J. Env. Bio-Sci., 2016: Vol.

30 (1):155-157
(155) ISSN 0973-6913 (Print), ISSN 0976-3384 (On Line)

ESTIMATES OF GENETIC VARIABILITY, HERITABILITY AND GENETIC

ADVANCES FOR YIELD AND HORTICULTURAL TRAITS IN CABBAGE
(BRASSICA OLERACEA VAR. CAPITATA L.)
Hament Thakur* and Vidyasagar
Department of Vegetable Science & Floriculture, CSKHPKV, Palampur (HP) 176 062
[Corresponding author E-mail*: hemantt114@gmail.com]

Received: 09-02-2016 Accepted: 31-03-2016

This study was carried out during 2013-14 to estimate the genetic variability for marketable head yield and horticultural traits in 41
cabbage genotypes. These genotypes were evaluated in randomized block design at the Vegetable Research Farm, CSKHPKV
Palampur. High ranges for gross head weight (602.00-1395.33), net head weight (223.33-637.00) and plant spread (31.17-52.30)
were observed. The PCV and GCV values were high for marketable head yield/plot (32.47 & 30.17), net head weight (27.64 & 25.54)
and gross head weight (20.44 & 18.71). High heritability was estimated for marketable head yield/plot (86%), net head weight (85%)
and gross head weight (83%), while other characters showed a lower heritability. Genetic advance as percentage of mean varied
from 4.18 % to 57.78 %. It was highest for marketable head yield/plot (57.78%), followed by net head weight (48.63 %) and gross head
weight (35.29 %). In the present study, high heritability accompanied with a high genetic advance for marketable head yield, gross
head weight and net head weight revealed the role of additive gene action and thus, a high genetic gain is expected from selection
for these traits. The gross and net weight of head were found to be highly variable and important characters, which might be
responsible for wide range in yield potential.

Cabbage, Brassica oleracea var. capitata L. (2n=2x=18) is a cabbage.

member of family Brassicaceae and is one of the most
important Cole-group vegetable crops. It has originated from
Brassica oleracea var. oleracea L. (syn. sylvestris L.) commonly
known as wild cabbage through mutation, human selection
and adaptation. It is a rich source of protein comprising all
essential amino acids, especially sulphur containing amino
acids and antioxidants, which is reported to have anti-
carcinogenic properties1-3. The increasing popularity due to
adaptability, cheaper and round the year availability and as an
integral part of the fast food industry has made it necessary to
initiate breeding efforts targeted towards genetic improvement
of cabbage. Improvement in any crop relies on the magnitude
of genetic variability and the extent of out sending of characters
from one generation to the next. Therefore, it is necessary to
partition the overall variability into its heritable and non-heritable
components, which will improve the consistency of selection,
because the phenotypic selection depends upon the range of
genetic diversity present in the population. For better yield
performance, phenotypically stable varieties are usually sought
for the commercial production. Thus, the present study was
taken up with the objective to examine the magnitude and the
direction of variability, and identify/developing superior
genotypes for obtaining higher yield with good quality traits in
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The experimental materials comprised of forty one genotypes
(4 CMS and 3 SI lines, 4 testers and 30 hybrids. The
experimental farm is situated at 320 6' N latitude and 760 3' E
longitude at an elevation of 1290.8m above mean sea level.
Severe winters and mild summers with high rainfall characterize
the place. Agro-climatically, the location represents the mid-
hill zone of Himachal Pradesh and is characterized by humid
sub-temperate climate with high rainfall (2500mm).
Transplanting of genotypes was carried out on 26th October,
2013 in randomized block design with three replications. The
plot size and spacing were 3.15m x 0.90m (14 plants/
treatment) and 45cm x 45cm, respectively (14 plants/
treatment). All the standard package of practices and plant
protection measures were timely adopted to raise the crop
successfully. Observations were recorded in each treatment
on the plant characters namely plant spread (cm), gross head
weight (g), number of non-wrapper leaves, net head weight
(g), polar and equatorial diameters of head (cm), days to
harvest, marketable heads per plot and marketable head yield/
plot (kg). The observations were recorded on 5 plants taken at
random in each treatment/plot. Head shape index,

NAAS Rating (2016)-4.20

 ESTIMATES OF GENETIC VARIABILITY, HERITABILITY IN CABBAGE (156)

Table-1. Analysis of variance for randomized block design

* Significant at 5% level of significance

Table-2. Estimates of genetic constants for different yield and horticultural traits in cabbage

compactness of head and heading percentage (%) were
calculated from original measured data4. The mean values
obtained from one year data were used for estimating the
analysis of variance5. The genotypic and the phenotypic
coefficients of variation were calculated6. Heritability in broad
sense and genetic advance as percent of mean were also
computed 7-8.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The analysis of variance for the characters plant spread (cm),
non-wrapper leaves, gross head weight (g), net head weight
(g), polar and equatorial diameter (cm), days to harvest, head
shape index, compactness of head (g/cm3), marketable heads
per plot, heading percentage (%) and marketable head yield
per plot (kg) have been presented in Table-1. The analysis of
variance indicated significant differences among treatments
for all the characters. The extent of variability with respect to
various characters in different diverse genotypes of cabbage
measured in terms of general mean, range, coefficients of
variation along with the amount of heritability in broad sense
and expected genetic advance as per cent of mean for twelve
quality characters has been presented in Table-2. High ranges
(157) THAKUR AND VIDYASAGAR

for marketable head yield per plot (5.39-24.41 t/ha), gross head
weight (602.00-1395.33), net head weight (223.33-637.00), days
to harvest (112.80-135.00) and plant spread (31.17-52.30) were
observed.
The higher magnitude of phenotypic coefficient of variation (PCV)
than those of genotypic coefficient of variation (GCV) indicated
the role of environment in the expression of traits, which is in
line with the results obtained in other variability study9-11. The
lower differences between PCV and GCV for all the characters
indicated lesser influence of the environment on the expression
of these traits. The respective PCV and GCV was high for
marketable head yield/plot (32.47 & 30.17), net head weight
(27.64 & 25.54) and gross head weight (20.44 & 18.71), while
these were low for days to harvest (4.45 & 3), plant spread
(10.97 & 8.67), polar diameter (11.33 & 9.34), compactness of
head (12.57 & 7.87), non wrapper leaves (13.17 & 10.02),
heading percentage (13.50 & 9.83), head shape index (13.81
& 10.73) and equatorial diameter (14.50 & 10.69). The traits
having high GCV possess a higher magnitude of variability
and thus, present a better possibility of exploitation for
improvement in cabbage through selection. Similar projections
were also made in another study12- 13. The genotypic coefficient
of variation provides help to measure the genetic variability in
a character and accordingly, it is not possible to partition
existing heritable variation in population based solely on this
estimate. Heritable portion of variation can be deduced by
computing the heritability and genetic advance as percentage
of mean. Genotypic coefficient of variation together with
heritability estimates would give the best result of the amount
of genetic advance to be expected from selection14. High
varied from 4.18 % to 57.78 %. It was highest for marketable
head yield/plot (57.78%), followed by net head weight (48.63
%) and gross head weight (35.29 %). In the present study,
high heritability accompanied with a high genetic advance for
marketable head yield, gross head weight and net head weight
revealed the role of additive gene action and thus, a high genetic
gain is expected from selection for these traits. If a character
is governed by additive gene action, heritability and genetic
advance both would be high5. High estimates of heritability
along with high genetic advance provide good scope for further
improvement in advance generation if characters subject to
mass progeny or family selection. The gross weight and the
net weight of head were found to be highly variable and important
characters, which might be responsible for wide range in yield
potential.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors are thankful to the Department of Vegetable
Science and Floriculture CSKHPKV, Palampur, H.P for
providing the necessary research facilities.
REFERENCES
1. Ghebramlak, A.M., Sharma, S.R., and Rattan, R.K. (2004). Indian
J. Genet. Plant Breed. 64: 83.
2. Kopsell, D.A., Kopsell, D.E., and Lefsrud, M.G. (2004). Hort.
Science 39: 361.
3. Singh, B.K., Sharma, S.R. and Singh, B. (2009). Sci. Hortic. 122:
32.
4. Pearson, O.H. (1931). Hill Gardia 5: 383.
5. Panse, V.G. and Sukhatme, P.V. (1978). In: Statistical Methods
for Agricultural Workers. Indian Council of Agricultural Research,

heritability was estimated for marketable head yield/plot (86%),
6.
net head weight (85%) and gross head weight (83%), while
7.
other characters showed a lower heritability. A high heritability
for a trait indicates that a large portion of phenotypic variance
8.
is contributed through genotypic variance and therefore, a
reliable selection can be made for these traits while low 9.
heritability indicated that the selection will be difficult as the 10.
expression of genotypes will be affected by the environmental 11.
factors. These results are in consonance with another study
on variability for yield, net and gross head weight 9, 11, 15. 12.
13.
Heritability values along with genetic advance as percentage
of mean, together, are more useful tools for selection than 14.
either of them alone. Genetic advance as percentage of mean 15.
New Delhi.
Burton, G.W. (1951). Agron. J., 43: 409.
Allard, R.W. (1960). In: Principles of Plant Breeding. John Wiley &
Sons, Inc. New York, USA.
Johnson, H.W., Robinson H.F. and Comostock R.E. (1955). Agron.
J., 47: 314.
Meena, M.L., Ram R.B., Rubee, L., (2009). Prog. Hort., 41: 89.
Sharma, K.C., (2010). J. Hill Agr. 1: 146.
Singh, B.K., Sharma S.R., Kalia P., and Singh B. (2011). Indian J.
Hortic., 68: 51.
Sharma, K.C., Verma, S. (2000). Indian J. Hort. 57: 248.
Singh, B., Mishra, A.K., Sanwal, S.K., Singh, P.K. and Rai, M.
(2013). Indian J. Hortic. 70: 296.
Burton, G.W., and De Vane, E.W. (1953). Agron. J. 45: 478.
Meena, M.L., Ram, R.B., Rubee, L., and Sharma, S.R. (2012).
Indian J. Agric Sci. 82: 370.