )

Where Y ... is mean value o f trait y.

<rlg
X 100
GCV = I Y...

IIcritability in broad sense (hj}2): was calculated according to Allard and hansch (1964) as:

h n2 ^ 2o x 100

Expeclcd genetic advance (GA): was estimated using the formula of Johnson el a /., (1955)

as:

GA <Jlo x k cr _ h2 k cr
Where, cr and cr 2p are defined as above, k is the selection differential.

3.5 Phenotypic and G enotypic Correlation Coefficients

Covariance analysis followed the same fashion as that o f analysis o f variance, and the mean

cross products were equated with their expectations to solve for the covariance component.

Table 3. Analysis o f covariance

M SCP Expected

Source of variation D.f. MSCP

Replication r -1 MSCPrxy

Genotype g -i MSCPgxy c r 2eXy + 2gx>

Error (r - l)( g - l) MSCPexy cr "exy

df= degrees of freedom. r= number of replications. g= number of genotypes. MSCPrxy = mean sum of cross
product o f replication for trails x and y. MSCPgxy= mean sum o f cross product o f genohpe for traits x and v.
MSCPexv= mean sum of cross product of environment for trait x and y. cr -exy = environment covariance
between iraits x and y. cr -pxy =genotypic co\ ariance of traits \ and y.

Genotypic covariance (cr “gx%) =.- MSCPgxv - MSCPexv


r

Phenotypic covariance ( cr ~pxv) = a 2gxy + cr exy

Where, cr 2exy = environmental covariance between trait x and y = MSCPexv


r

Phenotypic correlation, the observable correlation between two variables, which includes both

genotypic and environmental components between two variables, was estimated using the

formula suggested by Miller el cv/., (1958) and as:


34

g" pxy

rpxy = J(o'-px)(cr:py)

cr2gxy

rgxy = v V V K f f V )

Where rpxv is phenotypic correlation coefficient and rgxy is genotypic correlation coefficient

between characters x and y; ^"pxy and & 2frxy are phenotypic covariance and genotypic

covariance between characters x and y, respectively.

Phenotypic ( cr 2pxy) and genotypic ( cr 2gNy) covariance was computed from the table o f

covariance analysis (Table 3) in a manner similar to that o f the analysis o f variance.

The coefficient o f correlations at phenotypic level were tested for their significances with

table for simple correlation coefficient using g-2 df as suggested by Gomez and Gomez (1984)

or using simple t- table, with observed t.

IpxXgll
t V 1-r, 2

The calculated Y value was compared with the Y tabulated value at g-2 degree o f freedom.

(g= 100) at 5% and 1% level o f significance (where g is the number o f genotypes).

The correlation coefficient at genotypic level was tested with the following formula forwarded

by Robertson (1959);

t= r gXy / S E r gXy Where, rgxy ^genotypic correlation coefficient,


I 35

SErgxy = standard error o f genotypic correlation coefficient

lO - r g x t f /
SErgxy = ' Z 2lfxlfy

Where, l r xand h \ are heritability for character x and y.

The calculated t value for each genotypic correlation was tested against tabulated t at (g-2)

degrees o f freedom.

3.6 Path C o e ffic ie n t A n alysis

Path analysis followed the correlation analysis. The use o f path analysis requires a cause and

effect situation among the variables. Path coefficient analysis was calculated using formula

suggested by Dewey and Lu (1959) to assess direct and indirect effects o f different variables

on grain yield as:

r ij = P ij + X r ikpkj

Where r,, is mutual association between the independent traits (i) and dependent variable (j) as

measured by the correlation coefficient, p,j is component of direct effects o f the independent

trait (i) on the dependent variable (j); and Vi'ikPkj is the summation o f components o f indirect

effect o f a given independent trait i on the dependent variable j via all other independent traits

k.

The residual effect (U) was calculated using the formula (Dewey and LU, 1959) as:

U= v 1 - R~ , where R 2 = X rikpkj

Where, U= the residual (unexplained variation o f the dependent variable that is not accounted

for by Path coefficients).


36

In this study, grain yield was considered as the dependent trait and all other traits were taken

as independent traits.

3.7 Cluster Analysis

M ahalanobis's generalized distance (D“) statistics was used for assessing the divergence

between genotypes based on 18 traits measured. The generalized distance between any two

populations is defined as:

D 2 ij = (Xi- Xj) S ' 1 ( X i- X j)

Where D “ij = is the distance between any two groups i and j. x 1 anc^ X J are

vector mean o f the traits for the i"’ and j lh groups respectively, and S' 1 = the inverse o f

the pooled covariance matrix.

3.8 Group Discrim inant Analysis

Group discriminant analysis is used to classify genotypes into one o f the groups based on

future observations. Alemayehu (2003) first introduced its statistical procedure as a statistical

technique useful in taxonomic problems.

He denoted the linear discriminant function as: L=biXi + 1^2X 2+------------ +bpXp

Where, b l, b 2------ bp are coefficients o f the function which provide maximum discrimination

between the groups.

Xi, X 2 and Xp are the variables from which measurements are taken.
37

The seed colors and head compactness were considered as grouping variables and the

germplasm accessions were classified into either o f seed colors and head compactness type

based on the multiple traits measurements using the SPPS version 10.0 computer program.

The data was standardized using SYSTAT version 8.0 (SPSS, 1998) before discriminant

analysis.
38

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

4.1 Variability of Qualitative Traits in the Landraces


Six qualitative traits, namely, grain color, head compactness, presence or absence o f awns,
glume cover, glume color and head compactness were recorded for the landraces studied.

Variability was observed in all six traits except for head shape.

4.1.1 Grain color

The proportion o f genotypes in the white, red and brown grain was 76.5%, 15.5% and 8 %,

respectively (Fig 1). This seems to be the result o f conscious artificial selection that favored

the white colored genotypes and discriminated brown and red ones. Amsalu and Endeshaw

(1998) reported that white and brown seeds were the most frequent grain color types in

sorghum accessions collected from the major sorghum growing areas in the country. The

observed frequencies o f the different color categories in the current study could be

associated with the utilization and disease tolerance aspect o f the crop. Sorghum is the

staple crop in the collection area where white colored grain types make better quality injera

and porridge than the red and brown colored sorghums. Sorghums other than the white

grained types are mainly used for making Telia, a local home made alcoholic drink.

Besides, the white seeded sorghums fetch better market price than the other two sorghum

types and thus it is not surprising that the white seeded types cover large land area than the

red and brown sorghum types. Dogget (1982) similarly indicated that white colored

sorghums are known for their good food quality despite their susceptibility to grain mold.

The white grain sorghum lacks certain polyphenolic compounds that serve to protect the

sorghum grain from pre-harvest germination in humid regions in the intermediate and high
39

land areas, while red and brown colored seeds are rich in polyphenotic compounds (Asante,

1995).

90 -i

80 i

70 1

60 ■

0>
c 50 i
CD
Z3
cr
CD1_____
40 :
Li-
30 ;

10 ;
i
0 1
white brown red

Grain color
Figure 1. Frequency distribution of grain color for 100 genotypes

4.1.2 Absence or presence of awns

Most o f the genotypes (92.5%) in the current study were awnless while 7.5% o f them had

awns (Fig .2). The current finding is in partial agreement with previous findings indicating

the frequent occurrence o f aweless sorghums in the lowlands (Amsalu and Endeshaw,

1998). They authors compared sorghum accessions collected from the highlands,

intermediate altitude and lowlands and reported that the presence o f awns increased as one

moves from the lowlands to the highlands. In contrast to the case in small cereals, awn

might have lost its adaptive significance in sorghum as it was reported to be absent in most
40

o f the sorghum genotypes that were collected both in the warm and dry lowlands and the

humid highlands, as was reported by (Amsalu and Endeshaw 1998). In this study on

sorghum collected from Metekel Zone, a zone dominated by lowland areas but where there

exists extended wet growing season, awns seem to play little or no role.

Awn in sorghum might play a significant role in reducing evapotranspiration and that it is

likely that the awnless character is favored in sorghum to reduce evapo-transpiration in dry

low land areas Amsalu and Endeshaw, 1998. In the current study, however, there is no

evidence that would support the suggested role o f awn in reducing evapotranspiration. The

collection area in the current study is wet and warm lowland that represents the north­

western lowlands o f Ethiopia where the annual rainfall is 1500 mm and above and where

moisture stress cannot be considered as a serious problem. The role o f awns in reducing

evapotranspiration would not be evident. Nevertheless, Amsalu and Endeshaw (1998) gave

an explanation regarding the absence o f awns in the lowlands as compared to the high and

mid altitude areas o f the country. The more prevalence o f certain foliar diseases in the crop

in the intermediate and highland than in the lowland areas and associated loss o f

photosynthetic areas could be compensated by the presence o f awns in the highlands.


41

100 -
90

80

70

| 60
CD
=3 50
cr

30

20

Awn less Awned


Awn

Figure 2. Frequency distribution of awn for 100 genotypes

4.1.3 Head com pactness and head shape of the sorghum genotypes

All the Metekel collections in the current study were characterized by straight heads.

However, few o f the materials that were included as standard checks, were o f the goose

necked types. In the current study, the compact headed sorghum types represent a relatively

small percentage o f the genotypes collected (39%) as compared to the loose head types that

make up 61% o f the genotypes (32% loose and 29% very loose) As shown in Fig 3. The

reason for the observed high percentage o f loose headed materials than the compact headed

materials seems that there was targeted selection o f materials for grain mold resistance.

Grain mold is a major problem in Metekel zone where the relative humidity and rainfall are

high during the main growing season. Compact head types make favorable conditions for

grain mold development. Stemler el a/. (1977) and Prasada Rao and Mengesha (1981) gave

supporting explanation that the open panicle of sorghum is an adaptive trait which
42

facilitates quick drying o f the panicle in areas o f high rainfall and humidity, thereby

minimizing grain weathering due to fungal diseases such as grain mold.

Amsalu and Endeshaw (1998) reported similar observation where loose panicle types with

drooping branches occur abundantly in relatively cool and wet regions o f Ethiopia such as

Wellega, Illubabor, Shewa and Sidamo.


45 t

40

35

30 -

25 -

20

15 i

10

5 H

Loose V e ry loose Co m pact

Head c o m p a c tn e s s

re 3. Frequency distribution o f head com pactness for 100 genotypes

100 -

60

H a If c u r v e d S tra i g h t

Head shape

Figure 4. Frequency distribution of head shape for 100 genotypes


44

4.1.4 Glume cover and color

Sixty five percent o f the accessions had grains that are half covered with the glumes, 5% had

uncovered grains while 30% had fully covered grains (Fig 5). Selection seems to have favored

grains either half-covered or uncovered with the glumes. This seems to be an adaptive feature

that facilitates quick drying that minimizes grain mould. Amsalu (2000) observed that the

Collections that had 25% glume covered seeds were the most frequent followed by 50% and

75% in collections from Gamogofa, Gondar, Sidamo and Wello. Glume covers o f 100 % were

the least frequent. However, the reveres were true in the collection form Wellega.

Distribution o f glume color followed seed distribution about 50% o f the accession had white

glumes (Fig 6 ). A gray and red glumes constituted 15% each while brown glumes were

observed in only 4% o f the accessions. Amsalu (2000) has similarly observed the frequent

occurrence o f white seeded sorghum germplasms during his study.


70 i

60

50 -

“ 40
a>
d
cr
.?30

20 -

10

Fully covered Haff co ve re d Un c o v e re d

Glum cover
Figure 5. Frequency distribution o f glume covers for 100 genotypes

50

45

40

35 H

O 30
c
0)
3 25 -j
cr
CD
t 20 1
15

10

W hite Brown Red Gray

Glum color

Figure 6. Frequency distribution of glume color for 100 genotypes


46

4.2 A n aly sis of Variance

Analysis o f variance indicated that there were highly significant differences (PcO.Ol)

among the genotypes for all traits, days to 50% flowering (DTP), days to 95% maturity

(DTM), leaf width (LW), leaf length (LI.), leaf number (LN), leaf area (LA), plant height

(PH), internode length (INL), Panicle exertion, stalk diameter (STD), stalk borer (STB),

lodging (LOG), head width (HW), head length (HL), head weight (HW), Grain yield/plant

(YPP) and yield kg/ha (Y Kll) (Table 4) indicating the presence o f genetic variability for

the traits studied. Similarly, previous studies on collections from other regions indicate

significant variation for many o f these traits like number o f seeds/head, days to 50%

flowering, days to 95% maturity, leaf width, leaf length, leaf area, plant height and

yield/plant (Negash 2003).

Since the efficiency o f lattice ANOVA was not high (Appendix 1), we have used RCBD

ANOVA. Estimation o f variance components is easier in RCBD.


T able 4. Analysis o f variance, coefficient o f variation, and R2 for 20 traits in 100 sorg hum g en otyp es

Source of Mean square


Variation
l)t DTF DTM LW LL LA LN PH INL PEX STD
Replication 1 0.72 17,40 6.42 2 5 3 1.30 126262592.00 35.36 17.548.13 0.81 14.52 0.04
Genotype 99 184.30** 19256.25 ** 0.86** 236.20** 7978390.30** 5.44** 11.354.55** 72.43** 123.61** 0.12**
Error 99 0.06 0.00 0.39 17.97 655591.00 0.34 0.00 4.77 0.00 0.02
CV% 1.87 0.72 7.85 7.67 12.05 9.0 6.47 8.64 35.15 12.25
R2 0.97 0.99 0.69 0.82 0.84 0.78 0.94 0.88 0.91 0.75

E ff 101.9 100 100 100.5 100 131.2 101.6 107.6 101.5 100

Table 4. continued
Source of M ean square
V ariation _________________________________________________________________________
Df STB LODG CM HL nvv HWT TSWT NSH VPP YKH
Replication 1 9.68 2.44 0.98 9.768 87.06 83.54 25.92 3.785.28 1.245 32233.10
Genotype 99 1.97** 3.33** 1.76**: 66.29** 8.45** 203.20** 28.79** 274.21 1.26** 1 16.67** 1349769.70**
Error 99 0.44 1.26 0.51 6.9 1.26 53.95 3.49 19191.48 14.93 17158.10
C'V ‘X, 42.14 88.37 40.20 1.3.31 16.89 23.02 11.21 17.64 22.09 15.17
R2 0.74 0.69 0.73 0.84 0.75 0.76 0.81 0.90 0.8.3 0.96

Eff. 113.7 100 100.9 100 109.3 101 100 101 100 100.6

**= Significant al 1%. E ff- efficiency of latlicc ANOVA over RCBD ANOVA% c v - Coefficient of variation R~= Efficiency of the model
DTF=davs to 50% flowering. DTM=days to 95% maturity, LW =leaf width. LL=leaf length. LA=leaf area. LN ~leaf number. PH=plant height, INL=internode
length. PEX=Panicle exertion. STD=stalk diameter. STB=stalk borer. LOG=lodging%. GM=grain mold. HL=head length. HW=head width. HWT=head
weight. TSW =thousand seed weight. NSH=Number of seeds/head. YPP= yield/plant. YKH=Yield kg/h
48

4.3 Estimation of Variability Parameters

Variability present in the germplasm was estimated from the range o f values for phenotypic

and genotypic coefficients o f variation, heritability and genetic advance o f each character.

The ranges and mean o f each trait are presented in Table 5.

4.3.1 Ranges and means

A wide range o f values in morpho agronomic traits has been observed in the studied sorghum

germplasm (Table 5). The genotypes had broad range o f maturity period. The early maturing

genotypes reached physiological maturity in 140 days while the late types took 178 days to

mature. More than 90% o f genotypes took more than 160 days to mature. This is because

most genotypes were collected from long growing season area in the sub region. Amsalu

(2000) reported that days to flowering the collections he worked with ranged from 60.58-

188.50 (Gomgofa), 77.08-168.92 (Gondar), 69.58-175.42 (Harer), 100.42-191.92 (Shewa),

106.08-214.00 (Sidamo), 60.58-133.50 (Tigray), 98.42- 171.42 (Welega), 80.58-136.42

(Welo) which suggested that variation in maturity period for sorghum is generally wide and

is perhaps the result o f the difference in agro ecological zones where the crop is grown.

The studied genotypes showed variability in their leaf characters such as leaf width, leaf

length and leaf number and therefore leaf area showed variability among genotypes. The

variation for each leaf character (leaf width, leaf length, leaf number) ranged from
49

T abic 5. T h e observed range o f variation in m orpho- agro n om ic characters.

Character Range (interval) Range (unit) M ean

Days to flowering (DTF) 74-125 51.00 1 16.21 ±0.17


Days to maturity (DTM) 113 - 180 67.00 174.72 ±0.00
Leaf width (LW) (cm) 6 . 2 - 10.3 4.10 8.24 ±0.44
Leaf length (LL) (cm) 6 7 .6 - 120.8 53.20 103.09 ±2.30
Leaf number (LN) 8 - 17.6 9.60 14.66 ±0.41
Leaf area (LA) (cm2) 2,599.13 - 14,227.29 11,628.16 12,394.81± 572.53
Plant height (PH) (cm) 150 - 536 386.00 416.03 ±0.00
Internode length (INL) (cm) 1 2.2-50.4 38.20 35.20 ± 1.54
Panicle Exertion (PEX) (cm) 0 -2 6 .4 26.40 9.69 ±0.00
Stalk diameter (STD) (cm) 1.22-2.38 1.16 1.68 ±0.47
Lodging (LOG) (%) LOO- 9.00 8.00 1.4 ±0.79
Head length (ML) (cm) 14.2 - 44.2 30.00 28.67 ± 1.86
Head width (HW) (cm) 4.2 - 15.8 11.60 10.25 ± 1.26
Head weight (HWT) (g) 9 .8 - 7 2 .2 62.40 34.2 ± 5.19
Thousand seed weight (TSW) (g) 12-36 24.00 23.74 ± 1.32
Number of seed/ head (NSH) 87.5 -2 ,3 4 0 2.252.50 1000.97 ±97.96
Grain mold (GM) (1-9 scale) 0.84-6.94 6.10 2.25 ±0.26
Stalk borer (STB) (1 -9 scale) 0.71- 5.77 5.06 2.82 ±0.47
Grain Yield/plant (YPP) (g) 2.1 -4 1 .2 39.10 21.65 ± 2.73
Yield kg/ha (YKII) 19.33 -4 .5 9 0 4054.91 1.663.17 ±92,62

6.2 to 10.2 cm for leaf width, 65.6 to 120.8 cm for leaf length, and 8 to 17 for leaf number.

According to Amsalu (2000) mature sorghum leaves may reach a width o f 6.5 to 13.46 cm at

the widest point which is similar to what was observed in the current study. In a related study

by Geremew (1993) leaf length was reported to range from 45.22-126.37 cm and usually
50

shorter and smaller at the top. Similarly, the leaves on the main stem may vary in number

from 6.96 to 20.63 depending on variety (Amsalu 2000).

The variability in plant height among genotypes was high and ranged between 150 and 536

cm. The average height recorded was 416 cm, which is very tall. A variability in plant height

o f Ethiopian sorghum from 72 to 615 cm has been reported (Brhane and Yilma, 1978). Even

though the stalk diameter for most o f the genotypes was generally smaller, genotypes were

found to be resistant to lodging. This could be the adaptation o f the genotypes to the area.

The stack diameter range was from 1.22 to 2.38 cm.

There was also remarkable variability in grain mould resistance among the genotypes. The

experimental area is characterized by high rainfall and high temperature. This high moisture

and warm temperature creates favorable conditions for the development o f grain mould. The

variability observed for this trait could be either due to the difference in maturity period and

panicle architecture observed among the genotypes or due to inherent difference in resistance

to the disease. Prasada Rao and Mengesha (1981) have reported that the open panicle is an

adaptive trait, which facilitates quick drying o f the panicle in areas o f high rainfall and

humidity, thereby minimizing grain weathering due to fungal diseases such as grain mould.

Similarly variation in head length ranged from 10 to 44.2 cm which is again within the range

reported by previous investigators (Mengesha and Rao, 1982).Variation in panicle exertion

was also noted to range from 0 to 26.4 cm. The range in the international collections was 0 to

55 cm (Melak Haile, 1987).


51

Mean grain yield o f the accession was 1663.17 kg/ha with the variation ranging between

25.09-4080.44 kg/ha. Genotype 2001 Pw coll # 059 was the highest vielder o f all. Twenty

four landraces significantly outyielded the standard check variety IS 9302, which gave the

best vielder (2200 kg/ha) among the checks. Out o f these twenty four, eighteen genotypes

gave more than 2500 kg/ha. These include 2001 PW coll # 008, 017, 059, 062, 045, 047, 032,

051, 023, 050, 092, 083, 067, 029, 090, 078, 043, and 039. One o f the eighteen accessions,

2001 PW coll # 92, is in pipeline for release. In general, the standard checks performed

poorly with the yield were low yielders and their yield ranging only between 19.33 and 2200

kg/ha. This is perhaps due to poor adaptation o f the varieties to the area and incidence o f

grain mould and straiga. This indicates that better varieties than currently existing can be

developed for the area using local gerplasm collection as breeding materials.

The presence o f genotypes that outyielded the standard checks is an indication for the

possibility o f developing high yielding varieties from the available materials for Pawe and

similar areas. Therefore, the existence o f wider agro-morphological diversity among the

sorghum collections implies the potential to improve the crop and the need to conserve these

resources.

4.3.2 P h e n o ty p ic a n d g e n o ty p ic v a ria tio n a m o n g th e g e n o ty p e s

Heritability estimates are important to indicate the genetic gain that may be achieved through

selection. Estimates o f phenotypic (PCV) and genotypic coefficients o f variations (GCV),

broad sense heritability (h2), genetic advance in original units and as percent o f the mean

(GA %) for the present study are shown in Table 6. Across the 16 characters, the phenotypic
52

and genotypic coefficients of variation ranged from 5.64-81.13 and 5.62-77.22, respectively.

PCV and GCV values o f roughly more than 20% are considered to be high, values lees than

10% as low and values in between as medium (Deshmukh et . a/., 1986). The lowest PCV and

GCV were obtained for days to maturity while the highest PCV and GCV values were

obtained for panicle exertion (81.13 and 77.2), respectively. For most o f the characters

studied, phenotypic coefficient o f variance was slightly higher than the corresponding

genotypic coefficient o f variation signifying that environmental factors exerted reasonable

effect on the traits. On the other hand, the relative narrow gap between the corresponding

PCV and GCV values for all characters indicate the low influence o f the environment.

Negash (2003) also reported low values o f genotypic and phenotypic coefficient of variation

for days to flowering, days to maturity and leaf number/plant. He also reported PCV values

slightly higher than their corresponding GCV values.

4.3.3 IIeritabilitv e s tim a te s in broad sen se

Broad sense heritability (h2) is an important element in estimating response to selection


(Ferguson and Robeston, 1990). In this study, h2 estimates varied from 51% for leaf width to
99% for days to maturity (Table 6). On the whole, days to maturity, days to flowering, plant
height, yield kg/ha, panicle exertion, number o f seeds/head, internode length, head length,
yield/plant, thousand seed weight, leaf area and leaf length demonstrated high heritability
estimates (>75%). Similarly, Negash (2003) reported high heritability for days to flowering

(77 %), plant height (78.5%), days to maturity (84.3%), leaf no per plant (74.8%), number o f

nodes per plant (74.7%), and panicle length (84.8%).


53

Table 6. Means, variance components, PCV, GCV, h2, GA and GA% in the sorghum genotypes for 20 traits of sorghum

genotypes
•>
No. T raits M ean ± SE a 2,, PC V % GCV% h2 GA GA %

1 Days lo flowering (DF) 116.21 ±0.17 89.78 2.37 92.15 8.21 8.15 0.97 0.18 0.15

2 Days lo maturity (DM) 174.72 ± 0.00 96.46 0.79 97.25 5.64 5.62 0.99 0.20 0.11

3 Leaf width (LW) (cm) 8.24 ± 0.44 0.22 0.21 0.43 7.96 5.69 0.51 0.34 4.12
i
4 L Leaf length (LL) (cm) 103.09 ±2.30 89.00 29.10 1 IS .10 10.46 9.15 0.75 0.48 0.46

5 Leaf area (LA) (e n r ) 610.35+572.53 7295.18 2448.36 9743.54 16.17 13.99 0.75 152.25 24.94

6 Leaf number (LN) 14.66 ± 0.41 1.91 0.81 2.72 14.25 9.46 0.70 0.48 3.31

7 Plain height (PH) (cm) 416.03 ± 0.00 5314.72 .362.56 5677.28 18.1 1 17.52 0.94 0.85 0.20

8 Imcmodc length (INL) (cm) 35.20 ± 1.54 31.60 4.62 36.22 17.09 15.96 0.87 10.82 30.74

9 Panicle Exertion (PEX) (cm) 9.69 ± 0.00 56.00 5.81 61.81 81.13 77.22 0.90 0.78 8.05

10 Stalk diameter (STD) (cm) 1.68 ± 0 .1 0 0.04 0.02 0.06 14.58 11.90 0.66 0.43 25.60

11 Lodging (LOG) % 1.40 ± 0.79 0.91 1.50 2.42 112.07 68.92 0.37 1.22 87.31

12 Head width (HW) (cm) 10.25 ± 1.26 2.72 1.51 4.23 20.06 16.09 0.64 2.73 26.63

13 Head length (HL) (cm) 28.67 ± 1.86 26.66 6.49 33.15 20.08 18.00 0.80 0.64 2.23

14 Head weight (HWT) (g) 34.27 ±5.19 70.68 30.92 101.60 29.41 24.53 0.69 14.45 42.17

15 lOOOsecd weight (TSW ) (g) 23.74 ± 1.32 10.87 3.52 14.39 15.98 13.88 0.75 5.90 24.85

16 Number of seed / head (NSH) 1000.97197.96 12.2092.80 15012..81 137105.61 36.99 34.91 0.89 679.25 67.86

17 Grain mold (GM) (1-9 scale) 2,25 ± 0.26 0.60 0.55 1.15 53.77 38.75 0.51 1.29 57.54

18 Stalk borer (STB) (1-9 scale) 2.82 ± 0 .4 7 0.13 1.51 1.82 50.38 20.87 0.17 0.50 17.82

19 Yield /plant (YPP) (g) 21.65 ±2.73 46.97 1 1.37 58.34 35.28 3 1.66 0.80 12.67 58.52

20 Yield Kg /ha (YKH) 1663.17 ± 92.62 63.3721.62 41163.35 674884.97 49.39 47.86 0.94 880.33 52.93

SE=standard e rro r. a 2g= Genotypic variance. a 2c = Environnemental variance. ct2p= Phenotypic variance. PC V % -phenotypic coefficient of variation.
GCV%= Genotypic cocfficieni of variation, lr = heritability. GA = Gcnctic advance. GA % ^Genetic advance as percent of mean
54

Swamp and Chaugale (1962) reported low heritability for grain yield while other authors

(Abu-El-Gasim and Kambal, 1975) reported higher value (93.3%). Medium heritability was

observed for stalk diameter (66%), head width (64%), head weight (69%) and leaf width

(51%). In general heritability was high for all quantitive charters studied suggesting that

selection for the traits would be effective. But it should be noted that this is broad sense

heritability and hence is not absolute indicator o f selection efficiency. According to Singh

(1999), if heritability o f a character is very high, say 80% or more, selection for that

character is easy, but the masking effect of the environment is high on traits with low

heritability (less than 40%).

4.3.4 E s tim a te s o f e x p e c te d g e n etic a d v a n c e

Estimates o f expected genetic advance ranged from 0.18 days for days to flowering to 880

kg/ha for grain vield/ha (Table 6). That is, the resultant population obtained after crossing the

best 5% o f the materials will produce a new population whose days to flowering is earlier

than the older population by 0.18 days , and whose yield kg/ha is better than the older

population by 880kg/ha. In principle, many cycles o f selection can be conducted to increase

the superiority o f the new population. Low predicted response to selection was observed for

days to flowering (0.18), days to maturity (0.20), leaf width (0.34), leaf length (0.48 cm), leaf

number (0.48), plant height (0.85 cm) head exertion (0.78 cm), head length (0.64 cm), and,

1000 seed weight (5.9 g). I Iigh values o f genetic advance were observed for leaf area (152.25

cm2), number o f seeds/head (679.25) and grain yield kg/ha (880.33 kg). Negash (2003)

reported high value o f genetic advance for plant height (82.2 cm), leaf area (91.3 cm2) and

kernel number/panicle (373.1). Genetic advance less than 10%) was reported by Negash
(2003) for leaf number/plant, panicle length, panicle width, head weight, 100 kernel weight

and grain yield per plant

An estimate o f expected genetic advance as percent o f the mean is presented in Table 6. It

ranged from 0.11% for days to maturity to 87.3% for lodging and number o f seeds/head.

Genetic advance as percent o f the mean was high for head weight (42.17%), number o f seed

per head (86%), yield per plant (50%), and yield kg/ha (52.93%). Estimates o f genetic

advance greater than 10% but less than 40% were observed for leaf area (24.94%), internode

length (30.74%), head width (26.63%), stalk diameter (25.60%) and thousand seed weight

(24.85%). Genetic advance less than 10% were observed for leaf width, leaf length, days to

flowering, days to maturity, plant height, panicle exertion, leaf number and head length.

Negash (1997) reported intermediate to higher genetic advance as percent o f mean for plant

height (43.3%), kernel number/panicle (65.5%). head weight (40.5%), grain yield per plant

(45.8%) and 100-kernel weight (56%) for highland sorghum o f eastern Ethiopia.

In this study, intermediate to high PCV and GCV values were observed for most of the

traits. Low PCV and GCV values were obtained for days to flowering, days to maturity and

leaf width. O f all the characters evaluated, head weight, grain vield/plant, number o f

seeds/head and grain yield kg/ha appear to combine relatively high values o f GCV, hr and

GA (% o f the mean), making them most important characters, that can easily be improved by

selection. According to Panse (1957), higher heritability coupled with high genetic advance

as percent o f the mean suggests that the traits are controlled by additive gene action.

Therefore, this study indicated that the environment had less influence on these traits and

relatively rapid progress can be made for these traits through plant breeding.
56

4.4 C o rrelatio n S tudies

4.4.1 A s s o c ia tio n o f grain yield w ith o th er ch aracters

The estimates o f genotypic correlation coefficients among 20 traits are shown in Table 7.

Generally, the genotypic correlation coefficients were higher than their respective phenotypic

correlation coefficient which is in agreement with the findings o f Johnson et cil. (1955),

Weber and Morthy (1952), Negash (1997) and Negash (2003). This was explained to be the

result o f the masking and/or modifying effect of environment on the phenotypic association

among traits.

On the basis o f correlation alone (Table 7) head weight, thousand seed weight and number o f

seeds/head had strong and positive correlation with grain yield per plant at both genotypic

and phenotypic level. This shows that selection for, head weight, and number o f seeds/ha can

result in a high yielding variety. Negash (2003) and Geremew (1993) reported that grain

yield per plant manifested positive and strong association with yield/plot, head weight, and

hundred-kernel weight and kernel number. Geremew (J993) indicated positive and

significant association o f grain vield/plant with all yield components except head length at

Melkasa.

The association o f stalk borer attack and lodging with grain yield/plant was negative at both

genotypic and phenotypic level. This indicates that growing o f sorghum in an area where

there is high prevalence o f wind and stalk borer results low yield.
57

A negative genotypic correlation between two traits indicates that increase in one trait would

result in the reduction o f the other; increase or decrease o f both traits simultaneously would

be difficult.

Information on association between grain yield and its components is important for selection

o f the component that was most related to yield. Head weight, number o f seeds/head and

thousand seeds weight were more closely associated both genotypically and phenotypically

with grain yield/plant. Therefore, according to this study selection for higher values o f these

traits would lead to the development o f high yielding varieties.

4.4.2 A s s o c ia tio n s o f o ther characters

Days to flowering was positively and significantly correlated with days to maturity, leaf

number, and plant height at genotypic and phenotypic level (Table 7). Negash (2003)

reported similar result for the association between days to flowering and plant height and

days to maturity; this indicates that genotypes, which took longer time to flower, will also

take longer time to mature, are taller and tend to have more number o f leaves. Tall genotypes

seem to take longer time to flower and mature and hence do not complete the normal grain

filling period under the erratic rain fall conditions, specially during rain fall shortage at late

maturity in an area like Mankush (around pawe). Therefore, grain filling period seems

shorter than what it could have been under longer seasons. Tall genotypes also take more

time to flower and mature and produce proportionally high dry matter than reproductive sink

leading to low harvest index.


58

Plant height was positively and strongly correlated with internode length and head length at

both genotypic and phenotypic level. This result indicates that taller genotypes have longer

internode and longer head.

The association o i'leaf number with days to flowering and days to maturity was positive and

significant at both genotypic and phenotypic level, while the association o f lea number with

leaf area, plant height, stalk diameter, head width, grain mold and leaf length was positive

and significant at genotypic level; but leaf number had negative association with panicle

exertion. This result indicates that plants with more number o f leaves have larger stalk

diameter, panicle head and are more susceptible to grain mold disease. When there is more

number o f leaves/plant, the possibility o f creating high humidity within the plant canopy will

be high which in turn favor grain mold disease.

Stalk borer infestation is negatively correlated with days to flowering, days to maturity, plant

height, internode length, head length, number o f seeds/head and yield/plant. From the

positive correlation o f stalk borer and stalk diameter, it seems that the female moth prefers

laying eggs on genotypes with thicker stalks. This provides more food for the emerging

larvae.

In general, correlation between thousand seeds weight and number o f seeds/head was almost

zero, which means that it is possible to identify genotypes that have many big seeds/head.

Visual selections for genotypes with bigger heads possessing many big seeds would lead to

the identification o f genotypes that give higher yields. At both genotypic and phenotypic

level, leaf number and plant height have weak negative correlation with grain yield/plant and
59

grain yield kg/ha. Leaf width is positively correlated with grain yield. The same trend is

observed for leaf length at the genotypic and phenotypic level. Therefore, to develop high

yielding varieties the breeder should look for shorter genotypes with fewer but longer and

wider haves.
60

Table 7 Estimate o f genotypic (above diagonal) and phenotypic (below diagonal) correlation coefficient among 21 traits in
100 sorghum genotypes grown at Pawe in 2005.

C h a ra cte r DTF DTM LW LL LN LA PH I NL PEX STD STB LOG HL HW HWT TSW NSH GM YPP YK

DTF 0.918 0.107 0.389 0634 0.297 0.637 -0 032 -0 0 2 9 0 266* -0.37 0.162 0.051 0.118 0 001 -0.03 0.101 0 734” 0.047 -0.037

DTM 0.904” 0 173 0.419 0.706 0.341 0.632 -0 088 -0.078 0 282* -0.336 003 -0.035 0 134 -0.065 -0.074 0.085 0.131 0 018 -0.039

LW 0.076 0 13 0.731 0.409** 0.888 -0.311 -0.7 -0 782 0 .6 7 3 " 0.345** -0.226” -0.774 0 761” 0.519 0.435* 0.217 0.846** 0.223 0 044

LL 0.34” 0.37** 0.485** 0 57 0 963 0.001 -0.22 -0.669 0.647* 0 378 -0.341 -0.21 0.588 0.412 0 666 0.027 0 702 0.277 0.154

LN 0.529” 0.593** 0.35** 0 472* 0.542 0.468 -0.412 -0.506 0.619” 0.104** 0.296” -0.397 0.602 0.062 0.158 -0.068 0.535** -0.081 -0 198

LA 0.258** 0.3” 0.81” 0.904” 0.484” -0.131 -0 43 -0.763 0.706 0.401 -0.321 -0.445 0692 0.488 0.627 0.107 0.814 0.274 0.126

PH 0 614” 0.61** -0 237* 0.001 0.396” -0.119 0.452 0.413 -0.186 -0.492 0.054 0.532 -0.33 -0.197 -0.304 0 06 -0.337 -0.053 0.038

1 NL -0.029 -0 0 8 -0.534* * -0.161 -0.343-* -0.368” 0.418** 0 667 -0.682 -0 192 -0.353 0.988 -0.875 -0.179 0.01 0.062 -0 625 0.115 0.186

PEX -0.024 -0.078 -0.539* * -0.557” -0.411* * -0.633” 0.407” 0.611” -0.777” -0.383 -0.167 0.735 -0.903 -0.323 -0.441 *’' 0.054 -0.802 -0.133 0 047

STD 0.218 0.235* 0.564” 0.498” 0.603” 0.606” -0 159 -0.536” -0.623” 0.45” 0.191” -0.773” 0.713” 0.096 0.294” -0.16 0.586” -0.139*’* -0.353

STB -0.24 -0.2 3 2 ' 0.17 0 .224' 0.008 0 .238' -0.3 2 7 ” -0.169 -0 291 ” 0.214* - 0.017 -0.135 0.113 -0.137 0.177 -0.452 0 .292” -0.352 -0.235

LOg 0.114 0.03 *0.135 -0.187 0.139 -0.19 0.31” -0.264* -0.139 0.124 -0.096” -0.247* 0 057 -0.33 -0.262 -0.442 0.033 -0.542 -0.465

HL 0.043 -0 0 2 7 '0.444* * -0.171 -0.307* * -0.326” 0.444” 0.836” 0.634” -0 507** -0.163 -0.337” -0 6 1 5 ” -0.158 -0.084 0.1 -0.483 0.167 0.253

HW 0 096 0.109 0.526” 0.475” 0.433” 0.57*' -0.26** -0 .6 5 3 " -0.699” 0.564” 0 288” 0.031 -0.956” 0.568 0.414 0.15 0.883 0.181 0.325

HWT -0.013 -0.05 0.347” 0.321** 0.055 0.386** -0.137 -0.088 -0.242' 0.096 -0.15 -0 .5 1 4 " -0.114 0.463** 0.451 0.812 0.295 0.815 0.528
cn

TSW -0.018 -0 056 0.27* 0.12 0.471” -0.219* -0.006 -0.368” 0.196 0.144 -0.194 -0 049 0.321” 0.395” -0.005 0.157 0.447 0.275
o
o

NSH 0 08 0.078 0 168 0.033 -0.06 0.105 0.056 0.062 0.041 -0 107 -0.315” -0.296** 0.078 0.142 0.739” -0.015 -0.06 0.854 0.581

GM 0.078 0.116 044” 0.493** 0.347“ 0.544” -0.268” 1 -0.474” -0.634*’ 0.365” 0.427” 0.09 -0.374” 0.481” 0.151 0.272* -0.026 0.048 -0.021

YPP 0.039 0.016 0.195 0.235* -0.042 0.255* -0.038 0.124 -0.097 -0.071 -0.259* -0.345” 0.116 0.166 0.767” 0.386” 0 804” 0.009 0.765

YKH -0.039 -0.039 0.012 0.129 -0.158 0.096 0.056 0.184 0.078 -0.286** -0.178 -0.338** 0.218 0.038 0.482” 0.256* 0 549** -0.039 0.706**

% — jsignificant at 5%. *■ - signifia mt at 1°«


DTF=davs to 50% flowering, DTM=days lo 95% maturity. LW =leaf width, LL=leaf length, LA =leafarca. LN=Jcaf number. PH=planl heiglit. JNL=inter node
length. PEX=Paniele exertion. STD=stalk diameter. STB=stalk borer. LOG=lodging%, HL=hcad length. HW =hcad width. HWT=hcad weight.
TSW=thousand seed weight. NSH=Number of seeds/head. GM=grain mold YPP= yield/plant. YKH=Yield kg/ha
61

4.5 P a th A n a ly s is

Grain yield per plant is a resultant trait o f other component traits. Hence, path coefficient

analysis was carried out at genotypic and phenotypic levels considering grain yield per plant

as the dependent trait and other traits as the causal factors. Seven traits which are a subset o f

all other traits best explained the correlation with grain yield per plant. When all the 19 traits

were used the residual was 48%, while with these 7 traits the residual was only 6% (94% was

explained).

4.5.1. Genotypic path analysis of grain yield/plant

The genotypic direct (bold) and indirect effects o f 7 traits on grain yield per plant are shown in

Table 8. The direct effects o f number o f seeds/head (2.076), thousand seeds weight (0.676),

head width (1.879) and internodc length (1.181) were positive, l'he other traits like stalk borer,

head weight and leaf area had negative direct effects on grain vield/plant. Negash (2003)

found that traits such as thousand seed weight, head weight, number of seeds/head, panicle

width and leaf area had positive direct effect on yield per plant. Contrary to this, Negash

(1997) and Shahane and Borikar (1982) reported maximum positive direct contribution o f

head weight to grain vield/plant. Number o f seeds/head exerted high positive direct effect

(2.076) on grain yield/plant and exerted positive indirect effects through head width. Similar

result was reported by Geremew (1993), where number o f seeds/head was the most highly

associated component with grain yield/plant followed by 1000 seed weight.


62

Table 8. Genoypic direct effect (bold) and indirect effects of 8 traits on grain yield per plant.

NSH TSW STB llW T HDW TNL LA ra

NSH 2 076 -0.004 0.030 ^582 0.281 0.073 -0.020 0.874

TSW -0.011 0.676 -0.012 -0.878 0.778 0.012 -0.118 0.565

STB -0.938 0.120 -0.066 0.292 0.543 -0.227 -0.075 -0.276

HWT 1.686 0.305 0.010 -1.948 1.066 -0.212 -0.092 0.907

HW 0.311 0.280 -0.019 -L106 1.879 -1.033 -0.130 0.312

INL 0.128 0.007 0.013 0.349 -1.644 1.181 0.081 0.115

LA 0.223 0.424 -0.027 -0.952 1.301 -0.508 -0.188 0.461

NSH=Number of seeds/head, TSW =Thousand seeds weight, SB= Stalk borer attack. HWT= Head weight. HW= Head width,
1NL= Intemode length. LA= Leaf a re a .. rg= Genotypic correlation coefficient
63

Thousand seeds weight exerted intermediate direct effect on yield per plant. The indirect

effects o f this trait were positive through head width. Negash (2003), Singh and Baghel (1977)

reported high direct effects o f hundred-kernel weight and kernel number/head on grain

yield/plant in grain sorghum. This result shows that number o f seeds/head can be used as the

best indicator o f grain yield/plant for indirect plant selection for higher yield since its both

direct effect and genetic correlation with grain yield/plant were high and positive.

Although the genotypic correlations o f head weight and leaf area with grain yield per plant

were positive, the direct effects of these traits on grain yield/plant were negative. The positive

correlation was due to the indirect effects exerted on grain yield/plant through number o f

seeds/head, thousand seeds weight and head width. According to Singh and Chaudhary

(1977), whenever a character has positive association and high positive indirect effects but

negative direct effect on the economic trait like grain yield, emphasis should be given to the

indirect effects. Selection o f heavy heads with bigger diameter that contain many big seeds

should lead to the identification o f high yielding accessions.

The correlation coefficient o f head width with grain yield/plant was positive and the direct

effect was positive. The positive genetic correlation resulted not only from the high and

positive direct effect but also from high and positive indirect effects o f the trait through

number o f seeds/head and thousand seed weight. Therefore, for higher yield indirect selection

of these traits is advantageous.


64

Internode length exerted high positive direct effect, but low positive association with grain

yield/plant. Its indirect effect through number o f seeds/head was positive. Stalk borer had also

low negative direct effect and low negative correlation with grain yield. Genotypes tolerant to

stalk borer should be selected. The indirect effect o f number o f seeds/head, thousand seed

weight, and head width on grain yield through head weight are negative pointing to the

necessity o f selecting wider heads with many big seeds. Selection o f only heavy heads with

out considering other traits will produce genotypes with undesired characters which may

negatively affect grain yield per plant.

4.5.2 Phenotypic path analysis of grain yield/plant

The phenotypic direct and indirect effects o f yield related traits on grain yield/plant are

presented in Table 9. Number o f seeds/head and thousand seed weight exerted positive high

direct effect on grain yield/plant. Negash (2003) reported that kernel number/panicle exerted

maximum positive direct effect on grain yield//plant followed by hundred-kernel weight and

head weight. Kernel number/panicle and head weight also correlated strongly and positively

with grain yield/plant.

Indirect selection for grain yield per plant through these traits would be effective. The causes

o f high positive phenotypic correlations o f grain yield/plant with head weight were due to the

high and positive direct effect o f head weight on yield per plant and its positive indirect effect

via number o f seed/head and thousand seed weight.

The high correlation coefficient at both genotypic and phenotypic level and the high positive

direct effect o f number o f seeds/head and thousand seed weight and their positive direct effect
65

on grain yield/plant via head weight makes these two traits the best indirect selection criteria

for high grain yield. These traits also manifested high heritability and genetic advance as

percent o f the mean. The importance o f path analysis here is that, although at the genotypic

level the direct effect o f head weight on grain yield was negative its indirect effect through

number o f seeds/head and thousand seed weight was positive.


Table 9. Phenotypic direct effects (bold) and indirect effects of seven traits on grain yield/plant

TRAIT ~ NSH ~ TSW STB HWT HW INL LA rp

NSH 0.7012 -0.0057 0.0213 0.0976 -0.0168 0.0014 0.0050 0.8041

TSW -0.0108 0.3701 -0.0097 0.0521 -0.0381 -0.0001 0.0226 0.3860

STB -0.2209 0.0533 -0.0678 -0.0181 -0.0134 -0.0038 0.01 14 -0.2595

HWT 0.5180 0.1461 0.0093 0.1321 -0.0550 -0.0020 0.0185 0.7672

HW 0.0996 0.1189 -0.0076 0.0612 -0.1187 -0.0150 0.0274 0.1658

INL 0.0437 -0.0023 0.01 14 -0.01 15 0.0775 0.0229 -0.0177 0.1417

LA 0.0736 0 . 1742 -0.0161 0.0509 -0.0676 -0.0084 0.0481 0.2547

NSH=Number o f seeds/head, TSW=Thousand seed weight, STB= Stalk borer attack, HWT= Head weight,
HW= Head diameter, IN L - Internode length, LA= Leaf area, rp= Phenotypic correlation coefficient
67

4.6 C lu s te r A n alysis

Eighteen quantitative traits were used as input for cluster analysis. Ward's method which

minimizes within cluster variance was used in this study with the SPSS computer software

(SPSS. 1998). This method appeared to give the most satisfactory clustering result with most

populations included in clusters o f similar size (Smeath and Sokal, 1973). The clustering

obtained using W ard’s method grouped the original 100 genotypes in to ten clusters as shown

in Table 10 and Figure 7. Clusters contained from 1 to 23 members. Clusters means of the

traits are given in Table 1 1.

Sorghum landraces from different woredas of Metekel were grouped in the same cluster and

landraces from similar woredas were distributed in different clusters. . No geographic pattern

because the collection area is small and farmers exchange seeds. Therefore, sorghum

landraces collection expedition should be launched and searching for traits o f interest would

be effective in any place where the studied sorghum cultivation is practiced.


68

Appendices

Figure 7. Dendrogram o f 100 sorghum genotypes studied for 18 traits.

Dsst an ce

Genotypes
70

Cluster 1, II, III, V, VIII, IX, X contain late maturing genotypes having 115-121 days to

flowering and 171-178 days to maturity. Accessions in these clusters are tall (401- 512 cm)

with long leaves (86-107 cm)

Cluster IV is intermediate in maturity and is composed o f six checks (ETS 1176, AL70. ETS

639, Chiro, Muyra-1 and Muyra-2), released for the highland zones. Genotypes under this

cluster are tall (422.08cm). They are characterized by the fewest number o f seeds per head

(286), while the lowest value after this is that o f cluster 10 (380).

Cluster V represented accessions that are characterized by shorter height (160.50 cm) and

internode length (25 cm), which made them more important for future use as breeding

materials. Because most o f the tested Metekel sorghum landraces are very tall (above 4

meters),they are not suited for harvesting.

Cluster VI and VII are composed o f early flowering and maturing accessions: 74-112 days to

flowering and 122-133 days to maturity. Cluster VI is composed o f 3 released Varieties (Baji,

IS9302, Birmash) and they were standard checks, which are short seasoned lowland materials

used as standard checks in this experiment. They have the lowest stalk diameter (1.36). Their

thousand seed weight and yield per plant is among the lowest.

Cluster VII consisted o f only one genotype (2001 pw coll # 092). This genotype is an outlier

in its characters and it is in the pipeline for release. In the past four years o f yield trial, this
71

genotype had highly significant difference in resistance to grain mold and striga infestation

with other genotypes. It is characterized by relatively shorter time to flowering (75), and

maturity (122) with a height o f 233.70cm, but had longer internodes (46.70cm), panicle

exertion (21.70cm) and head length (35.50cm). Head weight (66.55g), thousand seed weight

(34.00g,) number o f seeds/head (1321) and yield/plant (40g) o f this genotype were higher.

This genotype could be considered as important source for most o f the traits o f interest.

Therefore, it is a valuable material for future breeding works.


72

Table 11. Cluster means of 18 quantitative traits

Trait I 11 HI IV V VI VII VIII IX X


DTF 1 17.43 118.23 1 17.47 112.42 1 16.25 74.00 75.00 1 19.92 121,38 1 14.88
DTM 176.41 176.53 176.50 171.17 177.00 132.80 122.00 177.79 177.92 178.00
LW 8.26 8.70 9.00 7.95 8.25 7.80 7,70 8.03 7.35 7.35
LL 104.80 107.18 104.07 88.00 86.80 76.63 82.10 86.69 90.47 97.60
LA 9589.00 10,192.00 10,685.00 8,337.00 6,233.00 3,729.00 4,380.00 6,894.00 6,669.00 7,278.00
LN 14.74 14.63 15.16 15.87 11.60 8.33 9.30 13.29 13.39 13.65
PH 412.61 394.77 401.45 422.08 160.85 176.20 233.70 489.96 488.47 512.25
IL 35.04 33.16 30.29 26.43 25.10 37.30 46.90 38.18 43.19 46.78
EX 4.49 5.45 4.27 4.88 10.60 12.17 21.70 21.50 19.37 20.74
STD 1.76 1.75 1.94 1.80 1.87 1.36 1.68 1.45 1.34 1.62
HL 25.89 26.05 23.56 18.20 16,20 26.88 35.50 30.77 33.91 37.80
HW 11.01 10.41 12.89 1 1.87 10.85 7.30 11.20 7.79 8,66 6.62
HWT 39.23 31.90 45.20 18.75 25.75 27.1 1 66.55 32.97 30.52 15.05
TSWT 25.04 25.64 24.60 19.92 23.00 21.50 34.00 20.33 23.00 19.25

SPH 1 152.00 793.00 1,278.00 286.00 819.00 799.00 1,321.00 1,266.00 945.00 380.00
YPP 27.27 19.53 25.36 5.13 17.58 16.10 40.00 23.94 21.21 6.24
YKH 2750.29 1591.79 1776.58 188.92 736.66 1542.45 2741.33 1905.22 2102.00 623.42

DTF=days lo 50% flowering, DTM=days to 95% maturity. LW =Ieaf w idth. LL ~leaf length, LA=lcaf area, LN=leaf number. PH=plant height. INL=inter node
length. PEX=Panicle exertion. STD=stalk diameter. HL=head length. HW=head width. HWT=head weight, TSW =thousand seed weight. NSH=Number of
seeds/head, YPP= yield/plant, YKH=Yield kg/ha
73

Inter cluster distance (D2) was computed and the results are presented in Table 12. Distance

between clusters 1 and II was minimum (D2 =7.67) followed by that o f clusters VIII and IX

(13.53), 1 and VI (15.06) and II and III (19.19). The maximum distance was found between

cluster VII and X (663.93).

As maximum Variations in the subsequent generations is expected from crosses that involve

parents from the clusters characterized by maximum inter-class distances, the crossing o f

2001 pw coll # 092 from cluster VII with those from clusters VIII and IX is expected to

produce desirable recombinants. Cluster VII which consisted only “2001 PW coll # 092”

accession is expected to produce segregates with moderate to high variations if they will be

crossed with parents selected from cluster I, 11 and 111. Since the inter cluster distances

between cluster VI and I, 11 and III were fairly large, hybridization o f parents selected from

cluster VI with parents from clusters I, II and III can produce progenies with desirable

variations.

On the other hand, crossing between cluster 1 and II; II and III; VIII and IX could not

produce desirable recombinants since the inter-cluster distances between these groups were

very small indicating their closeness and similarity o f their genetic make up. Distances

between clusters I and III; I and IV; I and VIII; 1 and IX; II and IV, VIII, IX; III and IV; IV

and VIII, IX; VIII and X; IX and X were also observed to be small (Table 12). Thus

crossings that involve parents from these groups may not produce progenies with desirable

variations.
74

Therefore, crossing distant clusters like 2001 PW coll # 92 cluster VII which is high yielding,

early maturing, with relatively short height and resistant to grain mold and striga, with parents

selected from cluster I (2 0 0 1PW coll # 8, 23, 32, 39, 47 and 50), II (2001 PW coll # 029, 043,

062 and 51) and 111 (2001 PW coll # 017, 045 and 042) which are late maturing, relatively

high yielding and tall could be good to reduce the hight, increase yield and improve other

important characters like grain mold and striga resistance. These are varietal types suitable for

Metekel and similar areas.

Fable 12. Inter I)" value of’ the 10 clusters of sorghum genotypes

Cluster 1 U III IV V VI VII VIII IX X

I 7.67 15.06 47.70 237.61 468.01 538.43 67.09 78.61 148.36

II 19.19 42.81 221. 21 450.03 559.77 72.59 85.18 139.01

III 69.29 226.86 489.79 558.35 113.34 135.46 221.68

IV 283. 66 441.34 562.44 97.65 99.46 129.59

V 300.68 448.80 308.19 341.60 429.18

VI 145.03 492.92 521.48 517.05

VII 563.56 580.00 663.93

VIII 13.53 59.53

IX 44.36

X
75

4.7 Group Discriminant Analysis

The 100 genotypes were regrouped in to 3 types o f seed color (white, brown and red) and head

compactness (loose, very loose and compact) groups, based on visual observation. The

objective here was to see whether the classification made based on difference in seed color

and head compactness before quantitative data collection was correct or not after data o f 16

quantitative traits have been collected.

In this study, taking the three types o f seed colors and head compactness as grouping

variables, the mean values o f each o f the 16 traits for each genotype were subjected to SPSS

version 10.0 computer packages for classification.

The results o f the classification based on seed color and head compactness are given in Tables

13 and 16, respectively. Using the mean values o f the 16 traits, 75 white-seeded genotypes

were classified into: 64 to their original white, 3 entered the brown and 8 entered the red

group. The result indicates that 85% of the original white color seeded genotypes were

correctly classified, 4% entered into group o f brown and 10.7% entered into group o f red

seeded land races.

The eight brown-seeded genotypes were classified: seven to their original brown, one entered

the white and none entered the red. The result indicates that 87.5% o f the original brown color

seeded genotype is correctly classified, 12.5% entered the group o f white. The 15 red seeded

genotypes were classified into: 1 1 to their original red, 2 entered the white and 2 entered into

brown. The result indicated that 73.3% o f the original red color genotypes is correctly
76

classified, 13.3% entered into group o f brown and 13.3% entered into group o f white land

races.

When the results o f all groups are considered together about 83.7% o f the total population o f

sorghum landraces studied was with minimum overlap, correctly classified into their

respective group during group formation, which was done during seed preparation before

planting.

Table 13. Summary of discriminant analysis for 100 sorghum genotypes by


grain color.
D estcription Grain color P redicted group m em bership Total

White Brown Red


White 64 3 8 75
O riginal C ount Brown 1 7 0 8
Red 2 2 11 15
White 85.3 4 10.7 100
% Brown 12.5 87.5 0 100
Red 13.3 13.3 73.3 100

83.7% o f original grouped cases correctly classified.

For classification o f seed color more contribution had been seen from traits like days to

maturity, days to flowering, head length and stalk diameter (Table 17). Mean o f the three seed

color groups are presented in Table 14. The white colored genotypes were late maturing, tall

and relatively high yielding. Red seeded group is early maturing and low yielding.
77

Table 14. Group means of 21 traits of white, brown and red colored
sorghum genotypes studied.

Grain color
Trait White Brown Red
Days to flowering 116.96 106.87 100.6
Days to Maturity 176.15 157.00 163.4
Leaf width (cm) 8.47 7.52 8.36
Leaf length (cm) 103.23 81.87 92.16
Leaf Number 14.30 13.22 12.62
Leal area (cm ) 9413.80 6193.99 7493.82
Plant Height (cm) 371.63 353.62 311.00
Internode length (cm) 31.61 30.80 32.40
Exertion (cm) 4.70 8.37 6.12
Stalk diameter (cm) 1.75 1.68 1.66
Head width (cm) 1 1.24 9.87 9.40
Head length (cm) 24.36 22.94 22.86
Head weight (g) 35.86 17.80 26.12
Lodging (%) 1.19 5.50 1 89
Leaf diseases 1.00 1.62 1.80
Grain mold 2 2.87 2.00 2.00
Stalk borrer 3 2.69 2.75 3.60
Thousand seed weight (g) 23.91 19.50 21.60
Number o f Seeds per head 1015.99 472.26 662.22
Yeild per plant (g) 22.33 9.16 14.49
Yield (K/ha) 1626.26 760.38 898.13
leaf diseases scored on a scale of 1 to 9 where 1 = free of disease and 9
=most of the leaves infected
Grain mold infected seeds scored on a scale of 1 to 9: where. 1 = mold free
and 9 com pletely molded seeds
Stalk borer damage on a scale of 1 to 9; 1 = free of borer damage and 9 =
most damaged
78

Table 15. Variables ordered by absolute size of correlation within function for grain
color classification of sorghum.

F u n c tio n
1 2

.5460 - 195
Days to maturity
5450 -.467
Days to flowering
.3080 014
Head length
-2 7 0 0 081
Stalk diameter
.2610 .072
Number of seeds/head
226(*) - 037
Panicle exertion
.2230 187
Leaf length
.164(*) 086
Internode length
-.0900 -.030
Head width
.165 .3630
Head weight
.315 -.3310
Plant height
- 013 .294(*)
Thousand seed weight
.028 .257O
Leaf width
167 .2140
Yield/plant
005 -,160(*)
Leaf number
085 .1170
Leaf area

- Eigen value .598 .281


- % variance 68 32
- % cumulative Variance 68 100
79

Using the mean values o f the 16 traits, out o f the 27 loose head sorghum genotypes 15 entered

their original loose head, 7 went into very loose head and 5 entered the compact head

genotype. The result indicated that 55.6% o f the original loose head genotypes are correctly

classified, 25.9% entered in to very loose head, 18.5% entered the compact head genotype.

Thirty of the 41 very loose head sorghum genotypes were classified to their original very loose

head, 10 to loose head and one to compact head. The result indicated that 73.2% o f the

original very loose-headed genotypes are correctly classified, 24.4% entered into group o f

loose headed and 2.4% entered the compact headed genotypes.

The 32 compact head genotypes were classified in 25 to their original compact head, 7 to

loose head and none to very loose headed genotypes. The result indicated that 78.1% o f the

original compact headed genotypes are correctly classified, 21.9% entered in to group of loose

headed land races. When the results o f all groups are considered, about 70.0% o f the total

population o f sorghum land races studied was correctly classified into their respective group

during group formation, which was done during seed preparation before planting. Therefore,

discriminant analysis efficiently separated the groups with some over lap based on head

compactness.
80

Tablel6. Summary of discriminant analysis for 100 sorghum genotypes using


_________ head com pactne s s . __________________________ __________________
HEAD C O M PA C TN E SS Predicted G roup M em bership Total

Loose V ery loose C om pact

Loose 15 7 5 27
Original Count Very loose 10 30 1 41

Compact 7 0 25 32
Loose 55.6 25.9 18.5 100
% Very loose 24.4 73.2 2.4 100
Compact 21.9 0 78.1 100

For classification o f head compactness more contribution had been seen from traits like head

exertion, plant height, internode length and head length ( Table 18). According to the

classification result o f head compactness using the discrimination variables, discriminant

functions and group mean value; the compact head genotypes had shorter height, head

exertion, internode length, were early maturing and relatively low yielding; while loose­

headed genotypes were tall, had lower head exertion, internode length and were late maturing.

Higher grain mold disease was observed on the compact headed genotypes. This result

indicates that genotypes with compact head should not be selected for areas like Pawe, which

have, high humidity and high temperature, which facilitate grain mold.

Therefore, it can be concluded that the different colored and head compactness type sorghum

land races are not only different in seed color and head compactness but they also differ in

most quantitative traits. Hence, selection for traits o f interest on group bases is advantageous

instead o f accessing the whole gene pool o f sorghum land races. This also indicates that some
81

quantitative traits are linked with some qualitative traits. Qualitative traits which are easy to

score can be used as indirect selection criteria for quantitative traits.


82

Table 17. Group means of 21 traits ofloose , very loose and compact headed
sorghum genotypes studied.

Head compactness
Traits Loose Very loose Compact
Days to flowering 116.76 118.21 113.14 ± 017
Days to Maturity 174,80 176.96 171.16 ± 0.00
Leaf width (cm) 8.42 8.08 8.33 ± o.44
Leaf length (cm) 101.68 96.41 98.79 ± 2 .3 0
Leaf Number 14.24 14.30 13.90 ±0.41
Leaf area (cm2) 9258.13 8445.10 871 1.33 ±572.53
Plant Height (cm) 421.95 455.94 359.91 ± 0.00
Internode length (cm) 35.61 37.74 31.63 ± 1.54
Exertion (cm) 8.88 13.60 5.38 ± 0 .0 0
Stalk diameter (cm) 1.73 1.61 1.72 ± 0 .1 0
Head width (cm) 10.52 9.67 10.78 ± 1.26
Head length (cm) 27.65 29.13 23.95 ± 1.86
Head weight (g) 37.52 33.56 32.01 ±5.19
Lodging (%) 1.25 1.13 1.84 ± 0 .7 9
Gram mold ~ 1,98 1.52 2.62 ± 0 .2 6
Stalk b o r r e r 3 2.63 2.49 2.84 ± 0 .4 7

Thousand seed weight (g) 23.98 24.06 23.00 ± 1.32


Number o f Seeds per head 1034.09 1018.22 892.75 ±97.96
Yeild per plant (g) 23.22 22.16 19.46 ± 2 .73
Yield (K/ha) 1776.05 1836.03 1404.26 ± 9 2 .6 2
leaf diseases scored on a scale of 1 to 9 where 1 = free of disease and 9 =
most of the leaves infected
Grain mold infected seeds scored on a scale of 1 to 9:1 = mold free and 9 =
completely molded seeds
Stalk borer damage on a scale of 1 to 9; 1 = free of borer damage and 9 =
most damage
T ab le 18. V a riab les o rd ered by absolu te size o f c o rrelatio n w ithin functio n
fo r head c o m p a c tn e s s classification.

Function
1 2
Panicle exertion .699(*) -.319
Plant height .5990 .233
Internode length .4580 .224
Head length .404(*) .131
Head weight -.3420 .291
Days to flowering ,2040 .108
Days to maturity .1750 .059
Leaf length -.216 .6970
Leaf area -.215 .6060
Head weight -.014 .567(*)
Yield/plant .067 .5120
Tousand seed weight -.122 .4920
Leaf widith -.259 .4160
Stalk diameterl -.261

CO
CO
o
*
Leaf number -.053 .2750
Number of seeds/head .132 .271 (*)

-Eigen value 1.48 0.146


-%variance 91.00 9.00
-%cumulative Variance 91.00 100.00
84

G Group Centroid

□ 1= loose

* 2 = Ve r y loose

■ 3 = Compact

Function 1 (87 .5%)

Figure 8. Classification result of head compactness using the discriminating variables


and discriminant functions.
85

5. Summary and Conclusion

Ninety-two land race collections and eight checks (standard) were included in the present

study. The experiment was arranged in a 10 x 10 simple lattice design. Data was collected on

20 quantitative and 6 qualitative traits.

There was variation in the qualitative traits o f the landraces under study. The white, brown and

red grain color genotypes constituted 76.5%, 8% and 15.5%, respectively. Selection favoring

the white color grain land races has been practiced by the local people.

Genotypes with awned glume were only 7.5% while the awnless glume genotypes were

92.5%). The distribution o f loose, very loose and compact headed genotypes was 32%, 29%

and 39%, respectively. All Metekel collections had straight heads, 3% checks had goose head.

It seems that the selection favoring the awnless genotypes with straight heads has been

operating. Despite the importance o f head compactness, farmers do not seem to have paid

great attention to this trait. Mild selection for loose head types (61%) has been operating.

Analysis o f variance o f the quantitative characters showed highly significant differences

among the genotypes for all traits. Sixteen genotypes gave grain yield better than the best

standard check (IS 9302) indicating the possibility o f identifying superior genotype to be

released as a variety or to be used in the breeding program. These include 2001 pw coll # 059,

062, 045, 047, 032, 051, 023, 050, 092, 083, 067, 029, 090, 078, 043, and 039.
86

The tested sorghum genotypes showed a wide range o f maturity time (113-180 days), leaf

width (6.2-10.3), leaf length (67.6-120.8), leaf number (8-17.6), plant height (150-536 cm),

head length (10-44.2), panicle exertion (0-26.4), and grain yield (19.3-4590 kg/ha).

The phenotypic and genotypic coefficient o f variation values o f the 16 characters ranged from

5.64-81.13 and 5.62-77.22, respectively. Low PCV and GCV (<10%) were obtained for days

to flowering and maturity, and leaf width. Leaf length had low GCV. Highest PCV and GCV

value (81.13 and 77.2%, respectively) was obtained for panicle excretion and yield kg/ha.

In this study heritability for all traits except lodging (37%) and stalk borer attack (17%) was

(>50%). Greater than 20% genetic advance was obtained for all traits except days to flowering

(0.15%), days to maturity (0.11%), leaf width, length and number (4.12%, 0.46% and 3.31%,

respectively), plant height (0.2%), panicle exertion (8.05%), head length (2.23%), and stalk

borer attack (17.82%).

High heritability and high genetic advance as percent o f the mean were observed for leaf area,

internode length, stalk diameter, head width, head weight, thousand seed weight, number o f

seeds per head, grain yield per plant and grain yield in kg/ha indicating that these traits were

governed by additive genetic action. In such traits, relatively rapid progress can be achieved

through selection.

Genotypic and phenotypic correlations among 20 traits and grain yield/plant were generally

low for most o f the traits showing these traits cannot be used for indirect selection for yield.
87

However, grain yield/plant showed strong positive correlation with head weight (0.815 and

0.767), number o f seeds/head (0.854 and 0.767) and thousand seed weight (0.447 and 0.386)

at genotypic and phenotypic levels, respectively. Path analysis has revealed that number o f

seeds/head and thousand seeds weight had strongest direct effect on grain yield. The direct

genetic effect o f head weight on grain yield was negative. The high positive genetic

correlation o f head weight with grain yield per plant was expressed through the indirect effect

of this trait on yield per plant through number o f seeds per head and thousand seed weight.

These three traits also had high heritability and genetic advance as percent o f the mean and

can therefore be used for indirect selection for yield per plant.

Cluster analysis based on the 20 traits assessed has grouped the genotypes into 10 distinct

clusters. Mehlanobis distance (D“) varied for different pairs o f clusters. The highest heterosis

and the highest possibility o f transgressive segregants is expected from the crosses o f elite

genotypes from distant clusters. The only accession that belongs to cluster VII is 2001 pw coll

# 092. This landrace has many desirable traits including grain mould and striga resistance. It

can be crossed with the highest yielding genotypes from cluster I, II and IV.

Discriminating genotypes into three distinct seed color and head compactness groups based on

16 quantitative traits revealed that classification using quantitative traits confirmed the

previous qualitative classes for most genotypes. The result showed that 87.5% o f the original

brown, 73.3% o f the original red and 85% o f the original white seeded genotypes were

correctly classified, while 55.6% o f the original loose head, 73.2% o f the original very loose
88

and 78.1% o f the original compact headed genotypes were correctly classified to their

respective classes after considering quantitative traits for classification. Their mean value

indicated that the white seeded and loose headed genotypes are late maturing, are high

yielding and tall, while the red seeded and compact headed genotypes are early maturing, low

yielding and short, and more susceptible to grain mould. Therefore, this study indicated that

different seed color and head compactness groups are different in many quantitative traits.

This may indicate linkage between qualitative and quantitative traits. The qualitative traits,

therefore, can be used as markers for indirect selection for specific quantitative traits including

grain yield.
89

REFERENCES

Abayneh Esayas. 2003. Soil of Pawe Agricultural Research Center. Ethiopian Agricultural
Research Organization, Addis Ababa, Technical paper No. 78.
Abebe Menkir and Yilma Kebede. 1988. Utilization of diverse germplasm resources to alleviate
sorghum production constraints. In: V.Guiragossion and S. Mukuru (eds.),
Proceedings of the EASRAM six regional workshop on sorghum and Millet
improvement in East Africa. 20-27 July 1988. Mogadisu, Somalia. Pp 2 0 - 27.
Abu-El-Gasim, E. II.and A. E.K.Mbal. 1975. Variability and interrelations among characters in
indigenous grain sorghum of the Sudan. E. Afri. Agri. For. J. 41 (2): 125-133.
Agdew Bekele.2006.Assocaition among yield and yield related traits in Soybean (Glycine max
(L.) Merrill). MSe. Thesis. Alemaya University of Agriculture, Alemaya,
Ethiopia.
Agong. S.G.. S. Schittenhelm and W. Friedt. 2000. Genotypic variation in Kenyan Tomato
(Lycopersicon esculanlum L.) Germplasm. Plant Genetic Resource News Letter. 123:
6-67.
Alemayehu, Bekele. 2003. Variability and interrelationship among yield and yield related traits of
lowland sorghum. MSe thesis. Alemaya University, Alemaya. Ethiopia.
Allard. R.W and P.E. Hansch. 1964. Some parameters of population.variability and their implication
in plant breeding. Advances in Agro. 16: 281- 383.
Amsalu Ayana. 2000. Genetic diversity in sorghum germplasm from Ethiopia and
Eritrea. PhD dissertation, Addis Ababa university, Ethiopia.
Amsalu Ayana and Endeshaw Bekele. 1998. Geographical patterns of morphological variation
in Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor spp. verticilliflonini (L) Moench) germplasm from
Ethiopia and Eritrea: Qualitative characters. Hereditas 129: 195-205.
90

Amsalu Ayana, Endeshaw Bekele and T. Bryngeisson. 2000. Genetic variation in wild sorghum
(Sorghum bicolor spp. verticil!iflorum (L) Moench) germplasm from Ethiopia and
Eritrea assessed by Random Amplified Polymorphic DNA (RAPD). Herditas.
132:249-254.
Andersen, W.R.and D. J. Fairbanks. 1990. Molecular markers: Important tools for plant genetic
resource characterization. Diversity. 6 (3&4): 51-53.
Arnon, 1. 1984. Physiological principles o f crop production, hr. U.S Gupta (ed.), Aspects of

Dry Land Farming. PP 49-145.


Asante, S.A. 1995. Sorghum grain quality and utilization. African crop Sci.J. 3:231-240.
Belay Semane. P. C. Struck, M.N. Nachil and Peacock. 1993. Ontogentic analysis of yield
component and yield stability o f durum wheat in water limited environment,
Euphvtica 71:211-219.
Beuselink, P R. and J. J. Steiner. 1992. A proposed framework for identifying, quantifying, and
utilizing plant germplasm resources. Field Crops Res. 29 (3): 261-272.
Bhatt, G.M. 1973. Significance o f path coefficient analysis: the nature of character
association. Euphatica 22: 338-343.
Bhatt, G.M. 1970. Multivariate analysis approach to selection of parents for hybridization aiming
at yield improvement in self-pollinating crops. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 21 :I-7.
Bittinger, T.S., R. P. Cantrell, Chang Tom. J.D. Axtell, and W.E. Nyquist. 1981. Analysis of
qualitative traits in ppg random mating sorghum population. Crop Sci. 21: 664-
669.
Brhane Gebrekidane and Yilma Kebede. 1978. Ethiopian sorghum improvement project progress
report No. 6. Addis Ababa University. Nazreth, Ethiopia.
Brhane Gebrekidane. 1973. The importance of Ethiopian sorghum in the world sorghum
collection. Econ. Bot. 27: 442-445.
Brhane Gebrekidane. 1979a. Sorghum genetic resource in Africa. Eth. J. Agri. Sci. 1: 106-115.
Brhane Gebrekidane. 1982. Utilization o f sorghum germplasm in sorghum improvement: Sorghum
in the eighties: Proceedings of the international symposium on sorghum, January
2-7, 1981. Pantanchiru, A. P. India. ICR1SAT Pp 335-345.
Brown, F. 1989. The Use o f Plant Genetic Resources. Cambridge University Press, New York,
New Rochelle, Melbourne, Sydney.
91

Burton, G.A. 1953. Estimating heritability in tall fescu (Festucci cinmdincea) from replicated
clonal material. Agron. J. 45: 481- 487.
Casady, A. J. 1965. Effect o f a single height (DW) gene o f sorghum on grain yield, yield
components and test weight. Crop Sci. 5: 385-388.

Chang, T.T.1992. Availability o f plant germ plasm for use in crop improvement. hr. plant
breeding in the 1990s. Proc. Symp. On plant breeding in the 1990s, pp. 17-35,

FIT. stalker and J.P. Murphy (eds.) Cap international.


Cochran W. and G.M. Cox. 1957. Experimental design, 2nd (ed). John Willey and sons, INC.
New York, 611 Pp.
Central Statistics Authority (CSA). 2004. Statistical Abstract. Addis Abeba, Ethiopia.
Deshmukh, S.N. M.S. Basu and P.S. Reddy. 1986 Genetic variability, character association and
path coefficients of quantitative traits in Virginia bunch of groundnut. Indian Agri.
sci. 56: 816-821.
Dewey, D R. and K.H. Lu. 1959. Correlation and path coefficient analysis of components of
crested wheat analysis in wheat ( Triticwn ciestivum L.) grass seed production.
Agron. J. 51: 515-518.
Doggett, H. 1982. A look back in the 70s. Sorghum in the eighties: Proceedings of the
international symposium on sorghum, Nov. 1981. Pantanchiru, A. P. India.
ICRISAT.
Doggett, H. 1988. Sorghum Long Mans. 2nd (ed.), Green and Co ltd. London.
Dry Land Farming. Pp 49-145.
Doggett, II. 1991 Sorghum history in relation to Ethiopia. hr. Engles, J.M.M., Hakes, J.G.
and Melaku Worede (eds.), Plant genetic resources o f Ethiopia. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge. Pp 140-159.
Eckebil, J.P., W.M. Ross, C O. Gardner and J.W. Marannville. 1977. Habitability estimates,
genetic correlation, predicted grains from S. progeny testing grain sorghum
random mating populations. Crop Sci. 17: 373-377.
Ellstrand, N.C. and K.W. Foster. 1983. Impact of population structure on the apparent
outcrossing rate of grain sorghum {Sorghum bicolor). Theor. Appl. Genet.66:323-
327.
92

Engels, J.M.M. and J.G. Hawkes. 1991. The Ethiopian gene ccnter and its diversity, hr. Hawkes,
J.G. and Melaku Worede (eds.), Plant Genetic resources of Ethiopia. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge. Pp 24-41.
Evenson, R.E.., D. Gollin and V.Santaniello. 1998. Agricultural values o f plant genetic
resources, FAO and center for international studies on economic growth,
SABI publishing, Wallingford, UK.
Falconer, I). S. 1981. Introduction to Quantitative Genetics (2nd ed.), Longman Inc. New
York
Ferguson, M.E. and L.D. Robertson. 1990. Morphological and Phonological variation in
wild relatives o f lentil. Genet, Resou. Crop Evol. 46: 3-12.
Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO) 1972. Improvement and
production of maize, sorghum and millets plant production and protection paper.
Rome.
Gaber, E. D. 1950. Cytotaxonomic studies in the genus sorghum: Univ. calif-pub. Bot. 23:
283-362.
Geremew Gebeyehu. 1993. Morpho-agronomic characterization o f sorghum landrace from
Gambol la. MSe. Thesis. Alemava University. Alemaya, Ethiopia.
Gomez, A.K. and A.A. Gomez. 1984. Statistical Procedure for Agricultural Research. John
Wiiley and Sons. London.
Guiragossion, V. and Melake Haile. H. Mengesha. 1987. World sorghum collection and
conservation ln\ M. Lynn Goorley and G. Jose Salians (eds.), Sorghum for acid
soils. Proceedings of a workshop on evaluating sorghum for tolerance to
aluminum toxic tropical soils in Latin America, held in culi, Colombia, 28 May to
2 June 19984. Pp 213-277.
Harlan, J. R. 1992. Crops and man, 2nd (ed.), Amer. Madis, Wisconsin.
Harlan, J. R.; Dewet, J.M.J. (1972). A splified classification of cultivated sorghum crop sci. 12:
172-176.
Hawkes, J.G. and Melaku Worede. 1991. Use of Ethiopian germplasm in national and
international programs, hr. J.M.M. Engles, J.G. Hawkes and Melaku Worede
(ed.), Plant genetic resources of Ethiopia. Cambridge university press,
Cambridge. Pp 360-368.
93

House, L.R. 1985. A Guide to sorghum breeding. 2'ul (ed.), Patancheru A.P. ICRISAT.
International board for gcnotic resource (1BPGR). 1981. Crop genetic resources. Rome, Italy.
International Crop Research Institute for the Semi-arid Tropics (ICRISAT) 1990. Industrial
utilization of sorghum : Summarry proceeding of a symposium on the current
status and potential of industrial uses o f sorghum in Nigeria. Patancheru, A. P. ,
502324, India.
International Crop Research Institute for the Semi-arid Tropics (ICRISAT) 1985. Sorghum
variety ICSV-I. Plant material description. No. 8 Patancheru A.P., 502324, India.
International Crop Research Institute for the Semi-arid Tropics (ICRISAT) 1991. Annual report.
1990. Patancheru, A.P. 502324, India: The cereals program (semi-formal
publication).
Iqbal, S. 2003. Path Coefficient Analysis in different genotypes o f soybean (Glycine max
(L) Merril). Pakistan.
Johnson, H. W., II. I7. Robinson and R. F. Comstock. 1955. Genotypic and phenotypic
correlation in soybean and their implication in selection. Agron. J. 47: 477-483.
Kambel, A. E. and O. J. Webster. 1966. Manifestation of hybrid vigor in grain sorghum and the
relations among components of yield, weight per bushel, and height. Crop Sci. 6
(6): 513-515.
Lothrop, J.E.. R.E. Atkins and O S. Simth. 1985. Variability for yield and yield components in
1AP1R grain sorghum random-mating populations I. Means, Variance components
and heritability. Crop Sci. 25: 235-240.
Melak Haile Mengesha and Rao. Prasada 1982. Current situation and future of sorghum
germplasm: Sorghum in the eighties. Proc. The international symp. on sorghum 2-
7 Nov. 1981. patacheru, A. P., India, ICRISAT. Pp. 323-333.
Melak Haile Mengesha. 1975. Crop germplasms diversity and resource in Ethiopia. In: Crop
genetic resources for today and tomorrow. Cambridge University press,
Cambridge, pp 433- 465.
Melaku Worede. 1988. Diversity and genetic resources base. Eth. J. Agric. Sci. 10: 39-52.
Melaku Worede. 1991. An Ethiopian perspective on conversation and utilization o f plant
genetic resources. In: J. M. M., Engles, J. G. Ilawkes and Melaku worede
(eds.), Plant genetic resources of Ethiopia. Cambridge University press,
Cambridge. Pp 3-19.
94

Miller, F R and Yilma Kebede. 1984. Genetic contribution to yield grains in sorghum, 1950 to
1980. Texas Agricultural Experiment station, department of soil and crop
sciences, Texas A & M university, College Station, Texas 77843. Pp 1-13.
Miller, P. A., J.C. Williams, H.F. Robinson and R.H. Comstock. 1958. Estimates of genetic and
environmental variance and covariance and their implication in selection. Agron.
J.50:126-131.
Negash Geleta, N. 1997. Variability and association of morph-agronomic characters with
reference to high land sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) landraces of
Hararghe, Eastern Ethiopia. M.Sc. thesis. Alemaya University of Agriculture,
Alemava Ethiopia.
Negash Geleta. 2003. Genetic variability and associations among yield and yield related traits in
sorghum (sorghum bicolor (L.) Monch) landraces of Western Ethiopia. MSe.
Thesis, Alemaya university, Alemaya, Ethiopia.
Pause,V. G. 1957. Genetics of quantitative characters in relation to plant breeding. Indian J.
Genet 17: 318-328.
Patterson FL Ohm IIw. 1975. Compensating ability of awns in soft red winter wheat. Crop Sci.
15: 403-407.
Powell, W. 1992. Plant genoms, gen. markers and linkage maps. hr. J.P. Moss (ed.),
Biotechnology and crop improvement in Asia. Pp. 95-97. ICRSAT, Pantancheru,
India.
Pearce, R.B., J.J. Morck and T.B. Badey. 1975. Rapid method for estimating leaf area per plant
in maize. Crop Sci. 15: 691-694.
Prasada Rao, K.E and M IL Mengesh. 1980. Sorghum & Millets germplasm collection in eastern
Sudan. Genetic resource unit, ICR1SAT. Progress report'16.
Prasada Rao, K.E and M.FI. Mengesh. 1981. A pointed collection of Zera zera sorghum in the
Gambella area.
Purseglove, J.W. 1985. Tropical Crops.Monocotyledons. Longman Champion Office Pt.Ltd.
Quinby, J. R. 1970. Leaf and panicle size of sorghum parents and hybrids. Crop Sci. 10: 251 -
254.
Rangaswamy, R. 1995. A text book of Agricultural Statistics. Wiley Eastern Limited. New
Delhi. 496 pp.
95

Ready, B.V.S., K.E. Prasada Rao and J.W. Stenhouse. 1990. Genetic diversity and selection
response in ICRISAT. hr. Viragassion, V.G. and Mukuru, S.Z. (eds.) Proc. of the
seventh EASRAM regional workshop on sorghum improvement, Nairobi, Kenya.
Pp 45-52.
Robertson, A. 1959. The sampling variance of the genetic correlation coefficient. Biometrics 15:
469-485.
Sabir, A., H.J. Newbury, G.Todd, J.Catty and B.V. Ford-Lioyd. 1992. Determination of genetic
stability using isozyme and RFLPs in beet plants regenerated in vitro. Theor.
Ap.pl. Genet. 8: 113-117.
SAS Institute Inc. 2001. Carry, INC, USA
Seyfu Ketema. 1993. Phenotypic Variations in teff germplasm. Agronomic and morphological
traits: A catalogue technical manual. No. 6, Institute of Agricultural Research,
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Shahane, T. G. and S. T. Borikar 1982. Character association and path analysis in winter
sorghum. Indian J. of Agri. Sci. 57 (7): 429-431.
Singh, B. D. 1999. Plant Breeding: Kalyani Publishers, New Delhi, India.
Singh, R. K. and B. D. Chaudhary. 1977. Biometrical Methods in Quantitative Genetic Analysis.
Kaliani Publishers, New Delhi-Ludhiana, India.
Singh, R. P. and S.S. Baghel. 1977. Yield components and their implication to selection in
sorghum. India J. Genet. PI. Breed. 37: 62-66.
Sneath, P. II. A. and Sokal, R. R. 1973. Numerical Taxonomy . H. W. Freeman, San Francisco.
Sokal, R.R and F.J. Rohlf 1981. Biometry (2nd ed.). Free Man, W.H. and Co. New York.
Soriano Viana, J.M and A. Jose Regazzi, 1999. Estimation o f genetic parameters in the
Statstical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) 1998. SPSS version 10.0 base manual for the IBM
PC. SPSS Inc., U. S. A.
Stemler, A.B., J R. Harlan and J.M.J.De Wet. 1977. The sorghum of Ethiopia. Eco. Bot. 31:
446-460.
Stickler, F.C., S. Wearden and A.W. Pauli. 1961. Leaf Area Determination in grain sorghum.
Agron. J. 53: 187- 188.
Swarup, V. and D.S. Chugale. 1962. Studies on genetic variability in sorghum. Phenotypic
variation and its heritable component in some important quantitative characters
contributing towards yield. Indian J. Genet. PI. Breed. 22 (1): 31-36.
96

vanderlip, R. L. 1979. How a sorghum plant develops. Cooperative extension service Kansas
State University. Manhattan, USA.
Weber, C.R. and B.R. Morthy. 1952. Heritable and non-heritable relationships and
variability o f oil content and agronomic characters in the F 2 generation o f
soybean crosses. Agron. J. 44: 202-209.
Weible D E and J. B. Sieglinger. 1984. Registration of sorghum parental lines. Crop Sci. 24:
1224-1225.
Welsh, J. R. 1981. Fundamentals of plant genetics and breeding. Jhon Willey and Sons, Inc.
New York.
Wilson, G.L, and J. D. Eastin. 1982. The plant and its environment, hr. J.V. Mertin (ed.),
(ICRISAT) sorghum in the eighties. Proc. of the international sympo. on
sorghum, 2-7 Nov. 1981. Patancheru A. P. India. ICRISAT.
Yilma Kebede and Abebe Menkir. 1987. Current activities, research recommendations and
future strategies of sorghum improvement program in Ethiopia. Paper presented at
the 19lh National Crop Improvement program in Ethiopia. April 22 - 26, 1987
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Yilma Kebede. 1991. The role of Ethiopian sorghum germplasm resource in the national
breeding program., hr. J.MM. Engles, J.G. Hawkes and Melaku W'orede (eds.),
Plant genetic resources of Ethiopia. Pp.351 - 322
Zewdie, M. 1994. Current status o f germplasm holdings at PGRC/E. hr. PGRC/E germplasm
News Letter. No. 2. pp 2-5.
97

APPENDIX
Appendix 1. Genotype means of 18 traits

ACC. NO. DTF DTM LW LL LA LN PH INL


2001 pw coll #001 122.5 177 7.5 112.5 8469.58 13.3 377 30.6
2001 pw coll #002 123.5 176.5 9.09 97.9 10295.54 15.5 416 29.4
2001 pw coll #003 122 177 8.5 106.9 9141.46 13.3 392 34.9
2001 pw coll #004 120 177 8.8 107 11046.69 15.6 434 39.2
2001 pw coll #005 120 177 8.8 98.8 9528.30 14.7 431 32.1
2001 pw coll #006 117,5 176 8.3 108 10118.90 15 396.5 34.1
2001 pw coll #007 119 175 8.4 106.1 10221.25 15.3 464 34.5
2001 pw coll #008 116.5 175 8.3 112.1 10011.17 14.2 409.5 32.4
2001 pw coll #009 120 178 7.6 111.7 9761.19 15.1 425.5 42.2
2001 pw coll #010 115 175 8.7 97.8 9402.12 14.8 396.5 33.3
2001 pwcoll #011 121.5 177 8.65 107.2 10281.09 14.7 413.5 30.5
Baji 74 140.5 7.5 67.7 3569.75 9.4 160.5 35.8
2001 pwcoll # 0 1 2 125 178 7.9 103.5 9749.55 15.9 392.5 33.3
2001 pwcoll #013 123.5 177 8.85 118 12091.48 15.5 382 33.4
2001 pwcoll #014 120 177 9.5 100.8 11292.11 15.8 407.5 28.4
2001 pwcoll #015 115 176 8.6 111.5 11159.17 15.2 403.5 31
2001 pwcoll #016 116.5 176 9.21 107.8 11391.92 15.4 417.5 33
2001 pwcol # 0 1 7 115 175.5 8.6 97.14 10515.13 16.8 396.5 30.9
2001 pwcoll #018 119 177 9.45 106.4 11818.43 15.6 387 34.2
2001 pwcoll #019 113 176 8.1 106.4 9235.19 14.4 408 34.2
2001 pw coll #020 125 177 9 101.2 9065.31 13.3 358 26.4
2001 pw coll #021 111.5 176 9.15 96.4 10064.16 15.1 390 31.8
2001 pw coll #022 113 175 8.2 103.7 9364.75 14.8 434.5 35.8
2001 pw coll #023 115 177 7.8 111.2 9441.28 14.6 378 31.8
ETS-1176 108 175.5 8.4 89.2 9493.59 16.9 435 30.1
2001 pw coll #024 117.5 177 8.7 107 10212.53 14.7 395.5 31.6
2001 pw coll #025 116.5 177 8.4 93.2 9411.26 15.9 433 33.1
2001 pw coll #026 116.5 176 8.5 102.6 9910.75 15.05 399 34.4
2001 pw coll #027 116.5 176.5 8 107.2 9924.27 15.2 401 36.4
2001 pw coll #028 115 177 8.6 93.7 9329.87 15.5 389 33.1
2001 pwcoll #029 113 177 8.9 111.3 9794.79 13.2 364.8 31
2001 pwcoll #030 118.5 177 8.3 93.5 7698.71 13.3 364.5 23.3
AL70 98 160 8.5 97.3 9916.18 16 392.5 26.6
2001 pwcoll #031 118.5 177 9 107.2 10217.80 14.2 409.5 32
2001 p w co \\# 03 2 117.5 175.5 8.3 104.4 9640.79 14.5 427.5 35.7
2001 pwcoll #033 120 177.5 8.6 113.4 10337.97 14.2 387 31.5
2001 pwcoll #034 115 176 8.5 100 9487.18 15 407 37.2
2001 pwcoll #035 115 176 8.8 111.9 10811.04 14.7 368 36.3
2001 pwcoll #036 116.5 175 8.5 105.6 9796.72 14.6 469 39.7
98

Appendix 1. continued

ACC. NO. DTF DTM LW LL LA LN PH INL


2001 pwcoll #037 115 176 8.6 106.6 10202.40 14.6 382 30.2
2001 pwcoll #038 115 175.5 8.6 112 11224.36 15.6 431 37.7
2001 pwcoll #039 116.5 176 8.3 107.3 9909.52 14.7 409 35.5
2001 pwcoll #040 115 176 8.6 98.7 9260.23 14.6 436 33.1
ETS-639 115 176.5 8.2 84.8 8756.93 16.9 452.5 16.9
2001 pwcoll #041 120 177.5 8.2 104.5 9747.13 15 425.5 33.2
2001 pwcoll #042 119 176 9.3 108.2 11617.81 15.5 401 29.3
2001 pwcoll #043 116.5 175 8.5 110.8 10211.45 14.6 408 38.7
2001 pwcoll #044 116.5 176 8.5 111.3 11287.95 16 462 36.2
2001 pwcoll #045 118.5 176.5 9.4 99.8 10164.06 14.4 400.5 27.9
2001 pwcoll #046 115 176 8.1 105.1 9976.75 15.5 383.7 28.1
2001 pwcoll #047 122 177 8.3 114.5 10310.33 14.3 343.5 37.4
2001 pwcoll #048 119.5 176 9.3 107 10766.30 14.6 399 28.9
2001 pwcoll #049 115 177 8.7 101.3 10408.98 15.9 420 38.1
Birmash 74 145 8.4 92.6 4694.30 8.1 206 37.9
2001 pwcoll #050 115 176.5 8.4 85.6 7630.17 14.1 410 32.2
2001 pwcoll #051 115 175 8.9 113 10954.15 14.6 366.1 32.2
2001 pwcoll #052 123 178 9.1 108.4 11390.73 15.3 440.5 28.2
2001 pwcoll #053 121 178 8.4 108.1 11074.80 16.3 421 34.6
2001 pwcoll #054 115 176.5 8.5 100.3 8653.20 13.5 413 31.6
2001 pwcoll #055 115 178 9.5 101.2 10488.93 14.5 421.5 35
2001 pwcoll #056 115 175.5 8.9 110.6 11654.19 15.7 395.5 33.9
2001 pwcoll #057 120 178 7.95 84.6 5492.09 11.3 457 38.3
2001 pwcoll #058 118.5 178 9.1 84 6712.70 12.6 496.5 36.9
2001 pwcoll #059 115 176 8.5 89.8 7880.06 13.8 494.5 36.7
2001 pwcoll #060 115 177 8.5 81.4 6519.60 12.4 157.7 25.6
2001 pwcoll #061 117.5 177 8 92.2 5946.14 10.8 164 24.6
IS9302 74 113 7.5 69.6 2922.55 7.5 162 38.2
2001 pwcoll #062 113 176 8.8 112 9626.61 13.1 382 28.4
2001 pwcoll #063 116.5 177 8.7 113.3 10442.67 14.2 371 32.2
2001 pwcoll #064 115 178 6.6 98.5 5864.95 12.1 519.5 45.5
2001 pw coll #065 122 177 7.8 105.1 8377.35 13.8 381.5 39.5
2001 pw coll #066 122.5 178 8.3 101.3 8491.79 14 513.5 46.6
2001 pw coll #067 119 178 7.1 89.3 7184.31 15.1 451.5 36.7
2001 pw coll #068 118 178 7.7 76.6 6034.16 13.7 502.5 38.4
2001 pw coll #069 108 178 7.2 89 6734.38 14 508.5 47.5
2001 pw coll #070 114 178 7.3 101.6 8021.51 14.5 507.5 47.5
2001 pw coll #071 119 178 7.4 84.4 6365.08 13.3 490 34
2001 pw coll #072 121 178 7.3 86.3 7173.29 15.1 493 36.6
Appendix 1. continued

ACC. NO. DTF DTM LW LL LA LN PH INL


2001 pw coll #073 118.5 178 7.5 83.7 6476.22 13.2 472.5 37.2
2001 pw coll #074 121 178 8.2 91.1 7910.81 13.9 456.5 37.8
2001 pwcoll #075 120 178 7.8 79.7 6036.59 13 485 39.4
chiro 108.5 160 7.5 83.8 7451.95 15.9 402.5 29
2001 pwcoll #076 122 178 7 88.6 6654.65 14.2 504 43.7
2001 pwcoll #077 121 177.5 7.3 98.9 6951.49 12.8 509.5 46.9
2001 pwcoll #078 120 177 7.5 85 5965.62 12.5 501 40.2
2001 pwcoll #079 119 178 7.9 83.4 6347.56 12.9 491.5 39.6
2001 pwcoll #080 119 178 8.3 94.5 7660.05 13.1 509 41
2001 pwcoll #081 123.5 177 7.8 88.6 6603.04 12.8 503 42
2001 pwcoll #082 125 178 6.8 94.5 6032.59 12.5 479 48.9
2001 pwcoll #083 121 178 7.55 98 6853.83 12.4 484 50.2
2001 pw coll #084 123.5 178 7.8 99.8 7830.66 13.4 493.5 44.7
2001 pw coll #085 125 178 8.4 90.4 7063.45 12.4 490 39.2
2001 pw coll #086 123.5 178.5 7.2 86.2 6641.00 14.2 512.6 42.8
Muyrra-1 123 178 8 88.1 7934.60 15.1 427.5 28.5
2001 pw coll #087 124.5 178 7.1 92.7 6438.33 13.2 473 45.3
2001 pw coll #088 125 179 8.9 103.8 9637.06 14 368 35.1
2001 pw coll #089 120 178.5 8.1 90.2 8121.06 14.9 498 39.4
2001 pw coll #090 115 178 7.2 85.6 6330.54 13.9 494 40.5
Murya-2 122 177 7.1 84.8 6466.86 14.4 422.5 27.5
2001 pw coll #092 75 122 7.7 82.1 4380.18 9.3 233.7 46.9
100

Appendix 1. continued

ACC. NO REX STD LOG I HW HL HWT TSW NSH GM YPP YKH


I
2001 pw coll #001 5 3 1.81 1.7 10.45 22.5 38.2 28 814.29 2 22 8 1514.00
2001 pw coll #002 0 2.14 4.05 11.3 22.2 23.8 26 280.95 2.5 7.4 474.00
2001 pw coll #003 0.2 1.88 1 12.1 29.5 36.7 24 975.00 3 23.4 2428.67

2001 pw coll #004 17.2 1.93 1.7 8.9 32.3 26.7 26 881.55 2 14.8 578.00
2001 pw coll #005 16 2 1.58 1 11.05 24.5 32.7 26 873.21 3 22.5 1799.33
2001 pw coll #006 3.6 1.78 1 11.1 27.4 32 32 734.38 2 20.3 1878.00
2001 pw co ll #007 10.2 1.94 1 11 30.9 43.4 28 1010.71 2 28.3 1609.33
2001 pw coll #008 1.8 1.74 1.7 12 23.6 33.6 28 1081.93 2 28.3 2553.33
2001 pw coll #009 7.6 1.75 1 10.85 29.9 41.8 28 923.96 2 26.2 1644.00
2001 pw co ll #010 3.9 1.59 1 10.9 25 43 5 26 1207.74 2.5 31.3 1925.33
2001 pwcoll #011 6.6 1.84 1 14.02 25 48 24 1256.25 1 14.15 1120.67
Baji 10.3 1.21 1 5 35 23.9 32.82 20 1015.00 3 18.3 1096.67
2001 pwcoll # 0 1 2 8.7 1.89 1 10.2 26.1 32.1 20 864.25 3 14.6 592.67
2001 pwcoll #013 7.6 2.23 0.75 10.8 25.3 34.7 32 542.19 4 17.35 456.67

2001 pwcoll #014 5.3 2.29 1 13.3 23.7 39.9 24.5 987.00 2 21.8 1171.33
2001 pwcoll #015 5.6 1.94 1 12.3 17.7 50 6 34 1161.00 1 28.8 2058.67

2001 pwcoll #016 5.1 2.04 1 11 30 5 43.1 28.5 1082.50 1 30.65 2062.00
2001 p w c o l# 0 1 7 2.5 2.02 0.75 12.4 22.8 40.6 24 1245.83 2 31.3 2512 67

2001 pwcoll #018 8.1 2.13 1 11.45 28.9 48.7 22 1404.00 1 25.75 1307.33

2001 pwcoll #019 3.2 1.93 0.75 118 23 7 38 6 24 1123.57 1 26.9 1873.33
2001 p w coll #020 0.7 1.7 1.7 10.27 19.8 28.1 24 607.83 2 12.19 265.33

2001 pw coll #021 3.9 2.06 1 11.5 18.8 33.6 24 979.17 2 21.1 997.33
2001 pw coll #022 3.7 1.61 1 11.4 22.8 46 28 1046.43 1 29.3 1644.00

2001 pw coll #023 44 1.66 0.75 13 28.4 43.6 22 1485.00 3 27.9 2788.00
ETS-1176 1 1.97 0.75 13.65 15.5 23.8 26 203.14 2 4.1 225.33

2001 pw coll #024 2.3 1.72 1 11.2 21.8 27 4 24 862.17 3 19.7 1403.33
2001 p w co ll #025 3.6 1.87 1 10.1 26.8 40.2 26 1058.33 3 24.1 1800.00

2001 pw coll #026 1.5 1.76 1 9.9 28.8 28.8 28 828.36 3 22.6 2189.33

2001 pw coll #027 4.2 2.01 1 10.88 26.2 36.9 24 875.00 3 21 1362.00

2001 pw coll #028 5 1.71 1.7 9.8 28.5 26.9 24 1334.00 3 26.25 1308.00
2001 pwcoll #029 6 1.54 1.7 10.58 24 25.5 24 806.50 4 20.75 2716.67
2001 pwcoll #030 3.5 1.62 1 15.2 15 1 59.4 18 1763.75 4 22.9 1678.67
AL70 10.3 1.59 0.75 12.3 20.7 24.5 20 118.75 3 2.25 20.00
2001 pwcoll #031 4.1 1.71 1 104 23.45 37.1 24 972.00 3 22.5 2043.33

2001 pwcoll #032 8.3 1.68 1 10.1 28.2 42.7 28 1246 50 1 32.1 2996.67

2001 pwcoll #033 4.9 1.77 0.75 11.4 28.6 33.1 24 706.43 4 25.1 1756.67

2001 pwcoll #034 2.8 1.91 4.05 7.9 30.6 30.7 24 841.67 3 20.2 1005.33
2001 pwcoll #035 6.9 1.73 1.7 8.4 26.8 34.9 24 893.75 3 21.45 1378.00

2001 pwcoll #036 4 2.16 0.75 10.75 25.9 29.3 24 1366.43 1 30.5 2091.33
101

Appendix 1. continued

ACC. NO PEX STD LOG HW HL HWT TSW NSH GM YPP YKH

2001 pwcoll #037 2.8 1.68 1 9.4 21.3 28.2 26 662.50 1 17.3 1285.33
2001 pwcoll #038 9.2 1.75 1 10.85 30.8 33.1 20 910 00 3 16.2 1558.00
2001 pwcoll #039 3.1 1.72 1 10.7 24.9 41 24 1112.50 3 26.7 2628.00
2001 pwcoll #040 5 1.51 0.75 11.13 27.1 36.2 24 1002.25 3 21.65 2059.33
ETS-639 0 2.05 4.75 12.5 12.4 17 16 306.67 2 3.8 96.00
2001 pwcoll #041 2.2 1.76 1 11.9 24.2 42.2 28 1024.79 3 25.3 1510.67
2001 pwcoll #042 3.9 1.83 1 14.7 28.7 40.3 28 1165.93 3 22.05 1514.67
2001 pwcoll #043 1.6 1.68 0.75 10.6 29.1 30.1 32 707.81 3 22.65 2643.33
2001 pwcoll #044 13.4 1.78 1 96 22 6 33.5 22 1231.50 3 27.2 2452.67
2001 pwcoll #045 3.4 1.68 1 13.54 21 2 41.5 22 1356.67 3 26.05 3144.67
2001 pwcoll #046 1 1.87 1 13.5 24.7 37.2 26 1000.67 2 23.15 2470.00
2001 pwcoll #047 0.4 1.75 1 11.27 29.1 42.8 30 1073 00 3 34.5 3092.00
2001 pwcoll #048 4.4 2.09 4.05 13.37 23.3 43.6 20 1357.29 3 27.05 1106.67
2001 pwcoll #049 4.2 1.53 1 11 25.6 39.3 26 1333.50 2 29.7 1411.33
Birmash 10.7 1.39 1 9.8 25.6 24.5 24 583.33 3 14 1281.33
2001 pwcoll #050 1.6 1.6 1 11.15 27.3 35.9 22 1083.33 3 23.7 2772.00
2001 pwcoll #051 7.6 1 76 1 11.2 27.4 40.6 26 774.40 3 20.1 3018.67
2001 pwcoll #052 ' 6.1 2.09 1j 13.7 19.4 60.3 24 1508.33 2 26.2 1784.00
2001 pwcoll #053 5.1 1.81 1 10.8 18 44.8 18 1697.50 2 29.3 1628.00
2001 pwcoll #054 8 1.7 1 11.42 26.7 37.7 18 1355.00 3 25.6 1820.00
2001 pwcoll #055 3.2 1.9 1 11.1 26.7 52.7 22 1775.83 3 32.3 2081.33
2001 pwcoll #056 1.5 1.77 1.7 12.33 26.9 38.5 28 1121.14 3 27.2 1638.67
2001 pwcoll #057 15.3 1.42 1 7.4 31.4 27.1 16 1169.00 1 23.1 1500.67
2001 pwcoll #058 23.7 1.22 1 7.1 31.8 33.9 22 988.33 1 21.65 1526.00
2001 pwcoll #059 22.5 1.61 j 1.7 8 7j 27.9 44.2 20 1587.50 1 31.75 4080.00
2001 pwcoll #060 6.9 1.99 1 10.7 14.2 28.2 24 966.00 1 20.25 944.00
2001 pwcoll #061 14.3 1.75 1 11 18.2 23.3 22 672.50 2 14.9 529.33
IS9302 15.5 1.48 1 6.75 31.15 24 20.5 800.00 2.5 16 2249.34
2001 pwcoll #062 5.3 1.42 1 10.9 23 39.5 28 1201.57 2 30.25 3547.33
2001 pwcoll #063 3.3 1.5 1 10.55 27.1 45 26 975.60 3 25.2 1732.00
2001 pwcoll #064 17 3 1.56 1 6.6 40.9 15.1 23 404.00 2 5.75 774.67
2001 pw coll #065 0 1.42 1 10.35 25 .2 ^ 43.6 26 1043.45 3 26.9 1104.00
2001 pw coll #066 23.3 1.58 0.75 54 38.4 13.9 20 270.00 1 5.4 512.00
2001 pw coll #067 24.4 1.4 1.7 7.9 32.1 19.5 22 614.17 1 13.6 2752.00
2001 pw coll #068 22.7 1.5 1 7.9 30.9 34.1 20 1245.00 1 24.9 1684.00
2001 pw coll #069 22.5 1.61 0.75 6.27 39.6 18.5 16 668.75 1 10.7 859.33
2001 pw coll #070 19.85 1.73 1 8.2 32.3 12.7 18 176.25 1 3.1 374.67
2001 pw coll #071 22.9 1.46 1 8.1 26.6 24.7 18 1253.75 1 21.2 1717.33
2001 pw coll #072 24.5 1.59 1 6.7 31.6 32.6 20 1107.50 1 24.15 1484.67
2001 pw coll #073 22.1 1.37 1.7 7.46 31.1 22.3 20 735.00 1 14.7 2189.33
102

Appendix 1. continued

ACC. NO. PEX STD LOG HW HL HW T TSW T NSH GM YPP YKH

2001 pw coll #074 24.9 1.48 0.75 8.1 29.2 28.7 20 1130.00 1 22.6 1945.33
2001 pwcoll #075 21.7 1.33 1 8.3 33.6 30.5 22 896.25 1 19.55 2232.67
chiro 5.5 1.72 5 11.25 21.5 13.5 16.5 375.00 3 6 522.52
2001 pwcoll #076 18.1 1.45 1 8.25 31 31.7 26 844.05 1 21.7 1789.33
2001 pwcoll #077 18.3 1.36 1 9.1 29.2 29.9 24 445.83 1 15.7 2288.67
2001 pwcoll #078 21 4 1.45 1 7.7 32.9 34.1 20 1240.00 1 29.8 2648.00
2001 pwcoll #079 21.5 1.29 1 8.7 31.2 43.4 20 2110.00 1 22.2 1916.00
2001 pwcoll #080 20.1 1.35 1 6.6 32 27.4 20 1242.50 1 23.85 1353.33
2001 pwcoll #081 21.2 1.34 1 11.8 33.4 28.3 22 807.50 1 17.9 1527.33
2001 pwcoll #082 16.2 1.25 1 8.17 37 39.1 20 1297.50 1 25.95 1844.67
2001 pwcoll #083 16.5 1.39 0.75 9.1 39.8 40 24 1527.25 1 29.45 2730.67
2001 pw coll #084 14 1.4 1 8.05 32.7 30.4 24 800.00 1 19.2 1885.33
2001 pw coll #085 21.5 1.46 1 8.1 35.3 32.9 24 1069.00 1 21.8 1186.00
2001 pw coll #086 17 9 1.34 1 7.4 40 7 23.1 22 917.50 1 21.65 1008.67

Muyrra-1 6.5 1.77 7 10 16.1 17.2 20.5 140.24 3 2.9 19.33


2001 pw coll #087 16 1 1.26 5 8.77 31.2 34.4 26 1134.00 1 25.2 2242.67
2001 pw coll #088 2.7 1.94 1 10.95 25.6 21.4 24 512.33 2 14.9 638.67
2001 pw coll #089 17.1 1.65 1 8.4 28.4 32.5 24 1046.00 1 20.3 1821.33

2001 pw coll #090 25.9 1.24 1 9.6 35.1 37 24 1322.14 1 29.9 2692.00
Murya-2 6 1.75 9 11.5 23 16.5 20.5 573.81 2 11.75 250.33
2001 pw coll #092 21.7 1.18 0.75 11.2 35.5 66 55 34 1321.53 1 40 2741.33

GM= grain mold. ML = Head length. HW = Head weight. HWT - Head weight. TSW T = Thousand seed weight. NSPH =
Number of seeds/liead. YKha = Yield kg/ha. DTF=davs to 50% flowering. DTM=days to 95% maturity. L\V=leaf width.
LL=leaf length. LN =leaf number. PH=plant height. INTL=inter node length. PEXE=Panicle exertion. STD=stalk diameter.
Lodging
Appendex 2. Thirteen years mean monthly Rainfall of Pawe in mm.

N o ;; M onth '- 'S |g l9 9 4 •'1 9 9 5 W 6 1996 1399 zm o 2001 20Q2 2003 2004 200$ £006

1 J a nu ary • 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.2
2 F ebru ary M 0.0 0.0 42.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.2
3 M arch • j 0.0 35.5 42.5 2.1 9.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 I 0.1 18.1 0.0
4 A p ril 13.7 14.8 88.8 2.1 9.6 0.0 6.0 4.9 8.3 1.8 83.3 2.9 18.6
5 M a y -.' 164.7 92.7 206.0 147.4 153.6 180.7 201.5 100.3 10.3 24.8 58.4 43.8 152.7
6 June / :;1 198.2 413.9 370.5 180.4 511.9 280.9 270.0 296.3 344.8 287.2 356.8 176.0 216.6
7 J u ly 290.7 233.3 532.7 330.0 384.8 285.7 195.3 347.4 244.0 402.3 | 416.6 388.4 401.9
8 A u g u s t . ;j 304.6 433.6 272.2 388.3 366.6 359.2 337.9 503.5 355.8 360.2 J 475.3 311.6 | 706.2
9 S eptem ber | 304.8 248.0 144.5 175.4 243.0 223.6 179.8 248.1 212.5 301.9 I 294.7 250.7 263.1
10 I d c t o b e r l l l ! 77.9 91.6 12.3 170.0 146.7 134.6 192.2 167.5 139.7 109.3 | 69.7 153.9 192.3
11 N o v e m b e r j 51.1 0.0 0.0 16.9 5.6 19.2 17.5 0.0 23.3 5.9 15.1 3.2 5.9
12 D ecem ber | 0.0 1.4 0.0 1.4 6.0 4.3 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0
to ta l 1405.7 1564.8 1712.2 1414.0 1837.6 1490.4 1407.2 1668.0 1338.7 1493.4 1774.0 1348.6 | 1977.7

Source: EIA R , N ational soil lab o rato ry , 2003.


104

Biography

The author was born in October 1967 at Belessa woreda, North Gondar. He attended his

primary and secondary school at Arbaya town and Gondar comprehensive secondary

school, respectively from 1973-1984.

In 1985 he joined Awassa Agricultural College and graduated with diploma in plant

science in 1986. After working for 1 1 years at Ethiopian Agricultural Research

Organization (EARO), he joined the Alemaya University in 1997 and graduated with

bachelor o f science degree in plant science in 2000. After graduation the author again

joined EARO and worked at Pawe Agricultural Research Center until the end o f 2004.

In February 2005, the author joined the School o f Graduate Studies o f Hawassa

University (earlier Debub University) for M.Sc. degree in agronomy.