IJPBCS

International Journal of Plant Breeding and Crop Science

Vol. 5(3), pp. 463-473, December, 2018. © www.premierpublishers.org. ISSN: 2167-0449

Research Article

Screening and Selection of Drought-Tolerant Groundnut

Varieties Based on Yield Performance
*1Oppong-Sekyere, D., 2Akromah, R., 3Kena, A.W., 4Larweh, V and 5Ozias-Akins, P.
1Department of Ecological Agriculture, Bolgatanga Polytechnic, P.O. Box 767, Bolgatanga, Ghana
2,3Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, KNUST-Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi,
Ghana
4CSIR-Crops Research Institute, Kumasi, Ghana
5University of Georgia, National Environmentally Sound Production Agriculture Laboratory (NESPAL), Coastal Plain

Experiment Station, 2356 Rainwater Road Tifton, Georgia, USA 31794

Drought is the most important abiotic limitation to groundnut production in Northern Ghana.
Drought, during the pod-filling stages is even more devastating. The current study was
conducted to screen groundnut varieties, for drought-tolerance based on yield and other traits.
Evaluation of groundnut genotypes was under two environments/water regimes; well-watered
and water-stressed. ANOVA was run for Quantitative data. Means were separated by l.s.d. at
95% confidence level. Correlation analyses were performed using SPSS. Combined analysis of
variance was computed for the groundnuts across water regimes. Dendrograms were
generated using yield data and based on Euclidean distance. Scoring and ranking was used to
assess disease incidence on a scale of 1-5. Results indicate that end-of-season drought caused
pod yield reduction that varied across genotypes. The Drought Tolerance Index ranged from
0.53 (Kpanieli) to 2.40 (Agric-Manipinta). The highest yielding genotypes under water-stressed
condition were Sinkara (582g/plot), Nkatie-sari (512g/plot), Ndogba (470g/plot), Chaco-pag
(400g/plot) and Oboshie (381g/plot) and Chinese (local) (340g/plot). Farmers’ selected Sinkara,
Ndogba, Chinese, Nkatie-sari, Agric-Manipinta and Chaco-pag based on pod yield and biomass
production. Sinkara (0.8798), Sokan-donworor (0.8739), Kpach-Isah (0.8318) and Kpanieli
(0.8016) recorded very high mean pod harvest index values, while Ndogba recorded the lowest
(0.2252). Combined analysis of variance for pod yield among all the genotypes indicate that the
groundnuts performed differently in both water regimes due to the significant interaction effect
observed between water regimes and genotypes. Information generated from this study can be
used to develop new groundnut varieties that combine higher yield and drought tolerant traits.

Keywords: Constraints, drought, end-of-season, environments, genotypes, tolerance

INTRODUCTION

Drought, especially during the pod-filling stages of
groundnut growth is a major production constraint,
particularly in the three Northern Regions of Ghana. This
therefore causes a significant pod yield reduction and its
subsequent reduction in productivity. Groundnut is grown
widely under rainfed conditions in the semi-arid tropics,
where drought stress is extensive and unavoidable. The
yield of groundnut in the Northern Ghana, which doubles
as the major producer, is frequently severely limited by
drought arising from unpredictable rainfall, high
evaporative demands and production on low water holding
capacity soils.
There is also the problem of the relatively shorter seasons
for growth of most crops in these semi-arid tropics in
comparison with the savannah environments; this has a
negative effect on the proper growth, maturity and yield of
groundnuts. Notwithstanding, early maturing groundnut
varieties with improved yield are essential for several agro-
*Corresponding Author: Daniel Oppong-Sekyere,
Department of Ecological Agriculture, Bolgatanga
Polytechnic, P.O. Box 767, Bolgatanga, Ghana. Email:
danieloppongsekyere@yahoo.com

Screening and Selection of Drought-Tolerant Groundnut Varieties Based on Yield Performance

Oppong-Sekyere et al. 464
ecological environments of the semi-arid regions of
Ghana, in particular, and the West Africa sub-region, in
general. There is lack of and/or inadequate information
regarding the genetic variability for drought-tolerant
groundnut varieties.
An important objective in any groundnut improvement
programme has always included breeding for cultivars that
are better able to use less water to produce significant
amount of yield. Drought tolerance for late maturity
varieties of groundnut would be very advantageous.
According to research (Jongrungklang et al., 2008),
drought affects chlorophyll content and hinders plants’
ability and capacity to photosynthesize (Arunyanark et al.,
2010). An important drought tolerance mechanism in
groundnuts is the capacity to maintain chlorophyll density
under conditions of water shortage Arunyanark et al.,
2010; Wunna et al., 2009). Superior yield performance
under moisture stress conditions is an important and
reliable index of drought tolerance (Varshney et al, 2006).
The objective of this research was to evaluate and select
drought - tolerant groundnut varieties based on yield (the
Drought Tolerance Index, DTI) and performance for other
traits.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
i. Source of genetic materials
Sixteen (16) local and improved groundnut genotypes
(Appendix 1) were screened in two water regimes or
environments; Well-Watered and Water-Stressed (less-
watered) in the 2016 minor season for drought tolerance.
ii. Experimental Site, Field Operations
Groundnut sowing was done on Saturday, 16th January,
2016 at Botanga Irrigation Fields, in the Northern Region
of Ghana (in the dry season with temperature around
42°C).
Botanga irrigation scheme is located in the Northern
Region of Ghana, in the Tolon-Kumbungu district; it lies
between latitude 9° 30” and 9° 35” N and longitude 1° 20”
and 1° 04” W. The cropping area is divided into two, upland
and lowland, the upland is free draining soil and plots are
designed for furrow irrigation. The upland area is for
vegetables production and the lowland for rice production
because of the nature of the soil that is heavily textured
and irrigated by flooding (Abdul-Ganiyu et al., 2012). The
irrigation system is an earth-filled dam of 12 m in height
with a crest level of 5.00 m. The irrigation system has
potential area of 570 ha and all the areas have been
developed (Abdul-Ganiyu et al., 2012).
The total annual rainfall in the area is around 1,300 mm,
which normally begins in March, reaches a peak in
September and then drops sharply in November (Abdul-
Ganiyu et al., 2012). Thereafter, there is a long dry period
Screening and Selection of Drought-Tolerant Groundnut Varieties Based on Yield Performance
from December to the end of February, during which only
negligible amounts of rain are received. Mean monthly
temperatures remain high throughout the year only falling
around 26oC in August in Botanga. March and April are the
hottest months recording nearly 40 oC (Abdul- Ganiyu et
al., 2012).
iii. Planting Operations, Screening and Evaluations in
Well-Watered and Water-Stressed Environments
The crop was grown on ridges in a two-row plot system, 2
m long, observing a spacing of 50 cm between rows and
20 cm between plants (Arunyanark et al., 2010).
Groundnut seeds were hand planted in two environments;
well-watered and water-stressed conditions. The balanced
α- lattice design (10 x 10) was adopted, and replicated four
times. Each plot measured 0.5 m by 2 m (1 m 2) with each
block containing ten (10) varieties. The distance between
the two water regimes (well-watered and water-stressed)
was 5 m, while another 5 m was kept between replications.
The trial was surrounded by two border rows.
Surface irrigation: A watering can be used to apply water
during the experiment.
iv. Drought Score and Assessment: Visual Ratings
and Phenotypic Evaluation
Groundnut plants which showed symptoms of drought
beginning from 75 DAP were recorded (Table 7). Severity
of drought incidence was scored on a scale of 1 – 5, where
1= no symptoms (< 25% of drought; Highly Tolerant), 2=
slight symptoms (25-50% of crop foliage affected;
Tolerant), 3 = moderate symptoms (50-75% of crop foliage
affected; Moderately Tolerant), 4 = severe symptoms
(>75% of crop foliage affected; Susceptible to drought),
and 5 = very severe symptoms (about 100% of crop foliage
affected; Highly Susceptible to drought) (Table 7)
(Nageswara and Nigam, 2003).
v. Irrigation Management for Well-Watered and
Water-Stressed Environments
The experiment was carried out between January and
June, 2016; that is the most critical month with high
temperature during the day, with an average of 40oC. After
sowing, the well-watered plots were irrigated fully two
times a day until harvest stage.
For the water-stressed environment, the crops were
irrigated twice a week up to when 50% plants flowered (30
Days After Planting, DAP). After that, the plants were
irrigated twice a day until pod filling time. The plants were
exposed gradually to end-of-season drought from the pod-
filling (50 DAP) until maturity. At 50 DAP, which
corresponded with peg penetration and pod filling, drought
stress was imposed for 14 days and irrigation was
resumed at the 15th day (http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh). Then
drought stress was imposed for 10 days, followed by
irrigation. After that, drought stress was imposed for 7 days
followed by irrigation up to harvest (Figure 1).

*D: Days, *WS: Water-Stressed, *DAS: Days after
Sowing, 14 D: 14 days, 10 D: 10 days, 7 D: 7 days
Figure 1: Drought stress imposition and irrigation
frequencies (Adapted from; Mamadou, Coulibaly
Adama, PhD. Thesis, 2013; http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh)
vi. Data Collection
The following yield and yield components data were
collected for both environment 1 (well-watered) and
environment 2 (water-stressed) regimes.
 Biomass Weight (Bio, g): Above ground biomass
(Haulm Weight) was calculated from ten (10) plants
selected randomly from all the treatments. Haulm
weight was taken by weighing the harvest using a Top
Pan Balance after 3 weeks air drying.
 Pod Yield (PY): Pod yield was determined from
10 plants selected randomly from all the treatments
after air and sun drying to constant weight for two
weeks.
 Pod Weight: Fresh weight of filled pods from ten
plants selected at random from all the treatments was
taken; the pods were sun and/or air dried to constant
moisture content and their dry weights recorded.
 Seed Weight: Pods selected from ten (10) plants
at random from all the treatments were shelled by
hand at moisture level of about 10% to 13% and seed
weights recorded.
 100 Seed Weight: Hundred (100) seeds were
selected at random and counted and weighed per
each selected treatment. Percent seed moisture were
taken using a Protimeter moisture metre. All weights
were taken using Camry electronic balance.
 Harvest index (HI): HI was calculated by using
the following formula:
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑟𝑦 𝑝𝑜𝑑 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 (𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑜𝑚𝑖𝑐 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑),(𝑔)
HI =
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐵𝑖𝑜𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 (ℎ𝑎𝑢𝑙𝑚) 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡,(𝑔)
(Girdthai et al., 2010a) (www.fao.org/docrep/004/Y3655E/
y3655e07.hmt).
 Shelling Percentage (%S): Shelling percentage was
calculated using the following formula: %S = Seed
Weight (g) / Dry Pod Weight and expressed in
percentage: - (Seed Dry Weight / Pod Dry Weight) x
100.
 Drought Tolerance Index (DTI): DTI was calculated
for each trait as the ratio of the trait (e.g. pod yield)
under Water-Stress (WS) treatment to that under Well-
Watered (WW) condition as suggested by Nautiyal et
al. (2002b).
Screening and Selection of Drought-Tolerant Groundnut Varieties Based on Yield Performance
Int. J. Plant Breed. Crop Sci. 465
vii. Statistical Analysis
Combined analysis of variance was computed for the
groundnut entries across water regimes (Gomez and
Gomez, 1984) for yield and yield components data using
STATA pc software version 12.0. Correlation analysis was
performed for yield parameters across water regimes.
SPSS pc software, version 22 was used to generate a
dendrogram for the groundnut accessions as per on pod
yields and based on Euclidian distance.
RESULTS
Selection Criteria for Drought-Tolerant Varieties
The mean performance of sixteen (16) groundnut
genotypes for the traits measured under both well-watered
and water-stressed regimes is shown in Table 1.
The best six drought tolerant genotypes were selected
based on the following criteria:
(i) The highest yielding genotype under Water-
Stressed condition; Sinkara (local) (582g/plot),
Nkatie-sari (SARI) (512g/plot), Ndogba (local)
(470g/plot), Chaco-pag (local) (400g/plot) and
Oboshie (CRI) (381g/plot) and Chinese (local)
(340g/plot)
(ii) The highest yielding genotype under Well-Watered
condition; Sinkara (Local) (600g/plot), Nkatie-sari
(SARI) (589g/plot), Ndogba (local) (567g/plot), Chaco-
pag (local) (562g/plot), Sokan-donworor (local)
(363g/plot) and Chinese (local) (321g/plot).
(iii) The least yield difference between stressed and
non-stressed conditions; Yenyawoso (CRI) (13),
Sinkara (local) (18), Chinese (local) (19), F-Mix (SARI)
(22), Obolo (CRI) (22) and Simpelgu (local) (38).
(iv) The Drought Tolerance Index (DTI) (Higher DTI
indicates genotype is drought tolerant) Nautiyal et
al. (2002b): Agric-Manipinta (Local) (2.40), Sumnut-23
(SARI) (2.36), Kpach-Isah (local) (1.56), Oboshie
(CRI) (1.41), Sumnut-22 (SARI) (1.20), and Chinese
(local) (1.06).
(v) Farmers’ preferred varieties: Sinkara (local),
Ndogba (local), Chinese (local), Nkatie-sari (SARI),
Agric-Manipinta (local) and Chaco-pag (local).
(vi) Days to maturity (early maturity); Chinese (local),
Ndogba (local), Kpach-Isah (local), Simpelgu (local),
Yenyawoso (CRI).
Varying degrees of significance was observed among the
means of the various groundnut varieties, particularly pod,
seed and biomass yields, as well as Harvest Index and
Shelling percentage (Table 1).
Oppong-Sekyere et al. 466

Table 1: Pod yield of entries under drought stress (WS) and their performance under well-watered (WW) conditions and their
respective drought tolerance indices
No. Variety PodYield underWell- PodYield under LeastPod Yield(g) Drought
Watered (WW), Water-Stressed difference = Tolerance Index
(g/plot) (WS), (g/plot) (WW-WS) (DTI)= WS/WW
1 Nkatie-Sari (SARI)e 589c 512 77 0.87
2 Chaco-pag (Local)e 562c 400 162 0.71
3 F-Mix (SARI) 102a 80 22 0.78
4 Sinkara (Local)a, b, d, e 600c 582 18 0.97
5 Agric-Manipinta (Local)c 125a 300 175 2.40
6 Ndogba (Local)e 567c 470 97 0.83
7 Sumnut-23 (SARI) 106a 250 144 2.36
8 Sokan-Donworor (Local) 363bcd 322 41 0.89
9 Sumnut-22 (SARI) 250abc 300 50 1.20
10 Chinese (Local)e 321bcd 340 19 1.06
11 Yenyawoso (CRI) 282abc 295 13 1.05
12 Simpelgu (Local) 270abc 232 38 0.86
13 Oboshie (CRI) 270abc 381 111 1.41
14 Kpach-Isah (Local) 109a 170 61 1.56
15 Kpanieli (SARI) 192b 101 91 0.53
16 Obolo (CRI) 200b 222 22 1.11
NB: Higher DTI indicates genotype is drought tolerant
a: best high yielding genotype(s) under WW, b: best high yielding genotype(s) under WS, c: genotype(s) with the highest DTI, d: Entries
selected based on the least yield difference between WW & WS, e: Entries selected based on good performance for all traits
WW: Well Water, WS: Water stress, DTI: Drought Tolerance Index, ‘Chinese’ = ‘China’
Means sharing a letter in the group label are not significantly different at the 5% level.

Table 2: Mean Performance of yield and yield components of entries under Well-Watered (WW) and Water-Stressed (WS)
(drought) Environments
Days to
Biomass Pod Seed 100 Seed Shelling
Maturity Pod Yield Harvest Index
Entry Weight Weight Weight Weight Percentage
No. (DM), (PY), g/plot (HI)
(Bio), g/plot (PWt.), g (SWt.), g (SW100), g (%S)
days
WW WS WW WS WW WS WW WS WW WS WW WS WW WS
NkatieSari 100-115
1 911ef 608 589c 512 186abc 172 57abc 61 33abc 34 0.2042abc 0.2829 30.65abc 35.47
(SARI)
Chaco-pag 100-115
2 568cdef 585 562c 400 106a 110 63abc 64 37abc 28 0.1866ab 0.1880 59.43d 58.18
(Local)
3 a 488 102 a 80 196 abc 200 59 abc 64 29 ac 31 0.4075 c 0.4098 30.10 abc 32.00
F-Mix (SARI) 100-115 481
4 Sinkara (Local) 100-115 650f 670 600c 582 193abc 199 57abc 60 55bd 57 0.2969abc 0.2970 29.53ab 30.15
Agric-Manipinta 100-115
5 495ab 530 125a 300 170abc 155 33c 56 25abcd 48 0.3434bc 0.2925 19.41ab 36.13
(Local)
6 Ndogba (Local) 85-90 853def 1361 567c 470 222bc 240 89e 92 35abcd 37 0.2603abc 0.1763 40.09abcd 38.33
Sumnut-23 100-115
7 439ab 684 106a 250 161ab 99 69abd 68 33abcd 55 0.3667abc 0.1447 42.86cd 68.69
(SARI)
SokanDonworor 100-115
8 784bcdef 540 363bcd 322 177abc 180 63abc 65 24c 25 0.1250ab 0.1317 35.59abcd 36.11
(Local)
Sumnut-22 100-115
9 881abcd 831 250abc 300 180abc 186 69abde 72 43abcd 37 0.2043abc 0.2238 38.33abcd 38.71
(SARI)
10 Chinese (Local) 85-90 964abcde 1222 321bcd 340 247c 250 41c 48 34abcd 36 0.2257abc 0.3300 16.60b 19.20
Yenyawoso 85-90 abcd abc abc ade d abc abcd
11 864 778 282 295 188 196 71 76 56 62 0.2043 0.2238 37.77 38.78
(CRI)
Simpelgu 85-90
12 564abc 595 270abc 232 148abc 162 67abd 72 44abcd 47 0.2624abc 0.2723 45.27acd 44.44
(Local)
13 Oboshie (CRI) 100-115 684abcde 708 270abc 381 173abc 203 86de 89 52abd 54 0.2529abc 0.2867 49.71acd 43.84
Kpach-Isah 85-90
14 953ab 970 109a 170 170abc 205 71ade 74 43abcd 45 0.1784ab 0.2113 41.76abcd 36.10
(Local)
15 Kpanieli (SARI) 100-115 721ab 649 192b 101 211abc 192 61abc 56 41abcd 32 0.2926abc 0.2958 28.91ab 29.17
16 Obolo (CRI) 100-115 1856ab 1868 200b 222 132abc 246 48bc 56 49abd 51 0.0711a 0.1317 36.36ab 22.76
WW; Well-Watered environment, WS; Water-Stressed environment; Means sharing a letter in the group label are not significantly
different at the 5% level.

Screening and Selection of Drought-Tolerant Groundnut Varieties Based on Yield Performance

 Int. J. Plant Breed. Crop Sci. 467

Ranking of Groundnut Genotypes by Clustering based
on Mean Performance for yield and yield components
of entries under (WW) and (WS) (drought)
Environments
Based on pod yield and performance for other traits under
well-watered (WW) and water-stressed (WS) (end-of-
season drought) conditions (Tables 1 and 2), the
groundnut genotypes were used to generate a
dendrogram (Figure 2).
At a relative rescaled Euclidian distance of 15, two major
cluster groups; clusters I (the biggest cluster of 12
varieties) and II (the smallest with 4 accessions) were
produced. Groundnut genotypes were clustered into
groups based on the selection criteria for drought-tolerant
varieties described previously.
Six drought tolerant groundnut varieties (Chinese,
Sumnut-22, Agric-Manipinta, Sumnut-23, Oboshie and
Kpach-Isah, all hypogaea varieties except Oboshie and
Kpach-Isah), were clustered under cluster group ‘I’ based
on varieties with higher drought tolerance index (DTI)
(Figure 2).
Cluster group I contained two sub-clusters; Ia (comprising
3 of the drought tolerant varieties; Sumnut-22, Obolo and
Chinese) and Ib (with 3 other drought tolerant varieties;
Agric-Manipinta, Sumnut-23 and Kpach-Isah) (Figure 2).
Per the selection criteria for drought tolerance (Section
4.5.1), four (Nkatie-sari, Ndogba, Chaco-pag and Sinkara)
out of the six groundnut varieties that qualified among the
best drought-tolerant groundnut varieties clustered under
the second cluster group II. These four mentioned
groundnut varieties and ‘Oboshie’ and ‘Chinese’ varieties
(in cluster group Ia) were the highest yielding groundnut
genotypes under water-stressed (drought) condition and
among varieties preferred by farmers (Figure 2).

Ia

Ib

II
B

Figure 2: Dendrogram of groundnut accessions generated by SPSS vs22 pc software, based on Euclidian distance as per pod yield
and performance for other traits, for both Well-Watered (WW) and Water-Stressed (WS) Environments (From top: Clusters A and B).

Screening and Selection of Drought-Tolerant Groundnut Varieties Based on Yield Performance

Oppong-Sekyere et al. 468

Correlation Analysis of Yield and Yield Components Correlation Analysis under water-stressed (WS)
for Groundnut Accessions under well-watered (WW) Environment
and water-stressed (WS) Environmental Conditions
Correlation analysis for yield and yield components for
Results of general correlation analysis of pod yields for water-stressed (WS) environmental condition, on the other
well-watered (WW) and water-stressed (WS) hand, indicated a significant and positive association
environments (Table 3) indicated a significant (F ≤ 0.05) between pod yield and pod weight (r = 0.67) at p = 0.004.
and positive association between pod yield under WW and Significant and negative relationship was observed
that under WS condition (r = 0.8684), but a significant (F ≤ between pod weight and shelling percentage (-0.85) at p =
0.05) and negative relations with Drought Tolerance Index 0.000 significance (Table 3).
at r = -0.093 (Table 3). Least pod yield difference also
recorded a significant (F ≤ 0.05) and positive relationship Table 3: General Correlation Analysis of Pod Yields for
with DTI at r = 0.5026 (Table 3). WW and WS Environments
Pod yield Pod yield Least pod
Correlation Analysis under Well-Watered (WW) DTI
(WW) (WS) yield
Environment Pod yield
-
Results of the correlation analysis for pod yield under well- (WW)
watered (WW) environment (Table 4) indicated significant Pod yield
0.8684* -
and negative association was observed between pod yield (WS)
and harvest index (r = -0.77) at a significant value of p = Least pod
-0.0174 0.0993 -
0.001. There was significant and negative correlation yield
between pod weight and shelling percentage (r = -0.68) at DTI -0.093* -0.0752 0.5026* -
p = 0.004 significant value. Significant and positive *p < 0.05
relationship was obtained between seed weight and
shelling percentage (r = 0.69) at a significant value of p =
0.003.
Table 4: Correlation Analysis of Yield and Yield Components for Well-Watered Environment
Pod yield Biomass Pod weight Seed weight 100 seed weight Harvest index
Biomass 0.01 (0.969)
Pod weight -0.07 (0.794) 0.06 (0.826)
Seed weight -0.15 (0.579) 0.17 (0.519) -0.003 (0.990)
100 seed weight 0.32 (0.227) 0.11 (0.690) -0.12 (0.660) 0.34 (0.203)
Harvest index -0.77 (0.001)* -0.26 (0.332) 0.30 (0.259) -0.02 (0.928) -0.25 (0.354)
Shelling percent -0.10 (0.724) 0.17 (0.541) -0.68 (0.004)* 0.69 (0.003)* 0.30 (0.252) -0.24 (0.364)
Significant at *p ≤ 0.05, *Figures in brackets ‘( )’ are Significant values.
Table 5: Correlation Analysis of Yield and Yield Components for Water-Stressed Environments
Pod yield Biomass Pod weight Seed weight 100 seed weight Harvest index
Biomass 0.01 (0.960)
Pod weight 0.67 (0.004)* 0.005 (0.987)
Seed weight 0.02 (0.955) 0.16 (0.546) 0.04 (0.873)
100 seed weight 0.17 (0.531) 0.12 (0.663) 0.02 (0.935) 0.23 (0.394)
Harvest index -0.39 (0.133) -0.12 (0.649) 0.19 (0.492) -0.25 (0.358) -0.08 (0.762)
Shelling percent -0.42 (0.106) 0.06 (0.822) -0.85 (0.000)* 0.40 (0.122) 0.13 (0.621) -0.39 (0.140)
Significant at *p ≤ 0.05, *Figures in brackets ‘( )’ are Significant values.
Participatory Varietal Selection (PVS) by Farmers; Nkatie-sari (SARI).
Selection of Best Groundnut Genotypes under both
Well-Watered and Water-Stressed Environments Under Water-Stressed environment, the best genotypes
selected by farmers were Ndogba (local), Chinese (local)
Pod yield and biomass production were the major criteria and Obolo (CRI).
considered by farmers in the selection of the best
groundnut genotypes since they added to the economic Effect of Drought on pod yield
value of the variety. Farmers indicated that groundnut
varieties with high biomass could be a good source of The groundnut genotype, Sinkara (local) recorded the
animal feed (fodder). highest pod yield (600 g/10plants) under both well watered
Under Well-Watered environment, the farmers’ and water-stressed (end-of-season drought) environments
preferences were Sinkara (Local), Chaco-pag (local) and (Table 1 and 2).

Screening and Selection of Drought-Tolerant Groundnut Varieties Based on Yield Performance

 Int. J. Plant Breed. Crop Sci. 469

600
400
200
0

I)

I)
l)

ac ix ( l)

on a (L )
I)
Kp h (L )

I)
)

I)

I)
)

I)

l)
)

)
Su oro cal
I

al
al

al

al
a
ca

ca

R
R

R
R

aw SAR
R

AR
F- Loc

c
oc
oc

c
bo (C
SA

(C

(C
nu (SA
do (SA
Lo

nk Lo

nu (Lo
o
tie (Lo

(S
(L

lo

o
(

os
Si shi
ri

3
li
se
ta

ag

r
a

bo
ie

Sa

-2

t-2
ar
lg
a

b
M
in

ne

Is

g
-p

an

pe

t
ip

w
h-
co

hi

ny
O
an

Si
ka
N

m
C
ha

Ye
-M

Su
N
Kp
C

n
ri c

ka
Ag

Genotypes

So Pod yield under well watered conditions Pod yield under water stressed conditions

Source: Field Survey

Figure 3: Pod yield performances under both Well-Watered (WW) and Water-Stressed (WS) environments
*Means may be significantly different from each other at F ≤ 0.05
Groundnut genotypes including Nkatie-sari, Ndogba, Results of Combined Correlation Analysis for Well-
Chaco-pag, Sokan-donworor and Chinese performed well Watered and Water-Stressed Environments
under both water regimes. Genotypes with least yield
difference included Yenyawoso, Sinkara, and Chinese Results of the combined correlation analysis for yield and
(Table 1). yield components under the two water regimes (WW and
WS) (Table 6) indicated a negative and significant (F ≤
Based on the selection criteria defined previously, the six 0.05) association between pod yield and the following
best drought tolerant genotypes were Sinkara (local), traits; biomass (r = - 0.2874), seed weight (-0.5256) and
Ndogba (local), Chinese (local), Chaco-pag (local), shelling percentage (-0.4070) but a positive and significant
Nkatie-sari (SARI) and Agric-Manipinta (local). (F ≤ 0.05) relationship with harvest index (r = 0.3935).
Biomass produced significant (F ≤ 0.05) and positive
The Drought Tolerance Index (DTI) ranged from 0.53 to correlation with seed weight (r = 0.2910) and 100 seed
2.40 for all the genotypes screened (Table 1). Agric- weight (r = 0.3129) but negative and significant (F ≤ 0.05)
Manipinta (local) had the highest DTI (2.40) whereas the association with harvest index (-0.4347). Pod weight
lowest DTI was recorded by Kpanieli (0.53). Agric- correlated positively and significantly (F ≤ 0.05) with 100
Manipinta (local) was therefore the most drought tolerant seed weight but produced a significant (F ≤ 0.05) and
genotype followed by Sumnut-23 (SARI), Kpach-Isah negative association with shelling percentage (-0.5119).
(local), Oboshie, Sumnut-22 (SARI), Obolo (CRI), Chinese Association between seed weight and 100 seed weight
(local) and Yenyawoso (CRI) (Table 1). Interestingly, most was significant (F ≤ 0.05) and positive at r = 0.7982, similar
of these groundnut genotypes that recorded higher DTI did with shelling percentage (r = 0.6993), but negative with
not record exceptionally high pod yield figures (Table 2). harvest index (r = -0.6515). The association between
General pod yield performances for the groundnuts hundred seed weight and harvest index was significant (F
evaluated are shown in Figure 3. ≤ 0.05) and negative (r = -0.6559), but positive with
shelling percentage (r = 0.4444). Harvest index and
shelling percentage were negatively and significantly (F ≤
0.05) correlated at r = -0.4279 (Table 6).
Table 6: Combined Correlation Analysis for groundnuts based on yield and its related traits
Pod yield Biomass Pod weight Seed weight 100seed weight Harvest Index Shelling %
Pod yield -
Biomass -0.2874* -
Pod weight -0.0792 0.1719 -
Seed weight -0.5256* 0.2910* 0.1623 -
100 seed weight -0.4541* 0.3129* 0.2973* 0.7982* -
Harvest Index 0.3935* -0.4347* -0.2665 -0.6515* -0.6559* -
Shelling % -0.4070* 0.2413 -0.5119* 0.6993* 0.4444* -0.4279* -
Significant at *p ≤ 0.05

Screening and Selection of Drought-Tolerant Groundnut Varieties Based on Yield Performance

Oppong-Sekyere et al. 470

Mean Drought Score Based on Visual Rating DISCUSSION

Assessment
General performance for drought tolerance
Drought Score and Assessment: Visual Ratings and
Phenotypic Evaluation Based on the following measurement criteria for drought
tolerance; (i) yield performance under water-stressed
According to the field visual/phenotypic drought environment, (ii) yield performance under well-watered
identification and scoring, and based on the above criteria, environment, (iii) least yield difference between stressed
the following average drought scores (Table 7), were and non-stressed conditions, (iv) the Drought Tolerance
recorded among the groundnut varieties; Index (DTI), (v) end-of-season drought tolerance, (vi)
(i) Eight highly tolerant varieties were observed (Nkatie- farmer’s preferred varieties, and (vii) date of maturity (early
sari, Chaco-pag, F-Mix, Agric-Manipinta, Sumnut-23, maturity), some promising groundnut varieties with good
Sokan-donworor, Sumnut-22 and Kpanieli). performance for pod yield under drought stress included;
(ii) Three (3) tolerant varieties were observed (Sinkara, Sinkara (landrace). The Drought Tolerance Index (DTI)
Ndogba and Chinese). (Higher DTI indicates genotype is drought tolerant)
(iii) Two (2) moderately tolerant varieties were recorded; (Nautiyal et al., 2002b); Agric-Manipinta (landrace) (2.40),
Yenyawoso and Kpach-Isah. Sumnut-23 (SARI) (2.36), Kpach-Isah (landrace) (1.56),
(iv) Three (3) drought-susceptible varieties were Oboshie (CRI) (1.41), Sumnut-22 (SARI) (1.20), and
recorded among the groundnuts, as per the criteria Chinese (landrace) (1.06) varieties were also identified.
defined above; Simpelgu, Oboshie and Obolo (Table
7). Farmers selected Sinkara (landrace), Ndogba (landrace),
Table 7: Mean drought Score based on phenotypic/visual Chinese (landrace), Nkatie-sari (SARI), Agric-Manipinta
ratings (landrace), Obolo (CRI) and Chaco-pag (landrace) based
No. Variety Rep.1 Rep.2 Rep.3 Rep.4 Average on performance for pod yield and biomass production
1 NkatieSari 1 1 1 2 1 under both water regimes (well-watered and water-
(SARI) stressed) due to their economic value added to the variety,
2 Chaco-pag 1 1 1 1 1 such as oil content and biomass. Abdullah et al. (2007)
(Landrace) reported 18 – 24 pods per plant in a similar study in
3 F-Mix (SARI) 1 1 1 1 1 groundnuts. Virk et al. (2005) reported that groundnut
4 Sinkara 1 3 1 2 2 varieties differ significantly in the number of pods per plant.
(Landrace) Reddy et al. (2003b) and Camberling and Diop (1999),
have reported varying average yields in most regions of
5 Agric- 1 1 1 1 1
Africa and Asia particularly in the major season. The
Manipinta
selected genotypes by the farmers are among the drought
(Landrace)
tolerant varieties identified in this study. Therefore,
6 Ndogba 3 1 4 1 2
farmers' involvement in this study was very useful because
(Landrace)
it enabled the breeder/researcher to take farmers'
7 Sumnut-23 1 1 1 1 1
preferred traits into consideration. Farmers were very
(SARI)
happy to be involved in the selection of parental lines.
8 SokanDonwo 1 1 1 1 1
ror In this study, end-of-season drought caused pod yield
(Landrace) reduction that varied from genotype to genotype. However,
9 Sumnut-22 1 1 1 1 1 certain genotypes showed least pod yield difference in
(SARI) both water regimes. The varieties Yenyawoso, Sinkara,
10 Chinese 2 2 3 2 2 and Chinese that showed least pod yield difference can be
(Landrace) used by farmers in the short time as drought tolerant
11 Yenyawoso 3 3 4 3 3 varieties prior to improvement of their popular varieties
(CRI) identified through the PRA study.
12 Simpelgu 4 3 4 3 4
(Landrace) Based on the selection criteria defined, the six best
13 Oboshie 5 4 4 3 4 drought tolerant genotypes identified in the study were
(CRI) Sinkara (landrace), Ndogba (landrace), Chinese
14 Kpach-Isah 3 3 4 3 3 (landrace), Chaco-pag (landrace), Nkatie-sari (SARI) and
(Landrace) Agric-Manipinta (landrace). The Drought Tolerance Index
15 Kpanieli 1 1 1 1 1 (DTI) ranged from 0.53 to 2.40 for all the groundnut
(SARI) genotypes screened. Agric-Manipinta (landrace) had the
16 Obolo (CRI) 4 4 3 4 4 highest DTI (2.40) whereas the lowest DTI was recorded
Drought Score (Scale: 1-5): Key: 1: Highly Tolerant, 2: by Kpanieli (0.53). Most of these groundnut genotypes that
Tolerant, 3: Moderately Tolerant, 4: Susceptible, 5: Highly recorded higher DTI did not record remarkably high pod
Susceptible. yield values.

Screening and Selection of Drought-Tolerant Groundnut Varieties Based on Yield Performance


Phenotypic (visual rating) assessments of drought in the
current study based on drought symptoms at 75 DAP
revealed a confirmation of drought tolerance in the
groundnut genotypes identified, thus, eight highly tolerant
varieties; Nkatie-sari, Chaco-pag, F-Mix, Agric-Manipinta,
Sumnut-23, Sokan-donworor, Sumnut-22 and Kpanieli
were identified. Also, three tolerant varieties; Sinkara,
Ndogba and Chinese were identified and two moderately
tolerant varieties were identified; Yenyawoso and Kpach-
Isah.
Research Institutions such as CSIR-CRI and CSIR-SARI
have developed some drought and disease tolerant
varieties, but these have unfortunately not yet reached the
farmers and seed companies (Adu-Dapaah et al., 2007).
Farmers’ selected their preferred groundnut varieties
based on their earliness, drought and disease tolerance
and their potential for high-yielding and biomass
production, but selection of a preferred variety is only one
part of the success story. In order for these improved
varieties to reach a large number of farmers, various
recognized actors such as registered seed companies,
Research Institutes, Ministry of Food and Agriculture
(MoFA), must ensure that certified breeder seeds are
available to licensed seed companies to produce
subsequent classes of seed at very affordable prices for
farmers.
CONCLUSION
The present study showed that, end-of-season drought
caused significant decline in groundnut pod yield varying
from genotype to genotype. However, most of the
genotypes showed significant potential for drought
tolerance based on pod yield and performance for other
characteristics. These promising groundnut genotypes
could be used as parental lines to develop drought-tolerant
varieties. Groundnut genotypes that showed least pod
yield difference in both water regimes could as well be
adopted by farmers in the short term as drought-tolerant
cultivars while they wait upon breeders to improve upon
their popular groundnut varieties (landraces). Farmers
preferred groundnut cultivars which come with traits such
as high pod yield, high oil content and biomass (animal
fodder), due to the extra economic value it adds to the
crop.
REFERENCES
Abdullah, T., Rahmianna A. A., Hardaningsih, S and Rozi,
F. (2007). Increasing Groundnut Yield on Dry Land
Alfisols in Indonesia. Journal of SAT Agricultural
Research, 5(1).
Abdul-Ganiyu, S., Amaanatu, M. K and Korese, J. K.
(2012) Water Use Efficiency and Productivity for Rice
(Oryza Sativa) in the Botanga Irrigation Scheme of
Northern Region of Ghana. Agricultural Science
Research Journal, 2(7): 362–368.
Screening and Selection of Drought-Tolerant Groundnut Varieties Based on Yield Performance
Int. J. Plant Breed. Crop Sci. 471
Adu-Dapaah, H. K., Asumadu, H., Lamptey, J. N. L.,
Haleegoah, J and Asafo-Adjei, B. (2007). Farmer
Participation in Groundnut Varietal Selection. African
Crop Science Conference Proceedings, 8: 1435 –
1439.
Arunyanark, A., Jogloya, S., Wongkaewb, S.,
Akkasaenga, C., Vorasoota, N., Kesmalaa, T and
Patanothaia, A. (2010). Heritability of Aflatoxin
Resistance Traits and Correlation with Drought
Tolerance Traits in Peanut. Field Crops Research, 117,
258-264.
Camberlin, P and Diop, M. (1999). Inter-relationships
between Groundnut Yields in Senegal, Inter Annual
Rainfall Variability and Sea Surface Temperatures.
Theoretical and Applied Climatology, 63, 163-181.
Girdthai, T., Jogloy, S., Vorasoot, N., Akkasaeng, C.,
Wongkaew, S., Holbrook, C. C and Patanothai, A.
(2010a). Heritability of and Genotypic Correlations
between, Aflatoxin Traits and Physiological Traits for
Drought Tolerance under End-of-season Drought in
Peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Field Crops Research,
118, 169-176.
Girdthai, T., Jogloy, S., Vorasoot, N., Akkasaeng, C.,
Wongkaew, S., Holbrook, C. C and Patanothai, A.
(2010b). Associations between Physiological Traits for
Drought Tolerance and Aflatoxin Contamination in
Peanut Genotypes under Terminal Drought. Plant
Breeding,129, 693-699.
Gomez, K. A and Gomez, A. A. (1984). Statistical
Procedures for Agricultural Research. John Wiley &
Sons, New York. 45p.
Jongrungklang, N., Toomsan, B., Vorasoot, N., Jogloy S.,
Kesmala, T and Patanothai, A. (2008). Identification of
Peanut Genotypes with High Water-Use Efficiency
under Drought Stress Conditions from Peanut
Germplasm of Diverse Origins. Asian Journal of Plant
Sciences, 7, 628-638.
Nageswara, R. R. C and Nigam, S. N. (2003). Genetic
Options for Drought Management in Groundnut. In:
Management of Agricultural Drought - Agronomic and
Genetic Options. Science Publishers, Inc, 123-141.
Nautiyal, P. C. (2002a). Groundnut: Post-harvest
Operations. Mejia, D. (Ed) ICAR (National Research
Center for Groundnut). Pp 16.
Nautiyal, P. C., Nageswara, R. R. C and Joshi, Y. C.
(2002b). Moisture Deficit–Induced Changes in Leaf
Water Content, Leaf Carbon Exchange Rate and
Biomass Production in Groundnut Cultivars Differing in
Specific Leaf Area. Field Crops Research, 74, 67-79.
Reddy, T.Y., Reddy V.R and Anbumozhi, V. (2003a).
Physiological Responses of Groundnut (Arachis
hypogea L.) to Drought Stress and its Amelioration: A
Critical Review. Plant Growth Regulation, 41: 75-88.
Reddy, T.Y., Reddy V.R and Anbumozhi, V. (2003b).
Physiological Responses of groundnut (Arachis
hypogaea L.) to Drought Stress and its Amelioration: A
Review. Acta Agronomica Hungarica, 51: 205-227.
Varshney, R.K., Hoisington, D.A and Tyagi, A.K. (2006).
Advances in Cereal Genomics and Applications in Crop
Oppong-Sekyere et al. 472

Breeding. Trends Biotechnol. 2006; 24:490 - 499.

Virk, A.S., Kaul, J.N., Bhangoo, B.S and Singh, A. (2005).
Influence of Planting Techniques and Plant Population
on Biology and Pod productivity of Summer Groundnut
varieties. Research on crops, 6(1): 173 – 174.

Accepted 7 November 2018

Citation: Oppong-Sekyere D., Akromah R., Kena A.W.,

Larweh V., Ozias-Akins P. (2018). Screening and
Selection of Drought-Tolerant Groundnut Varieties Based
on Yield Performance. International Journal of Plant
Breeding and Crop Science 5(3): 463-473.

Copyright: © 2018 Oppong-Sekyere et al. This is an

open-access article distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any
medium, provided the original author and source are cited.

APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Source, Sub-species, Days to Maturity and Phenotypic Characteristics of Groundnut Genotypes
Studied
№. Genotype *Sub- Source Days to Phenotypic Characteristics and Other Trait
Species Maturity, Drought Early Leaf Late Leaf Oil Content and Other
days Characteristics Spot Spot Traits
disease disease
1 Nkatie-sari Hypogaea CSIR- 100-115 Tolerant Highly Highly Oil Content: 46%, Seed
(Virginia) SARI, (110) Tolerant Tolerant Colour: Light tan testa
Ghana colour
2 Chaco – pag Fastigiata Landrace, 100-115 Tolerant Moderately Moderately Seed colour: Red
Ghana Tolerant Tolerant
3 F – mix Hypogaea CSIR- 100-115 Tolerant Highly Highly Oil Content: 49%
(Spanish) SARI, (120) Tolerant Tolerant Seed colour: Tan with
Ghana red/brown shades
Av. Yield: 2500kg/ha
Highly Tolerant to
Rosette and Rust
4 Sinkara Hypogaea Landrace, 100-115 Tolerant Tolerant Tolerant Oil Content: 45%
(Spanish) Ghana (120) Seed colour: Red
Yield Potential: 2.2t/ha
5 Agric- Hypogaea Landrace, 100-115 Tolerant Tolerant Tolerant Oil Content: 47%
Manipinta (Spanish) Ghana (110-120) Seed colour: red teste
High yield potential
6 Ndogba Fastigiata Landrace, 85-90 Moderately Moderately Moderately Seed colour: Tan red
Ghana Tolerant Susceptible Susceptible
7 Sumnut – 23 Hypogaea CSIR- 100-115 Tolerant Moderately Moderately Seed colour: tan red
SARI, Tolerant Tolerant Rosette disease
Ghana Tolerant
8 Sokan- Fastigiata Landrace, 100-115 Tolerant Moderately Moderately Seed colour: Red to
donworor Ghana Susceptible Susceptible whitish
9 Sumnut – 22 Hypogaea CSIR- 100-115 Tolerant Moderately Moderately Seed colour: Tan red
SARI, (110-120) Tolerant Tolerant Rosette disease
Ghana Tolerant

Screening and Selection of Drought-Tolerant Groundnut Varieties Based on Yield Performance

 Int. J. Plant Breed. Crop Sci. 473

Appendix 1 continue:
№. Genotype *Sub- Source Days to Phenotypic Characteristics and Other Trait
Species Maturity, Drought Early Leaf Late Leaf Oil Content and Other
days Characteristics Spot Spot Traits
disease disease
10 Chinese Hypogaea Landrace, 85-90 Tolerant Susceptible Susceptible Oil Content: 35%
(Spanish) Ghana (100) Early maturing
Use: Soup and
Confectionery
11 Yenyawoso Fastigiata CSIR-CRI, 85-90 Moderately Moderately Moderately Oil content: 50%
(Spanish) Ghana (90) Susceptible Susceptible Susceptible Resistant to Rust
Seed colour: Dark red
Yield Potential:
2700kg/ha
Days to 50% flowering:
23DAP
12 Simpelgu Fastigiata Landrace, 85-90 Tolerant Moderately Moderately Seed colour: Deep red
Ghana Susceptible Susceptible
13 Oboshie Fastigiata CSIR-CRI, 100-115 Moderately Moderately Moderately Oil Content: 46.49%
(Spanish) Ghana (105-110) Susceptible Susceptible Susceptible Seed Colour: Brown
Days to 50% flowering:
26
Shelling %: 67
Good flavour, sweet
taste (Confectionery)
Yield: 2.6tons/ha
Days to Flowering:
26DAP
Shelling%: 67%
Growth Habit: Semi-
erect
14 Kpach – Fastigiata Landrace, 85-90 Tolerant Moderately Moderately Seed colour: Light red
Isah Ghana Susceptible Susceptible
15 Kpanieli Hypogaea CSIR- 100-115 Tolerant Tolerant Tolerant Oil Content: 51%
(Spanish) SARI, (120) Yield Potential: 2.5t/ha
Ghana Seed colour: red testa
16 Obolo Fastigiata CRI, 100-115 Moderately Moderately Moderately Seed colour: Brown
(Spanish) Ghana (105-110) Susceptible Susceptible Susceptible Days to 50% flowering:
SARI 25
Shelling %: 70
Has sweet taste and
flavour (Confectionery)
*Sub-species, *Oil content and other traits; were obtained from CSIR-SARI, CRI and MoFA published data
CSIR-Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, SARI – Savanna Agriculture Research Institute, Ghana, CRI – Crops
Research Institute, MoFA-Ministry of Food and Agriculture, ‘Landrace’- Farmers’ popular locally adapted variety

Screening and Selection of Drought-Tolerant Groundnut Varieties Based on Yield Performance