International Journal of Plant Breeding and Crop Science

Vol. 6(1), pp. 498-507, March, 2019. © www.premierpublishers.org, ISSN: 2167-0449

Research Article

Heterosis Studies for Agro-morphological and Fiber Quality

Traits in Cotton (Gossypium spp.) Hybrids at Werer, Ethiopia
*1Merdasa Balcha, 2Wassu Mohammed, 3Zerihun Desalegn and 4Bedane Gudeta
1,4Werer Agricultural Research Center, Ethiopia, P.O. Box: 2003, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
2School of Plant Sciences, Haramaya University, Ethiopia, P.O. Box: 138, Dire Dawa, Ethiopia.
3Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research, Ethiopia, P.O. Box: 2003, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

The present investigation was undertaken to estimate the extent of heterosis for yield, yield
related and fiber quality traits designed among 16 parents, 2 testers, 32 hybrids and 4 standard
checks developed through line x tester method during 2017 cropping season using 6x9 alpha
lattice design. The analysis of variance indicated substantial variability among the experimental
material for most yield and fiber quality traits. Mid parent, better parent and standard heterosis
estimated in the range between -24.2 to 63.99%, -28.13 to 56.12% and -27.7 to 64.95% for lint yield,
respectively. The magnitude of mid and better parent ranged from -24.67 to 55.01% and -25.56 to
50.66% for seed cotton yield, respectively. Moreover, hybrids L9 x T2, L10 x T1, L16 x T1 and L10
x T2 hybrids showed positive and significant standard heterosis of 64.95%, 64.79%, 63.20% and
52.55% over best check variety for lint yield, respectively. A minimum for hybrids L3 x T2, L13 x
T2 and L3 x T2 while maximum for hybrids L9 x T2, L9 x T2 and L10 x T1 displayed positive and
significant mid and better parent heterosis for seed cotton yield, respectively.

Key word: heterosis, hybrids, line x tester, lint yield, seed cotton yield

INTRODUCTION

Ethiopia has great potential for cotton production, but the
amount of cotton produced is low due to only four percent
utilized currently (Bosena et al., 2011). Cotton plays a key
role in the national economy and total foreign exchange
through generation of direct and indirect employment of
many people in the agricultural and industrial sectors of
cotton production and processing. Cotton grown for fiber
as major and for oilseed in the international market. Cotton
is the most important natural textile fiber used to produce
apparel, home furnishings and industrial products in the
world (Wakelyn et al, 2007). Cotton is key role in the world
for textile manufacture and accounting about 50% of all
fibers used in the textile industry. It is more important than
the various synthetic fibers, even though its use is
gradually reducing (Acquaah, 2007). On other hand,
cotton is also one of the most valuable multipurpose crop
e.g. food (cotton seed) and fiber. The highly significant
product i.e. lint is a source of better natural fiber quality for
textile sector, cotton seed uses for oil extraction, seed
meal and cotton cake (Kouser and Qaim, 2012; Rathore et
al., 2009). Cotton is the most important textile fiber crop in
the world and most important oilseed crop (Khan, et al,
2002). Cotton remain undisputed as king of global textile
industry and almost pure cellulose, softness and
breathability of natural fiber (Monicashree et al., 2017).
Line x tester analysis is powerful tools to estimate the
combining ability effects and aids in selecting desirable
parents and crosses for exploitation in pedigree breeding
in both self and cross-pollinated plants (Kempthorne,
1957). Ahuja and Dhayal (2007) revealed that line x tester
analysis provides for the detection of appropriate parents
and crosses superior in terms of the investigated
characters, so application of the analysis has been widely
used by plant breeders to selection in early generations.
The line x tester analysis method is used to estimates
favorable parents and crosses as well as GCA and SCA
effect (Bocianowski et al, 2015).
*Corresponding Author: Merdasa Balcha, Werer
Agricultural Research Center, Ethiopia, P.O. Box: 2003,
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
E-mail: balchamerdasa@gmail.com

Heterosis Studies for Agro-morphological and Fiber Quality Traits in Cotton (Gossypium spp.) Hybrids at Werer, Ethiopia
Balcha et al. 499

Hybrid varieties are the first filial generations (F 1) of
crosses between two or more pure lines, inbreds, open-
pollinated varieties, clones and other populations that are
genetically dissimilar (Singh, 2005). Hybrid cotton
production is routine in some countries, particularly India
and enjoyed little success in America primarily due to the
cost of hybrid seed production. As the term heterosis was
coined by Shull in 1914 and defined the heterosis or hybrid
vigour concept as the interpretation of increased vigor,
size, fruitfulness and speed of development resistance to
disease or climatic rigors of any type. The use of F 1
heterosis has long been objectives of cotton breeders (Wu
et al., 2004). Cotton is highly amenable for both heterosis
and recombination breeding. In cotton, heterosis has the
potential for significantly improving yield from 10 to 20%
and of making improvements in fiber quality and pest
resistance (Meredith, 1998).
Heterosis has substantially remained as one of the
significant developments in cotton breeding programs
(Baloch et al., 2003; Baloch, 2004; Ganapathy and
Nadarajan, 2008; Khan et al., 2010). The use of F1
heterosis has long been objectives of cotton breeders (Wu
et al., 2004). The major limiting factor in using heterosis for
hybrid cotton production is the lack of an efficient and
dependable system for producing F1/F2 hybrids seed
mainly due to the ineffectiveness of the male gametocide
(Meredith and Brown, 1998), and the inconsistency results
from male sterile and restorer factors (Percy and Turcotte,
1991). On the other hand, Meredith (1998) also suggested
that major limiting factor for use of heterosis in cotton are
lack of dependable good combiners and efficient seed
production practices. Marani (1967), Stroman (1961) and
Wu et al., (2004) reported heterosis in cotton has been
observed in interspecific and intraspecific crosses. The
crosses between G. barbadense and G. hirsutum were
much more productive than either parent for objectionable
qualities in the hybrid. In cotton, exploitation of heterosis
is used to increase yields in countries where a high number
of labor force is available to make hand emasculation and
crossing (Chaudhry, 1997).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The present study was conducted at Werer Agricultural
Research Center, Amibara district, Afar National Regional
State and placed 280 km from Addis Ababa in the eastern
direction during 2017 cropping season. The material used
in the study comprised of thirty-two hybrids, 16 parents,
two tester and four checks as listed in Table 1 using line x
tester mating design following the method of Kempthorne
(1957). The experiment was laid out as alpha lattice design
in 6 x 9 arrangements with two replications. Each block
comprises 9 units (plots) having 5m long and 5 row wide
with the spacing of 0.90m between rows and 0.20m
between plants. Two seeds per hill were placed and later
thinned out and left with one healthy seedling per hill after
seedlings established well. All cultural practice was done
manually throughout the entire growing season as
required. Data of 17 qualitative and quantitative traits were
collected viz., days to initial squaring, days to initial
flowering, days to 50% flowering, days to initial boll
opening, days to 65% boll opening, number of bolls per
plant, plant height, average boll weight, seed cotton yield,
ginning percentage, lint yield, stand count, fiber length,
fiber strength, uniformity index, micronaire and fiber
elongation.

Table 1: Descriptions of the lines, testers and checks

Entries Stock ID Pedigree Code
1 CV142-1 LS-90 x Pima S3 5-7 x Deltapine-90 L1 x T1
2 CV142-2 HTO#052 x LS-90 24-7 x Deltapine-90 L2 x T1
3 CV142-3 HTO#052 x DP-90 21-7 x Deltapine-90 L3 x T1
4 CV142-4 Cucurova1518 X LG-450 35-4 X Deltapine-90 L4 x T1
5 CV142-5 ISA 205H x Beyaze altin/5 16-2 x Deltapine-90 L5 x T1
6 CV142-6 HS-46 x Stonevile 453 19-8 x Deltapine-90 L6 x T1
7 CV142-7 Stam 59 A x Cucurova 1518 30 -2 x Deltapine-90 L7 x T1
8 CV142-8 Delcero x Deltapine90 #F5-5-4-2-2 x Deltapine-90 L8 x T1
9 CV142-9 Nazilli-84 X HS-4 #F5-43-3-3-2 x Deltapine-90 L9 x T1
10 CV142-10 Sidha fage Farm No 3A4 DP-90 F1#44 x Deltapine-90 L10 x T1
11 CV142-11 Melka werer Farm 2 Farm no 51 DP-90 F1#103 x Deltapine-90 L11 x T1
12 CV142-12 Algeta Farm no AM 12c DP-90 F1#146 x Deltapine-90 L12 x T1
13 CV142-13 Farm no Ago1 DP-90 F1#334 x Deltapine-90 L13 x T1
14 CV142-14 Weyto Farm no M1 DP-90 F1#375 x Deltapine-90 L14 x T1
15 CV142-15 Europa x Stam 59A – 04-5 x Deltapine-90 L15 x T1
16 CV142-16 Brazilian x Deltapine-90 L16 x T1
17 CV142-17 LS-90 x Pima S3 5-7 x Werer-50 L1 x T2
18 CV142-18 HTO#052 x LS-90 24-7 x Werer-50 L2 x T2
19 CV142-19 HTO#052 x DP-90 21-7 x Werer-50 L3 x T2
20 CV142-20 Cucurova1518 x LG-450 35-4 x Werer-50 L4 x T2
21 CV142-21 ISA 205H x Beyaze altin/5 16-2 x Werer-50 L5 x T2
22 CV142-22 HS-46 x Stonevile 453 19-8 Werer-50 L6 x T2
Heterosis Studies for Agro-morphological and Fiber Quality Traits in Cotton (Gossypium spp.) Hybrids at Werer, Ethiopia
 Int. J. Plant Breed. Crop Sci. 500

Table 1: Continue
23 CV142-23 Stam 59 A x Cucurova 1518 30 -2 x Werer-50 L7 x T2
24 CV142-24 Delcero x Deltapine90 #F5-5-4-2-2 x Werer-50 L8 x T2
25 CV142-25 Nazilli-84 x HS-4 #F5-43-3-3-2 x Werer-50 L9 x T2
26 CV142-26 Sidha fage Farm No 3A4 DP-90 F1#44 x Werer-50 L10 x T2
27 CV142-27 Melka werer Farm 2 Farm no 51 DP-90 F1#103 x Werer-50 L11 x T2
28 CV142-28 Algeta Farm no AM 12c DP-90 F1#146 x Werer-50 L12 x T2
29 CV142-29 Farm no Ago1 DP-90 F1#334 x Werer-50 L13 x T2
30 CV142-30 Weyto Farm no M1 DP-90 F1#375 x Werer-50 L14 x T2
31 CV142-31 Europa X Stam 59A – 04-5 x Werer-50 L15 x T2
32 CV142-32 Brazilian x Werer-50 L16 x T2
Parental lines
33 LS-90 x Pima S3 5-7 P-1
34 HTO#052 x LS-90 24-7 P-2
35 HTO#052 x DP-90 21-7 P-3
36 Cucurova1518 x LG-450 35-4 P-4
37 ISA 205H x Beyaze altin/5 16-2 P-5
38 HS-46 x Stonevile 453 19-8 P-6
39 Stam 59 A x Cucurova 1518 30 -2 P-7
40 Delcero x Deltapine90 #F5-5-4-2-2 P-8
Entries Pedigree Code
41 Nazilli-84 x HS-4 #F5-43-3-3-2 P-9
42 Sidha fage Farm No 3A4 DP-90 F1#44 P-10
43 Melka werer Farm 2 Farm no 51 DP-90 F1#103 P-11
44 Algeta Farm no AM 12c DP-90 F1#146 P-12
45 Farm no Ago1 DP-90 F1#334 P-13
46 Weyto Farm no M1 DP-90 F1#375 P-14
47 Europa x Stam 59A – 04-5 P-15
48 Brazilian x Deltapine-90 P-16
Checks
49 Sisikuk-02 - OPV C-1
50 Weyto-07 – OPV C-2
51 Stam-59A – OPV C-3
52 Delcero x Deltapine90 #F5-5-4-2-2- OPV C-4
Testers
53 Deltapine-90 T-1
54 Werer-50 T-2
Data Analysis Standard heterosis,
F1 − SV
𝑆𝐻(%) = x100
The data collected for all agronomic and quality traits were SV
subjected to general analysis of variance using PROC F1 ═ Mean performance of the crosses
GLM procedure in SAS (SAS, 2004). The magnitude of SV = Mean value of standard check
heterosis was estimated in relation to standard checks for SH= Standard Heterosis
showed significant differences following the method
The differences in the magnitude of heterosis were tested
suggested by Falconer and Mackay (1996) and (Hayes et
following the procedure given by Panse and Sukhatme
al., 1955) as,
(1961). Test of significance for the three heterosis was
Mid parent heterosis/Relative Heterosis (%),
F1 − MP made by using the t-test. The standard errors of the
MPH(%) = x100 difference for heterosis and critical difference were
MP computed as follows;
Better parent heterosis/ heterobeltiosis (%),
F1 − BP SE (d) = √2MSe/r , for standard heterosis and better
BPH(%) = x100 parent heterosis
BP
Where, SE (d) = √3MSe/2r, for mid parent heterosis
F1 ═ Mean performance of the crosses CD = SE (d) x t, t value at error degree of freedom to 5
SV = Mean value of best standard check (Weyto-07) or 1% level of significance
MP= Mid parent mean Where, SE (d) =standard error of the difference
P1+P2
Mid parent value is 𝑀𝑃 = MSe = error mean square
2
BP=Better parent mean r = number of replications
CD =Critical difference
Heterosis Studies for Agro-morphological and Fiber Quality Traits in Cotton (Gossypium spp.) Hybrids at Werer, Ethiopia
Balcha et al. 501

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION genotypes were significant at (P < 0.05) for traits of days
to initial squaring, days to initial flowering, days to 50%
Analysis of Variance flowering, days to initial boll opening, days to 65% boll
opening, number of bolls per plant, plant height, average
The analysis of variance included 32, 4, 16 and two F1 boll weight, seed cotton yield, ginning percentage, lint
hybrids, standard checks, parent and tester respectively. yield, micronaire, fiber length, fiber strength and fiber
Analysis of variance showed that mean squares of elongation (Table 2).
Table 2: Analysis of variances for the studied Cotton traits
Mean squares Statistics
Traits Block(10) Trt (53) Error (43) Mean CV (%) LSD (5%)
Days to initial squaring 2.27 6.15* 3.18 31.55 5.65 3.59
Days to initial flowering 2.33 9.34* 2.42 51.85 2.99 3.14
Days to 50% flowering 3.32 13.22** 2.46 59.58 2.63 3.16
Days to initial boll opening 1.71 32.57** 3.37 98.6 1.86 3.71
Days to 65% boll opening 3.08 65.44** 5.19 134.8 1.69 4.59
Number of bolls per plant 2.78 18.34** 1.72 15.79 8.31 2.65
Plant height (cm) 157.91 307.28** 89.75 88.05 10.76 19.12
Average boll weight (g) 0.60 0.69** 0.18 4.71 8.92 0.85
Seed cotton yield (t/ha) 8.97 89.11** 7.95 33.17 8.50 5.68
Ginning percentage (%) 2.45 11.27** 0.61 38.22 2.05 1.58
Lint yield (t/ha) 1.85 14.95** 1.03 12.68 8.01 2.05
Stand count 16.82 13.47ns 11.59 71.38 4.77 6.87
Micronaire(mg/inch) 0.08 0.57** 0.08 4.62 6.01 0.56
Fiber Length (mm) 0.75 19.75** 0.82 30.32 2.98 1.83
Uniformity Index (%) 30.44 29.26ns 19.61 82.89 5.34 8.93
Fiber Strength(g/tex) 2.09 27.50** 1.69 30.29 4.29 2.62
Fiber elongation (%) 0.25 1.00** 0.28 7.52 7.06 1.07
**and * indicate significance at 1 and 5% probability levels by F-test, ns = not significant by F-test, number in parenthesis
indicates degrees of freedom, trt(treatments) = parents + hybrids + lines + testers, LSD (5%)= least significant difference
at P < 0.05, CV (%)= coefficient of variation in percent
Estimates of Heterosis percentage, respectively, of which 23 and 18 hybrids
showed positive and significant heterosis for the former
Mid Parent Heterosis and latter traits, respectively. A total of 8 and 6 hybrids
displayed negative and significant heterosis for lint yield
Estimate of heterosis of F1 over mid parent computed for
and ginning percentage, respectively. More importantly, 18
11 yield, yield related and four fiber quality traits showed
hybrids displayed positive and significant heterosis for
significant differences among crosses as presented in
both economic importance traits, while only three hybrids
Table 3. The mid parent heterosis ranged from -24.67 to
had negative and significant heterosis for both traits. The
55.01% in which both the lowest and highest values were
observed range of mid parent heterosis for ginning
observed for seed cotton yield. A total of 28 hybrids
percentage was approaching same which was reported by
(87.5%) displayed significant heterosis over mid parent for
Tuteja (2014) and Monicashree et al. (2017).
seed cotton yield. Hybrids L9 x T2 (55.01%), L10 x T1
(54.25%), L16 x T1 (54.18%), L11 x T1 (53.52%), L12 x T1 The mid parent heterosis for average boll weight and
(49.02%) and L7 x T1 (47.41%) showed significant and number of bolls per plant ranged from -12.4 to 26.13 and -
maximum positive heterosis for seed cotton yield that 25.56 to 51.3%, respectively. A total of 30 and 22 hybrids
indicating the predominance of non-additive gene action. exhibited positive and significant mid parent heterosis for
On the other hand, hybrids namely, L4 x T1 (-10.73%), L3 number of bolls per plant and average boll weight,
x T1 (-17.49%), L13 x T2 (-22.17%) and L3 x T2 (-24.67%) respectively, while only one and 10 hybrids had negative
showed minimum negative and significant mid parent and significant mid parent heterosis for the former and
heterosis for seed cotton yield. The expression of mid latter traits, respectively. The mid parent heterosis for plant
parent heterosis in both directions (negative and positive) height ranged from -31.59 to 43.07% and 5 and 3 hybrids
for seed cotton yield in cotton hybrids has been reported displayed positive and negative significant mid parent
by several researchers (Rauf et al., 2005; Zerihun and heterosis, respectively. Only two hybrids (L1 x T1 and L2
Ratanadilok, 2007; Abro et al, 2009; Karademir et al., x T1) exhibited positive and significant mid parent
2009). heterosis for all the three traits but none of the hybrids
displayed negative significant mid parent heterosis for all
The mid parent heterosis fall in the range between -24.62 the three aforementioned traits. A total of 20 hybrids for
to 63.99% and -14.03 to 9.75% for lint yield and ginning average boll weight and number of bolls per plant and four
Heterosis Studies for Agro-morphological and Fiber Quality Traits in Cotton (Gossypium spp.) Hybrids at Werer, Ethiopia
 Int. J. Plant Breed. Crop Sci. 502
hybrids for number of bolls per plant and plant height had significant heterosis. Whereas, 3, 5 and 5 hybrids
positive and significant mid parent heterosis. In contrast, exhibited negative and significant mid parent heterosis for
only one hybrid (L14 x T1) displayed negative and days to initial squaring, days to initial flowering and days
significant heterosis for number of bolls per plant and plant to 50% flowering, respectively. The mid parent heterosis of
height. Higher average boll weight over the mid parent was hybrids for days to initial boll opening and days to 65% boll
reported by Mukhtar and Khan (2000), Abro et al. (2009) opening ranged from -1.79 to 6.86% and -1.71 to 7.81%,
and Monicashree et al. (2017). On other hand, Tigga et al. respectively, in which none of the hybrids exhibited
(2017) noticed significant and positive mid parent negative and significant heterosis for these traits.
heterosis for seed cotton yield (55.33%), number of boll However, 9 and 14 hybrids had positive and significant mid
per plant (54.15%), average boll weight (3.60%), ginning parent heterosis for days to initial boll opening and days to
percentage (9.89%) and plant height (25.74%) using two 65% boll opening, respectively. The three hybrids namely,
hybrids and four parent material in which indicating the L1 x T1, L3 x T1 and L2 x T2 displayed positive and
predominance of non-additive gene action. significant mid parent heterosis for all phenological traits
while 4, 5 and 5 hybrids exhibited positive and significant
The hybrids displayed mid parent heterosis for heterosis for 4, 3 and 2 out of 5 phenology traits,
phenological traits in which range between -8.02 and respectively. In contrast, only four hybrids (L12 x T2, L13
13.11%, -3.41 and 10.38%, and -6.22 and 8.33% for days x T2, L15 x T2 and L16 x T2) exhibited negative and
to initial squaring, days to initial flowering and days to 50% significant heterosis maximum for two traits (days to initial
flowering, respectively. A total of 18, 16 and 7 hybrids for flowering and days to 50% flowering) as negative heterosis
days to initial squaring, days to initial flowering and days of phenological traits is a desirable traits in cotton
to 50% flowering, respectively, displayed positive and breeding.
Table 3: Mid parent heterosis for yield, yield related and fiber quality traits of cotton crosses at Werer in 2017 cropping season
Crosses DIS DIF DF DIBO DBO NBPP PH ABW SCY GP LY M FL FS FE
L1 x T1 9.52** 8.82** 8.33** 3.43* 5.99** 36.99** 43.07** 3.77** 42.00** -14.03** 21.81** -20.99** 15.86** 16.15** 17.17**
L2 x T1 12.00** 4.76** 5.39** 1.96 5.63** 21.33** 24.17** 2.14** 2.7 -12.70** -10.31** -15.12** 15.36** 10.18** 12.50**
L3 x T1 13.11** 10.24** 7.05** 6.47** 7.05** 24.54** -8.45 -3.96** -17.49** -3.01** -20.01** -17.06** 7.45** 19.45** -3.47**
L4 x T1 -2.44 3.09* 1.79 2.63 4.26* 14.47** -14.24 -2.17** -10.73** 0.69 -9.69** 7.84** -8.90** -19.76** -1.01**
L5 x T1 -1.61 0.5 0.88 1.04 5.20* 29.00** -18.10* 2.79** -0.55 2.37** 2.07* -11.08** -0.15 -2.47 12.99**
L6 x T1 -4.92** 2.02 0.88 1.04 5.04* 31.84** -3.95 2.90** -6.08* 0.64 -5.76** 10.48** 1.04 14.49** -5.84**
L7 x T1 -8.20** 0 0.44 -0.78 4.26* 51.30** -9.79 15.48** 47.41** 3.96** 53.39** 0.5 -1.8 -2.99 6.71**
L8 x T1 3.28* 4.08** 0.87 0.26 5.79** 35.37** -17.44 -4.36** 5.78* 3.56** 9.63** -1.42** -1.26 -1.24 -2.56**
L9 x T1 10.34** 1.48 3.51* -0.78 5.86** 42.28** -1.36 -11.36** 4.29 2.76** 6.87** -6.74** 3.86* -1.98 8.28**
L10 x T1 1.64 6.60** 2.16 1.55 4.43* 31.95** 8.33 4.96** 54.25** -1.35 51.85** -0.87* 1.39 5.05** 2.24**
L11 x T1 4.84** 0.98 0.87 5.51** 4.58* 37.17** 9.58 11.98** 53.52** 5.39** 61.49** 7.64** 3.72* -4.35** 9.59**
L12 x T1 5.08** 1.98 0.43 1.55 3.25 29.67** 1.56 26.13** 49.02** 2.29* 52.34** 4.09** 0.03 -4.91** 8.97**
L13 x T1 -0.83 5.37** 5.58** 0 5.20* 42.13** -8.1 4.25** 32.46** -1.5 30.22** -2.80** -1.74 3.05* 4.41**
L14 x T1 4.13* 5.58** -1.71 4.64** 7.81** -25.56** -31.59** 19.31** 21.11** -5.73** 14.63** -11.38** -1.16 -1.89 -7.74**
L15 x T1 -1.64 0.5 1.29 -1.79 2.5 25.76** 10.96 -4.47** 26.70** 7.74** 36.81** 0.35 -0.87 6.12** 11.31**
L16 x T1 -1.59 -3.41* -2.95* 2.35 3.63 24.35** -10.13 6.27** 54.18** 6.41** 63.99** 2.55** 3.63* 2.25 8.20**
L1 x T2 11.81** 9.71** 2.42 6.86** 3.4 6.62** 21.69** -12.40** 8.12** -12.28** -5.06** -13.82** 16.30** 16.86** 18.52**
L2 xT2 11.11** 10.38** 4.42** 6.37** 5.55** 12.69** 38.88** -12.24** 34.67** -8.84** 22.82** -18.26** 13.72** 15.73** 19.86**
L3 x T2 12.20** 7.25** 4.42** 5.97** 1.96 1.13 -19.41* 2.56** -24.67** -0.26 -24.62** -22.08** 2.02 9.20** 2.07**
L4 x T2 3.23* 6.12** 0 0 1.91 10.42** 23.68* 9.42** 27.36** -0.66 26.90** 5.76** -7.96** -15.96** -5.19**
L5 x T2 -4.00* -0.5 -2.54 -0.52 -1.71 18.23** -15.59 -7.59** 9.21** 5.24** 15.65** -5.65** -1.05 7.98** 12.46**
L6 x T2 2.44 5.00** 0 0.52 0.38 14.92** 10.88 -3.94** 24.01** 2.00* 26.43** 8.25** 0.83 2.13 6.05**
L7x T2 0.81 2 -0.43 1.3 2.67 23.16** 14.1 15.32** 13.65** 2.59** 17.13** 3.73** 0.31 10.64** 6.99**
L8 x T2 0.81 4.04** -2.52 3.41* 1.52 21.82** -2.31 14.75** 37.57** 2.43** 41.45** -2.45** 1.98 5.29** -1.75***
L9 x T2 5.98** 2.44 2.54 0.26 3.85 22.00** 13.04 2.25** 55.01** 1.94* 58.06** 3.22** 0.94 6.28** 15.59**
L10 x T2 5.69** 5.53** 3.77* 4.15* 2.47 11.79** 5.31 -8.29** 34.76** 3.18** 39.18** 6.44** -0.64 6.12** -9.79**
L11 x T2 7.20** 1.94 0 2.36 2.63 20.91** -5.46 18.06** 15.67** 6.96** 23.88** 17.16** 6.07** 8.88** 2.64**
L12 x T2 9.24** -2.94* -5.44** 0 0.94 23.05** -10.86 20.00** 35.46** 4.08** 41.23** -0.31 4.33* -1.92 10.22**
L13 x T2 3.28* -2.42 -6.22** 0.52 1.33 17.60** 6.58 4.94** -22.17** -1.78 -23.65** 3.86** -2.87 8.27** -4.48**
L14 x T2 4.92** 3.52* -5.79** -1.03 1.54 24.88** -6.18 24.76** -2.29 -0.07 -1.98* 0.1 0.11 6.36** -11.85**
L15 x T2 2.44 -2.46 -5.39** 0.26 2.46 35.53** 14.86 10.94** 29.71** 9.75** 43.19** -2.20** -4.34* 10.28** 8.09**
L16 x T2 -2.36 -3.38* -4.49** 1.31 -0.19 19.69** 1.44 14.14** 42.10** 4.42** 48.54** -0.4 2.52* 5.52** -2.16**
SE(+) 1.26 1.12 1.15 1.26 1.61 0.95 7.11 0.38 1.97 0.72 0.75 0.21 0.67 0.63 0.12
CD (5%) 3.14 2.78 2.86 3.13 4 2.37 17.67 0.95 4.89 1.78 1.85 1.03 3.3 3.11 0.6
CD (1%) 4.21 3.73 3.83 4.2 5.37 3.18 23.69 1.27 6.56 2.39 2.48 1.37 4.4 4.14 0.8
*and**, significant at P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively, SE =standard error of mean, CD = critical difference, DIS=days to initial
squaring, DIF= days to initial flowering, DF= days to 50% flowering, DIBO= days to initial boll opening, DBO= days to 65% boll
opening, NBPP= number of bolls per plant, PH= plant height, ABW= average` boll weight, SCY= seed cotton yield, GP= ginning,
percentage and LY= lint yield, M= micronaire, FL= fiber length, FS= fiber strength and FE= fiber elongation

Heterosis Studies for Agro-morphological and Fiber Quality Traits in Cotton (Gossypium spp.) Hybrids at Werer, Ethiopia
Balcha et al. 503

Twelve and 15 hybrids exhibited positive and negative mid
better parent heterosis, respectively, and ranged from -
22.08 (L3 x T2) to 17.16% (L11 x T2) for micronaire.
Hybrids L2 x T2 (-18.26%), L1 x T1 (-20.99%) and L3 x T
(-22.08%) were among minimum negative mid parent
heterosis for micronaire, while hybrids L6 x T1 (10.48%)
and L11 x T2 (17.16%) are among the top highly significant
for micronaire which is undesirable traits in cotton
breeding. Eleven, 20 and 21 hybrids showed positive and
significant mid parent heterosis for fiber elongation, fiber
strength and fiber length, respectively. Mid parent
heterosis ranged from -11.85 to 19.86%, -19.76 to 19.45%
and -8.90 to 16.30% for aforementioned traits,
respectively. Five hybrids i.e. L1 x T1, L2 x T1, L1 x T2, L2
x T2 and L11 x T2 displayed positive and significant mid
parent heterosis for fiber length, fiber strength and fiber
elongation, while 2, 8, 3, 2 and 2 hybrids showed positive
and significant heterosis for fiber length and fiber strength,
fiber strength and fiber elongation, fiber length and fiber
elongation, micronaire and fiber elongation, and
micronaire and fiber strength, respectively. Patil et al.,
(2012) reported highest heterosis over mid and better
parent varied from low to medium for fiber strength fiber,
elongation and fiber strength. Similar results were reported
by Bolek et al. (2010) and Ashokkumar et al. (2013) for
fiber strength, fiber strength and micronaire.
Better Parent Heterosis
Estimate of better parent heterosis computed for 11 yield,
yield related and four fiber quality traits presented in Table
4. Better parent heterosis ranged from -25.56 to 50.66%, -
28.13 to 56.12% and -16.95 to 6.44% for seed cotton yield,
lint yield and ginning percentage, respectively. Hybrid L9 x
T2 (50.66%) exhibited highest positive better parent
heterosis followed by hybrids L12 x T1 (46.49%), L16 x T1
(46.29%), L11 x T1 (42.11%) and L10 x T1 (38.74%) for
seed cotton yield. Eighteen, 21 and 7 hybrids displayed
positive and maximum better parent heterosis for seed
cotton yield, lint yield and ginning percentage,
respectively, whereas 7, 9 and 15 hybrids exhibited
negative and significant better parent heterosis for
aforementioned traits, respectively. Out of all hybrids, only
four hybrids displayed positive better parent heterosis for
most important economic traits viz. seed cotton yield, lint
yield and ginning percentage, while 14 hybrids exhibited
positive and maximum heterosis for two former traits
whereas only two hybrids had better parent heterosis for
two latter above mentioned traits. Previous studies also
reported different magnitude of better parent heterosis for
seed cotton yield and ginning percentage traits. Sawarkar
et al. (2015) reported significant positive and negative
better heterosis for seed cotton yield and ginning
percentage. Other author also report similar result for
above mentioned traits (Patil et. al., 2012; Tigga et al.,
2017).

Table 4: Better parent heterosis for agro-morphological and fiber quality traits of cotton crosses evaluated at Werer in
2017 cropping season
Crosses DIS DIF DF DIBO DBO NBPP PH ABW SCY GP LY M FL FS FE
L1 x T1 2.99 3.74* 0.78 -2.76 -0.34 2.11 41.95** -9.82** 34.48** -16.95** 11.72** -33.93** 2.50* 1.22 11.54**
L2 x T1 6.06** -2.65 -2.31 -4.15* -0.68 -1.35 12.37 -13.09** 1.03 -13.38** -11.05** -25.02** 3.30** -5.5** 9.62**
L3 x T1 9.52** 4.63** -0.77 1.42 0.34 1 -14.38 -8.82** -17.90** -3.11** -20.28** -25.22** -4.05** 3.04** -4.97**
L4 x T1 -6.25** 3.09 0.88 2.09 4.26 10.20** -14.83 -9.57** -11.49** -2.76** -12.02** -7.52** -14.64** -3.2* -5.77**
L5 x T1 -6.15** -1.96 -1.71 0 4.60* 16.78** -21.01* -1.34* -10.00** -0.34 -5.33** -14.38** -0.35 -3.1** 11.54**
L6 x T1 -7.94** 0 -1.71 0.52 5.04* 17.44** -5.77 2.53** -14.77** -1.44 -16.07** 0.59* 0.09 -17** -7.05**
L7 x T1 -11.11** -1.98 -1.72 -1.55 4.26 48.66** -10.88 15.27** 34.50** 1.78 42.75** 0.4 -3.23** -3.4** 6.37**
L8 x T1 0 3.03 -2.52 0 5.38* 31.18** -18.28 -4.36** -4.07 3.37** -0.54 -2.14** -2.45* -3.8** -2.56**
L9 x T1 8.47** -2.83 0.85 -1.04 5.04* 41.13** -1.56 -19.94** -0.27 -1.17 -1.5 -9.69** 2.58** -3.2** 0.64**
L10 x T1 -1.59 5.00** -1.67 0.51 3.83 20.76** 4.66 -0.97 38.74** -3.19** 34.48** -4.75** -0.18 4.11** 1.91**
L11 x T1 0 -3.74* -2.52 5.24** 3.01 36.44** 8.21 3.64** 42.11** 4.56** 48.32** -3.86** 2.01* -8.5** 2.56**
L12 x T1 5.08** -1.9 -3.33* 0 1.89 20.43** -0.75 16.73** 46.49** 0.52 47.22** 0.69* -0.21 -9.8** 5.13**
L13 x T1 -3.23 0 0.82 -1.52 4.60* 35.70** -8.4 2.55** 24.68** -2.56* 21.29** -12.46** -4.40** -1.3 -1.28**
L14 x T1 1.61 4.00* -6.50** 3.05 6.98** -33.75** -33.08** 13.45** 12.72** -7.43** 8.44** -12.82** -1.41 -3.2** -12.18**
L15 x T1 -4.76* -2.88 -3.28* -4.00* 1.52 17.47** 5.74 -10.55** 25.14** 0.75 29.67** -1.48** -2.44* 4.8** 3.89**
L16 x T1 -7.46* -8.33** -8.73** 2.08 2.26 21.17** -12.05 2.01** 46.29** 6.04** 56.12** 1.85** 3.08** -2.5** 5.77**
L1 x T2 5.97** 5.61** -1.55 0.46 -1.37 -20.32** 17.64 -24.56** 0.8 -15.01** -13.81** -26.92** 2.75** 0.81 17.65**
L2 x T2 6.06** 3.54* 0 0 0.68 -8.08** 30.66** -25.98** 34.64** -9.28** 22.45** -26.71** 1.68 -1.69 22.06**
L3 x T2 9.52** 2.78 0 0.95 -3.05 -17.73** -21.53* -1.63** -25.55** -0.45 -25.21** -28.66** -9.02** -6.74** 8.82**
L4 x T2 0 5.05** -2.52 -0.52 0.38 6.72** 19.46 2.16** 24.21** -4.33** 25.01** -7.98** -13.9** -29.5** -5.88**
L5 x T2 -7.69** -1.96 -3.36* -1.54 -2.63 7.41** -16.04 -10.37** -2.63 2.16* 6.15** -10.62** -1.09 7.38** 16.18**
L6 x T2 0 3.96* -0.84 0 -1.13 2.73* 4.44 -4.63** 14.26** -0.39 13.73** 0.1 0.04 -2.54* 9.56**
L7 X T2 -1.59 0.99 -1.68 0.52 1.13 20.53** 10.77 13.88** 2.14 0.15 7.87** 2.08** -1.01 8.84** 12.50**
L8 x T2 -1.59 4.04* -2.52 3.14 0.38 17.60** -7.19 13.52** 22.91** 1.94 27.03** -4.78** 0.61 1.38 2.94**
L9 x T2 3.33 -0.94 1.68 0 1.5 20.53** 8.24 -6.74** 50.66** -2.24* 47.21** 1.64** -0.16 3.73** 11.76**
L10 x T2 3.17 5.00** 3.33* 3.08 1.5 2.68 4.56 -12.58** 23.05** 0.95 24.50** 3.99** -2.33* 3.94** -5.15**
L11 x T2 3.08 -1.87 0 2.09 2.63 20.74** -10.39 8.19** 5.44 6.44** 12.61** 6.24** 4.48** 3** 0
L12 x T2 8.33** -5.71** -5.83** -1.52 0.75 13.87** -12.53 9.96** 35.40** 1.98 37.99** -1.94** 4.25** -8.01** 11.03**

Heterosis Studies for Agro-morphological and Fiber Quality Traits in Cotton (Gossypium spp.) Hybrids at Werer, Ethiopia
 Int. J. Plant Breed. Crop Sci. 504
Table 4: Continue
L13 x T2 1.61 -6.48** -7.38** -1.02 0.38 12.71** 1.92 2.14** -25.56** -3.12** -28.13** -5.02** -5.64** 2.5** -5.88**
L14 x T2 3.23 3 -7.32** -2.54 -0.75 11.53** -8.02 17.44** -10.45** -2.15* -8.26** -3.16** -0.29 3.72** -12.50**
L15 x T2 0 -4.81** -6.56** -2 1.88 26.13** 5.23 2.85** 26.01** 2.33* 37.19** -2.35** -5.71** 7.64** 22.79**
L16 x T2 -7.46** -7.41** -7.14** 1.04 -0.38 17.09** -4.67 10.70** 37.01** 4.37** 42.96** -2.73** 2.13* -0.5 0
SE(+ ) 1.26 1.12 1.15 1.26 1.61 0.95 7.11 0.38 1.97 0.72 0.75 0.21 0.67 0.63 0.12
CD (5%) 3.59 3.18 3.27 3.58 4.58 2.71 20.21 1.08 5.59 2.04 2.12 0.59 1.9 1.79 0.35
CD (1%) 4.79 4.24 4.35 4.78 6.11 3.61 26.94 1.44 7.46 2.71 2.82 0.79 2.54 2.39 0.46
*and**, significant at P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively. SE = standard error of mean, CD = critical difference, DIS=days
to initial squaring, DIF=days to initial flowering, DF= days to 50% flowering, DIBO= days to initial boll opening, DBO= days
to 65% boll opening, NBPP= number of bolls per plant, PH= plant height, ABW= average boll weight, SCY= seed cotton
yield, GP= ginning percentage, LY= lint yield, M= micronaire, FL= fiber length, FS= fiber strength and FE= fiber elongation
All most half (16) and 15 hybrids displayed positive and Seventeen, 26 and 22 hybrids exhibited positive and
negative significant better parent heterosis for average boll significant standard heterosis over standard check
weight, respectively, which ranged from -25.98 to 17.44%. (Weyto-07) for seed cotton yield, ginning percentage and
Better parent heterosis for plant height and number of boll lint yield, respectively. Among total crosses, 17, 5 and 18
per plant ranged from -33.08 to 41.95% and -33.75 to hybrids showed positive and significant standard heterosis
48.66%, respectively. Two and 23 hybrids had positive and for abovementioned traits over both standard check. Only
maximum significant better parent heterosis for plant five hybrids (L6 x T1, L9 x T1, L5 x T2, L7 x T2 and L11 x
height and number of boll per plant, respectively. Different T2) showed positive and significant standard heterosis
magnitude of better parent heterosis for the traits were over standard check for ginning percentage and lint yield.
reported by Tuteja (2014) and Solanke et al. (2015). More importantly, 5 hybrids displayed positive and
Phenological traits namely, days to initial squaring, days to significant heterosis for three economic importance traits
initial flowering, days to 50% flowering, days to initial boll mentioned above over standard check, while only three
opening and days to 65% boll opening displayed positive hybrids had negative and significant standard heterosis.
and significant better parent for 8, 10, 1, 1, 6 hybrids, The result of this research coincide with the result of
respectively which ranged from -11.11 to 9.52%, -8.33 to Solanke et al. (2015) and Monicashree et al. (2017).
5.61%, -8.73 to 4.35, -4.15 to 5.24% and -3.05 to 6.98%,
respectively. None of hybrids showed negative and Other crucial traits had great contribution in seed cotton
significant better parent heterosis for days to 65% boll yield increment viz. number of boll per plant, plant height
opening. and average boll weight ranged from -28.02 to 76.31%, -
40.07 to 27.13% and -32.25 to 7.82% over standard check
On other hand, 7, 10, 12 and 15 hybrids exhibited positive (Weyto-07). Beside this, hybrids L1 x T1 and L14 x T1
and significant better parent for micronaire, fiber length, showed maximum and minimum standard heterosis,
fiber strength and fiber elongation, respectively, whereas respectively, for number boll per plant and plant height.
the heterosis ranged respective from -33.93 to 6.24%, - Among hybrids, 23, one and 9 hybrids displayed positive
14.64 to 4.48%, -32.07 to 8.84% and -17.83 to 13.48%. and significant standard heterosis over standard check
Two hybrids (L4 x T1 and L4 x T2) showed negative and (Weyto-07) for aforementioned three traits, respectively.
significant better parent across all traits in which negative Five hybrids exhibited positive and significant standard
value of heterosis had advantage for only micronaire traits. heterosis for both average boll weight and number of boll
Moreover, 21.85%, 3.13%, 18.75% and 3.13% of hybrids per plant over standard check and check mean,
displayed positive and significant better parent heterosis respectively. Only one hybrid (L1 x T1) showed positive
for fiber length and fiber elongation, micronaire and fiber and significant for traits plant height and number of boll per
elongation, fiber strength and fiber elongation, and fiber plant over checks. The observed magnitude of mid parent
length and fiber strength, respectively. Boleck et al. (2010) heterosis for the traits in line with reported by Tuteja and
and Ashokkumar et al. (2013) reported related result for Agrawal (2013), Ranganatha, et al. (2013) and Lingaraja
micronaire, fiber length and fiber strength. et al. (2017).
Standard Heterosis In phenological traits, 24, 11, 9, 12 and 13 hybrids
The standard heterosis (SH) computed for 15 traits over displayed positive and significant standard heterosis over
best standard check presented in Table 5. Among positive standard check (Weyto-07) for days to 65% boll opening,
and significant heterosis hybrids, hybrids L9 x T2, L10 x days to initial boll opening, days to 50% flowering, days to
T1, L16 x T1, L10 x T2, L16 x T2 and L12 x T1 exhibited initial flowering and days to initial squaring, respectively.
highest standard heterosis for lint yield over standard On the other hand, standard heterosis over standard
check. Standard heterosis ranged from -28.99 to 60.15%, check (Weyto-07) ranged 0.78 to 15.18%, 0 to 14.74%, -
-14.49 to 21.09% and 27.70 to 64.95% for seed cotton 3.42 to 11.11, -2.94 to 14.71%, -8.20 to 16.39% for days
yield, ginning percentage and lint yield over standard to 65% boll opening, days to initial boll opening, days to
check in case for seed cotton yield as similar result was 50% flowering, days to initial flowering and days to initial
reported by authors, Sawarkar et al. (2015), Adsare et al. squaring, respectively. Seven hybrids namely, L1 x T1, L2
(2017) and Lingaraja, et al. (2017). x T1, L3 x T1, L1 x T2, L2 x T2, L3 x T2 and L10 x T2

Heterosis Studies for Agro-morphological and Fiber Quality Traits in Cotton (Gossypium spp.) Hybrids at Werer, Ethiopia
Balcha et al. 505

exhibited positive and significant for all phenological traits Twenty two, 28, 17 and 25 displayed positive and
over standard check. Four hybrids for days to initial boll significant for micronaire, fiber length, fiber strength and
opening and days to 65% boll opening, 2 hybrids for days fiber elongation, respectively and ranged from -3.34 to
to initial boll opening and days 65% boll opening and 2 37.32%, -14.56 to 36.84% and -22.08 to 37.50% for three
hybrids for days to initial flowering, days to initial 50% latter traits, respectively, over standard check. Five hybrids
flowering and 65% boll opening were displayed positive namely, L16 x T1, L7 x T2, L9 x T2, L11 x T2 and L13 x T2
and significant standard heterosis over standard check. showed positive and significant heterosis for all tested
None of hybrids showed negative and significant standard traits. Four, 5, 7, 3, 3 and one hybrids showed positive and
heterosis over standard check for maturity i.e. days to 65% significant standard heterosis over standard check for the
boll opening. The results are in conformity with Tuteja and traits of 2, 2, 2, 3 and 2, respectively. Hybrids L1 x T1, L2
Agrawal (2013), Ranganatha, et al. (2013) and Lingaraja x T1, L3 x T1, L1 x T2, L2 x T2 and L3 x T2 among the
et al. (2017) for days to 50 % flowering and initial boll best for all quality traits to desirable direction. Patil et al.
opening. (2012) reported positive and significant standard heterosis
over standard check with high value of 9.35% for fiber
In quality traits, 21.86% and 68.75% hybrids showed length, 6.21% for fiber elongation and 11.36% for
significant negative and positive standard heterosis over microniare. Similar result were reported by Tuteja and
standard check (Weyto-07) for micronaire, respectively, Agrawal (2013), Sajjad et al. (2015) and Lingaraja et al.
and ranged from -26.75 (L1 x T1) to 14.47% (L16 x T1). (2017)
Table 5: Standard heterosis over Weyto - 07 for agro-morphological and fiber quality traits of cotton crosses evaluated
at Werer in 2017 cropping season
Crosses DIS DIF DF DIBO DBO NBPP PH ABW SCY GP LY M FL FS FE
L1 x T1 13.11** 8.82** 11.1** 11.05** 13.62** 76.31** 27.13** -19.22** 24.01** -14.49** 5.58** -26.75** 36.98** 31.23** 27.94**
L2 x T1 14.75** 7.84** 8.55** 9.47** 13.23** 33.49** 0.63 -22.15** -3.69 -10.81** -14.53** -16.89** 34.32** 27.19** 25.74**
L3 x T1 13.11** 10.78** 10.3** 12.63** 15.18** 37.59** -23.32* -9.12** -23.52** -0.24 -24.1** -17.11** 25.53** 36.84** 12.50**
L4 x T1 -1.64 -1.96 -2.56 2.63 4.67* 0.91 -23.72* -4.56** -18.38** 7.48** -12.3** 2.52** 0.43 -5.61** 8.09**
L5 x T1 0 -1.96 -1.71 2.63 6.23** 22.10** -29.26** -3.91** -17.00** 8.35** -10.54** 2.52** 2.47** -6.67** 27.94**
L6 x T1 -4.92** -0.98 -1.71 2.11 5.45** 27.33** -12.28 -7.49** -3.54 5.85** 1.54** 11.51** 0.92 -14.56** 6.62**
L7 x T1 -8.2** -2.94* -2.56 0.53 4.67* 25.97** -20.19* 3.26** 24.04** 9.38** 34.9** 11.29** -0.5 -6.14** 22.79**
L8 x T1 3.28 0 -0.85 0.53 6.62** 11.16** -25.29* -14.33** -11.53** 6.82** -6.01** 10.09** 2.77** -2.28** 11.76**
L9 x T1 4.92** 0.98 0.85 0 5.45** 19.59** -11.48 -11.07** 0.77 10.18** 10.40** 0.11 5.48** -4.39** 15.44**
L10 x T1 1.64 2.94* 0.85 3.16 5.45** 23.23** -6.27 0 60.15** 3.55** 64.8** 5.59** 5.92** 2.11 17.65**
L11 x T1 6.56** 0.98 -0.85 5.79** 6.62** 16.86** -0.6 -7.17** 31.05** 7.66** 40.20** 6.58** 4.89** -3.51** 17.65**
L12 x T1 1.64 0.98 -0.85 3.68* 5.06* 2.05 -11.11 4.56** 39.83** 7.21** 49.20** 11.62** 2.61** -3.16** 20.59**
L13 x T1 -1.64 5.88** 5.13** 2.11 6.23** 26.42** -17.42 -8.14** 30.28** 2.52** 32.83** -2.96** 3.93** 3.86** 13.24**
L14 x T1 3.28 1.96 -1.71 6.84** 7.39** -28.02** -40.07** 1.63** 3.95 -1.13 2.48** -0.11 1.88** -4.21** 0.74
L15 x T1 -1.64 -0.98 0.85 1.05 3.89 -0.46 4.54 -19.87** 15.40** 19.22** 36.82** 9.21** 0.32 3.51** 37.50**
L16 x T1 1.64 -2.94* -1.71 3.16 5.45** 8.20** -17.72 -0.65 50.29** 9.19** 63.20** 14.47** 5.99** 3.51** 21.32**
L1 x T2 16.39** 10.78** 8.55** 14.74** 12.45** 37.59** 3.7 -30.94** -3.87 -13.02** -16.68** -21.71** 37.32** 30.70** -13.82**
L2 x T2 14.75** 14.71** 11.1** 14.21** 14.79** 24.37** 7.51 -32.25** 28.41** -7.15** 18.38** -21.49** 32.22** 32.28** -18.26**
L3 x T2 13.11** 8.82** 11.1** 12.11** 11.28** 12.07** -35.44** -1.95** -28.99** 2.28** -27.70** -23.57** 19.03** 23.86** -22.08**
L4 x T2 4.92** 1.96 -0.85 0 3.89 -2.28 5.51 7.82** 18.46** 5.74** 24.56** -1.43** 1.32* -2.11 5.76***
L5 x T2 -1.64 -1.96 -1.71 1.05 0.78 12.30** -30.16** -12.70** -7.14* 11.07** 2.62** 7.02** 1.39* 2.11 -5.65*
L6 x T2 3.28 2.94* 0.85 1.58 2.33 11.39** -2.77 -12.70** 29.32** 6.97** 37.59** 7.24** 2.54* 0.88 8.25**
L7 x T2 1.64 0 0 2.63 4.67* 2.96* -3.2 4.24** -2.58 7.63** 4.29** 12.94** 1.48* 5.79** 3.73**
L8 x T2 1.64 0.98 -0.85 3.68* 3.89 0.46 -15.15 3.91** 17.22** 5.34** 22.8** 7.13** 5.99** 2.98** -2.45**
L9 x T2 1.64 2.94* 3.42* 1.05 5.06* 2.96* -2.67 3.58** 52.23** 8.99** 64.95** 8.88** 2.35** 2.46* 3.22**
L10 x T2 6.56** 2.94* 5.98** 5.79** 5.06* 4.78** -12.71 -11.73** 42.04** 7.99** 52.6** 11.40** 3.65** 1.93 6.44**
L11 x T2 9.84** 2.94* 1.71 2.63 6.23** 3.42** -17.68 -0.98* 0.56 8.94** 8.86** 13.82** 7.09** 8.60** 17.16**
L12 x T2 6.56** -2.94* -3.42* 2.11 4.28* -2.73* -25.23* 0.65 29.25** 8.76** 39.82** 5.04** 6.86** -1.23 -0.31
L13 x T2 3.28 -0.98 -3.42* 2.63 3.89 5.01** -8.11 -6.52** -22.22** 1.94** -21.28** 1.75** 2.58** 7.89** 3.86**
L14 x T2 4.92** 0.98 -2.56 1.05 2.72 21.18** -21.22* 7.49** -14.59** 4.51** -11.31** 10.96** 3.04** 2.63* 0.1
L15 x T2 3.28 -2.94* -2.56 3.16 5.45** 7.74** 4.04 -5.86** 20.18** 21.09** 44.80** 4.61** -3.34** 6.32** -2.20**
L16 x T2 1.64 -1.96 0 2.11 3.11 4.56** -10.81 7.82** 40.76** 6.82** 49.40** 9.32** 4.69** 5.61** -0.4
SE(+) 1.15 0.97 1.06 1.15 1.39 0.85 6.9 0.31 0.21 0.46 0.08 0.22 0.57 1.08 0.37
CD (5%) 3.29 2.79 3.04 3.3 3.98 2.43 19.8 0.88 6.03 1.32 0.22 0.45 1.16 2.19 0.74
CD (1%) 4.41 3.74 4.07 4.42 5.34 3.26 26.54 1.19 8.09 1.78 0.3 0.61 1.55 2.93 1
* and ** significant at (P < 0.05) and (P < 0.01) respectively, CD= critical difference, SE= standard error of mean, DIS=days
to initial squaring, DIF=days to initial flowering, DF =days to 50% flowering, DIBO= days to initial boll opening, DBO= days
to 65% boll opening, NBPP= number of bolls per plant, PH= plant height, ABW=average boll weight, SCY= seed cotton
yield, GP= ginning percentage, LY= lint yield, , M= micronaire, FL= fiber length, FS= fiber strength and FE= Fiber
elongation.
Heterosis Studies for Agro-morphological and Fiber Quality Traits in Cotton (Gossypium spp.) Hybrids at Werer, Ethiopia

CONCLUSIONS
Analysis of variance showed significant difference among
tested genotypes. This indicating that there were
sufficiently of genetic variability among the parental lines
and most desirable crosses were involved for hybrids
production. The magnitude of mid, better parent and
standard heterosis, ranged from -24.67 to 55.01%, -25.56
to 50.66% and -28.99 to 60.15% for seed cotton yield,
respectively. The minimum heterosis was observed for
hybrids L3 x T2, L13 x T2 and L3 x T2, while the maximum
was exhibited by hybrids L9 x T2, L9 x T2 and L10 x T1
displayed positive and significant mid, better parent and
standard heterosis for seed cotton yield, respectively.
Moreover, L10 x T1, L9 x T2, L15 x T2 and L1 x T2 hybrids
had positive and significant standard heterosis over
standard check (Weyto-07) for seed cotton, lint yield,
ginning percentage and fiber length, respectively in which
there is feasibility of heterosis breeding through utilizing
the best parents. In addition, L1 x T1, L3 x T1 and L9 x T1
hybrids had positive and significant standard heterosis for
number of boll per plant, fiber strength and average boll
weight, respectively. Among the hybrids, L16 x T1, L3 x T1
and L15 x T1 exhibited positive and significant standard
heterosis for micronaire, fiber strength and fiber
elongation, respectively. The results suggested the
presence of exploitable heterosis in the F1 crosses and
encourage conducting subsequent hybrids experiments in
the country.
REFERENCES
Abro, S., Kandhro, M.M., Laghari, S., Arain, M.A. and
Deho, Z.A. (2009). Combining ability and heterosis for
yield contributing traits in upland cotton (Gossypium
Hirsutum L.). Pakistan Journal of Botany, 41(4): 1769-
1774.
Acquaah, G. (2007). Principles of Plant Genetics and
Breeding, 2nd edition. Garsington Road, Oxford OX4
2DQ, UK.
Adsare, A.D., Salve, A.N. and Patil, N.P. (2017). Heterosis
studies for quantitative traits in interspecific hybrids of
cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L. x Gossypium
barbadense L.). Journal of Phytology, 9: 11-14.
Ahuja, S.L. and Dhayal, L.S. (2007). Combining ability
estimates for yield and fiber quality traits in 4 x13 lines
x tester crosses of G. hirsutum L. Euphytica, 153(2): 87-
98.
Ashokkumar, K., Kumar, K.S. and Ravikesavan, R. (2013).
Heterosis studies for fiber quality of upland cotton in line
x tester design. African Journal of Agricultural
Research, 8(48): 6359- 6365.
Baloch, M.J. (2004). Genetic variability and heritability
estimates of some polygenic traits in upland cotton.
Pakistan Journal of Scientific and Industrial
Research, 47(6): 451-454.
Baloch, M.Z., Ansari, B.A. and Memon, N. (2003).
Performance and selection of intraspecific hybrids of
Heterosis Studies for Agro-morphological and Fiber Quality Traits in Cotton (Gossypium spp.) Hybrids at Werer, Ethiopia
Int. J. Plant Breed. Crop Sci. 506
spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Pakistan Journal
of agriculture and Veterinary Science, 19(1): 28-31.
Bocianowski, J., Nowosad, K., Brzeskwiniewicz, H. and
Luczkiewicz, T. (2015). Finding Ranking of testers in
line x tester experiments. American Journals of Current
Genetics, 1(1): 1-9.
Bolek, Y., Cokkizgin, H. and Bardak, A. (2010). Combining
ability and heterosis for fiber quality traits in cotton.
Plant Breeding and Science, 62: 3-16.
Bosena, T., Bekabil, F., Gebremedhin, B. and Hoekstra, D.
(2011). Factors affecting cotton supply at the farm level
in Metema district of Ethiopia. Journal of Agriculture,
Biotechnology and Ecology, 4(1): 41-51.
Chaudhry, M.R. (1997). Commercial cotton hybrids. The
International Cotton Advisory Committee Recorder,
15(2): 3-14.
Falconer, D.S. and Mackay. T.F. (1996). Introduction to
quantitative genetics. 4th edition. Longman, London,
UK.
Ganapathy, S and Nadarajan, N. (2008). Heterosis studies
for oil content, seed cotton yield and other economic
traits in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). Madras
Agricultural Journal, 95(7-12): 306-310.
Hayes, H.K., Immer, F.R. and Smith, D.C. (1955). Method
of Plant Breeding. Mc Graw Hill book Company, New
York, London, Toronto.
Karademir, C., Karademir, E., Ekinci, R. and Oktay, G. E.
(2009). Combining ability estimates and heterosis for
yield and fiber quality of Cotton in line x tester design.
Notulae Botanicae Horticulture Agrobotanici Cluj-
Napoca, 37 (2): 228-230.
Kempthorne. (1957). An Introduction to Genetic Statistics.
John Wiley and Sons, New York, USA.
Khan, M.A., Myers, G.O. and Stewart. J.M. (2002).
Molecular markers, genomics and cotton improvement.
Crop Improvement challenges in the 21st century, 253-
284.
Khan, N., Basal, H. and Hassan, G. (2010). Cottonseed oil
and yield assessment via economic heterosis and
heritability in intraspecific cotton populations. African
journal of Biotechnology, 9(44): 7418-7428.
Kouser, S. and Qaim, M. (2012). Valuing financial, health
and environmental benefits of Bt cotton in Pakistan.
The International Association of Agricultural
Economists (IAAE), 44(3): 323-335.
Lingaraja, L., Sangwan, R.S., Nimbal, S., Sangwan, O.
and Singh, S. (2017). Heterosis studies for economic
and fiber quality traits in line x tester crosses of upland
cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). International journal of
pure and applied bioscience, 5(2): 240-248.
Marani, A. (1967). Heterosis and combining ability in
intraspecific and interspecific crosses of cotton. Crop
Science, 7(5): 519-522.
Meredith, W.R and Brown, J.S. (1998). Heterosis and
combining ability of cottons originating from different
regions of the United States. The Journal of Cotton
Science, 2: 77-84.
Meredith, W.R. (1998). Heterosis in cotton. Heterosis in
crops. pp. 282-283. An International Symposium. 17-22
Aug. 1997. CIMMY, Mexico City, Mexico.
Balcha et al. 507
Monicashree, C., Balu, P.A. and Gunasekaran. M. (2017).
Combining ability and heterosis studies on yield and
fiber quality traits in upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum
L.). International Journal of Current Microbiology and
Applied Sciences, 6(8): 912-927.
Monicashree, C., Balu, P.A. and Gunasekaran. M. (2017).
Combining ability and heterosis studies on yield and
fiber quality traits in upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum
L.). International Journal of Current Microbiology and
Applied Sciences, 6(8): 912-927.
Mukhtar, M.S. and Khan. T. M. (2000). Estimation of
heterosis for yield and yield components in cotton.
Pakistan Journal of Biological Science, 3: 1412-1413.
Panse, V.G. and Shukhatme, P.V. (1961). Statistical
method for agricultural workers. ICAR Publication, New
Delhi.
Patil, S. A., Naik, M.R. Pathak, V.D. and Kumar V. (2012).
Heterosis for yield and fiber properties in upland cotton
(Gossypium hirsutum L.). Journal of Cotton Research
and Development, 26(1): 26-29.
Percy, R.G. and Turcotte. E.L. (1991). Inheritance of male
sterile mutant ms 13 in American pima cotton. Crop
Science, 31(6): 1520- 1521.
Ranganatha, H. M., Patil, S. S., Manjula, S.M. and Patil, B.
C. (2013). Studies on heterosis in cotton (Gossypium
hirsutum L.) for seed cotton yield and its components.
Asian Journal of Bio Science, 8(1): 82-85.
Rauf, S., Khan, T.M. and Nazir. S. (2005). Combining
ability and heterosis in Gossypium hirsutum L.
International Journal of Agriculture and Biology, 7(1):
109-113.
Sajjad, M., Malook, S., Murtaza, A., Bashir, I., Shabaz,
M.K., Ali, M. and Sarfraz, M. (2015). Gene action study
for yield and yield stability related traits in Gossypium
hirsutum. Life Science Journal, 12(5): 1-11.
SAS Institute. (2004). SAS/STAT 9.1 User’s Guide. SAS
Inst., Cary, NC.
Sawarkar, M., Solanke, A., Mhasal G.S. and Deshmukh,
S.B. (2015). Combining ability and heterosis for seed
cotton yield, its components and quality traits in
Gossypium hirsutum L. Indian Journal of Agricultural
Research, 49 (2): 154-159.
Singh, B.D. (2005). Plant breeding: Principles and
methods. 7th edition. Kalyani Publishers, New Delhi,
India.
Solanke, A., Deshmukh, S.B., Mhasal, G.S. and Marawar,
M.W. (2015). Heterosis and combining ability in genetic
male sterility based diploid cotton hybrids for yield, yield
component, fiber quality characters and oil content.
Electronic Journal of Plant Breeding, 6(1): 150-156.
Heterosis Studies for Agro-morphological and Fiber Quality Traits in Cotton (Gossypium spp.) Hybrids at Werer, Ethiopia
Stroman, G. N. (1961). An approach to hybrid cotton as
shown by intra and interspecific crosses. Crop Science,
1(5): 363-366.
Tigga, A., Patil, S.S., Edke, V., Roy, U. and Kumar, A.
(2017). Heterosis and inbreeding depression for seed
cotton yield and yield attributing traits in intra hirsutum
(G. hirsutum L. x G. hirsutum L.) Hybrids of Cotton.
International Journal of Current Microbiology and
Applied Sciences, 6(10): 2883-2887.
Tuteja, O. P. (2014). Studies on heterosis for yield and
fiber quality traits in GMS hybrids of upland cotton
(Gossypium hirsutum L.). Journal of Cotton Research
Development, 28(1): 1-6.
Tuteja, O. P. and Agrawal, M. (2013). Heterosis for seed
cotton yield and other traits in GMS based hybrids of
American cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Cotton
Research Journal, 5(2): 131-141.
Wakelyn, P. J. Beroniere, N., French, A.D. Thibodeaux, D.,
Triplett, B., Rousselle, M., Goynes, W., Edwards, J.,
Hunter, L., Mcalister, D. and Gamble, G. (2007). Cotton
Fiber Chemistry and Technology National Cotton. 3rd
Edition. International Fiber Science and Technology,
National Cotton Council, Washington, D.C.
Wu, Y. T., Yin, J.M., Guo, W. Z., Zhu, X.F. and Zhang, T.Z.
(2004). Heterosis performance of yield and fiber quality
in F1 and F2 hybrids in upland cotton. Plant Breeding,
123(3): 285-289.
Zerihun, D. and Ratanadilok, N. (2007). Heterosis and
inbreeding depression on cotton (Gossypium
hirsutum). Kasetsart Journal of Natural Science, 41:
149-161.
Accepted 29 January 2019
Citation: Balcha M, Mohammed W, Desalegn Z, Gudeta
B (2019). Heterosis Studies for Agro-morphological and
Fiber Quality Traits in Cotton (Gossypium spp.) Hybrids at
Werer, Ethiopia. International Journal of Plant Breeding
and Crop Science, 6(1): 498-507.
Copyright: © 2019: Balcha et al. This is an open-access
article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted
use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original author and source are cited.