Genetics of resistance to stored grain weevil (Sitophilus oryzae L.) in maize

Figures & data

Table 1. Details of inbreds used for genetic analyses of resistance against weevil infestation

S. No.	Inbreds	Pedigree	GWL (%)	NIP	PT (µm)	GH (N)
Lines
1	CAO3139	POP31	39.5	118.7	123.4	295.7
2	CM140	J 617-61-1-1-1-1-6-FS5-1-1	34.5	136.7	152.6	349.9
3	CML336	89[TL8645]/[P47s3/Mp78:518]B-24-1-1-4-1-3-B-#-B	49.1	144.3	107.4	263.1
4	Pant110	Pop31-U18-2-1-1-4-2-2-U-2-U-3	6.6	26.8	96.0	315.1
5	V340	Derivative of (CM128 × CM129)	10.2	40.2	107.7	340.7
6	MGHC4	(IML485-06-07)-3-1-3-2-3-U	29.6	127.8	87.7	386.2
7	MGHC2-2	(Non NEH Pop-06-07)-8-3-2-U	10.3	29.8	89.9	359.8
8	CM135	IPA-3	10.0	22.0	92.8	329.9
9	CML245	Pob86COHC77-21-2-1-2-1-1-1-b	25.6	154.7	87.2	344.2
Mean			23.9	89.0	105.0	331.6
Testers
1	BLSBRIL92	(CM140 × CA00106)-U-U-U-U-U	8.4	27.3	109.5	332.4
2	MGP461	(Pop Bulk-06-07)-4-7-1-2-2-U	19.4	40.7	107.6	366.5
3	MGP462	(VL Pop Corn-06-07)-1-2-3-1-3-U	7.1	17.8	90.0	281.7
4	MGP463	(VL Pop Corn-06-07)-2-1-2-3-1-U	9.1	23.3	90.0	292.3
5	MGP464	(IML499-06-07)-1-2-5-3-2-U	8.1	18.0	127.6	350.3
6	MGP465	(Non NEH Pop-06-07)-13-2-3-U	7.9	22.8	76.9	332.3
7	BPCL51	Amber Pop corn 51-B	12.3	37.8	132.7	332.1
Mean			10.3	26.8	104.9	326.8

Note: GWL: grain weight loss; NIP: number of insect progeny emerged; PT: pericarp thickness; GH: grain hardness.

Table 2. Performance of commercial hybrid checks to weevil infestation

S. No.	Check hybrid	Pedigree	GWL (%)	NIP	PT (µm)	GH (N)
1	Bio-9681	Hybrid from Bioseed Pvt. Ltd.	42.9	170	110.4	380.9
2	HM-11	HKI1128 × HKI163	36.1	143	62.7	340.5
3	HM-9	HKI1105 × HKI1128	34.5	156.3	74.2	377.9
4	HQPM-1	HKI193-1 × HKI163	36.7	195.2	77.9	319.5
5	PMH-1	LM13 × LM14	35.9	203.3	99.8	412.5
6	Parkash	CM139 × CM140	29.7	87	115.1	429.7
7	Seed Tech-2324	Hybrid from Bisco Bioscience Pvt. Ltd.	40.5	191.2	123.4	328.9
8	Vivek QPM-9	VQL1 × VQL2	33.8	116.8	127.6	379.3
Mean			36.3	157.9	98.9	371.1

Note: GWL: grain weight loss; NIP: number of insect progeny emerged; PT: pericarp thickness; GH: grain hardness.

Table 3. Mean and GCA effects of parents used in generating experimental crosses

S. No.	Parents	GWL		NIP
		Mean	GCA	Mean	GCA
Lines
1	CA03139	39.5	0.72	118.7	−1.39
2	CM140	34.5	1.81 ^**	136.7	15.05 ^**
3	CML336	49.1	−1.06	144.3	6.86 ^*
4	Pant110	6.6	−8.88 ^**	26.8	−26.53 ^**
5	V340	10.2	1.92 ^**	40.2	2.46
6	MGHC4	29.6	9.26 ^**	127.8	30.51 ^**
7	MGHC2-2	10.3	−1.61 ^**	29.8	−26.34 ^**
8	CM135	10.0	−6.51 ^**	22.0	−27.63 ^**
9	CML245	25.6	4.34 ^**	154.7	27.01 ^**
		GM = 23.9	SE = 0.56	GM = 89.0	SE = 2.78
Testers
1	BLSBRIL92	8.4	0.63	27.3	4.913 ^*
2	MGP461	19.4	3.85 ^**	40.7	17.616 ^**
3	MGP462	7.1	−10.49 ^**	17.8	−39.06 ^**
4	MGP463	9.0	−2.65 ^**	23.3	−13.40 ^**
5	MGP464	8.1	1.15 ^*	18.0	8.04 ^**
6	MGP465	7.9	2.09 ^**	22.8	11.83 ^**
7	BPCL51	12.2	5.41 ^**	37.8	10.06 ^**
		GM = 10.3	SE = 0.49	GM = 26.8	SE = 2.45

^* Level of significance at p = 0.05.

^** Level of significance at p = 0.01.

Note: GWL: grain weight loss; NIP: Number of insect progeny emerged; GCA: general combining ability; GM: grand mean; SE: standard error.

Table 4. Mean and SCA effects among promising experimental crosses

S. No.	Crosses	GWL		NIP
		Mean	SCA	Mean	SCA
1.	V340 × MGP464	9.1	−18.51 ^**	35.0	−65.51 ^**
2.	MGHC2-2 × BLSBRIL92	9.1	−14.52 ^**	40.2	−28.41 ^**
3.	CML336 × MGP462	6.0	−7.02 ^**	26.3	−31.47 ^**
4.	Pant110 × MGP464	9.8	−7.02 ^**	37.0	−34.51 ^**
5.	CM140 × MGP462	8.9	−7.03 ^**	39.2	−26.83 ^**
6.	CML336 × MGP465	12.2	−13.44 ^**	39.7	−69.05 ^**
7.	CML336 × MGP463	12.5	−8.41 ^**	43.2	−40.31 ^**
8.	CA03139 × MGP463	14.5	−8.15 ^**	41.8	−33.38 ^**
9.	Pant110 × BLSBRIL92	13.0	−3.31 ^*	49.0	−19.38 ^*
10.	CM135 × BLSBRIL92	15.2	−3.45 ^*	53.5	−13.79
11	V340 × MGP462	12.1	−3.93 ^*	42.0	−11.41
12.	Pant110 × BPCL51	15.6	−5.49 ^**	71.7	−1.87
13.	CM135 × MGP464	8.9	10.37 ^**	31.0	−39.42 ^**
		GM = 24.6	SE = 1.48	GM = 90.0	SE = 7.35

^* Level of significance at p = 0.05.

^** Level of significance at p = 0.01.

Note: GWL: grain weight loss; NIP: Number of insect progeny emerged; SCA: specific combining ability; GM: grand mean; SE: standard error.