International Journal of Environment and Climate Change

Volume 13, Issue 8, Page 1209-1217, 2023; Article no.IJECC.101221

ISSN: 2581-8627
(Past name: British Journal of Environment & Climate Change, Past ISSN: 2231–4784)

Study on Genetic Parameters and

Character Association in Ridge Gourd
(Luffa acutangula Roxb.)
Somil Singh Chauhan a++*, Vijay Bahadur a#, V. M. Prasad a†
and Samir E. Topno a‡
a
Department of Horticulture, Naini Agricultural, Institute, SHUATS, Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh, India.

Authors’ contributions

This work was carried out in collaboration among all authors. All authors read and approved the final
manuscript.

Article Information
DOI: 10.9734/IJECC/2023/v13i82061

Open Peer Review History:

This journal follows the Advanced Open Peer Review policy. Identity of the Reviewers, Editor(s) and additional Reviewers, peer
review comments, different versions of the manuscript, comments of the editors, etc are available here:
https://www.sdiarticle5.com/review-history/101221

Received: 01/04/2023
Original Research Article Accepted: 01/06/2023
Published: 09/06/2023

ABSTRACT
The experiment was carried out on Genetic variability and character association in eight genotypes
of Ridge Gourd with three replications during summer season 2021-22 at the Research Field of
Department of Horticulture, Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture, Technology and Sciences,
Prayagraj, India. The observations were recorded on various yield and yield contributing characters
of ridge gourd. The results from the present investigation revealed that on the basis of Based on
mean performance for fruit yield per plant (2.17 kg) and fruit yield (88.35 q/ha), genotypes IET
2021/RIGVAR-6 were considered suitable genotypes in Prayagraj climatic condition. Coefficient of
variation revealed that high magnitude of GCV and PCV were recorded for Fruit yield/ ha (q) and
Average fruit weight (g). The heritability estimates were found to be high (greater than 60%). The
genetic advance and genetic advance as a percentage of mean estimates were found to be
significant (more than 20%). Genotypic correlation coefficient analysis revealed that fruit yield /ha
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
++
M.Sc. Research Scholar;
#
Associate Professor;
†
Professor;
‡
Assistant Professor
*Corresponding author: E-mail: [email protected];

Int. J. Environ. Clim. Change, vol. 13, no. 8, pp. 1209-1217, 2023
 Chauhan et al.; Int. J. Environ. Clim. Change, vol. 13, no. 8, pp. 1209-1217, 2023; Article no.IJECC.101221

(kg) showed positive significant association with Fruit length (cm) (0.024**), Fruit diameter (cm)
(0.971**), Number of fruit per plant (0.331**), Average fruit weight (g) (0.940**) at genotypic level.
Whereas Phenotypic correlation coefficient analysis revealed that fruit yield /ha (kg) showed
positive significant association with Fruit length (cm) (0.347**), Fruit diameter (cm) (0.999**),
Number of fruit per plant (0.653**), Average fruit weight (g) (0.999**) at phenotypic level.

Keywords: Ridge gourd; heritability; genotypic and phenotypic coefficient of variation; genetic
advance; earliness.

1. INTRODUCTION the maximum temperature of the location

reaches up to 46 ºC – 48 ºC and seldom falls as
The presence of genetic variation is crucial for low as 4ºC – 5ºC. The relative humidity ranges
crop improvement. The first line of research between 20 to 94 percent. The average rainfall in
involves evaluating a large number of germplasm this area are around 1013.4 mm annually.
lines to determine the degree of variability Treatment was in a plot of single row in each
present in a population. This improvement in any replication. Recommended cultural practices
crop depends on the level of genetic variability were followed as per the package of practices of
and the amount of available advantageous horticultural crops of University of Agricultural
genetic diversity [1-4]. Some of the biometrical Sciences, Dharawad [19]. Five randomly
parameters include genotypic (GCV) and selected plants from each genotype were
phenotypic (PCV) coefficients of variation. High subjected to made observation on Plant height,
value of these coefficients indicates wider Primary branches at 30 & 60 DAS, Plant spread,
diversity. The small difference between GCV and Days to first flowering, Days of Emergence of
PCV also indicates minimal susceptibility to first male & female flowers, No. of male & female
environmental impacts [5-9]. flowers, Sex ratio, Nodes Number at which First
Male & female Flower appears, Days to First
“Another indicator of variability is heritability,
Fruit setting, Day To First Fruit Picking, Fruit
which is the ratio of genetic variance to total
Weight, No. of Fruits Per Plant, Fruit Yield Per
variance. This is broad sense heritability and
Plant, Fruit Length, Fruit Girth Yield per Hectare
gives an idea about that portion of observed
and Vine Length at Harvest. Variability for
variability which is attributable to genetic
different qualitative characters and expected
differences” [10-15]. “Heritability estimates
genetic advance at 5per cent intensity were
supplemented by genetic variance are more
calculated as per Burton [20] and Johnson et al.
meaningful. Heritability is a component in the
[21], respectively.
computation of expected progress which is most
meaningful when accompanied by genetic 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
advance. Genetic advance would be more in
cases where the additive genetic variance is Analysis of variance in these 8 genotypes of
more than non- additive genetic variance” ridge gourd showed that highly significant
[16,17,18]. differences for all the quantitative and
qualitative traits studied indicating adequate
2. MATERIALS AND METHODS genetic variability among the genotypes studied
(Table 1). Large variation among the genotypes
The experiment was conducted during the
found for the traits, Genetic variability estimates
summer seasons of 2021-22 at the Research
including mean, range, genotypic and
Field of Department of Horticulture, Sam
phenotypic variances, genotypic and
Higginbottom University of Agriculture,
phenotypic coefficient of variances, broad
Technology and Sciences, Prayagraj using
sense heritability, genetic advance and genetic
randomized block design with three replications.
advance over mean for different characters are
The present investigation was undertaken with 8
presented in Table 2.
ridge gourd genotypes i.e., IET 2021/RIGVAR-1,
IET 2021/RIGVAR-2, IET 2021/RIGVAR-3, 3.1 Genotypic and Phenotypic
2021/RIGVAR-5, IET 2021/RIGVAR-4, IET Coefficient of Variation
2021/RIGVAR-6, JAI IET PURI LONG, PUSA
NASDAR with the objective of obtaining Both High GCV% and PCV% are recorded
information on variability, heritability and genetic highest at Days to 1st Male Flower (GCV%
advance. During the period of experimentation, 27.71) (PVC%38.23) followed by Number of

1210
 Chauhan et al.; Int. J. Environ. Clim. Change, vol. 13, no. 8, pp. 1209-1217, 2023; Article no.IJECC.101221

Male Flower, Number of Female Flower, Days to moderate estimates for Sex Ratio character
first fruit picking, Number of Fruits per Plant, only. This indicates closeness of respective σ2p
Average Fruit Yield Per Plant and Fruit Length. and σ2g value thereby low environmental effect
Moderate GCV% and PCV% are recorded at Plant on expression of these characters. Such values
Spread, Days to First Flowering and Nodes number may be attributed to the additive gene effects
at which first Female flower appears. This also and direct selection for these traits would be
suggests that improvement in these characters fruitful. Thus, phenotypic selection may be
might be gained to a reasonable extent therefore, effective for these characters. This also pointed
selection for these characters would be effective out the fact that these characters have
because the response to selection is directly appreciable genetic potential and are
proportional to the variability present in the comparably less influenced by environment,
experimental material [22-24]. hence desirable for simple selection in
breeding programmes [25-27]. High to
Both low GCV% and PCV% were recorded at Plant moderate heritability coupled with low genetic
Height 30DAS, Plant Height 60DAS, Primary advance as percent of mean was recorded for
Branches 30DAS, Primary Branches 60DAS, Days rest of the characters which indicated that these
to First Female Flower, Sex ratio, Days to First Fruit characters are highly influenced by
Setting, Fruit Girth, Yield per Hectare, Vine Length environmental effects and selection would be
at Harvest, TSS and Vitamin C. ineffective.

3.2 Heritability and Genetic Advance 3.3 Genotypic and Phenotypic Correlation

The heritability estimate was found tobe high Genotypic correlation coefficient analysis
(>60%) for almost all the characters viz., Plant revealed that fruit yield plant-1 (kg) showed
Height 30DAS, Plant Height 60DAS, Plant Spread, positive significant association with Primary
Days to First Flowering, Days to First Fruit Setting, Branches 30 DAS, Primary Branches 60 DAS,
Number of Fruits per Plant, Fruit Yield Per Plant, Days to First Flowering, Nodes at which first
Fruit Length, Fruit Girth, Yield per Hectare, Vine male flower appears, Nodes at which first
Length at Harvest, TSS and Vitamin C. High female flower appears, Number of fruit per
genetic advance was observed for Plant Height plant, TSS and Vitamin C. While negative
30DAS, Plant Height 60DAS, Plant Spread, Days significant association was observed with Plant
to First Male Flowering, Days to first fruit setting, Height 30DAS, Plant Height 60DAS, Plant
Days tofirst fruit picking, Fruit Length, Fruit Girth, Spread, Days to first male flowering, Sex ratio,
Yield per Hectare and Vine Length at Harvest. Days to first fruit setting, Days to first fruit
While other characters had low estimates of picking, Fruit weight, Fruit Girth, Yield per
genetic advance. The high or moderate value of hectare, Vine Length per hectare.
genetic advance indicates additive gene action
whereas low genetic advance value indicates non- Phenotypic correlation coefficient analysis
additive gene action. The high or moderate value of revealed that fruit yield plant-1 (kg) showed
genetic advance indicates additive gene action positive significant association with Plant Height
whereas low genetic advance value indicates non- 30DAS, Plant Height 60DAS, Primary Branches
additive gene action. 30DAS, Primary Branches 60 DAS, Days to First
Flowering, Days to first female flowering, Sex
The estimation of genetic advance for all the Ratio, Nodes at which first female flower
characters are presented in Genetic advance as appears, Days to first fruit setting, Fruit weight,
percent mean was categorized as low (0-10%), Fruit Girth, Yield per Hectare, Vine Length at
moderate (10- 20% and (≥20%) as given by Harvest, TSS and Vitamin C. While negative
Johnson et al. [21] and Falconer and Mackay significant association was observed with Days
(1996). The genetic advances as percent mean to first female flower appears and Days to first
was highest in all characters and have fruit picking.

1211
 Chauhan et al.; Int. J. Environ. Clim. Change, vol. 13, no. 8, pp. 1209-1217, 2023; Article no.IJECC.101221

Table 1. Analysis of Variance for different traits in Ridge gourd

Characters Mean Sum of Squares

Replication (df=2) Treatment / Genotypes (df=7) Error (df=14)
Plant Height 30DAS 112.87 70.07** 1.33
Plant Height 60DAS 198.12 63.39** 1.10
Primary Branches 30DAS 0.42 0.21** 0.08
Primary Branches 60DAS 18.07 0.16** 0.21
Plant Spread 35.88 50.89** 1.56
Days to First Flowering 0.005 0.47** 0.04
Days To Emergence Of First Male Flowers 132.92 83.39** 25.96
Days To Emergence Of First Female Flowers 0.075 8.39** 0.68
No. of Male Flowers 1.24 9.42** 1.59
No. of Female Flowers 0.26 0.30** 0.19
Sex Ratio 0.53 22.04** 2.45
Nodes Number at which First Male Flower Appears 0.37 2.87** 0.79
Nodes Number at which First Female Flower Appears 0.09 0.49** 0.17
Days to First Fruit Setting 1.84 8.72** 0.61
Day To First Fruit Picking 6.69 70.46** 22.936
Fruit Weight 0.03 122.79** 0.439
No. of Fruits Per Plant 0.36 10.31** 0.117
Fruit Yield Per Plant 0.005 0.41** 0.001
Fruit Length 0.36 39.63** 0.112
Fruit Girth 0.51 136.44** 0.095
Yield per Hectare 3.90 2060.46** 1.994
Vine Length at Harvest 0.51 454.64** 0.455
TSS 0.001 0.031** 0.006
Vit. C 0.013 0.051** 0.008

1212
 Chauhan et al.; Int. J. Environ. Clim. Change, vol. 13, no. 8, pp. 1209-1217, 2023; Article no.IJECC.101221

Table 2. Genetic parameters for different characters in Ridge gourd

Characters GCV (%) PCV (%) H2 (Heritability Broad Sense %) GA GA as %Mean

(5%LOS)
Plant Height 30DAS 4.53 4.61 96.28 109.55 84.58
Plant Height 60DAS 2.54 2.59 96.58 195.64 89.09
Primary Branches 30DAS 9.11 13.80 43.54 0.96 34.61
Primary Branches 60DAS 4.55 13.82 10.83 1.60 45.53
Plant Spread 12.53 12.92 94.04 39.69 100.13
Days to First Flowering 11.29 12.34 83.66 2.80 68.09
Days To Emergence Of First Male Flowers 27.71 38.23 52.52 49.57 256.32
Days To Emergence Of First Female Flowers 8.16 8.85 85.07 16.21 67.37
No. of Male Flowers 35.36 41.92 71.14 4.68 83.71
No. of Female Flowers 93.07 99.58 87.35 1.84 147.60
Sex Ratio 2.25 5.51 16.71 4.13 13.27
Nodes Number at which First Male Flower Appears 35.23 46.82 56.64 1.31 45.25
Nodes Number at which First Female Flower Appears 12.57 17.87 49.47 1.25 39.05
Days to First Fruit Setting 6.69 7.17 87.02 20.47 67.96
Day To First Fruit Picking 28.56 40.04 50.89 23.17 135.76
Fruit Weight 0.95 1.63 33.90 13.90 27.85
No. of Fruits Per Plant 30.57 30.92 97.76 8.82 119.39
Fruit Yield Per Plant 24.20 24.26 99.52 1.51 80.14
Fruit Length 22.64 22.70 99.44 32.91 167.58
Fruit Girth 1.84 2.05 80.81 22.12 64.36
Yield per Hectare 2.40 3.20 56.37 28.97 43.31
Vine Length at Harvest 0.72 0.79 82.17 138.62 68.56
TSS 7.66 9.32 67.57 0.82 56.39
Vit. C 8.46 9.91 72.88 1.05 60.59

1213
 Chauhan et al.; Int. J. Environ. Clim. Change, vol. 13, no. 8, pp. 1209-1217, 2023; Article no.IJECC.101221

Fig. 1. Genetic parameter

1214
 Chauhan et al.; Int. J. Environ. Clim. Change, vol. 13, no. 8, pp. 1209-1217, 2023; Article no.IJECC.101221

Table 3. Genotypic correlation for different characters in ridge gourd

PH PH PB PB PS DFF DFMF DFFF NMF NFM SR NFMFA NFFFA DFFS DFFP FW NFPP FYPP FL FG YPH VLAH TSS Vit.C
30DAS 60DAS 30DAS 60DAS
PH 1
30DAS
PH 0.96571 1
60DAS
PB -0.20342 -0.09154 1
30DAS
PB 0.185686 0.329992 0.903582 1
60DAS
PS 0.801343 0.623929 -0.25755 -0.06277 1
DFF -0.1459 -0.0329 0.998243 0.925601 -0.21747 1
DFMF 0.110317 -0.13014 -0.30787 -0.42614 0.633157 -0.31397 1
DFFF 0.89041 0.944501 0.23327 0.606218 0.574836 0.290069 -0.16124 1
NMF -0.33861 -0.30104 0.943143 0.736979 -0.1832 0.930062 -0.02882 0.028174 1
NFM -0.44622 -0.37184 0.95457 0.735011 -0.35434 0.936637 -0.17888 -0.04896 0.982852 1
SR 0.863554 0.963093 0.052266 0.474714 0.410181 0.10759 -0.32582 0.942264 -0.21191 -0.24656 1
NFMFA -0.40221 -0.32827 0.96529 0.762011 -0.31813 0.949948 -0.16863 -0.00162 0.987863 0.99864 -0.20443 1
NFFFA -0.24934 -0.14572 0.99821 0.876862 -0.2717 0.993367 -0.27653 0.181593 0.959409 0.97047 -0.00581 0.979177 1
DFFS 0.916775 0.975048 0.13133 0.529457 0.566345 0.189241 -0.18977 0.992572 -0.08858 -0.15763 0.970701 -0.11155 0.077125 1
DFFP 0.068706 -0.1649 -0.21639 -0.35485 0.601064 -0.22432 0.995023 -0.16438 0.066476 -0.08339 -0.34669 -0.07266 -0.18345 -0.2036 1
FW 0.862035 0.963456 0.028204 0.453695 0.399862 0.083506 -0.34607 0.932935 -0.24016 -0.2705 0.999113 -0.22955 -0.03032 0.965243 -0.37008 1
NFPP -0.22867 -0.20816 0.933256 0.756123 -0.06021 0.926362 0.015827 0.120195 0.990911 0.954649 -0.14482 0.964172 0.946417 0.001301 0.107305 -0.17345 1
FYPP -0.39518 -0.30974 0.97336 0.781295 -0.34034 0.959019 -0.21794 0.015818 0.980125 0.997425 -0.17775 0.998691 0.985088 -0.09174 -0.12272 -0.20169 0.955472 1
FL 0.407585 0.201799 0.096645 0.071227 0.836473 0.114553 0.758401 0.291489 0.288528 0.114172 -0.00134 0.139388 0.108339 0.225133 0.770138 -0.02281 0.392258 0.104112 1
FG 0.869127 0.961256 -0.01449 0.412977 0.421958 0.040049 -0.2766 0.920431 -0.27111 -0.30868 0.994915 -0.26624 -0.07178 0.95509 -0.30126 0.993572 -0.20769 -0.24173 -0.01315 1
YPH 0.877841 0.934481 -0.17461 0.247462 0.490714 -0.12273 -0.102 0.85056 -0.39098 -0.44504 0.943657 -0.40212 -0.22713 0.895295 -0.13511 0.940446 -0.33121 -0.3858 0.024217 0.971527 1
VLAH 0.863963 0.965027 0.039228 0.462903 0.403664 0.094964 -0.36142 0.937521 -0.23001 -0.25977 0.997066 -0.21935 -0.01945 0.968623 -0.38572 0.998837 -0.16042 -0.1907 -0.01287 0.987277 0.925453 1
TSS -0.30149 -0.19936 0.993864 0.850834 -0.30802 0.985873 -0.27621 0.127299 0.9651 0.981388 -0.05835 0.987308 0.998434 0.022581 -0.18246 -0.08221 0.947137 0.992626 0.0908 -0.12444 -0.27906 -0.07104 1
Vit. C -0.28909 -0.18573 0.995316 0.858087 -0.30154 0.988122 -0.28048 0.140922 0.963 0.978657 -0.0444 0.985183 0.999081 0.036474 -0.18699 -0.06828 0.946125 0.99086 0.091955 -0.11069 -0.26623 -0.05708 0.999901 1

Table 4. Phenotypic correlation for different characters in ridge gourd

PH PH PB PB PS DFF DFMF DFFF NMF NFM SR NFMFA NFFFA DFFS DFFP FW NFPP FYPP FL FG YPH VLAH TSS Vit
30DAS 60DAS 30DAS 60DAS C
PH 1
30DAS
PH 0.989143 1
60DAS
PB 0.959814 0.99046 1
30DAS
PB 0.95022 0.985034 0.999212 1
60DAS
PS 0.876449 0.796208 0.707118 0.685792 1
DFF 0.970002 0.995177 0.999121 0.996743 0.733337 1
DFMF -0.38386 -0.47387 -0.53038 -0.52658 -0.01822 -0.52287 1
DFFF 0.990704 0.999699 0.988993 0.983768 0.803925 0.993805 -0.45246 1
NMF 0.721696 0.623441 0.528933 0.5135 0.933315 0.553025 0.328117 0.638951 1
NFM 0.45313 0.317969 0.189732 0.163448 0.825089 0.22495 0.457846 0.331816 0.902767 1
SR 0.948982 0.983862 0.998571 0.999848 0.684793 0.995765 -0.51478 0.982955 0.517903 0.164241 1
NFMFA 0.941367 0.921882 0.894465 0.892582 0.860284 0.900394 -0.10061 0.931103 0.823291 0.514257 0.897157 1
NFFFA 0.963995 0.99204 0.999653 0.998863 0.719436 0.999102 -0.50796 0.991204 0.548792 0.208898 0.998548 0.905916 1
DFFS 0.986917 0.999804 0.992503 0.987856 0.787894 0.996445 -0.47237 0.999626 0.617919 0.306218 0.986937 0.923611 0.99411 1
DFFP -0.38069 -0.46546 -0.51641 -0.51072 -0.03223 -0.5108 0.998752 -0.44377 0.319267 0.430762 -0.49831 -0.08843 -0.49394 -0.46298 1
FW 0.957701 0.989575 0.999807 0.99879 0.701055 0.998926 -0.54662 0.987629 0.516734 0.1798 0.997847 0.88608 0.998964 0.991485 -0.53297 1
NFPP 0.83067 0.739852 0.641421 0.617723 0.995745 0.670411 0.029617 0.747874 0.938042 0.868528 0.616282 0.812953 0.654334 0.730228 0.011822 0.635318 1
FYPP 0.983706 0.999443 0.994337 0.989794 0.775613 0.997852 -0.49468 0.998663 0.598438 0.286161 0.988592 0.91376 0.995269 0.999668 -0.48521 0.993782 0.71711 1
FL 0.583655 0.458071 0.332671 0.303827 0.901631 0.368755 0.276116 0.468539 0.911015 0.98076 0.302296 0.590692 0.348644 0.445271 0.24778 0.32531 0.936871 0.428363 1
FG 0.960409 0.990921 0.999734 0.998297 0.707718 0.999307 -0.54538 0.988981 0.522585 0.188559 0.997255 0.887439 0.998957 0.992625 -0.53223 0.999941 0.642685 0.994831 0.334413 1
YPH 0.964015 0.992437 0.999881 0.998633 0.717925 0.999592 -0.52273 0.991155 0.540968 0.204733 0.997976 0.899235 0.999802 0.994264 -0.50929 0.999564 0.653162 0.995806 0.347158 0.999639 1
VLAH 0.960133 0.990788 0.999725 0.998307 0.707012 0.999268 -0.54614 0.988828 0.521676 0.187551 0.997259 0.886989 0.998923 0.9925 -0.53298 0.999948 0.64193 0.994732 0.33349 0.999999 0.999615 1
TSS 0.959414 0.990436 0.999759 0.998458 0.705231 0.999176 -0.54635 0.988477 0.520171 0.185219 0.99744 0.886698 0.998943 0.992205 -0.53304 0.999974 0.639954 0.994458 0.331042 0.999993 0.999609 0.999995 1
Vit. C 0.960381 0.990905 0.999768 0.998375 0.707677 0.999311 -0.5444 0.988996 0.523003 0.188623 0.997359 0.887916 0.99902 0.992631 -0.5312 0.999949 0.642598 0.994812 0.334286 0.999999 0.999671 0.999998 0.999994 1

1215
 Chauhan et al.; Int. J. Environ. Clim. Change, vol. 13, no. 8, pp. 1209-1217, 2023; Article no.IJECC.101221

4. CONCLUSION for Science Technology and

Environment, 28- 31 January 2009,
High GCV% and PCV% are recorded highest at Kollam. 2009;37-39.
Days to 1st Male Flower (GCV% 27.71) (PVC% 4. Hiscox JD, Israelstom GF. A method of
38.23) followed by Number of Male Flower, extraction of chlorophyll content from leaf
Number of Female Flower, Days to first fruit tissue without maceration. Canadian J.
picking, Number of Fruits per Plant, Average Bot. 1979;57:1332-1334.
Fruit Yield Per Plant and Fruit Length. The 5. Anand N. Heterosis and combining ability
heritability estimate were found to be high in ridge gourd. M.Sc (Hort.) Thesis, Univ.
(>60%) for almost all the characters viz., Vine Hortil. Sci., Bagalkot; 2012.
length 30DAS, Vine length 60DAS, Vine length at 6. Bates LS, Walderen RP, Teare ID. Rapid
harvest, Plant Spread, Days to First Flowering determination of free proline inwater
etc. High genetic advance was observed for Vine stresses studies. Plant and Soil.
length 30DAS, 60DAS, Vine length at harvest, 1973;39:205-207.
Plant Spread, Days to First Male Flowering, Days 7. Bharathi LK, Naik G, Dora DK.
to first fruit setting etc. Correlation and path analysis in spine
gourd (Momordica dioca Roxb.). The
Genotypic correlation coefficient analysis
Orissa J. Hort. 2006;33(2):105-108.
revealed that fruit yield plant-1 (kg) showed
8. Bisognin DA, Storck L. Variance
positive significant association with Primary
components and heritability estimation for
Branches 30 DAS, Primary Branches 60 DAS,
fruit shape in bottle gourd (Lagenaria
Days to First Flowering, Nodes at which first
siceraria (Mol.) Stand.). Ciencia Rural.
male flower appears, Nodes at which first female
2000;30(4):593-597.
flower appears, Number of fruit per plant, TSS
9. Borthakur U, Baruah K. Variability and
and Vitamin C. Phenotypic correlation coefficient
correlation studies in bitter gourd
analysis revealed that fruit yield plant-1 (kg)
(Momordica charantia L.). Haryana J.
showed positive significant association with Vine
Hort. Sci. 2006;35(1&2): 97-98.
length 30DAS, Vine length 60DAS, Vine length at
10. Islam MR, Hossain MS, Bhuiyan MSR,
harvest ,Primary Branches 30DAS, 60 DAS,
Husna A, Syed MA. Genetic variability
Days to First Flowering, Days to first female
and Path-coefficient analysis of bitter
flowering, Sex Ratio, Nodes at which first female
gourd (Momordica charantia L.). Int. J.
flower appears, Days to first fruit setting, Fruit
Estimating heritability in tall foscue
weight, Fruit Girth, Yield per Hectare, Vine
Festuca Sustainable Agric. 2009;1(3): 53-
Length at Harvest, TSS and Vitamin C. This
57.
indicated that priority should be given to these
11. Choudhary BR, Pandey S, Singh P K and
characters during selection for improvement in
Singh R. Genetic divergence in
ridge gourd.
hermaphrodite ridge gourd (Luffa
acutangula). Vegetable Science. 2011;
COMPETING INTERESTS 38(1): 68– 72.
Gayen N, Hossain M. Study of heritability
Authors have declared that no competing and genetic advance in bottle gourd
interests exist. [Lagenaria siceraria (Mol.) Standl.]. J.
Inter. Academicia. 2006;10(4):463-466.
REFERENCES
12. Grafiaus JE. A geometry of plant breeding.
1. Hanumegowda K, Shirol AM, Mulge R, Crop Sci. 19594;241-246.
Shantappa T and Prasadkumar. 13. Kadam PY, Kale PN. Genetic variability in
Correlation coefficient studies in ridge ridge gourd. J. Maharashtra Agric. Univ.
gourd [Luffa acutangula (L.) Roxb.]. 1987;12: 242-243.
Karnataka Journal of Agricultural 14. Kumar S, Singh R, Pal AK. Genetic
Sciences. 2012;25(1):160– 2. variability, heritability, genetic advance,
2. Harland SC. The genetics of cotton correlation coefficient and path analysis in
Jonathan cape, London. 1939;132. bottle gourd. Indian J. Hort. 2007;
3. Hegade VC, Pradeepkumar T, George 64(2):163-168.
TE. Variability and genetic diversity 15. Kutty MS, Dharmatti PR. Genetic variability
studies in ridge gourd (Luffa acutangula studies in bitter gourd (Momordica
(Roxb) L.) Proceedings of the21st Kerala charantia L.). Karnataka J. Hort.
Science Congress, Kerala State Council 2004;1(1).

1216
 Chauhan et al.; Int. J. Environ. Clim. Change, vol. 13, no. 8, pp. 1209-1217, 2023; Article no.IJECC.101221

16. Lush JL. Heritability of quantitative sunflower. Pak. J. Bot. 2005;35(3):361-

characters in farm animals. Proc. of 85 th 367
Congress Genetics Heredities, 23. Singh SK, Singh B, Kumar U, Rai M.
Supplement. 1949;356-375. Heterosis analysis in bitter gourd through
17. Narayanankutty C, Sunanda CK, line × tester design. Veg. Sci. 2013;
Jaikumaran U. Genetic variability and 34:95.
character association analysis in snake 24. Tyagi SVS, Sharma P, Siddiqui SA,
gourd.Indian J. Hort. 2006;63(4): Khandelwal RC. Combining ability for yield
402-406. and fruit Quality in Luffa. Int. J. Veg. Sci.
18. Prakash M, Heterosis and combining 2010;16:267-277.
ability in ridge gourd. M.Sc (Hort.)
25. Rao BN, Rao PV, Reddy BMM. Correlation
thesis, Univ. Hortil. Sci., Bagalkot; 2012.
and path analysis in the
19. Anonymous. Package of practices for
segregatingpopulation of ridge gourd (L.
agricultural crops (Kannada), Univ. Agril.
acutangula (Roxb.) L.). Crop Res. 2000;
Sci. Dharwad. 2010;273-276.
20(2):338-342.
20. Burton GW, Devane RW. Estimating
heritability in tall foscue (Festuca 26. Rathod V. Studies on genetic variability
arubdinaces) from replicatedclonal and molecular characterization of bitter
material. Agron. J.1953;45:478-481. gourd (Momordica charantia L)
21. Johnson HW, Robinson HF, Comstock RE. genotypes. M.Sc (Hort.) Thesis, Univ.
Estimates of genetics and environmental Agril. Sci., Bangalore; 2007.
variability in soybeans. Agron. J. 1955;47: 27. Reddy RP, Reddy VSK, Padma SSV.
314-318. Performance of parents and hybrids for
22. Simuzu AG, Demirsoy H, Demirsoy L. A yield and yield attributing characters in
validated physiology prediction model Ridge Gourd (Luffa acutangula (Roxb.)
L.). The Bioscan. 2013;8(4): 1373-1377.

© 2023 Chauhan et al.; This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly cited.

Peer-review history:
The peer review history for this paper can be accessed here:
https://www.sdiarticle5.com/review-history/101221

1217