There is intrinsic variety among the materials, as evidenced by the analysis of variance (ANOVA) results that showed substantial (P < 0.05) variations among the 28 tomato crosses for all attributes examined (Table 1). Genetic parameter and association study was made possible by the characters' genotypes showing substantial differences [18].
Table 1
Mean squares ANOVA resulting from genotypes 12 yield and yield-related characteristics tomato cross at Hareto, 2023.
SV | Replications | Genotypes | Error | CV% | GM |
df | 2 | 27 | 71 | | |
D 50% F | 26.4 | 134.5** | 29.2 | 8.7 | 61.8 |
PHFF | 0.1 | 0.4 | 0.34 | 13 | 4.5 |
BPP | 0.5 | 19.5** | 0.87 | 11.7 | 7.7 |
FPC | 25 | 141** | 5.4 | 11.7 | 18.9 |
FPP | 0.13 | 13* | 0.19 | 6.7 | 6.64 |
FrPC | 19.8 | 208.8* | 3.4 | 4.6 | 43 |
FCPP | 42 | 3067* | 51.3 | 6.6 | 107 |
FrPP | 0.14 | 2.6* | 0.083 | 13.8 | 2.08 |
FL | 0.15 | 2.8* | 0.18 | 8 | 5.2 |
FD | 0.02 | 1.7* | 0.2 | 8.4 | 5.3 |
IFW | 0.005 | 0.04* | 0.008 | 5.2 | 0.54 |
FYpP | 0.0034 | 0.023* | 0.0008 | 3 | 0.84 |
D50% F- Days to 50% flowering, PHFF- Plant height at first flowering (cm), BPP- Branches per plant (no.), FPC- Flowers per cluster (no.), FPP- Flowers per plant (no.), FrPC- Fruits per cluster (no.), FCPP-fruit cluster per plant, FL-fruit length, FD-fruit diameter, IFW- Individual fruit weight (g), and FYpP-fruit yield per plant
Analysis of Genetic Parameters
Table 2 presents the estimates of genetic advance (GA) as a percentage of mean for 12 characteristics, heritability, genotypic variance and phenotypic variance, genotypic (GCV) and phenotypic (PCV) coefficients of variation, range, and mean. In the majority of the personalities, the range of variance was rather noticeable. With the exception of days to 50% flowering, fruit length, and fruit diameter, the phenotypic variance and phenotypic coefficient of variation were larger than the genotypic variance and coefficient of variation, respectively, for the majority of the yield-contributing traits examined. The findings showed that the environment had an impact on the majority of yield parameters. With the exception of flowers per cluster, all yield-contributing traits showed high heritability (> 50%). The found strong genetic progress in percent mean for fruit clusters per plant, individual fruit weight, yield per plant, and fruits per cluster, along with their high heritability, suggests that these features might be effectively selected for. [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24]) and [25] have also published findings that are similar to these.
Table 2
Genetic parameters for 12 yield contributing characters in F2 segregating population of tomato hybrids
Character | Range | Mean | σ2g | σ2p | GCV | PCV | h | GA | GA (%Mean) |
PHFF | 33.00–52.00 | 42.38 | 10.9 | 15.24 | 7.82 | 9.21 | 72.14 | 13.69 | 32.29 |
BPP | 22.74–68.50 | 41.28 | 26.2 | 51.30 | 12.40 | 17.35 | 51.08 | 18.26 | 44.22 |
FPC | 5.00–22.00 | 11.27 | 5.96 | 9.99 | 21.68 | 28.06 | 59.68 | 34.49 | 306.2 |
FPP | 4.00–11.00 | 6.66 | 0.80 | 1.66 | 13.39 | 19.35 | 47.83 | 19.07 | 286.1 |
FrPC | 60.00 -544.00 | 189.92 | 3697.1 | 6671.93 | 32.02 | 43.01 | 55.41 | 49.10 | 25.85 |
FCPP | 1.00 -5.07 | 2.72 | 0.64 | 1.03 | 29.29 | 37.26 | 61.80 | 47.43 | 1741. 86 |
FrPP | 1.67 -31.00 | 10.98 | 40.8 | 53.05 | 58.17 | 66.31 | 76.95 | 105.1 | 957.0 |
FL | 11.86–114.00 | 38.42 | 484.4 | 630.9 | 57.30 | 65.38 | 76.79 | 103.4 | 269.2 |
FD | 32.00 -77.90 | 49.50 | 54.00 | 72.01 | 14.84 | 17.14 | 74.97 | 26.48 | 53.49 |
IFW | 32.00 -80.65 | 49.05 | 53.58 | 70.32 | 14.92 | 17.10 | 76.20 | 26.84 | 54.72 |
PHFF | 22.13–230.80 | 69.96 | 942.37 | 1274.32 | 43.88 | 51.03 | 73.95 | 77.73 | 111.1 1 |
FYpP(Kg) | 0.64–9.11 | 2.70 | 2.65 | 3.50 | 60.39 | 69.40 | 75.71 | 108.2 | 4016. |
D50% F- Days to 50% flowering, PHFF- Plant height at first flowering (cm), BPP- Branches per plant (no.), FPC- Flowers per cluster (no.), FPP- Flowers per plant (no.), FrPC- Fruits per cluster (no.), FCPP-fruit cluster per plant, FL-fruit length, FD-fruit diameter, IFW- Individual fruit weight (g), and FYpP-fruit yield per plant
Correlation Coefficient Analysis
Flowers per cluster and plants per cluster, plants per cluster and fruit clusters per plant, fruits per cluster and fruits per plant, fruits per cluster and fruit yield per plant, fruit clusters per plant and fruits per plant, fruits per plant and fruit yield per plant, fruit length and individual fruit weight, and fruit diameter and individual fruit weight were found to have a significant positive genotypic and phenotypic correlation (Table 3). Plant height at 50% blooming had a strong and positive link with fruit output per plant, fruit clusters per plant, fruits per plant, branches per plant with flowers per plant, and flowers per plant with fruits per plant (Table 3). Flowers per cluster and individual fruit weight as well as fruit diameter and weight showed a significant negative genotypic connection (Table 3). Individual fruit weight and the number of flowers on a plant likewise exhibited a strong negative association. Plant height at first flowering and flowers per plant, days to 50% blooming and fruits per cluster and fruit diameter all shown a strong positive genotypic connection[19], the [27], [28], [29], and [30] have also found similar results in tomatoes.
Table 3
Above diagonal (genotypic) and, below diagonal (phenotypic) correlation coefficient for yield and yield components of tomato genotypes during 2018–2019
Variables | DFF | PHFF | BPP | FPC | FPP | FrPC | FCPP | FrPP | FL | FD | IFW | FYpP |
DFF | X | -0.28 | -0.31 | -0.32* | -0.19 | 0.22 | -0.08 | -0.18 | 0.06 | 0.11 | 0.05 | 0.22 |
PHFF | 0.53* | X | 0.9** | 0.14 | -0.19 | 0.61* | -0.13 | 0.19 | -0.1 | -0.03 | -0.11 | 0.11 |
BPP | -0.27 | 0.9* | X | 0.06 | -0.28 | 0.6* | -0.19 | 0.03 | 0.20 | -0.13 | -0.06 | 0.12 |
FPC | 0.67* | 0.14 | 0.06 | X | 0.18 | 0.29 | 0.23 | 0.07 | 0.16 | 0.11 | 0.16 | 0.07 |
FPP | 0.61* | -0.19 | 0.2 | 0.17 | X | 0.57* | 0.70 | 0.12 | 0.09 | 0.42 | -0.12 | -0.07 |
FrPC | -0.08 | 0.6* | 0.61* | 0.21 | 0.54* | X | 0.35 | 0.11 | 0.20 | 0.22 | 0.20 | 0.04 |
FCPP | -0.02 | -0.10 | 0.19 | 0.21 | 0.6* | 0.34 | X | 0.28 | 0.31 | -0.03 | -0.12 | 0.12 |
FrPP | -0.15 | 0.17 | 0.02 | 0.004 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.30 | X | 0.04 | -0.02 | -0.24 | 0.09 |
FL | 0.03 | -0.06 | -0.1 | 0.203 | 0.16 | 0.05 | 0.19 | 0.03 | X | 0.39 | -0.13 | 0.24 |
FD | 0.08 | -0.04 | -0.13 | 0.12 | 0.4* | 0.19 | 0.28 | -0.02 | 0.39 | X | 0.04 | 0.51 |
IFW | -0.02 | 0.09 | 0.05 | -0.15 | -0.15 | 0.18 | 0-.02 | 0.24 | -0.14 | 0.13 | X | 0.04 |
FYpP | 0.19 | 0.24 | 0.104 | -0.08 | -0.04 | -0.06 | 0.06 | 0.13 | -0.09 | 0.16 | 0.5* | X |
D50% F- Days to 50% flowering, PHFF- Plant height at first flowering (cm), BPP- Branches per plant (no.), FPC- Flowers per cluster (no.), FPP- Flowers per plant (no.), FrPC- Fruits per cluster (no.), FCPP-fruit cluster per plant, FL-fruit length, FD-fruit diameter, IFW- Individual fruit weight (g), and FYpP-fruit yield per plant
Path Coefficient Analysis
The fruit production per plant was positively correlated with the number of fruits on the plant (1.096) (Table 4). The number of flowers on a plant also directly increased the amount of fruit produced by that plant. Conversely, flowers per cluster, fruit clusters per plant, and fruit width had a negative direct influence on yield per plant, whilst fruits per cluster and individual fruit weight shown a positive direct effect.
Plant height at first flowering, fruit length, branches per plant, and days to 50% blooming all had a negative direct impact on production per plant. Significant positive genotypic correlations were found between plant height at first blooming, fruits per cluster, fruit clusters per plant, flowers per plant, and fruits per plant and yield per plant. Fruit clusters per plant showed the largest indirect benefit of fruits per plant. Characters with a strong direct influence on yield per plant suggested that direct selection for these features might be successful and that selection based on these characters could increase yield per plant. Characters that were not employed in the route analysis contributed to the residual impact, which was 0.231. [21], [25], [31], [32] and [28] have also reported findings that are similar.
Table 4
Partitioning the genotypic correlation into direct (bold) and indirect effects of 11 characters on yield per plant in F2 segregating population of 28 tomato hybrids
Character | DFF | PHFF | BPP | FPC | FPP | FrPC | FCPP | FrPP | FL | FD | IFW | rg |
DFF | -0.07 | 0.000 | -0.02 | -0.02 | 0.114 | -0.18 | 0.062 | -0.06 | 0.013 | 0.07 | -0.06 | 0.035 |
PHFF | -0.02 | -0.003 | -0.02 | -0.04 | 0.12 | 0.112 | -0.28 | 0.553 | 0.08 | 0.052 | -0.13 | 0.489** |
BPP | -0.02 | 0.000 | -0.07 | -0.02 | 0.17 | 0.029 | -0.12 | 0.281 | 0.08 | 0.03 | -0.09 | 0.281 |
FPC | 0.01 | 0.000 | -0.00 | -0.13 | 0.13 | 0.074 | -0.08 | 0.086 | -0.03 | 0.18 | -0.29 | 0.01 |
FPP | -0.06 | -0.01 | -0.08 | -0.05 | 0.35 | 0.043 | -0.25 | 0.380 | 0.05 | 0.16 | -0.33 | 0.39* |
FrPC | 0.04 | -0.001 | -0.01 | -0.02 | 0.03 | 0.483 | -0.43 | 0.882 | -0.02 | -0.15 | 0.03 | 0.87** |
FCPP | 0.02 | -0.002 | -0.04 | -0.07 | 0.13 | 0.382 | -0.552 | 1.060 | 0.044 | -0.04 | -0.07 | 0.94** |
FrPP | 0.001 | -0.002 | -0.04 | -0.01 | 0.12 | 0.388 | -0.53 | 1.09 | 0.04 | -0.06 | -0.03 | 0.99** |
FL | 0.01 | 0.001 | 0.01 | -0.00 | -0.07 | 0.040 | 0.096 | -0.17 | -0.25 | -0.23 | 0.44 | -0.157 |
FD | 0.03 | 0.000 | 0.01 | 0.05 | -0.13 | 0.162 | -0.05 | 0.14 | -0.13 | -0.44 | 0.60 | 0.21 |
IFW | 0.01 | 0.001 | 0.02 | 0.06 | -0.17 | 0.027 | 0.057 | -0.06 | -0.17 | -0.40 | 0.67 | 0.009 |
D50% F- Days to 50% flowering, PHFF- Plant height at first flowering (cm), BPP- Branches per plant (no.), FPC- Flowers per cluster (no.), FPP- Flowers per plant (no.), FrPC- Fruits per cluster (no.), FCPP-fruit cluster per plant, FL-fruit length, FD-fruit diameter, IFW- Individual fruit weight (g), and FYpP-fruit yield per plant