02 Jaydeva Thesis

c

The groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) is a valuable food and

oilseed crop. It is commonly called the king of vegetable oil seeds or
poor man¶s nut. It belongs to the family Papilionaceae, largest and most
important of the three divisions of leguminosae. Groundnut appears to
have originated in the South America i.e. North -West of Brazil, the
secondary centre of its cultivation is in Africa (Vavilov, 1951).
The botanical name for groundnu t, Arachis hypogaea Linn., is

derived from two Greek words, Arachis meaning a legume and hypogaea
meaning below ground referring to the formation of pods in the soil.
Different cultivars of groundnut are broadly classified into the following
two groups.
1. Virginia ± having bunchy, semi-spreading or spreading growth

habit
2. Spanish ± having bunch growth habit
The groundnut is a slow growing annual geocarpic plant with a

central upright stem. The plants grow from 30 to 60 centimete r high and
produced angular, hairy stems with spreading or erect branches. The
spreading varieties have pods scattered along their prostrate branches
from base to top whereas, the pods are found in clusters at the base of the
plant of the erect or bunch type. The flowers are borne a t the axils of the
leaves, either above or below the ground, it has a relatively deep tap root
system with a well developed lateral root system.
2
Groundnut is the 13 th most important food crop of the world. It is

the world 4th most important source of edible oil and 3rd most important
source of vegetable protein. Groundnut seeds contain high quality edible
oil (50 per cent), easily digestible protein (25 per cent) and carbohydrates
(20 per cent) (Weiss, 1983).
Globally, 50 per cent of groundnut produce is used for oil

extraction, 37 per cent for confectionary use and 12 per cent for seed
purpose. In India, 80 per cent of the total produce is used for oil
extraction, 11 per cent as seed, 8 per cent for direct food uses and 1 per
cent is exported (www.icrisat.org). Groundnut haulms (vegetative plant
parts) provide excellent hay for feeding livestock . They are rich in
protein and have better palatability and digestibility than other fodder.
Groundnut cake obtained after oil extraction, is used in the animal and
poultry feeds. It is also used as organic manure and is rich source of
nitrogen (7.6 per cent). Groundnut cotyledons contains 20 per cent
carbohydrates and is excellent source of thiamine and vitamin E a nd
small quantities of vitamin A, C and D (Weiss, 1983). Groundnut oil is
used in medicine as it is highly nutritive and laxative too. The magnitude
of per capita oil consumption in India is very low. On an average an
Indian consumes only 6 kg of oil which is less than half of the world¶s
average of nearly 13 kg/year.
Groundnut is grown on 26.4 million ha worldwide with a total

production of 36.1 million metric tonnes and an average productivity of
1.4 metric t ha-1 (www.icrisat.org) and is grown in nearly 100 countries.
The major groundnut producing countries from the world are China,
India, Nigeria, USA, Indonesia and Sudan. Developing countries account
for 96 per cent of the global groundnut area and 92 per cent of the global
3
production. Asia accounts for 58 per cent of the global groundnut area
and 67 per cent of the groundnut production with an annual growth rate
of 1.28 per cent for area, 2.00 per cent for production and 0.7 per cent for
productivity. It ranks first among the oil seed crops of India, which is
largest groundnut producing country accounting for 33 per cent of world
production and 40 per cent of the area. In India major groundnut
producing states are Gujarat, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and
Maharashtra (www.faostat.org). It occupied an area of 7.92 million ha
with it¶s annual production of 7.02 million metric tonnes, with an average
productivity of 1052 kg ha -1 (Anonymous, 2007). In Maharashtra 3.2
lakh ha area is under groundnut cultivation in Jharif season with the
production of 2.8 lakh tonnes and an average productivity of 1147 kg ha-1
(Anonymous, 2007), while in summer season the crop occupied an area
of 0.86 lakh ha with the production of 1.09 lakh tonnes and an average
productivity of 1364 kg ha-1 (Anonymous, 2007a).
There are several reasons for the low yield of groundnut in India
and Maharashtra and efforts are being made to remove the bottleneck
limiting the production.
Groundnut varieties have a wide variability in their germination

behaviour. The cultivated groundnut Arachis hypogaea L. has two sub-
species : subspecies hypogaea (Virginia Bunch and Virginia Runner
varieties) and subspecies fastigiata (Spanish and Valencia varieties). The
kernels of Spanish and Valencia bunch types ar e usually non-dormant,
whereas those of Virginia bunch and runner varieties are dormant (Rao,
1976). The non-dormant character in Spanish and Valencia bunch type is
undesirable for groundnut cultivation in summer season where at harvest
stage of the crop rains are invariably received and cause heavy losses of
4
produce by way of sprouting of pods in the field. It is more problematic

in soil areas where moisture retention capacity is high. A loss of 20-50
per cent in bunch groundnut pod yield has been repor ted due to in situ
germination (Nagarjun and Radder, 1983a). In the Spanish bunch type,
cultivars possessing 3-4 weeks dormancy will be able to save the field
losses due to in situ sprouting when the mature crop is caught in untimely
rains. Thus the non-dormant nature of bunch groundnuts, besides
reducing the yield, also deteriorates seed and oil quality. Seed
availability is also reduced because of field sprouting.
Seed dormancy is a physiological inactive stage or resting stage of

seed. When viable seed fails to germinate under favourable conditions is
called seed dormancy. Dormancy is an important factor in commercial
groundnut production. It can be beneficial when dormancy prevents
mature seeds from sprouting before harvest. It can be detrimental when
dormancy reduces stand or hampers taking a second crop immediately
after harvest.
Lack of dormancy in bunch types has been described as an inherent

property of seed and does not primarily depend on soil conditions (Hull,
1937; Lin and Lin, 1971a and Weiss, 1983). Occur rence of seed
dormancy is reported on a few dormant Spanish bunch strains (Patil,
1973; Patil and Chandramouli, 1978) but periodical da ta on extent of
dormancy present during the storage period is lacking for most of the
varieties developed at various centres. Hence a first step towards
introducing dormancy into the recommended high yielding varieties, it
was considered useful to study the promising varieties of Spanish bunch
groundnuts to know the extent of dormancy present in them.
5
The search for investigation of non-conventional methods of

inducing dormancy in bunch types to save the produce and to retain the
seed quality against the field sprouting are of greater importance. For
inducing seed dormancy in groundnut number of methods have been
developed. There are some chemicals which are capable of altering the
seed dormancy. Among those, treatment with foliar application of mal eic
hydrazide at different stages of crop growth. Mal eic hydrazide a growth
inhibitor has been successfully used to control sprouting of tubers, roots
and bulbs during storage. The key idea in the use of growth regulators is
to control some aspects of growth, regulate the balance between source
and sink, which is the final analysis results in the higher yield of desired
product. The information on the choice of proper concentrations of MH
and its time of application on the locally available groundnuts is lac king.
Keeping this in view an attempt has been made to study the

feasibility of inducing dormancy with various concentrations of maleic
hydrazide in groundnut genotypes ×iz., TG-26, TAG-24 and SB-XI, the
present investigation "Induction of seed dormancy in summer groundnut'
was undertaken with the following objectives.
1. Standardization of concentrations of mal eic hydrazide for

induction of dormancy in summer groundnut.
2. Determination of dormancy period of groundnut varieties under

study.
6
º

Although groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) is an important oil seed

crop of summer season, it is being widely grown under irrigation during
summer season. The area under summer irrigated groundnut is fast
increasing though it's yields are very low as compared to USA and China.
Several reasons could be ascribed to its low productivity of which

nearly 20 per cent loss in the field is by the in situ germination due to lack
of dormancy (Anonymous, 1979). Hence, there is a need to identify
sources of short duration with certain period of dormancy to minimize
yield losses due to in situ germination (Ashok Kumar, 1989 and Patil et
al., 1991).
The Review of Literature pertaining to the aspects of induction of

seed dormancy in summer groundnut is very meager. However, an
attempt has been made to review the available literature on this aspect
and the same is presented in this chapter.
º

Basically seed dormancy indicates the inability of the seeds to

germinate even under favourable conditions. It is fairly obvious that
more than one cause might be responsible for the dormancy of a seed.
In a broad view, two types of dormancy can be distinguished i.e.

(1) "Innate' dormancy where the seeds will not germinate even under
favourable conditions and (2) Imposed dormancy where seeds will not
germinate when conditions are unfavourable. Several forms of innate
dormancy have been recognized. Seeds may fail to germinate because of
impermeable seed coat to water (Matthews, 1976).
7
º º

Seed dormancy in groundnut is controlled by many features.

Different causes of seed dormancy in groundnut have been reported by
many workers.
º º

In recent years the presence of naturally occurring growth

inhibitors have received increased attention which are supposed to play
an important role in induction and termination of dormancy. Amen
(1968) has developed a general model for seed dormancy b ased on the
assumption that the state of dormancy is determined by the balance
between growth inhibitors and growth promoters.
Nagarjun and Gopalkrishnan (1958) reported that non-dormant

seeds of TMV-2 groundnut contained a water soluble growth pr omoting
hormone and the seed extract induced root initiation in the dormant seeds
of TMV-3 groundnut. The physiological studies done by Sreeramulu and
Rao (1971) revealed that the water soluble hormone was indole acetic
acid which has root inducing activity. This auxin was noticed at high
levels in the embryonic axis and seed coat of non -dormant seed.
º º º

Dormancy like most of the physiological phases in seed, is initially

determined by the genetic make up of the seed and varies largely among
species and even within a species. The variation may be expressed in the
strain which is used for the improvement of varieties.
8
Hull (1937) reported that dormancy in groundnut is an inherited

character and the rest period extend ed even upto two years in some
varieties. John et al. (1950) pointed out that dormancy is an inherent
property of Virginia groundnut. The trait dormancy was found to be
partially dominant over the trait non-dormancy. Genetic differences in
seed dormancy between strains with different botanical groups have been
demonstrated for several investigators (Ramachandran et al., 1967 and
Lin and Lin, 1971b).
º º

Hardness or impermeability of seed coat is said to be one of the

many causes for dormancy. This causes physical restriction to the
exchange of gas and water which are essential for the initiation of
germination process. The inheritance of hard seed coat varies among and
within the species. This dormancy is also mediated by environment
prevailing during seed ripening period.
Significant morphological differences in the testa among the

different cultivars of groundnut were reported. The seeds of µstarr¶
variety showed relatively thin compact testa while that of Virginia type
was thicker (Gulek et al., 1977).
º º
Ethylene was involved in the normal regulation of seed dormancy

(Toole et al., 1964). Ketring and Morgan (1969) reported that the
embryonic axis of non-dormant seeds of peanut actively produced
ethylene during germination, where as ethylene production was low in
dormant seeds.
9
º

Maleic hydrazide (diethanolamine salt of 1,2-dihydroxy-3,6

pyridazine-dione), a growth inhibitor has been successfully used to
induce dormancy and thus to reduce sprouting losses in potato, sugarbeat,
onion, carrot and rice. However, the information available on the effect
of MH in inducing seed dormancy in groundnut is meager and
inconclusive.
Schoene and Hoffmann (1949) reported the growth inhibiting and

herbicidal properties of maleic hydrazide. The effectiveness of MH in
preventing sprouting of potato tuber was first reported by Zukel (1950).
Naylor and Davis (1950) found that MH was uniformly effective as

a growth inhibitor both for dicotyledonous and monocotyledonous plants.
Pre-harvest foliar application of MH was found to be effective in
reducing the storage losses in sugarbeat (Wittwer and Hansen, 1951 and
Mikkelesen et al., 1952).
Wittwer and Paterson (1952) and Rao and Wittwer (1955) have
successfully used MH as pre-harvest foliar spray on potato to prevent
sprouting of tubers in the field before harvest.
Krishnamurthy (1969) reported that induction of seed dormancy in

two varieties of bunch groundnut (Spanish improved and TMV-2) with
the foliar application of MH. Karivaratharaju and Rao (1972) suggested
the use of MH-30 for pre-harvest foliar application to reduce the l osses
due to viviparous germination in rice as the harvesting period coincides
with rainy season in coastal regions.
Vaithialingam and Rao (1973) reported that i nduction of dormancy

in TMV-2 bunch groundnut by the foliar application of MH -30, in a field
10
trial conducted at Coimbatore. Nagarjun and Radder (1983) reported that

foliar application of MH could induce dormancy in bunch type of
groundnut variety in the field trials.
Gupta et al. (1985) reported that induction of dormancy in bunch

type of groundnut variety T-64 by the foliar spray of MH in the field
trials conducted at Allahabad. Appalanavidu and Murthy (1961) reported
that the maleic hydrazide (MH) was found to be successful in inducing
dormancy in tubers, bulbs and seeds and also in increasing the yield of
Ragi.
º

The concentration of MH is important in obtaining the higher

degree of dormancy.
Wittwer et al. (1950) have suggested the use of 500 ppm MH to

induce dormancy in carrot and onion as 2500 ppm did not reduce
sprouting significantly than 500 ppm concentrations. Zukel (1950)
reported that a single foliar spray of 2500 ppm MH was effective in
inducing dormancy in potato tubers. Hansen (1949) stated that pre-
harvest foliar spray of MH at 2500 ppm concentration was effective in
reducing sprout growth in sugarbeet.
Paterson et al. (1952) revealed that a concentration of 500 or 1000

ppm MH was sufficient to reduce the sprouts in Irish cobbler and Pontiac
varieties of potato. But spraying MH at higher concentration (2500 ppm)
induced prolonged dormancy (four to seven weeks). Thus, they have
suggested that any degree of dormancy could be induced with adjustment
in spraying time and concentration of the chemical.
11
Appalanaidu and Murthy (1961) reported that the percentage of

germination in ragi was reduced when MH sprayed to the crop at the rate
of 5 and 10 lb per acre after 30 and 45 days of sowing res pectively.
According to Randhawa and Nandpuri (1966) reported that the

lower concentration of MH was less effective than higher concentration
in reducing the sprouts in onion bulbs during the storage. They have
noticed maximum dormancy in onion when MH w as sprayed at 1000
ppm prior to harvest.
Krishnamurthy (1969) conducted the pot culture experiment and

revealed that foliar spray of 500 ppm MH at 15 and 25 days prior to
harvest induced dormancy in two varieties of bunch groundnut (Spanish
improved and TMV-2). The number of sprouts reduced from 13.3 to 1.8
in Spanish improved and 17.5 to 5.8 in TMV -2. In a field trial he
observed the induction of dormancy in Spanish improved with 200, 400
and 600 ppm concentrations of MH sprayed at 75, 81 and 106 days a fter
sowing. Sprouting was 10.3, 12.7 and 10.5 per cent due to 200, 400 and
600 ppm concentrations respectively as compared to that of unsprayed
control (25.6 %). On the basis of this he recommended to use 200 ppm,
as the higher concentrations further di d not induce dormancy appreciably.
Vaithialingam and Rao (1973a) reported that foliar application of

MH induced dormancy irrespective of the stage of application. The MH
sprayed @ 5000 ppm at 70 DAS, 15000 ppm at 80 DAS and 10,000 ppm
at 90 DAS induced dormancy ranging from 30 to 40 per cent. At 30
DAH, the dormancy effect was greatly reduced.
Vaithialingam and Rao (1973b) studied the induction of seed

dormancy in non-dormant groundnut. The MH-30 application as foliar
spray was done at 0, 5000, 10000, 15000, 20000, 25000 and 30000 ppm
at 70, 80 and 90 DAS. Revealed that irrespective of stages of application,
12
all the treatments reduced the germination of the non -dormant seeds
severely and increased the total free amino acid content while inducing
dormancy.
Nagarjun et al. (1980) conducted a field trial with bunch groundnut

to study the optimum stage and concentrations of MH for foliar spray on
the seed quantity and subsequent growth of seedlings. They reported that
there was a reduction in seed moisture content due to foliar spray of 250
ppm MH in the early stage of crop growth (60 days). However, the MH
application did not show any effect on seed purity, seed viability and seed
protein content and seedling growth, while MH at concentrations greater
than 500 ppm increased oil content significantly.
Nagarjun and Radder (1983a) observed that foliar spray of mal eic
hydrazide (MH) after 60 days of sowing was found to be superior in
inducing seed dormancy compared to later stages of MH application (75
and 90 days of crop growth). The concentrations ranging from 250 to
1000 ppm remarkably enhanced the seed dormancy to the extent of 60 -80
per cent. However, application of MH in lower concentrations (250 ppm)
but at an early stage of crop growth (60 days) was found to be as good as
that of higher concentrations in inducing seed dormancy. Reduction in
moisture content and the rate of catalase enzyme activity were in
association with increase in the degree of induced seed dormancy.
Gupta et al. (1985) have reported that a foliar spray of MH @ 15 x

103 or 20 x 103 ppm applied to groundnut variety (T-64) at 90 days after
sowing induced the seed dormancy.
Bhapkar et al. (1986) revealed that a foliar application of MH-30 at

different concentrations ×iz., 5000 ppm at 70 DAS, 10000 ppm at 90 DAS
induced seed dormancy ranging from 30 to 40 per cent. Abrar and
13
Jadhav (1991) reported that the seed dormancy period was increased from
5 to 25 days in cv. PI-139915 and PI-169292 by 200 ppm MH applied as
foliar spray one month before harvesting.
Jagatap (2000) studied the induction of seed dormancy in bunchy

groundnut genotypes ×iz., RHRG-12, TAG-24, RHRG-16 and SB-XI. He
revealed that seed dormancy could be induced upto 30, 10, 30 and 20
days, respectively by foliar application of MH @ 250 ppm than other
concentrations of MH applied ×iz., 500 and 750 ppm. He also noticed
that reduction in seedling vigour index and seedling dry weight due to
dormancy induction. The 100 kernel weight (g) was increased and seed
viability remains unaffected due to MH spray @ 250, 500, 750 ppm in all
the genotypes.
Nautiyal (2004) conducted an experiment at NRC, Junagarh

(Gujarat) in groundnut on induction of seed dormancy in non -dormant
groundnut cultivars using foliar spray of MH at various concentrations
and reported that foliar spray of malic hydrazide @ 1000 ppm, 60 days
after crop emergence was found to be superior in inducing dormancy in
Spanish groundnut cultivars.
º

!
Kramer and Kozlowski (1960) reported that the dormant nature of

seed appears to vary according to the geographic spread of species or
genera. Gavrielith (1962) reported that the dormancy period of a variety
changes from year to year.
Varisai and Dorairaj (1968) screened 206 groundnut varieties

under irrigated condition for dormancy. Only 6 bunch varieties had a
14
dormancy period of about 15-20 days. None of the bunch varieties

studied was completely dormant.
Bailey et al. (1972) reported that the Spanish and Virginia

genotypes showed as much as 70 per cent seed dormancy and one
Virginia genotype as little as 3 per cent. Narasimha Reddy and Swamy
(1977) studied gibberellins and germination inhibitors in viable and non -
viable seeds of peanut and reported that the more acidic and basic
germination inhibitors were present in viable seeds. Loss of viability is
associated with presence of inhibitors and absence of gibberellin like
substances.
Reddy et al. (1985) studied 17 groundnut varieties belonging to

Spanish and Valencia botanical groups reported that the derivative of the
cross, J-11 x Robout-33-1 was found to possess seed dormancy for a
period of about 35 days.
Pandya and Patel (1986) studied seed s of 4 Virginia and 73

Spanish bunch varieties and 5 Spanish x Virginia hybrids for percentage
germination after 3-50 days of storage at room temperature. Virginia
types and their crosses, particularly G-201, ICGS-6, Robout-33-1 and
(TMV 10 x Robout-33-1)-2, were more dormant than most of the Spanish
types tested. Among the Spanish varieties, RSHY-6, ICGS-21, ICGS-30,
ICGS-57, TG-9 and TG-17 were identified as sources of dormancy for
breeding.
Kamala et al. (1987) reported that the germination percentage (pre-

harvest sprouting) was scored 105-140 days after sowing in 15 bunch
varieties of 105 days duration. TG -9, TG-17 and TG-15 showed the
lowest germination percentage (8 -10 % after 140 days), followed by
CGS-1-19 and Dh-8. Reddy et al. (1987) observed that CGC-7, also
15
known as CGS-1-19 possesses a seed dormancy period of 5 weeks. The

F8 of CGC-7 shows differential germination, indicating variation for
dormancy period.
Kumar et al. (1991) reported that the cultivars of subsp fastigiata

generally lacked dormancy while those of subsp hypogea were
characterized by long dormancy periods.
Varman and Raveendran (1991) observed that varieties of bunch

groundnut Arachis hypogaea subsp. Fastigiata, show little seed
dormancy, with a result that 20-50 per cent of pods germinate in situ due
to rains at the pod maturity stage. With a vi ew of identifying seed
dormancy, some 55 high yielding genotypes of subsp. Fastigiata were
grown in the field during kharif 1988 at the agricultural research Station,
Aliyarnagar. Pods were collected at maturity and evaluated for seed
dormancy. ICGV-86011 possessed seed dormancy, with pods sprouting
18 days after harvest compared with 2-4 days for the other genotypes.
Seed dormancy was also observed in pods of ICGV-86011 subjected to
water stress at pod maturity.
Nautiyal et al. (1993) reported that the degree of maturity, position

of kernel in the pod and the storage period all had a confounding
influence on the seed dormancy.
Anonymous (1995) reported that relationship between dormancy

and viability, fourteen dormant and non-dormant groundnut genotypes
were raised during the rabi-summer 1995 and pods after through drying
were placed in cotton bags and stored inside the galvanized bins. The
viability of the seeds was monitored at different storage periods.
Dormant genotypes maintained higher germinability than the non -
dormant types. The germinability of the dormant genotypes ×iz.,
16
ICGS011, ICGS-44, TG-22 was > 99 per cent even after eight months
storage.
Venu et al. (1995) studied that the relationship of seed moisture

content with dormancy and seedling vigour in Spanish and Virg inia
genotypes of groundnut. It was observed that the whole seed dormancy
was higher in both Spanish and Virginia types as compared to embryo
dormancy. The genotype Dh-3-30 indicated dormancy period of 20-30
days with whole seeds but did not show embryo dormancy, indicating the
presence of dormancy factors in seed coat. On the contrary, the removal
of seed coat in ICGS-30, EDR, Bidar local and Mardur local improved
the germination but failed to release the dormancy completely, thereby
indicating that the factors responsible for dormancy might be residing
both in seed coat and embryo. The embryo of Dh-3-30 which had no
dormancy exhibited higher seedling vigour index values than the whole
seeds of the same genotype as well as whole seeds and embryo¶s of the
other dormant genotypes.
Nautiyal et al. (1996) screened about 200 Spanish germplasm lines

for fresh seed dormancy during rabi/summer 1995. Revealed that
genotypes showed variation in germination percentage. During
rabi/summer 1995, the crop was harvested at 110 DAS and most of the
genotypes showed more than 60 per cent fresh seed dormancy, finally
they concluded that the dormancy period of most of the genotypes was
laid between 30-40 days.
Anonymous (1999) reported that three mutants of cv. Girnar -1

(non-dormant) namely PBS-30021, 30109 and 30163 were found to
possess fresh seed dormancy about 1-4 weeks.
17
Joshi and Nautiyal (1999) conducted an experiment at NRC,

Junagarh (Gujarat) on groundnut to screen about 180 Spanish type
germplasm accessions alongwith the cultivars having fresh seed
dormancy ×iz., ICGS-11 and ICGS-44 as checks, were screened both
under field and laboratory conditions. They reported that the genotypes
NRCG-7197, NRCG-7186 and NRCG-835 had 23, 24 and 28 per cent
pods were sprouted, respectively in the field. They concluded that these
genotypes had 8, 1 and 5 per cent fresh seed dormancy.
Upadhyay and Nigam (1999) conducted an experiment to

determine the fresh seed dormancy index (FSDI) percentage in 200
groundnut germplasm accessions and 21 cultivars belonging to the
Spanish group and revealed that, large variation in pod loss due to in situ
sprouting of seed, the fresh seed dormancy was found among the
accessions and cultivars. Fresh seed dormancy index varied from 2 per
cent in chico to 88 per cent in ICGS-44 (check), concluded that cultivars
with an FSDI value of less than 10 per cent, showed more pod loss in situ
than the cultivars with high FSDI. Thus, pod loss due to in situ sprouting
increased with a decrease in FSDI. Cultivar SB-XI did not show any in
situ sprouting or pod loss.
Mathur et al. (2000) stated that two cultivars of groundnut ×iz.,

PBS-12115 and PBS-12126 were found to be higher yielder and PBS-
12115 possessed fresh seed dormancy of 21-28 days, while PBS-12126
possessed fresh seed dormancy of about 14-21 days and suggested to use
these two genotypes as donar parents for incorporation of fresh seed
dormancy in breeding programme.
Swain et al. (2001) studied 17 erect, 8 semi-spreading and 5

spreading varieties to analyse the nature of variation of seed dormancy in
18
different varietal forms of groundnut and revealed that dormancy period

of the varieties ranged from 33 to 107 days. Finally they stated that TG-
26 had the longest dormancy period of 107 days.
Swain and Sahoo (2001) studied the duration of seed dormancy in

different bunch type groundnut cultivars and reported wide variation in
their duration ranging from 5.4 days to 106.6 days.
Manonmani (2002) studied both dormant and non -dormant

cultivars of groundnut, reported that dormant cultivars maintained higher
seed germinability in storage for a longer period than the non-dormant
cultivar of groundnut varieties.
Singh et al. (2002) screened 5 different cultivars of groundnut for

detection of dormancy periods, revealed that all the cultivars possess
dormancy period ranging from 4 to 5 months. Minimum dormancy of 4
months was observed in non-dormant bunch type groundnut cultivars ×iz.,
Chitra, Prakash and Kaushal whereas in spreading type groundnut
cultivars ×iz., Chandra and Amber possessed 5 months dormancy period.
The results indicated that bunch type varieties had less dormancy in
comparison to spreading type of cultivars.
Swain et al. (2002) studied a dormancy behaviour of different type

of cultivars of groundnut ×iz., 17 erect, 8 semi-spreading and 5 spreading
types, they reported that most erect varieties showed short to moderate
dormancy period and most semi -spreading and spreading varieties
possessed longer dormancy period coupled with strong intensity of
dormancy and seeds of kharif showed the highest degree of dormancy
followed by rabi and summer.
19
Asibuo James Yaw et al. (2008) conducted an experiment at Ghana

(Africa) to determine the heritability of fresh seed dormancy in groundnut
and to transfer this trait from dormant exotic lines (ICGV -86158 and
ICGV-87388) into two non-dormant groundnut varieties (Shitaochi and
Aprewa), they reported that seed dormancy is controlled by monogenic
inheritance with dormancy dominant over non -dormant, as the results
showed that more than 90 per cent of the freshly harvested seeds of the
non-dormant parents germinated before 14 days, whereas less than 10 per
cent of the seeds of the dormant parents ger minated during the same
period.
º "

Javeed et al. (1998) reported that different strains of fungi in 36

seed samples of groundnut varieties collected from Faisalabad, Chadwad,
Rawalpindi and Attock districts of Punjab, Pakistan and observed that
Alternaria alternata, Aspergillus fla×as, Aspergillus niger, Arthrobotry¶s
spp., Cephalosporium spp., Fusarium equiseti, Fusarium moniliforme, F.
solani and Rhizopus spp. were recorded at different frequencies,
groundnut varieties BC-12, B-40, BC-21 and Valencia generally had less
pathogens present on the seeds.
Rasheed et al. (2004) reported different seed borne mycoflora of 12

groundnut seed samples collected from different localities of Pakistan by
using blotter test, agar plate and deep freezing method of the 14 genera
and 28 spp. of fungi isolated, 18 fungal sp. ×iz., Macrophomina
phaseolina, Rhizoctonia solani, Fusarium oxysporium, Aspergillus fla×us,
Aspergillus niger, were found predominant. Higher number of fungi
were isolated where blotter method was used as compared to agar plate
20
and deep freezing method. Surface sterilization of seeds reduced the

incidence of A. fla×us and Aspergillus niger.
El-Maghraby et al. (2007) revealed that sixty-four species and 2

vareities which belong to 19 genera of fungi were identified from 40
peanut seed samples collected from different places in Egypt by using
dilution plate method on glucose-czapek¶s medium. The most frequent
genera noticed were ×iz., Aspergillus (21 species and 2 varieties),
Penicillium (16 species) and Fusarium (6 species) and they finally
concluded that A. fla×us, A. niger, Fusarium oxysporium and Penicillium
chrysogencem were the most common fungal species ass ociated with
groundnut seeds.
21
Ñ

The present investigation entitled, ³Induction of seed dormancy in

summer groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.)´ was conducted during
summer 2007 season at Seed Technology Research Unit Farm,
Department of Agricultural Botany, Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth,
Rahuri.
The details of materials used and methods adopted for these

investigations, are described in this chapter.

A piece of fairly well leveled land with uniform fertility was

selected for conducting the experiment. Before laying out the
experiment, the field was brought to good tilth by ploughing once and
harrowing twice and by collecting stubbles and debris of the previous
crop.
º #

The Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth, Rahuri is situated between

19°47¶ and 19°57¶ north latitude and between 74°82¶ and 74°19¶ east
longitude. It is situated at about 525 meters above the mean sea level.
This tract is laying on the eastern side of the Western Ghat, falls under
rain shadow area. Climatically, this area falls in semi-arid, subtropical
zone with an annual rainfall varying from 307 to 619 mm with an average
of 525 mm which is generally received through south -west monsoon.
22
$%

A separate experiment was laid out in a Factorial Randomized

Block Design with three replications. The gross plot size was 4.00 x 3.00
m2, while the net plot size was 3.8 x 2.4 m2. The row to row spacing was
30 cm, while plant to plant spacing was 10 cm (Fig. 1).

Three groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) varieties ×iz., TG-26,

TAG-24 and SB-XI were selected for study.
Pure seeds of all these cultivars were obtained from the Groundnut
Breeders, Groundnut Research Scheme, MPKV, Rahuri (Maharashtra).
The seeds were hand dibbled at 30 x 10 cm with one seed per hill for all
varieties.

Farm yard manure @ 10 tonnes per hectare was uniformly spread

in the field before harrowing. The fertilizers in the form of urea, single
super phosphate were applied @ 25:50:00 kg ha-1, respectively and
gypsum was applied @ 250 kg ha -1 at the time of sowing.
" &
First pre-sowing irrigation followed by second irrigation was given

immediately after sowing. Thereafter the uniform irrigation given to all
the plots as when required till harvest of the crop.
23
' (
Usual agronomic practices of groundnut cultivation including those

of its seed production were timely carried out during the growth period to
raise a good crop.
)

(*
The pedigree and salient features of three genotypes evaluated are

as below.

+
1. TG-26 (TGS-2 x TAG-1) Spanish bunch, semi-dwarf,
high harvest index
2. TAG-24 (TG-18A x M-13) x TAG-1 Spanish bunch, semi-dwarf,
high yielding
3. SB-XI Ah-4218 x Ah-4354 Spanish bunch, kharif and
summer base, early
,*

-.*
A 100 per cent maleic hydrazide in the form of powder was used
for the foliar spray. Initially 15000 ppm of MH spray solution was
prepared by adding 33.75 g of MH powder in 2.25 litre of distilled water.
Then mixture was solubalized by using KOH pellets with the help of
magnetic stirrer. The spray solution of 150, 300, 450, 600 and 750 ml for
250, 500, 750, 1000 and 1250 ppm respectively was taken , then the
volume was made upto 9 litres. The spray mixture was applied @ 500
litres per ha so as to wet the completely foliage. Care was taken while
spraying to prevent the carry over of the drift of solution to the adjoining
plots. Maleic hydrazide was sprayed at two stages of crop growth i.e. 60
24
DAS and 90 DAS with five concentrations ×iz., 250, 500, 750, 1000 and
1250 ppm and absolute control were given.
/ . !
The plants were uprooted from plot area of each treatment and in
each replication separately. All dirt, impurities and immature pods were
removed and pods were taken immediately into the laboratory for further
post harvest observations.
0 1!

The following post harvest observations were recorded.
0
For testing dormancy, the germination percentage was determined

at 5 days interval immediately after harvest. Initial germination was
recorded on very first day after harvest. Four replications of 100 seeds
from each treatment were kept for germination at 25°C temperature for
10 days using between paper method (BP). The germination percentage
was expressed on the basis of normal seedlings only as described in ISTA
rules (Anonymous, 1999).
0 º
!
%2&
Ten normal seedlings from each treatment and in each replication

were selected randomly immediately after germina tion test. The total
root and shoot length was measured in centimeter. The average of ten
seedling was worked out for calculating the seedling vigour index.
25
The seedling vigour index I was determined by using the formula

given by Abdul Baki and Anderson (1973) as below.
Vigour index I = Average root + Average shoot x Germination

length in cm length in cm percentage
0
!
%3&&- 45*
The seedlings selected for calculating the seedling vigour index-I

were oven dried and the oven dry weight of these seedlings was used for
calculating the seedling vigour index - II.
Seedling vigour index II was determined by using the formula

given by Abdul Baki and Anderson (1973) as below.
Vigour index II = Seedling dry matter x Germination percentage
0 -6*
Moisture content of seeds was determined by drying 10 gm seeds

at 103 2°C for 17 hours in hot air oven (Anonymous, 1999). The
percentage of moisture content was calculated on the wet weight basis by
following formula given by Roberts and Roberts (1972).
M2 M3
Moisture content (%) = ----------------- x 100
M2 M1
Where,
M1 = weight of container (g)
M2 = weight of container + seed before drying (g)
M3 = weight of container + seed after drying (g)
26
0 $

!-7*
Three replications each of 25 seeds were randomly selected from

each treatment and soaked in 75 ml of distilled water at 2 5°C for 24
hours. The solution and seeds were gently swirled for 10 to 15 seconds
prior to evaluation. The electrical conductivity of the solution was
measured by using conductivity meter having cell constant one and
expressed as mmhos/cm/g (Loeffler et al., 1988).
0 "
-6*
The seed health was determined by blotter test to detect the

presence of seed borne fungi of groundnut seed (Anonymous, 1999).
Three layers of blotters (size fitting to the size of petridish) soaked in
sterilized distilled water were placed in petridish. Ten seeds were placed
in each petridish at equidistance and the petridishes were kept in an
incubator 20 2°C for 7 days beneath near ultra violet light (NUV) with a
cycle of 12 hrs light and 12 hrs darkness. Thre e replications were
maintained. The seeds were then examined on 8 th day under stereoscopic
binocular microscope. The fungi were identified on the basis of
sporulation and their fruiting structures.
0 ' 008-*
The observation on 100 kernel weight was taken at every 5 days

interval. One hundred seeds were randomly selected from each treatment
and in three replications. The weight of 100 kernel (g) were recorded
(Anonymous, 1999).
0 )
The observation on shelling percentage was taken at 0 and 65

DAH. Two hundred fifty grams of cleaned and completely dried pods
27
were weighed from each treatment in three replications and shelled.

Weight of the kernels was recorded and the shelling percentage was
worked out by using the following formula.
Weight of kernel
Shelling percentage = ---------------------------- x 100
Weight of the pods
0 / 1-6*
The oil content (%) was determined by Near Infrared

Transmittance (NIT) instrument. The 250 g of groundnut seeds were
placed in an NIT inlet in three replications in each treatment. The oil
content was then expressed in percentage by weight.
0 0 -6*
The nitrogen percentage in the seed was estimated by modified

Kjeldhal¶s method (Jackson, 1967). The gram groundnut seed sample
from each treatment in three replications was digested in digestion tubes
using 0.02 N concentration H 2SO4 and 2 % Boric acid. After digestion of
sample, 10 ml of an aliquot of digested acid extract was placed in
distillation apparatus with 40 % NaOH solution. Then distillation was
carried out till all the ammonia is evolved. The distillate was titrated wit h
standard H2SO4 alongwith blank till the colour changes from green to red.
The nitrogen percent was worked out by using the following formula.
ml of H 2SO4 ml of H2SO4 Normality Acid extract volume 100

% N = for sample ± for blank x of H2SO4 x 0.014 x --------------------------- x ----------------------
Aliquot taken (ml) wt. of sample (g)
The protein in the seeds was calculated by multiplying the nitrogen per
cent with a factor 5.46 (Tai and Young, 1974).
28
0 -9*
Viability of groundnut seeds were determined at 0 DAH by

tetrazolium test as described by Lakon, 1949. The 100 seeds from all the
treatments were conditioned over night in distilled water in four
replications. The seed coats were removed by using forceps and needles
by lifting up at the pointed end and tearing in a spiral manner. The
prepared seeds were deeped in 1.0 per cent aqueous solution of 2,3,5-
triphenyl tetrazolium chloride and placed in a small beakers covered with
lid. The beakers were placed in a dark, warm place (20°C) for three
hours. The seeds were evaluated as viable or dead on the basis of
staining pattern in embryo followed by cotyledons.
0 º
:-6*
The observation on sound mature kernel (%) was taken at 65 DAH.

The groundnut kernels were drawn randomly and weighed about 250 g in
three replications in each treatment. The fully matured, uniform sized
seeds were separated by discarding undersized, broken, im mature and
shriveled seeds with the use of purity test board. The sound mature
kernel percentage was worked out by using the following formula.
Mature dry kernel

Sound mature kernel percentage = ------------------------------ x 100
Total weight of kernel

The data on laboratory determination were analysed by using

FCRD method as described by Snedecor and Cochran (1967).
29
-

An experiment was conducted at Seed Technology Research Unit,

MPKV, Rahuri, to study the effect of spraying of different concentrations
of Maleic Hydrazide (MH) on induction of dormancy in bunchy
groundnut during summer, 2007. The varieties used were TG-26, TAG-
24 and SB-XI. The MH concentrations used were 250 ppm, 500 ppm,
750 ppm, 1000 ppm and 1250 ppm. The spraying was done at 60 and 90
days after sowing. The induction of dormancy was tested by testing the
groundnut seed germination and other seed quality parameters every after
5 days interval after harvest upto 65 days. The dormancy was supposed
to be broken down by considering the Minimum Seed Certification
Standards (MSCS) for germination (70 %) in groundnut. The results
obtained from the study are presented in this chapter.

$

The data on effect of MH concentrations on induction of dormancy

are presented in Table 1 and Fig. 2.
The significantly highest germination was recorded in control seed

sample (without MH spraying) during all the periods of t esting,
irrespective of genotypes. The MH sprayed @ 250 ppm recorded the
mean germination of 43, 61, 65 and 67 per cent at 0, 5, 10 and 15 DAH,
respectively, irrespective of genotypes. At 20 DAH the germination was
74 per cent which is above the MSCS. The MH sprayed @ 500 ppm
recorded the mean germination of 38, 54, 58, 58 and 66 per cent at 0, 5,
30
31
10, 15 and 20 DAH, respectively, irrespective of genotypes. At 25 DAH

the germination recorded was 70 per cent which is above the MSCS. The
MH sprayed @ 750 ppm recorded the mean germination of 27, 50, 54,
56, 63 and 69 per cent at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20 and 25 DAH, respectively,
irrespective of genotypes. At 30 DAH the germination recorded was 72
per cent, which is above the MSCS. The MH sprayed @ 1000 ppm
recorded the mean germination of 13, 39, 47, 48, 57, 64, 65, 69 and 69
per cent at 0, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35 and 40 DAH, respectively,
irrespective of genotypes. At 45 DAH the germination recorded was 72
per cent which is above the MSCS. The MH sprayed @ 12 50 ppm
recorded the mean germination of 27, 50, 53, 55, 64 and 69 per cent at 0,
5, 10, 15, 20, 25 and 25 DAH, respectively, irrespective of genotypes. At
30 DAH the germination recorded was 73 per cent which is above the
MSCS.
º $
The data on effect of genotype on germination percentage of

bunchy groundnut after harvest as influenced by different concentrations
of MH are presented in Table 1 and Fig. 3.
From the data, it is seen that genotypes differed significantly in

respect of germination percentage during all the periods of testing. At 0
DAH, the genotype TG-26 recorded significantly the least mean
germination (34 %) followed by TAG-24 (39 %) and SB-XI (41 %),
irrespective of concentrations. At 5 DAH, the genotype SB-XI recorded
least mean germination (43 %) followed by TG-26 (49 %) and TAG-24
(81 %). The genotype SB-XI recorded significantly the least mean
germination of 45, 52, 56, 61 and 67 per cent at 10, 15, 20, 25 and 30
DAH, respectively, irrespective of concentrations. At 35 DAH the
32
germination was 72 per cent, which is above the MSCS. The genotype
TG-26 recorded the mean germination of 49, 52, 56, 60, 67 and 69 per
cent at 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 and 30 DAH, respectively, irrespective of
concentrations. At 35 DAH the germination was 74 per cent, which is
above the MSCS. The germination of the genotype TAG-24 recorded the
germination of above the MSCS during all the periods of testing, except
at 0 DAH (39 %), irrespective of concentrations.
$
The data on effect of interaction of genotype and concentration of

MH on induction of dormancy are presented in Table 1a.
From the data, it is seen that, the germination percentage of

varieties ×iz., TG-26, TAG-24 and SB-XI were significantly influenced
by the interaction effect between genotypes and concentrations of MH
during all the periods of testing (0 to 65 DAH).
-*
The variety TG-26 sprayed with water (control) recorded the mean
germination of 79, 94, 92, 92, 93, 93, 94, 94, 93, 93, 95, 95, 96 and 96 per
cent at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60 and 65 DAH,
respectively. The variety TAG-24 sprayed with water (control) recorded
the germination of 85, 92, 95, 95, 95, 94, 93, 94, 94, 96, 94, 94, 97 and 95
per cent at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60 and 65 DAH,
respectively. The variety SB-XI sprayed with water (control) recorded
the germination of 80, 92, 93, 91, 91, 92, 92, 90, 91, 95, 93, 9 6, 96 and 96
per cent at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60 and 65 DAH,
respectively.
33
34
35
º .;º0

The genotype TG-26 sprayed with MH @ 250 ppm recorded the

germination of 35, 51, 57 and 57 per cent at 0, 5, 10 and 15 DAH,
respectively. At 20 DAH the germination recorded was 70 per cent. The
genotype TAG-24 sprayed with MH @ 250 ppm recorded the
germination of 49 per cent at 0 DAH. At 5 DAH the germination
recorded was 91 per cent. The genotype SB -XI sprayed with MH @ 250
ppm recorded the germination of 41, 41, 44, 54, 56 and 61 per cent at 0,
5, 10, 15, 20 and 25 DAH, respectively. At 30 DAH, the germination
recorded was 71 per cent.
.;00

The genotype TG-26 sprayed with MH @ 500 ppm, recorded the

germination of 30, 42, 45, 51, 58, 66, 67 and 69 per cent at 0, 5, 10, 15,
20, 25, 30 and 35 DAH, respectively. At 40 DAH, the germination
recorded was 77 per cent. The genotype TAG-24 sprayed with MH @
500 ppm recorded the germination of 41 per cent at 0 DAH. At 5 DAH
the germination recorded was 84 per cent. The genotype SB-XI sprayed
with MH @ 500 ppm recorded the germination of 30, 35, 40, 47, 53, 56,
68 and 68 per cent at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30 and 35 DAH, respectively.
At 40 DAH the germination recorded was 7 7 per cent.
.;'0


20, 25, 30 and 35 DAH, respectively. AT 40 DAH the germination
36
the germination recorded was 80 per cent. The genotype SB -XI sprayed
At 40 DAH the germination recorded was 7 2 per cent.
.;000


germination of 12, 27, 33, 39, 43, 54, 55, 6 1, 66 and 68 per cent at 0, 5,
10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40 and 45 DAH, respectively. At 50 DAH the
germination recorded was 80 per cent. The genotype TAG-24, sprayed
with MH @ 1000 ppm recorded the germination of 14 and 65 per cent at
0 and 5 DAH, respectively. At 10 DAH, the germination recorded was
81 per cent. The genotype SB -XI sprayed with MH @ 1000 ppm
recorded the germination of 14, 24, 29, 37, 40, 46, 52, 55, 56 and 59 per
cent at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40 and 45 DAH, respectively. At 50
DAH the germination recorded was 81 per cent.
" .;º0


20, 25, 30 and 35 DAH, respectively. At 40 DAH the germination
the germination recorded was 80 per cent. The genotype SB -XI sprayed
At 40 DAH the germination recorded was 73 per cent.
37
º
!
%&
º $

The data on effect of concentrations of MH on seedling vigour

index (SVI) are presented in Table 2.
From the data, it is seen that the seedling vigour index differed
significantly due to spraying of various concentrations of maleic
hydrazide. The highest (2561, 2749, 2746, 2824, 2821, 2802, 28 66,
2915, 2998, 3007, 3001, 3053 and 3060) SVI -I during all periods of
testing (0 to 65 DAH) was recorded in control seed sample i.e. without
MH spraying (water) irrespective of genotypes followed by the MH
sprayed @ 250 ppm, 500 ppm, 1250 ppm and 750 ppm during all the
periods of testing (0 to 65 DAH). While the MH sprayed @ 1000 ppm
recorded significantly the lowest (367, 1061, 1308, 1401, 1530, 1717,
1854, 2228, 2288, 2517, 2557, 2608, 2736 and 2787) SVI -I during all the
periods of testing (0 to 65 DAH).
º º $
The data on effect of genotype on seedling vigour index of bunchy

groundnut after harvest as influenced by different concentrations of MH
are presented in Table 2.
From the data, it is seen that genotypes differed significantl y in

respect of seedling vigour index I. The genotyp e TAG-24 recorded
significantly the highest (1166, 2248, 2543, 2545, 2623, 2645, 2685,
2761, 2795, 2832, 2856, 2863, 2946 and 2960) vigour index followed by
the genotype TG-26 (1116, 1347, 1363, 1589, 1690, 1876, 1911, 2289,
2384, 2695, 2723, 2795, 2884 and 2910). The genotype SB-XI recorded
the lowest (1007, 1245, 1287, 1503, 1593, 1789, 1840, 2204, 2290, 2590,
2652, 2712, 2810 and 2808) seedling vigour index during all the periods
of testing (0 to 65 DAH), irrespective of concentrations.
38
39
º $

MH on SVI-I are presented in Table 2a.
From the data, it is seen that the interaction effect between

groundnut genotypes and concentrations of MH on SVI-I was significant
during all the periods of testing (0 to 65 DAH). The genotype TG-26
sprayed with water (control) recorded significantly the highest (2591,
2691, 2755, 2758, 2830, 2848, 2878, 2878, 2924, 2939, 2953, 2997,
3017, 3059 and 3075) SVI-I followed by the MH sprayed @ 250 ppm,
500 ppm, 120 ppm and 750 ppm during all the periods of testing (0 to 65
DAH), while the MH sprayed @ 1000 ppm recorded significantly the
lowest (380, 785, 839, 1086, 1115, 1413, 1422, 2032, 2153, 2504, 2524,
2584, 2824 and 2830) SVI-I. The genotype TAG-24 sprayed with water
(control) recorded highest (2348, 2768, 2885, 2924, 2973, 2940, 2961,
2971, 3037, 3103, 3172, 3188, 3222 and 3155) SVI-I, followed by the
MH sprayed @ 250 ppm, 500 ppm, 1250 ppm and 750 ppm during all the
periods of testing (0 to 65 DAH). While the MH sprayed @ 1000 ppm
recorded the lowest (379, 1690, 2138, 2163, 2393, 2485, 2500, 2580,
2670, 2690, 2698, 2718, 2841 and 2852) SVI-I. The genotype SB-XI
sprayed with water (control) significantly recorded the highest ( 2630,
2694, 2735, 2750, 2757, 2783, 2810, 2821, 2890, 2908, 2925, 2930, 2938
and 2970) SVI-I followed by MH sprayed @ 250 ppm, 500 ppm, 1250
ppm and 750 ppm during all the periods of testing (0 to 65 DAH), while
the MH sprayed @ 1000 ppm recorded significantly the lowest ( 343, 900,
945, 1060, 1210, 1430, 1518, 1530, 2237, 2351, 2416, 2559, 2740 and
2780) SVI-I during all the periods of testing (0 to 65 DAH).
40
41
42

<&
%2&&
$

The data on effect of concentrations of MH on seedling vigour

index (SVI-II) are presented in Table 3.
From the data, it is seen that the seedling vigour index II differed
significantly due to spraying of various concentra tions of maleic
hydrazide. The highest (483, 484, 486, 491, 503, 508, 514, 516, 520,
524, 530, 530, 535 and 540) SVI-II was recorded in control seed sample
i.e. spraying with water in all three genotypes during all periods of testing
(0 to 65 DAH), followed by the MH sprayed @ 250 ppm, 500 ppm, 1250
ppm and 750 ppm. The MH sprayed @ 1000 ppm recorded significantly
the lowest (36, 110, 122, 205, 230, 251, 279, 295, 320, 332, 364, 385,
395 and 399) SVI-II during all the periods of testing (0 to 65 D AH),
irrespective of genotypes.
º $
The data on effect of genotype on seedling vigour index ± II of

bunchy groundnut after harvest as influenced by different concentrations
of MH are presented in Table 3.
From the data, it is seen t hat genotypes differed significantly in

respect of SVI-II. The genotype TAG-24 recorded significantly the
highest (172, 281, 301, 414, 431, 433, 442, 468, 474, 479, 483, 489, 492
and 497) seedling vigour index II followed by the genotype TG -26 (132,
149, 165, 242, 250, 282, 296, 311, 348, 366, 416, 417, 423 and 433). The
genotype SB-XI recorded significantly the lowest (118, 124, 146, 224,
260, 289, 301, 310, 317, 344, 369, 379 and 379) seedling vigour index II
during all the periods of testing (0 to 65 DAH), irrespective of
concentrations.
43
44
$
The data on effect of interaction between genotypes and

concentrations of MH on SVI-II are presented in Table 3a.

groundnut genotypes and concentrations of MH on SVI -II were
significant during all the periods of testing (0 to 65 DAH). The genotype
TG-26 sprayed with water (control) recorded significantly the highest
(473, 480, 481, 486, 486, 501, 506, 516, 518, 520, 521, 534 and 543)
SVI-II, followed by the MH sprayed @ 250 ppm, 500 ppm, 1250 ppm
and 750 ppm during all the periods of testing (0 to 65 DAH), while the
MH sprayed @ 1000 ppm recorded significantly the lowest (23, 68, 78,
161, 167, 200, 211, 222, 287, 304, 374, 376, 459 and 466) SVI-II during
all the periods of testing (0 to 65 DAH). The genotype TAG -24 sprayed
with water (control) recorded significantly the highest (508, 514, 516,
522, 524, 526, 527, 528, 534, 535, 538, 546, 548 and 557) SVI-II
followed by the MH sprayed @ 250 ppm, 500 ppm, 1250 ppm and 750
ppm during all the periods of testing (0 to 65 DAH), while the MH
sprayed @ 1000 ppm recorded significantly the lowest (61, 219, 224,
319, 384, 385, 400, 418, 425, 425, 430, 472, 476 and 476) SVI-II during
all the periods of testing (0 to 65 DAH). The genotype SB-XI sprayed
with water recorded significantly the highest (394, 455, 462, 474, 484,
484, 490, 491, 493, 494, 496, 496, 503 and 510) SVI-II, followed by the
MH sprayed @ 250 ppm, 500 ppm, 1250 ppm and 750 ppm during all the
periods of testing. The MH sprayed @ 1000 ppm recorded significantly
the lowest (25, 42, 65, 134, 138, 159, 226, 244, 247, 263, 284, 323, 343
and 347) SVI-II during all the periods of testing (0 to 65 DAH).
45
46
47

-*
$

The data on effect of concentrations of MH on SDW of genotypes

From the data, it is seen that seedling dry weight of genotypes

differed significantly due to spraying of MH at various concentrations.
The highest (3.9, 4.5, 5.1, 5.2, 5.2, 5.2, 5.3, 5.3, 5.4, 5.4, 5.4, 5.4, 5.5 and
5.6 g) SDW during all periods of testing (0 to 65 DAH) was recorded in
control seed sample i.e. water spraying irrespective of genotypes, while
the MH sprayed @ 1000 ppm recorded significantly the lowest (2.5, 2.5,
2.8, 3.7, 3.7, 3.9, 4.0, 4.0, 4.1, 4.1, 4.1, 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 g) SDW,
irrespective of genotypes as compared to other concentrations i.e. MH
sprayed @ 250 ppm, 500 ppm, 750 ppm and 1250 ppm, during all the
º $
The data on effect of genotypes on seedling dry weight of bunchy

groundnut after harvest as influenced by different concentrations of MH
From the data, it is seen that seedling dry weight of all the
genotypes differed significantly due to spraying of MH irrespective of
concentrations. The genotype TAG-24 recorded significantly the highest
(4.0, 4.1, 4.3, 4.4, 4.6, 4.6, 4.7, 4.8, 4.8, 4.9, 4.9, 4.9, 4.9 and 5.0 g) SDW
followed by TG-26 (2.6, 2.8, 3.6, 4.1, 4.1, 4.3, 4.5, 4.6, 4.6, 4.6, 4.6, 4.7,
4.7 and 4.8 g), while the genotype SB -XI recorded significantly the
lowest (1.9, 2.3, 3.0, 3.4, 3.7, 4.0, 4.0, 4.0, 4.2, 4.3, 4.3, 4.3, 4 .3 and 4.5
g) SDW, irrespective of concentration during all the periods of testing (0
to 65 DAH).
48
49
$

MH on SDW of genotypes are presented in Table 4a.

groundnut genotypes and concentrations of MH on SDW of genotypes
were significant during all the periods of testing (0 to 65 DAH). The
genotype TG-26 sprayed with water recorded significantly the highest
(3.8, 4.5, 5.2, 5.4, 5.4, 5.4, 5.4, 5.5, 5.5, 5.5, 5.5, 5.6, 5.6 and 5.7 g) SDW,
while the MH sprayed @ 1000 ppm recorded the lowest (2.1, 2.2, 2.3,
3.3, 3.8, 3.9, 3.9, 4.0, 4.0, 4.1, 4.1, 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 g) SDW, as compared
to other concentrations i.e. MH sprayed @ 250 ppm, 500 ppm, 750 ppm
and 1250 ppm during all the periods of testing (0 to 65 DAH). The
genotype TAG-24 sprayed with water recorded significantly the highest
(4.7, 4.8, 5.6, 5.7, 5.7, 5.7, 5.8, 5.8, 5.8, 5.9, 5.9, 5.9, 6.0 and 6.0 g) SDW,
while the MH sprayed @ 1000 ppm recorded significantly the lowest
(3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 4.0, 4.1, 4.2, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.4, 4.5, 4.5, 4.5 and 4.6 g) SDW
as compared to other treatments i.e. the MH sprayed @ 250 ppm, 500
ppm, 750 ppm and 1250 ppm during all the periods of testing (0 to 65
DAH). The genotype SB-XI sprayed with water (control) recorded
significantly the highest (3.2, 4.2, 4.3, 4.6, 4.7, 4.8, 4.8, 4.8, 4.9, 4.9, 4.9,
5.0, 5.0 and 5.1 g) SDW, while the MH sprayed @ 1000 ppm
significantly recorded the lowest (1.4, 1.9, 2.1, 3.0, 3.3, 3.5, 3.6, 3.6, 3.8,
3.8, 3.9, 4.0, 4.1 and 4.2 g) SDW as compared to other concentrations i.e.
the MH sprayed @ 250 ppm, 500 ppm, 750 ppm and 1250 ppm during all
the periods of testing (0 to 65 DAH).
50
51
52
-6*
$

The data on effect of concentration of MH on moisture content as

influenced by foliar spray of MH with various concentrations are
presented in Table 5.
From the data, it is seen that there was no significant difference in

moisture content of bunchy groundnut due to the various concentrations
of MH sprayed. However, numerically higher moisture content due to
water spray (32, 30, 29, 27, 25, 21, 18, 16, 11, 10, 9, 7, 7 and 7 per cent)
was recorded at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60 and 65
DAH, respectively, irrespective of genotypes as compared to various
concentrations of MH sprayed.
º $
The data on effect of genotypes on moisture content of bunch y

groundnut as influenced by foliar spray of MH with various
concentrations are presented in Table 5.

respect of moisture content due to spraying of MH irrespective of
moisture content (33, 32, 29, 27, 24, 23, 19, 17, 12, 11, 9, 7, 7 and 7 per
cent) followed by the genotype TG-26 (32, 31, 29, 24, 22, 21, 17, 14, 10,
10, 9, 7, 7 and 7 per cent). The genotype SB-XI recorded significantly
the lowest moisture content (30, 29, 27, 24, 22, 20, 17, 14, 10, 10, 9, 7, 7
and 7 per cent) at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60 and 65
DAH, respectively irrespective of concentrations.
53
54
55
56
&

concentrations of MH on moisture content of groundnut seeds are
presented in Table 5a.

moisture content of groundnut seeds due to the i nteraction between
groundnut genotypes and various concentrations of MH sprayed.
However, numerically higher moisture content was recorded due to
interaction between the genotypes TAG-24 sprayed with water (control)
(33, 33, 30, 27, 23, 23, 20, 18, 12, 11 , 10, 8, 8 and 7 per cent) at 0, 5, 10,
15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60 and 65 DAH as compared to other
genotypes and various concentrations of MH sprayed.
" $

!-7*
" $

The data on effect of concentrations of MH on EC of bunchy

groundnut seeds are presented in Table 6.
From the data, it is seen that significantly the highest EC (0.468,

0.448, 0.445, 0.440, 0.428, 0.416, 0.393, 0.361, 0.320, 0.317, 0.298,
0.286, 0.258 and 0.244 mm hos/cm) was recorded due to MH sprayed @
1000 ppm in comparison to MH sprayed @ 250 ppm, 500 ppm, 750 ppm
and 1250 ppm, while the lowest EC (0.409, 0.406, 0.402, 0.393, 0.386,
0.380, 0.349, 0.328, 0.290, 0.280, 0.272, 0.263, 0.231 and 0.224 mm
hos/cm) was recorded due to water spray (control) at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25,
30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60 and 65 DAH, respectively, irrespective of
genotypes.
57
58
" º $
The data on effect of genotype on electrical conductivity of bunchy

groundnut after harvest are presented in Table 6.
From the data, it is seen that the genotypes differed significantly in

respect of electrical conductivity due to spraying of MH. The genotype
SB-XI recorded significantly the highest EC (0.448, 0.437, 0.426, 0.4 21,
0.411, 0.403, 0.370, 0.339, 0.300, 0.292, 0.282, 0.277, 0.243 and 0.236
mm hos/cm) followed by the genotype TG-26 (0.423, 0.420, 0.408,
0.403, 0.397, 0.390, 0.367, 0.340, 0.306, 0.297, 0.291, 0.271, 0.241 and
0.233 mm hos/cm). The genotype TAG -24 recorded significantly the
lowest EC (0.418, 0.408, 0.407, 0.401, 0.395, 0.387, 0.362, 0.342, 0.294,
0.287, 0.278, 0.267, 0.235 and 0.228 mm hos/cm) at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25,
30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60 and 65 DAH, respectively, irrespective of
" $

concentrations of MH on EC of bunchy groundnut seed are presented in
Table 6a.

groundnut genotypes and concentrations of MH were significant on EC of
bunchy groundnut seeds during all the periods of testing (0 to 65 DAH).
The genotype TAG-24 sprayed with MH @ 1000 ppm recorded the
highest EC (0.466, 0.459, 0.457, 0.443, 0.438, 0.416, 0.397, 0.368, 0.320,
0.323, 0.298, 0.289, 0.264 and 0.251 mm hos/cm) in comparison to MH
sprayed @ 250 ppm, 500 ppm, 750 ppm and 1250 ppm, while the control
59
60
61
recorded the lowest EC (0.404, 0.396, 0.397, 0.388, 0.386, 0.374, 0.342,
0.328, 0.279, 0.270, 0.263, 0.257, 0 .232 and 0.225 mm hos/cm) during all
the periods of testing (0 to 65 DAH). The genotype TG -26 sprayed with
MH @ 1000 ppm recorded the highest EC (0.433, 0.442, 0.440, 0.428,
0.423, 0.415, 0.394, 0.355, 0.320, 0.310, 0.298, 0.288, 0.256 and 0.240
mm hos/cm) in comparison to MH sprayed @ 250 ppm, 500 ppm, 750
ppm and 1250 ppm, while the control recorded the lowest EC (0.404,
0.400, 0.400, 0.394, 0.386, 0.378, 0.353, 0.323, 0.290, 0.283, 0.280,
0.271, 0.234 and 0.227 mm hos/cm) during all the periods of testi ng. The
genotype SB-XI sprayed with MH @ 1000 ppm recorded significantly
the highest EC (0.464, 0.458, 0.457, 0.442, 0.427, 0.415, 0.397, 0.361,
0.313, 0.317, 0.298, 0.280, 0.255 and 0.242 mm hos/cm) in comparison
to MH sprayed @ 250 ppm, 500 ppm, 750 ppm and 1250 ppm, while the
control recorded significantly the lowest EC (0.417, 0.412, 0.403, 0.401,
0.386, 0.388, 0.352, 0.333, 0.290, 0.282, 0.275, 0.260, 0.226 and 0.219
mm hos/cm) during all the periods of testing (0 to 65 DAH).
'
-6*
' $

The data on effect of concentrations of MH on per cent seed

mycoflora of bunchy groundnut genotypes are presented in Table 7.

seed mycoflora per cent of groundnut seeds due to the various
concentrations of MH sprayed ,during all the periods of testing (0 to 65
DAH).
62
63
' º $
The data on effect of genotypes on seed mycoflora of bunchy

groundnut after harvest are present ed in Table 7.

respect of seed mycoflora irrespective of MH concentrations. The
genotype TG-26 recorded significantly the highest seed mycoflora (11,
13, 13, 14, 15, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 22, 25, 27 and 32 %) followed by the
genotype TAG-24 (6, 9, 9, 10, 11, 11, 12, 12, 14, 14, 15, 17, 18 and 26
%). The genotype SB-XI significantly recorded the lowest seed
mycoflora (7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 10, 10, 12, 12, 14, 15 and 23 %) at 0, 5, 10,
15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60 and 65 DAH, respectively,
irrespective of concentrations. However, the important predominant
pathogens recorded were Aspergillus fla×us, Aspergillus niger, Fusarium
moniliforme, Rhizophus spp. and Penicillium spp.
' $

concentrations of MH on per cent seed mycoflora are presented in
Table 7a.

per cent seed mycoflora of bunchy groundnut due to the interaction
between groundnut genotypes and various concentrations of MH sprayed,

64
65
66
) 00:-*
) $

The data on effect of concentrations of MH on 100 kernel weight


100 kernel weight of bunchy groundnut due to the various concentrations
of MH. However, numerically higher 100 kernel weight was recorded
due to spraying of MH @ 1000 ppm during all the periods of testing.
) º $
The data on effect of genotypes on 100 kernel weight of bunchy

groundnut after harvest as influenced by foliar spray of MH at various
concentrations are presented in Table 8.

respect of 100 kernel weight due to spraying of MH irrespective of
100 kernel weight (51, 49, 48, 48, 48, 47, 46, 45, 45, 44, 44, 44, 43 and
43 g) followed by the genotype TG-26 (48, 45, 45, 44, 42, 42, 41, 41, 40,
40, 40, 40, 40 and 39 g) while the genotype SB -XI significantly recorded
the lowest 100 kernel weight (47, 44, 43, 42, 41, 40, 39, 39, 39, 38, 38,
37, 37 and 36 g) irrespective of concentrations of MH, during all the
) $

concentrations of MH on 100 kernel weight of groundnut seeds are
67
68
69
70

100 kernel weight of groundnut seed due to the interaction between
However, numerically higher 100 kernel weight was recorded due to
interaction between the genotype TAG-24 sprayed with MH @ 1000 ppm
/
/ $

The data on effect of concentrations of MH on shelling percentage

of bunchy groundnut genotypes are presented in Table 9.

shelling percentage of groundnut genotypes due to the various
concentrations of MH sprayed. However, numerically higher shelling
(80.64 and 69.63 %) was recorded due to spraying of MH @1000ppm at
0 and 65 DAH, respectively, irrespective of genotypes.
/ º $
The data on effect of genotypes on shelling percentage of bunchy

groundnut after harvest are presented in Table 9.

respect of shelling percentage irrespective of MH concentrat ions. The
genotype TAG-24 recorded significantly the highest shelling percentage
of 82.24 % and 70.55 % followed by the genotype TG-26 80.38 % and
69.31 %. The genotype SB-XI recorded significantly the lowest shelling
percentage of 78.76 % and 68.74 % at 0 and 65 DAH, respectively,
irrespective of concentrations.
71
/ $

concentrations of MH on shelling percentage are presented in Table 9a.
From the data, it is seen that there was no significant difference on

shelling percentage of bunchy groundnut due to the interaction between
However, numerically higher shelling per cent of 82.64 % and 70.90 %
was recorded due to the interaction between genotype TAG-24 and the
MH sprayed@1000ppm at 0 and 65 DAH, respectively in comparison to
other genotypes and concentrations of MH sprayed.
0 1-6*
0 $

The data on effect of concentrations of MH on oil content of

bunchy groundnut seeds as influenced by foliar spray of MH are
presented in Table 9.

oil content of groundnut seed due to the various concentra tions of MH
sprayed. However, numerically higher oil content of 43.96 and 48.12 per
cent was recorded due to spraying of MH @ 1000 ppm at 0 and 65 DAH,
respectively, irrespective of genotypes.
0 º$
The data on effect of genotypes on oil content of bunchy groundnut

seed after harvest are presented in Table 9.
72

respect of oil content, irrespective of MH concentrations. The genotype
TAG-24 recorded significantly the highest oil content of 45.12 and 48.93
per cent followed by the genotype SB-XI as it was 44.00 and 47.33 per
cent at 0 and 65 DAH, respectively, irrespective of concentrations of MH
sprayed while the genotype TG-26 recorded significantly the lowest oil
content of 43.85 and 46.09 per cent.
0 $

concentrations of MH on oil content are presented in Table 9a.

oil content of bunchy groundnut seeds due to the interaction between
However, numerically higher oil content of 45.47 and 49.23 per cent was
recorded due to the interaction between the genotype TAG -24 sprayed
and MH @ 1000 ppm as compared to other genotypes and concentrations
of MH sprayed, respectively at 0 and 65 DAH.
-6*
$

The data on effect of concentrations of MH on protein content of

bunchy groundnut seeds are presented in Table 9.

protein content of groundnut seed due to the various concentrations of
MH. However, numerically higher protein content of 24.87 and 24.98
73
per cent was recorded due to spraying of water at 0 and 65 DAH,

respectively, irrespective of genotypes.
º$
The data on effect of genotype on protein content of bunchy

groundnut after harvest as influenced by differen t concentrations of MH

respect of protein content irrespective of MH concentrations. The
genotype TAG-24 recorded significantly the highest protein content of
25.36 and 25.58 per cent followed by the genotype TG -26 as it was 24.46
and 24.53 per cent at 0 and 65 DAH, respectively, irrespective of
concentrations of MH. While the genotype SB-XI recorded significantly
the lowest protein content of 23.87 and 24.08 per cent.
&

concentrations of MH on protein content are presented in Table 9a.

protein content of bunchy groundnut seeds due to the interaction between
However, numerically higher protein content of 26.03 and 25.66 per cent
was recorded due to the interaction between the genotype TAG -24
sprayed with water at 0 and 65 DAH, as compared to other genotypes and
74
º
º $

The data on effect of concentrations of MH on per cent viable

seeds are presented in Table 9.

groundnut seed viability as tested by TZ test due to the various
concentrations of MH. However, there was numerically higher (93.89 %)
seed viability was recorded due to spraying of M H @ 1000 ppm.
º º$
The data on effect of genotype on seed viability as tested by TZ

test of bunchy groundnut after harvest as influenced by different
concentrations of MH are presented in Table 9.
From the data, it is seen that geno types shown non-significant

difference in respect of per cent viable seeds as tested by TZ test.
º &

concentrations of MH on per cent viable seeds as tested by TZ test are

groundnut seed viability as tested by TZ test due to the interaction
between groundnut genotypes and various concentrations of MH sprayed.
However, numerically higher seed viability (94.67 %) was recorded due
to interaction between the genotype TG -26 sprayed with MH @ 1000
ppm as compared to other genotypes and concentrations of MH sprayed.
75

: - 86*
$

The data on effect of concentrations of MH on SMK percentage of

bunchy groundnut seeds are presented in Table 9.

SMK percentage of groundnut seeds due to the various concentrations of
MH sprayed. However, numerically higher SMK per cent of 92.09 %
was recorded due to spraying of MH @ 1000ppm at 65 DAH, irrespective
of genotypes.
º$
The data on effect of genotype on sound mature kernel percentage

of bunchy groundnut seeds are presented in Table 9.
From the data, it is seen that the genotypes differed significantly in

sound mature kernel percent, irrespective of MH concentrations. The
genotype SB-XI recorded significantly the highest SMK per cent of 93.62
% followed by the genotype TG-26 as it was SMK per cent of 92.49 %.
The genotype TAG-24 recorded significantly the lowest SMK per cent of
91.05 % at 65 DAH, irrespective of concentrations.
$

concentrations of MH on SMK percentage are presented in Table 9a.

SMK percentage of bunchy groundnut seeds due to the interaction
between groundnut genotypes and various concentrations of MH sprayed.
However, numerically higher of 94.03 % SMK was recorded due to the
interaction between genotype SB-XI and MH sprayed @ 1000 ppm at 65
DAH, as compared to other genotypes and the concentrations of MH
sprayed.
76
77
78
79
^
A field trial was conducted to study the induction of seed

dormancy in bunchy groundnut varieties ×iz., TG-26, TAG-24 and SB-XI
by various concentrations ×iz., 250, 500, 750, 1000 and 1250 ppm of MH
sprayed at 60 and 90 DAS alongwith control during the summer 2007.
The results obtained are discussed in this chapter.
&

.
In current investigation, the comparison between different

genotypes in respect of per cent germination when sprayed with various
concentrations of MH at 60 and 90 DAS revealed that the genotypes
differed significantly, at 0 to 65 DAH. The genotype SB-XI recorded the
lowest (41, 43, 45, 52, 56, 61, 68, 71, 75, 77, 88, 89, 92 and 92 % )
germination during all the periods of testing than the genotype TG-26,
while the genotype TAG-24 recorded the highest (39, 81, 91, 91, 91, 92,
92, 93, 90, 92, 91, 91, 92 and 93 %) germination during all the periods of
testing. Among the three genotypes SB -XI and TG-26 responded well for
induction of dormancy by MH spray, as the dormancy was induced upto
30 days in these genotypes , irrespective of concentrations. While the
genotype TAG-24 didn¶t respond well for dormancy induction by MH
spray, as the dormancy induced was only for 5 days. After 5 days
dormancy was broken down, as the germination recorded after 5 days was
above the MSCS. Among the foliar application of MH at different
concentrations reduced the subsequent germination of seeds due to
induction of dormancy as compared to control (water spray). Spraying of
MH @ 1000 ppm concentration was most effective in inducing dormancy
80
as the germination recorded (13, 39, 47, 48, 57, 64, 65, 69, 69, 72, 83, 86,
88 and 89 %) to a greater extent, it might be due to lethal inhibitory effect
of MH. All the genotypes had non-dormant nature it could be seen from
the control sample (water spray) and recorded the highest (82, 93, 92, 93,
91, 93, 92, 92, 92, 95, 94, 94, 95 and 94 %) germination percentage,
followed by the MH sprayed @ 250, 500, 1250 and 750 ppm
concentrations during all the periods of testing. The genotype SB-XI
sprayed with MH @ 1000 ppm, had given the minimum (14, 24, 29, 37,
40, 46, 52, 55, 56, 59, 81, 85, 88 and 91 %) germination percentage
during all the periods of testing than the genotype TG-26 and TAG-24
stating that maximum dormancy was induced in SB -XI @ 1000 ppm
concentration of maleic hydrazide. The MH application on lower
concentration at 60 and 90 DAS of crop growth failed to induce
dormancy, as the lower concentration might have limited penetration and
translocation of the chemical to the growing meristem.
Dormancy may block any of the sequential processes involved in

the germinations. The work of earlier scientists revealed that the
application of an inhibitor (MH) could bring about certain changes in the
physiological and biochemical processes like alteration in promoter to
inhibitor ratio, moisture content of the seed, water absorption capacity of
the seeds, protein content and oil content of the seed, which are
responsible to make the seed dormant by way of arresting the growth of
the embryo. Another important conception was that, dormant and non-
dormant state of the seed was dependent on relative levels of inhibitors
and promoters present in the seed (Khan, 1977 and Bewley and Black,
1982). The non-dormant nature of bunch groundnut was due to increase
in the level of growth promoting auxin during the seed development and
maturity (Sreeramulu and Rao, 1971a).
81
The non-dormant nature of bunchy groundnut is due to the

presence of growth promoting water soluble auxin (Nagarjun and
Gopalkrishnan, 1958 and Ketring, 1977). Since, MH is an auxin -
antagonist, the primary effect of MH on inducing dormancy seems to be
through interference in the trypotophan metabolism, as the tryptophan is
the precursor in the synthesis of auxins (Karivaratharaju and Rao, 1972).
Besides this, MH is found to increase the content of another amino acid,
hydroxyproline (Karivaratharaju and Rao, 1972 and Vaithialingam and
Rao, 1973a); which inhibits the auxin induced cell elongation (Clelan d,
1963).
The introduction of antiauxins to the seed by means of foliar

application at the time of kernel development may suppress the auxin
formation and induce dormancy (Leopold, 1958). Maleic hydrazide a
growth and respiratory inhibitor, possesses the characteristics of antiauxin
and has been found to be capable of inducing dormancy by antagonizing
with auxin in groundnut, potato, sugarbeet, carrot and rice by interfering
in root growth and water absorption (Ellison and Smith, 1948; Patterson
et al., 1952; Wittwar and Hansen, 1951; Krishnamurthy, 1967). Maleic
hydrazide application on onion plant prolongs its dormancy via its effects
on nucleic acid synthesis and cell division rather than a direct effect on
the level of natural growth inhibitor and promoters in the bulbs (Abdel -
Rahaman and Issenberg, 1974).
The results obtained in present investigation are in confirmation

with the results reported by Nautiyal (2004), who reported that MH
sprayed @ 1000 ppm concentration induced dormancy much better in
non-dormant groundnut varieties. Gupta et al. (1985) stated that effect of
MH in inducing dormancy in groundnut varieties was found to be
82
increased with increase in the concentration and reported MH sprayed @

20 x 103 ppm had induced more dormancy than 5 x 10 3, 10 x 103 and 15 x
103 ppm. Randhawa and Nandapuri (1986) reported that MH sprayed @
1000 ppm concentrations reduced the sprouting per cent in onion bulbs.
Nagarjun et al. (1980) and Abrar and Jadhav (1991) reported that 250
ppm and 200 ppm, respectively could induce dormancy in bunch
groundnut seeds for a period of 3-4 weeks.
0 4 -
*

!

+

2º" (2º ,2=& &!
#
Control No dormancy No dormancy No dormancy No dormancy
250 ppm 15 5 25 15
500 ppm 35 5 35 20
750 ppm 35 5 35 25
1000 ppm 45 5 45 40
1250 ppm 35 5 35 25
Irrespective of 30 5 30 -
concentrations
º
!
%&>&&

-*
The comparison between seedling vigour index I, II and SDW as

influenced by different treatments revealed that the genotypes differed
significantly in respect of seedling vigour I , II and SDW due to their
genetic make up and inhibitory effect of MH. The varie ty TAG-24
recorded significantly the highest seedling viour index I, II and seedling
dry weight followed by the genotype TG-26, irrespective of
concentrations of MH during all the periods of testing. The genotype SB-
83
XI recorded the least seedling vigour index I, II and seedling dry weight.
The control (water spray) recorded significantly the highest seedling
vigour index I, II and seedling dry weight, respectively, followed by MH
sprayed @ 250, 500, 1250 and 750 ppm, irrespective of genotypes. The
MH sprayed @ 1000 ppm concentration recorded significantly lowest
seedling vigour index I, II and seedling dry weight during all the periods
of testing. The variety SB-XI and the MH sprayed @ 1000 ppm
concentration had recorded the lowest seedling vigour index I, II and
seedling dry weight, followed by the genotype TG-26 and TAG-24. The
genotypes sprayed with water (control) had given the more seedling
vigour index I, II and SDW during all the periods of testing (0 to 65
DAH).
Among the various concentrations of maleic hydrazide, the MH @

1000 ppm worked effectively as growth retardant irrespective of
genotypes whereas among the genotypes, SB-XI responded well to MH
irrespective of its concentrations for reducing its vigour whic h might be
sign for induction of dormancy. The decline in seedling vigour index I
and II could be due to less germination as result of MH spray. The
reduction in seedling dry weight due to various concentrations of MH
sprayed, might be due to inhibitory effect of growth retardants on
seedling growth by affecting the shoot length, root length and often also
the stem elongation (Pandey and Sinha, 2006). The amount of growth
retardants decreases during the active growth period of plants and
increases during the period of growth suppression. Thus, reducing the
biomass resulting in low dry weight as compared to control. MH
application at all the concentrations reduced the dry matter content of
seedlings compared to control. These results are in accordance w ith
Nagarjun and Radder (1983a).
84
-6*
The moisture content as influenced by different treatments revealed

that the genotypes differed significantly in respect of seed moisture
content. The genotype TAG-24 recorded significantly the highest
moisture content, followed by the genotype TG -26. The genotype SB-XI
recorded significantly the lowest moisture content during all the periods
of testing. The moisture content as influenced by various concentrations
of MH sprayed, showed non-significant difference on moisture content of
seed during all the periods of testing. The interaction effect was non-
significant.
However, Jagatap (2000), Nagarjun et al. (1980) and Nagarjun and

Rudder (1983) reported that reduction in moisture content due to MH
spray at various concentrations as compare to control.
$
!-7*
The electrical conductivity as influenced by different treatments

revealed that, the genotypes differed significantly in respect of electrical
conductivity of groundnut seeds. The genotype SB-XI recorded the
highest EC, followed by the genotypes TG-26 and the genotype TAG-24
during all the periods of testing. The electrical conductivity as influenced
by the MH sprayed @ 1000 ppm and control (water spray) re corded the
highest and lowest EC, respectively, than other concentrations of MH
applied. All the three genotypes sprayed with MH @ 1000 ppm recorded
the highest EC while the control (water spray) recorded the lowest EC, as
compare to other concentrations of MH sprayed.
The seeds which give high EC have been found to be correlated

with low field emergence. Seeds with very high EC may not be suitable
85
for sowing (Agarwal, 1995). The highest EC might be due to inhibitory

effect of MH, as it was inhibited the germination of groundnut seeds in
the genotypes SB-XI and TG-26. It could be the reason that, these
varieties recorded the highest EC value. The genotype TAG -24 recorded
comparatively lower EC value, as it was recorded more germination
percentage. Among the various concentrations of MH sprayed the MH
sprayed @ 1000 ppm recorded higher EC, it could be attributed to
inhibition of germination of seeds. The seed from control recorded the
lowest EC as it gave more germination percentage.

-6*
The per cent seed mycoflora as influenced by different treatments

revealed that, the genotypes differed significantly in respect of per cent
seed mycoflora. The genotype TAG-24 recorded the highest per cent
seed mycoflora followed by the genotype T G-26 and the genotype SB-XI
during all the periods of testing. The per cent seed mycoflora as
influenced by various concentrations of MH sprayed, showed non -
significant difference during all the periods of testing. The freshly
harvested crop showed less per cent seed mycoflora at initial period of
testing which increased at later periods of testing. Observation taken on
per cent seed mycoflora was every 5 days interval upto two months from
the date of harvesting. The important pre-dominant seed pathogens
noticed during the periods of testing were Aspergillus fla×us, Aspergillus
niger, Fusarium moniliforme, Rhizophus spp. and Penicillium spp. The
present results obtained are in conformity with the work of Javeed et al.
(1998), Rasheed et al. (2004) and El-Magharaby et al. (2007) who
reported the same seed pathogens in their experiment, who analysed the
seed samples after every month upto one year.
86
" 00 : -*>

:-6*
The 100 kernel weight as influenced by different treatments

revealed that, the genotypes differed significantly in respect of 100 kernel
weight. The genotype TAG-24 recorded the highest 100 kernel weight
followed by the genotypes TG-26 and SB-XI during all the periods of
testing (0 to 65 DAH). It might be due to their genetic makeup. There
was no significant difference in 100 kernel weight as influenced by
various concentrations of MH sprayed. Non-significant effect on 100
kernel weight could be attributed to unaffected yield contributing
characters due to MH spray. The present results are in accordance with
the work of Gupta et al. (1985) who reported non-significant difference
on seed index (gm) due to MH spray at various concentrations.
The shelling percentage as influenced by different treatments

revealed that, the genotypes differed significantly in respect of shelling
percentage. The genotype TAG-24 recorded highest (82.24 and 70.55 %)
shelling percentage followed by the genotype TG-26 (80.38 and 69.39 %)
and the SB-XI (78.76 and 68.74 %) at 0 and 65 DAH, respectively. At 0
DAH all three genotypes recorded more shelling percentage due to more
moisture content. At 65 DAH, shelling percentage was reduced due to
reduction in moisture content. The difference in s helling percentage
among the genotypes is due to their genetic makeup. The shelling
percentage as influenced by various concentrations of MH sprayed was
non-significant. Non-significant effect on shelling percentage might be
due to unaffected yield contributing characters due to MH spray. The
present results obtained are not in accordance with the results reported by
87
Gupta et al. (1985) who observed reduction in shelling percentage due to

MH spray.
The sound mature kernel percentage as influenced by dif ferent

treatments revealed that, the genotypes differed significantly in respect of
sound mature kernel percentage. The genotype SB -XI recorded highest
(93.62 %) SMK percentage, followed by the genotype TG -26 (92.49 %)
and TAG-24 (91.05 %) at 65 DAH. Though the genotype SB-XI
recorded lowest shelling percentage but it recorded highest sound mature
kernel percentage. The genotype TAG -24 recorded highest shelling
percentage, but it recorded lowest sound mature kernel percentage. It
could be attributed more number of uniform and fully matured seeds in
genotype SB-XI. It can also be correlate with highest induction of
dormancy, due to spraying of MH, which might have reduced the
vegetative growth and diverted all the food material towards sink i.e.
pods. The present results are in conformity with the work of Nagarjun et
al. (1980) who studied purity of seed (per cent uniform sized and matured
seed) and reported that change in the concentration of MH application did
not show any significant adverse or beneficial effect on the seed purity.
' 1
-6*
The oil content as influenced by different treatments revealed that,

the genotypes differed significantly in respect of oil content. The
genotype TAG-24 recorded the highest (45.12 and 48.93 %) oil content,
followed by the genotype SB-XI (44.00 and 47.73 %) and TG-26 (43.35
and 46.09 %) at 0 and 65 DAH, respectively . The difference in oil
content among the genotypes might be due to their genetic makeup. The
slight increase in the oil content due to MH spray, might be due to the
88
greater availability and translocation of mineral elements, especially

sulphur which was directly involved in biosynthesis of oil (Nagarjun and
Rudder, 1983 and Suryanarayana et al., 1976) who also found increased
oil content due to the foliar spray of MH.
The protein content as influenced by different treatments revealed

that, the genotypes differed significantly in respect of protein content.
The genotype TAG-24 recorded significantly the highest (25.36 and
25.58 %) protein content, followed by the genotype TG-26 (24.46 and
24.53 %) and SB-XI (23.87 and 24.08 %) at 0 and 65 DAH, respectively.
The difference in protein content among the genotypes might be due to
their genetic make up. There was slight reduction in the protein content
due to MH application at different concentrations.
The present results obtained are in accordance with the work of

Nagarjun and Rudder (1983a) who also did not find greater reduction in
protein content in Spanish improved peanut due to foliar spray of MH and
Paterson et al. (1952) who did not observe any change in the nitrogen
content of potato tubers due to foliar spray of MH to the crop , as there is
no degradation of protein with the MH application. However,
Karivartharaju and Rao (1972) reported increase in protein content.
) -9*-6*
The seed viability as tested by TZ test as influenced by different

treatments revealed that, the viability of different genotypes and
concentrations as tested by TZ test had shown non -significant difference.
The present results of the study indicated that the viability of seed
from foliar spray of MH at concentrations ranging from 250 ppm to 1250
ppm successfully induced the dormancy in the genotypes which is shown
89
by viability test indicating that, there was a viability, however

germination was inhibited due to MH spray. Hence, it can be stated that
the MH is safe to induce dormancy in groundnut.
Maleic hydrazide known to act as respiration inhibitor (Paterson et

al., 1952). Loss of viability occurs due to an irreversible physiological
and biochemical changes in seed (Narasimha Reddy and Swamy, 1977).
Viability of a seed is lost due to inactivation of enzymes, proteins and
loss of reserved food material due to respiration (Pandey and Sinha,
2006). In this context maleic hydrazide inhibits respiration and arrests
loss of reserved food and inactivation of proteins and enzymes. Hence
maleic hydrazide does not cause a detrimental effect, as there was no loss
of seed viability. The present results are in conformity with the
(Nagarjun et al., 1980) reported that the change in the concentration of
MH application did not show any significant adverse effect on the seed
viability as tested by TZ test.
90
ÿ
A field experiment was conducted to study the induction of seed

dormancy as influenced by various concentrations of MH in bunchy type
groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) genotypes at Seed Technology Research
Unit (STRU) farm, MPKV, Rahuri. Three genotypes ×iz., TG-26, TAG-
24 and SB-XI were used. The MH sprayed with various concentrations
×iz., 250 ppm, 500 ppm, 750 ppm, 1000 ppm and 1250 ppm alongwith
control at 60 and 90 DAS. The various observations like germination
(%), seedling vigour index I and II, seedling dry weight (g), moisture
content (%), electrical conductivity (mmhos/cm), seed mycoflora (%) and
100 kernel weight (g) were recorded at every 5 days interval , starting
immediately after harvest, while shelling percentage, oil content (%),
protein content (%) were recorded at 0 and 65 DAH and seed viability
(TZ test %) and sound mature kernel (%) were recorded at 0 and 65
DAH, respectively.
The following conclusions are drawn from this study.
1. The spraying of MH at 60 and 90 days after sowing could

induced dormancy upto 30 days in the genotypes SB-XI and
TG-26 whereas only 5 days of dormancy could be induced in
the genotype TAG-24, irrespective of concentrations.
2. The MH sprayed @ 250 ppm, 500 ppm, 1250 ppm, 750 ppm
and 1000 ppm could induced dormancy of 15, 20, 25, 25 and
40 days, respectively, irrespective of genotypes.
3. The spraying of Maleic hydrazide @ 1000 ppm reduced the

seedling vigour index I and II, seedling dry weight, electrical
conductivity and seed moisture content as compared to
91
control and other concentrations ×iz., 250, 500, 750 and 1250
ppm applied which shows the effectiveness of MH @ 1000
ppm for induction of dormancy.
4. The seed quality parameters ×iz., seed viability (%), 100

kernel weight (g), shelling percentage, sound mature kernel
(%), per cent seed mycoflora, oil content (%) and protein
content (%) remain unaffected in all the varieties due to
spraying of maleic hydrazide.
It is concluded that foliar application of Maleic hydrazide @

1000 ppm at 60 and 90 days after sowing could induce seed
dormancy upto 45 days in the genotypes SB-XI and TG-26
whereas, only 5 days dormancy could induce in the variety
TAG-24.
0 4 -
*

!

+

2º" (2º ,2=& &!
#
Control No dormancy No dormancy No dormancy No dormancy
250 ppm 15 5 25 15
500 ppm 35 5 35 20
750 ppm 35 5 35 25
1000 ppm 45 5 45 40
1250 ppm 35 5 35 25
Irrespective of 30 5 30 -
concentrations
92
r

Abdul Baki, A.A. and Anderson, J.D. 1973. Vigour determination in

soybean seed by multiple criteria. Crop Sci. 13 : 630 -633.
Abdul-Rahman and Issenberg, F.M.R. 1974. The role of exogenous plant

growth regulators in the dormancy of onion bulbs. J. agric.
Sci. Comb, U.K. 82 : 113-116.
Abrar, A.K. and Jadhav, B.B. 1991. Effect of growth regulators,

chemicals and temperature on dormancy in peanut. Ann. Pl.
Physiol. 5 (1) : 64-69.
Agarwal, R.L. 1995. Seed vigour tests, Seed Technology (2 nd Edn.).

Oxford and IBH Pub.Co., New Delhi : 583-590.
Amen, R.D. 1968. A model of seed dormancy. Bot. Rev. 34 : 1 -31.
Anonymous. 1979. All India Coordinated Research Project on Oil Seeds,

12th Annual Workshop (Kharif). pp. 19.
Anonymous. 1995. Studies on seed dormancy. Annual Report, National

Research Centre for Groundnut, Junagarh-362 001, Gujarat,
India.
Anonymous. 1999. Screening for seed dormancy. Annual Report 1998 -

99. National Research Centre for Groundnut, Junagarh-362
001, Gujarat, India. pp. 35.
Anonymous. 1999. International Rules for Seed Testing. Rules and

Annexes. Seed Sci. and Technol. 13 (2) : 299 -513.
93
Anonymous. 2007. Agriculture Research Data Book, Indian Council of

Agriculture Research, Krishi Bhavan, New Delhi ± 110 001,
India. pp. 215-216.
Anonymous. 2007a. Economics Survey of Maharashtra, Directorate of

Economics, Planning Department, Govt. of Maharashtra,
Mumbai, India. pp. 197-198.
Appalanaidu, B. and K.S. Murthy. 1961. Effect of Maleic hydrazide on

ragi. The Andra Agric. J. 8 : 168-175.
Ashok Kumar, T.S. 1989. An assessment of genetic potential of some

dormant cultures for improving erect bunch varieties of
groundnut (Arachis hypogea L.), M.Sc. (Agri.) thesis, Univ.
Agric. Sci., Dharwad, pp. 1-188.
Asibuo James Yaw, Akromah Richard, Safokantanka, Osei, Adu -Dapaah,

Hanskofi Obemeng-Dapaah Seth and Agyeman Adelaide.
2008. Inheritance of fresh seed dormancy. African J.
Biotechnol. 7 (4) : 421-424.
*Bailey, W.K. and John, E. Bear. 1972. Seed dormancy of different

botanical types of peanuts ( Arachis hypogea L.). J.
American Peanut Res. And Edu. Assoc. 5 (1) : 40-47.
Bewley, J.D. and Black, M. 1982. Physiology and biochemistry of seeds.

II. Development, germination and growth. Springer-Verlag
Berlin Heidelberg, New York. pp. 88-101.
Bhapkar, D.G., Patil, P.S. and Patil, V.A. 1986. Dormancy in groundnut
± A Review. J. Maharashtra agric. Univ. 11 (1) : 68-71.
94
*Cleland, R. 1963. Hydroxyproline as an inhibitor of auxin induced cell

elongation. Nature. 200 : 908.
El-Maghraby, O.M.O. and Mohammed, El-Maraghy. 2007. Mycoflora

and mycotoxins of peanut (SW) in Egypt. Mycopathologia.
98 (3) : 165-170.
Gavrielith, G.H. 1962. A review of problems associated with testing of

peanut seeds. Proc. Int. Seed Test. Assoc. 27 : 357-372.
Gulek, J.A., Clark, L.E. and Smith, O.D. 1977. Testa comparisons of
peanut cultivars. Crop Sci. 17 : 777-782.
Gupta, R.K., Singh, S.S. and Verma, M.M. 1985. Introduction of

dormancy in groundnut (Arachis hypogea L.) variety T-64
by maleic hydrazide. Indian J. agric. Res. 19 (2) : 82 -86.
Hansen, C.M. 1949. The storage of sugarbeets. Agricultural

Engineering. 30 : 377-378.
http://www.icrisat.org/text/cool stuff/crops / g crops 4.html . groundnut,

L¶ arachide (Arachis hypogaea L.).
Hull, F.H. 1937. Inheritance of rest period of seeds and certain other
characters in the peanut. Fla. Arg. Exp. Station Tech. Bull.
pp. 314.
Jackson, M.C. 1967. Soil chemical analysis, Prentice Hall of India Pvt.
Ltd., New Delhi. pp. 498.
Jagatap, P.B. 2000. Physiological maturity and seed dormancy studies in

bunch type groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). M.Sc. (Agri.)
thesis, PGI, MPKV, Rahuri. pp. 1-85.
95
Javeed, M.S., Abdul-Wahid, S., Idrees, M. and Salem, A. 1998. Seed

borne mycoflora of peanut ( Arachis hypogea L.)
varieties/genetic stock in Punjab. Pakistan J. Phytopath. 10
(1) : 53-55.
John, C.M., Seshadri, C.R. and Rao, M.B.S. 1950. Dormancy of the
seeds in the groundnut. Madras agric. J. 35 : 159 -167.
Joshi, Y.C. and Nautiyal, P.C. 1999. Screening for fresh seed dormancy.
Research Accomplishments, Deptt. of Plant Physiology : 54 -
62.
Kamala, T., Sadasivan, R. and Rathnam, N.N. 1987. Screening method

for dormancy in bunch groundnut. Madras agric. J. (1987).
74 (2) : 114-115.
Karivaratha Raju, T.V. and Rao, J.S. 1972. Effect of Maleic hydrazide
(MH) on inducing dormancy in rice. Madras Agricultural
Journal. 59 : 257-261.
Karivartharaju, T.V. and Rao, J.S. 1972. Effect of maleic hydrazide

(MH) on inducing dormancy in rice. Madras agric. J. 59 :
257-261.
Ketering, D.L. and Morgan, P.W. 1969. Ethylene as a component of

emanations from germinating peanut seeds and its effect on
dormant Virginia type seeds. Pl. Physiol. 44 : 326 -330.
Ketring, D.L. 1977. Effect of plant growth regulators on reproduction of

µstarr¶ Spanish type peanuts. Agron. J. 69 : 110-114.
*Khan, A.A. 1977. The Physiology and biochemical of seed

germination. North-Holland Pub. Co. Amersterdom. pp. 26.
96
Kramer, P.J. and Kozlowski, T.T. 1960. Physiology of trees. McGraw

Hill, New York.
Krishnamurthy, K. 1969. Induction of dormancy in groundnut by pre -

harvest foliar application of Maleic hydrazide. Indian
Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 37 : 33-36.
Kumar, T.S.A., Gowda, M.V.C. and Nadaf, H.L. 1991. Seed dormancy
in erect bunch genotypes of groundnut ( Arachis hypogea L.).
J. Oil Seeds Res. (1991), 8 (2) : 166-172.
Lakon, G. 1949. The topographical tetrazolium method for determining

the germinating capacity of seeds. Plant Physiol. 24 : 389 -
393.
Leopold, A.C. 1964. Maleic hydrazide as an antiauxin in plants. Pl. Sci.

114 : 9.
Lin, H. and Lin, C.Y. 1971a. Studies on seed dormancy of peanuts.II.

The effects of seed maturity on dormancy and sprouting of
peanuts. J. Taiwan Agric. Res. 20 : 42-48.
Lin, H. and Lin, C.Y. 1971b. Studies on seed dormancy of peanuts. J.

Taiwan agric. Res. 20 : 49-53.
Loeffler, T.M., D.M. Tekromy and D.B. Egli. 1988. The bulk
conductivity test as an indicator of soybean seed quality.
Journal of Seed Tech. 12 (1) : 37-53.
Manon Mani. 2002. Storability of dormant and non -dormant cultivars of

groundnut. Seed Res. 30 (1) : 158-160.
97
Mathur, R.K., Manivel, P., Samdur, M.Y. and Bandopadhyay, A. 2000.

Screening for fresh seed dormancy in Spanish bunch
groundnut. J. Oilseeds Res. 17 (1) : 181-182.
Matthews, S. 1976. Seed in relation to ecology in Advances in research

and technology of seeds (Thompson, J. Red.) part II. Centre
for Agricultural Publishing and Documentation,
Wageningen. pp. 92.
Mikkelsen, D.S., Griffeth, R.B. and Pririe, D. 1952. Sugarbeet response

to maleic hydrazide. Agronomy Journal. 44 : 533 -536.
Nagarjun, P. and G.D. Radder. 1983. Studies on induction of seed

dormancy in bunch type groundnut. Seed Res. 11 (1) : 24.
Nagarjun, P., G.D. Radder and V.S. Patil. 1980. Effect of foliar
application of maleic hydrazide on seed quality and seedling
vigour in bunch groundnut. Seed Res. 8 (2) : 121-126.
Nagarjun, S.S. and Gopalkrishnan, S. 1957. Presence of root promoting

hormone in seeds of a non-dormant bunch type groundnut,
TMV-2. Madras agric. J. 44 : 672.
Nagarjun, S.S. and Gopalkrishnan, S. 1958. Root inducing substance in

groundnut seed. Curr. Sci. 27 : 29-30.
Narasimhareddy, S.B. and Swamy, P.M. 1979. Abscisic acid like

inhibitors and cytokinins in the developing seeds of dormant
and non-dormant varieties of peanuts (Arachis hypogea L.),
J. Expt. Bot. 30 : 37-42.
98
Nautiyal, P.C. 2004. Issues related to maintenance of seed viability and

regulation of dormancy in groundnut. Groundnut Research
in India : 321-338.
Nautiyal, P.C., Bandyopadhyay, A. and Ravindra, V. 1993. Problems

with defining seed dormancy char acteristics of groundnut
genotypes. J. Oilseed Res. 10 : 271-276.
Nautiyal, P.C., Ravindra, V. and Misra, J.B. 1996. Fresh seed dormancy
in Spanish type groundnut. Research accomplishments,
Deptt. of Plant Physiology, NRC on groundnut, Junagarh
(Gj), India : 63-69.
Naylor, A.W. and Davis, E.A. 1950. Bot. Gaz. 112 : 112-126.
Pandey, S.N. and Sinha, B.K. 2006a. Plant growth regulators. Plant
Physiology. 4th Edn. Vikas Publishing Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi:
446-484.
Pandey, S.N. and Sinha, B.K. 2006b. Biology of dormancy, Plant

Physiology. 4th Edn. Vikas Publishing Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi:
531-537.
Pandya, R.B. and Patel, V.J. 1986. Dormancy in kernels of Spanish and
Virginia bunch varieties of groundnut. J. Oilseed Re s. 3 (1) :
19-27.
Paterson, D.R., Wittwer, S.H., Willer, L.F. and Sell, H.M. 1952. The
effect of pre-harvest foliar sprays of maleic hydrazide on
sprout inhibition and storage quality of potatoes. Pl. Physiol.
27 : 135-142.
99
Patil, S.H. 1973. Trombay groundnut selections for increased oil content
and yield. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 43 : 370 -376.
Patil, S.H. and Chandramouli. 1978. Trombay groundnut an extreme

form of fastigiata with high productivity, derived from a
cross between radiation induced mutants. Indian J. Agric.
Sci. 48 : 351-358.
Patil, V.K., Quadar, M.A. and Shinde, V.S. 1991. Oilseed production,
constraints, technology and future research needs in
Maharashtra : Agric. Situation India. 46 : 401 -407.
Ramachandran, M., Loganatham, N.S., Sridhar an, C.S.,

Chandrasekheram, N.R. and Krishnaswami, P. 1967.
Evolution of dormant bunch groundnut strains by
hybridization. Indian J. agric. Sci. 37 : 429 -436.
Randhawa, K.S. and Nandpuri, K.S. 1966. Effect of plant growth

regulators on sprouting of onions under ordinary storage
conditions. Indian Journal of Agronomy. 11 : 238 -242.
Rao, N.G. 1976. Groundnut breeding in India : present status and future
strategy. Paper presented at the Workshop cum Seminar of
All India Coordinated Research Project on Oilsseds (Kharif
crops). pp. 1-51.
*Rao, S.N. and Wittwer, S.H. 1955. Further investigations on the use of
maleic hydrazide as a sprout inhibitor for potatoes. Amer.
Petste. J. 32 : 51-59.
Rasheed, S., Dawar, S., Ghaffer, A. and Shaukat, S.S. 2004. Seed bo rne
mycoflora of groundnut. Pakistan J. Botany. 36 (1) : 199-
202.
100
Reddy, P.S., Basu, M.S., Tiwari, S.P., Devidayal and Radhakrishnan, T.

1987. Spanish groundnut strains with fresh seed dormancy.
Curr. Sci. India. 56 (8) : 368-369.
Reddy, P.S., Zade, V.R. and Deshmukh, S.N. 1985. CGSI-19 : A new
Spanish bunch groundnut cultivar with fresh seed dormancy.
J. Oilseeds Res. 2 :103-106.
Roberts, E.H. and Roberts, D.L. 1972. Moisture content of seeds. In

viability of seeds (Roberts, E.H. Ed.), Chapman and H all
Ltd., 11 New Fetter Lane, London EC-4. pp. 424-429.
Schoene, D.C. and Hoffman, O.L. 1949. Science, 109 : 588 -589.
Singh, C.B., Verma, R.K., Khan, A.A., Singh, N.B. and Uttam, A.K.
2002. Dormancy behaviour and overcoming method in
groundnut. Seed Res. 30 (2) : 211-214.
Snedecor, G.W. and Cochran, W.G. 1967. Statistical methods chapter 12.
Sreeramulu, N. and Rao, I.M. 1971. Physiological studies on dormancy

in seeds of groundnut. Aust. J. Bot. 19 : 273-280.
Suryanarayana, N., G.H. Sankara Reddy and T. Bapi Reddy. 1976. Efect
of growth regulators on growth and yield of TMMV-2
groundnut. Oilseeds J. 6 : 54-58.
Swain, S.K., Sahoo, P. and Patnaik, M.C. 2001. Seed dormancy in

groundnut (Arachis hypogea L.) - variability for intensity
and duration. Seed Res. 29 (1) : 13-17.
Swain, S.K. and P. Sahoo. 2001. Association of seed dormancy with

some pod and kernel characters in groundnut. J. Res., Orisa
Univ. Agric. Tech. 19 (1,2) : 40-44.
101
Swain, S.K., Sahoo, P. and Patnaik, M.C. 2002. A comparative analys is

of dormancy pattern in the varietal forms of groundnut. J.
Oilseeds Res. 19 (2) : 223-225.
Tai, Y.P. and Young, C.T. 1974. Variation in protein percentage in

different portions of peanut cotyledons. Crop Sci. 14 : 227 -
229.
Toole, V.K., Bailey, W.K. and Toole, E.H. 1964. Factors influencing
seed dormancy of peanut seeds. Pl. Physiol. 39 : 822 -855.
Upadhyay, H.D. and Nigam, S.N. 1999. Inheritance of fresh seed

dormancy in peanut. Crop Science.
Vaithialingam, R. and Rao, J.S. 1973a. Induction of dormancy in

groundnut by pre-harvest foliar spray of MH-30. Madras
agric. J. 1973. 6 (9-12) : 1862-1863.
Vaithialingam, R. and Rao, J.S. 1973b. Effect of MH 30 on the total

amino acids in non-dormant groundnut. Madras agric. J. 60
(9-12) : 1864-1865.
Varisai, M.S. and M.S. Dorairaj. 1968. Screening the genetic stock of
Arachis hypogea L. for seed dormancy in Madras State.
Indian J. agric. Sci. 28 (1) : 73-75.
Varman, P.V. and Raveendran, T.S. 1991. New source of seed dormancy
in bunch groundnut. Curr. Res. University of Agricultural
Sciences, Bangalore. 20 (11) : 237-238.
*Vavilov, N.I. 1951. Studies on the origin of cultivated plants. Chronica

Botanica. 13 (1/6) : 1949-1950.
102
Venu, P., Chetti, M.B., Uppar, D.S., Doddamani, M.B. and Mummigatti,
U.V. 1995. Factors influencing seed dormancy in Spanish
and Virginia groundnut genotypes. J. Oilseeds Res. 12 (1) :
103-108.
Weiss, E.A. 1983. Groundnut in : Oilseed Crops. Longmann Group Ltd.,

London. pp. 111.
Wittwer, S.H. and Hansen, C.M. 1951. The reduction of storage losses in
sugarbeets by pre-harvest foliar sprays of maleic hydrazide.
Agronomy Journal. 43 : 340-341.
Wittwer, S.H. and Paterson, D.R. 1952. Inhibition of sprouting and

reduction of storage losses in onions, potatoes, sugarbeets
and vegetable root crops by spraying plant in field with
maleic hydrazide. Quarterly Bulletin, Michigan Agricultural
Experiment Station. 34 : 3-8.
Zukel, J.W. 1950. Use of MH as a plant growth inhibitors. Agric. Chem.

5 : 35-36.
* Originals not seen.

103
[
?(@(4$<(,
A candidate for the degree
of
( $A1 #&$+#$-(A&#BCBA$*
in
$$4 #&$+#$(+4$#.+1C1@
D ³Induction of seed dormancy in summer groundnut

(Arachis hypogaea L.) ´
E
D Seed Science and Technology
, D
D Born at Megalahatti, Tal. Molakalmuru, Dist.
Chitradurga (Karnataka) on 7th July, 1983. Son of
Shri. Boranayaka P. and Smt. Obamma .
$
D Passed S.S.L.C. examination from SNS High
School, Hanagal, Dist. Chitradurga in 2000 and
P.U.C. examination from ST Rural Composite
PU College, Nayakanahatti, Dist. Chitradurga in
2002 with First Class.
Received Bachelor of Science (Agriculture)
degree from College of Agriculture, Dharwad,
UAS, Dharwad in 2006 with First Class.
(! D Awarded JRF for PG degree programme by
ICAR, New Delhi.
Passed N.C.C. µB¶ and µC¶ certificates
Elected as Vice-President of Students¶
Association, College of Agriculture, Dharwad
during 2003-04.
D At ± Megalahatti, Tal. Molakalmuru,
(
Dist. Chitradurga-577 535 (Karnataka)

Phone No. (08198) 229019

02 Jaydeva Thesis

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

02 Jaydeva Thesis

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

c 

The groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) is a valuable food and

The botanical name for groundnu t, Arachis hypogaea Linn., is

1. Virginia ± having bunchy, semi-spreading or spreading growth

2. Spanish ± having bunch growth habit

The groundnut is a slow growing annual geocarpic plant with a

Groundnut is the 13 th most important food crop of the world. It is

Globally, 50 per cent of groundnut produce is used for oil

Groundnut is grown on 26.4 million ha worldwide with a total

Groundnut varieties have a wide variability in their germination

produce by way of sprouting of pods in the field. It is more problematic

Seed dormancy is a physiological inactive stage or resting stage of

Lack of dormancy in bunch types has been described as an inherent

The search for investigation of non-conventional methods of

Keeping this in view an attempt has been made to study the

1. Standardization of concentrations of mal eic hydrazide for

2. Determination of dormancy period of groundnut varieties under

Although groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) is an important oil seed

Several reasons could be ascribed to its low productivity of which

The Review of Literature pertaining to the aspects of induction of

Basically seed dormancy indicates the inability of the seeds to

In a broad view, two types of dormancy can be distinguished i.e.

º º    

Seed dormancy in groundnut is controlled by many features.

In recent years the presence of naturally occurring growth

Nagarjun and Gopalkrishnan (1958) reported that non-dormant

Dormancy like most of the physiological phases in seed, is initially

Hull (1937) reported that dormancy in groundnut is an inherited

º º       

Hardness or impermeability of seed coat is said to be one of the

Significant morphological differences in the testa among the

Ethylene was involved in the normal regulation of seed dormancy

Maleic hydrazide (diethanolamine salt of 1,2-dihydroxy-3,6

Schoene and Hoffmann (1949) reported the growth inhibiting and

Naylor and Davis (1950) found that MH was uniformly effective as

Krishnamurthy (1969) reported that induction of seed dormancy in

Vaithialingam and Rao (1973) reported that i nduction of dormancy

trial conducted at Coimbatore. Nagarjun and Radder (1983) reported that

Gupta et al. (1985) reported that induction of dormancy in bunch

The concentration of MH is important in obtaining the higher

Wittwer et al. (1950) have suggested the use of 500 ppm MH to

Paterson et al. (1952) revealed that a concentration of 500 or 1000

Appalanaidu and Murthy (1961) reported that the percentage of

According to Randhawa and Nandpuri (1966) reported that the

Krishnamurthy (1969) conducted the pot culture experiment and

Vaithialingam and Rao (1973a) reported that foliar application of

Vaithialingam and Rao (1973b) studied the induction of seed

Nagarjun et al. (1980) conducted a field trial with bunch groundnut

Gupta et al. (1985) have reported that a foliar spray of MH @ 15 x

Bhapkar et al. (1986) revealed that a foliar application of MH-30 at

Jagatap (2000) studied the induction of seed dormancy in bunchy

Nautiyal (2004) conducted an experiment at NRC, Junagarh

Kramer and Kozlowski (1960) reported that the dormant nature of

Varisai and Dorairaj (1968) screened 206 groundnut varieties

dormancy period of about 15-20 days. None of the bunch varieties

Bailey et al. (1972) reported that the Spanish and Virginia

Reddy et al. (1985) studied 17 groundnut varieties belonging to

Pandya and Patel (1986) studied seed s of 4 Virginia and 73

Kamala et al. (1987) reported that the germination percentage (pre-

known as CGS-1-19 possesses a seed dormancy period of 5 weeks. The

Kumar et al. (1991) reported that the cultivars of subsp fastigiata

Varman and Raveendran (1991) observed that varieties of bunch

Nautiyal et al. (1993) reported that the degree of maturity, position

c

º º

º º

" &

,*

0 1!

0

0 -6*

0 $

0 ' 008-*

0 )

0 -9*

$

-*