Evaluation of Dry Pea Germplasm against Ascochyta Blight Disease under Green House Condition

Authors

  • Muhammad Amin Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, Faculty of Agriculture and Environment, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur, Pakistan
  • Hafiz Ghulam Muhu-Din Ahmed Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, Faculty of Agriculture and Environment, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur, Pakistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55627/foodagric.01.01.0271

Keywords:

Pisum Sativum L, Ascochyta Blight, Germplasm, Resistant, Pea

Abstract

Dry peas (Pisum sativum L.) are grown in the world for its utility in variety of delicious food items. Diseases like blight caused by Ascochyta pisi causes severe yield losses in its production. The current research was aimed at evaluation of response of one hundred and three dry pea germplasm genotypes against blight disease under the controlled environmental conditions in plastic tunnel. A highly susceptible check variety was planted after every two test germplasm genotypes. Disease was induced by artificial spraying of Ascochyta pisi culture. The experiment was conducted in Pulses Research Institute (PRI), Ayub Agricultural Research Institute (AARI), Faisalabad, Pakistan from 2018 to 2020. The data was recorded according to the disease rating scale, only one germplasm genotype was found highly resistant while three germplam genotypes shown resistant response against the disease. Two germplasm genotypes showed moderately resistant response. Thirteen germplasm genotypes exhibited susceptible response. Eighty-four germplasm genotypes showed highly susceptible response against the disease. This study indicates that most of germplasm genotypes found susceptible against Ascochyta blight, but the research activity is useful to find out resistance sources of dry pea against blight disease.

Downloads

Published

2022-12-30

How to Cite

Evaluation of Dry Pea Germplasm against Ascochyta Blight Disease under Green House Condition. (2022). Food and Agriculture Research Journal , 1(1), 37-42. https://doi.org/10.55627/foodagric.01.01.0271