Evaluation of Rice Landraces for Yield and Related Traits Under Rainfed Conditions in Nepal
Résumé fourni par la source
The primary staple crop in Nepal in terms of production and cultivated area is rice (Oryza sativa L.). This study evaluates the agronomic performance of fifteen genotypes of rice landraces under rainfed conditions in Krishnapur municipality, Kanchanpur, Nepal, during the rainy season of 2023. The experiment was conducted on an alpha lattice design with two replications. The study focused on yield and yield-related traits, including tiller per plant, plant height, panicle length, and grain length and width. ANOVA showed a significant variation among different genotypes for various traits. Rai Manuwa showed the highest tiller per plant (9), plant height (146 cm), panicle length (27.5 cm), and grain yield per plant (16.63 gm.), indicating greater drought adaptability. However, Sorali showed the lowest performance across most traits, indicating poor drought tolerance. The yield trait association analysis revealed a strong positive correlation between the total grain yield, average tiller per plant, and average panicle length. Therefore, yield could be increased by selecting these traits. Using the cluster analysis process, fifteen different genotypes of rice landraces were grouped into four groups. Genotypes in Cluster 2 (Rai Manuwa, Sarju) and Cluster 3 (Taichin) were identified as potential genotypes and tiller per plant, panicle length, and grain yield as potential traits for the breeding programs focused on improving drought tolerance.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Evaluation of Rice Landraces for Yield and Related Traits Under Rainfed Conditions in Nepal
- Date Crossref
- 15/06/2025
- Éditeur
- Society for AgroEnvironmental Sustainability
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.