Introgression of bruchid resistance from Vigna radiata var. sublobata into greengram (Vigna radiata): evaluation for bruchid resistance and yield potential in inter sub specific lines
Keywords:
Bruchid resistance, Callosobruchus chinensis, Greengram, Inter subspecific linesAbstract
Among the storage pests, bruchids (Callosobruchus spp.) is the most destructive pest of greengram. This necessitates the development of bruchidresistant cultivars. Owing to lack of donors in the greengram, wild species are exploited. In this investigation, 200 inter-sub-specific lines (F9) of greengram [VBN(Gg)2 (bruchid susceptible) × Vigna radiata var. sublobata/2 (bruchid resistant)] were screened for bruchid (Callosobruchus chinensis) resistance by adopting the “no choice” method. Out of 200 lines evaluated, four were identified as highly resistant, viz., GGISC49, GGISC153, GGISC179, and GGISC186 (<10% damage), and three as resistant lines viz., GGISC124, GGISC140, and GGISC172 (10-20% damage) for bruchid. The independent screening also revealed consistent results. The screening parameters viz., weight loss of seed on 30th day, growth index, adult emergence % on 30thday showed a positive significant correlation with seed damage %, whereas mean number of eggs per seed and mean developmental period showed a negative significant correlation with seed damage %. Further, seven lines were evaluated for ten yield and yield-related attributes along with VBN(Gg)2. Three lines, viz., GGISC124, GGISC140, and GGISC186, were found to have higher single plant yield (>15 g). These lines can be tested in multienvironment and exploited for high yield with bruchid-resistant cultivars. Collectively, the seven lines can be utilized as a potential donor for improving the bruchid resistance, thereby reducing the post-harvest losses in greengram.
References
Amusa Amusa OD, Emereuwa EA, Akinyosoye ST, Olayiwola OI, Osunkojo OV, Adetola AA, Ugbo FD, Ogunkanmi LA and Oboh BO. 2023. Seed storage proteins and seed coat compounds additively influence Callosobruchus maculatus tolerance in selected cowpea varieties. Legume Science e201.
Bertan I, de Carvalho FI and de Oliveira AC. 2007. Parental selection strategies in plant breeding programs. Journal of Crop Science and Biotechnology 10: 211–222.
Dongre TK, Pawar SE and Harwalkar MR. 1993. Resistance to Callosobruchus maculatus (F.) in pigeonpea and other Cajanus species. Journal of Stored Products Research 29: 319–322.
Fernandez GCJ and Talekar NS. 1990. Genetics and breeding for bruchid resistance in Asiatic Vigna species. In: Bruchids and Legumes: Economics, Ecology and Coevolution. Springer, New York. pp 209–217.
Ghosh S, Roy A and Kundagrami S. 2019. Diversity analysis of mungbean genotypes for bruchid resistance. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research 53: 309–314.
Ghosh S, Roy A and Kundagrami S. 2022. Screening of mungbean genotypes against bruchid attack to reduce post-harvest losses. Legume Research 45: 1019–1027.
Gopinath PP, Parsad R, Joseph B and Adarsh V. 2021. grapesAgri1: collection of shiny apps for data analysis in agriculture. Journal of Open Source Software 6(63): 3437.
Harshitha GP, Jayamani P, Manimegalai S and Muthuswamy A. 2022. Host plant resistance for bruchids in pre-breeding lines of greengram. Legume Research 45: 1–5.
Howe RW. 1971. A parameter for expressing the suitability of an environment for insect development. Journal of Stored Products Research 7: 63–65.
Journal of Food Legumes 39 (Special issue - NC Pulses 2026), 2026
Indiastat. 2025. Season-wise area, production and productivity of moong in India. Available at: www. indiastat.com (Accessed on 28 April 2025).
Khattak SU, Hamed M, Khatoon R and Mohammad T. 1987. Relative susceptibility of mungbean varieties to Callosobruchus maculatus. Journal of Stored Products Research 23: 139–142.
Kokiladevi E, Manickam A and Thayumanavan B. 2005. Characterization of alpha-amylase inhibitor in Vigna sublobata. Botanical Bulletin of Academia Sinica 46: 189–196.
Lal RR and Verma P. 2007. Post-harvest Management of Pulses. Indian Institute of Pulse Research, Kanpur. pp 26.
Madhavan N, Pandey AK, War AR, Hanumantharao B, Shwe T, Alam A, Pratap A, Malik S, Karimi R and Mbeyagala E. 2019. Biotic and abiotic constraints in mungbean production and progress in genetic improvement. Frontiers in Plant Science 10: 1340.
Majhi PK and Mogali SC. 2020. Characterization and selection of bruchid tolerant greengram genotypes. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research 54: 679–688.
Mariyammal I, Seram D, Samyuktha SM, Karthikeyan A, Dhasarathan M, Murukarthick J, Kennedy JS, Malarvizhi D, Yang TJ and Pandiyan M. 2019. QTL mapping for bruchid resistance in Vigna population. Molecular Breeding 39: 1–13.
Misal AM. 2005. Biochemical basis of resistance to stored grain pest in Vigna species. Ph.D. Thesis, Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth, Ahmednagar, Maharashtra.
Nagaraja M. 2006. Evaluation of pigeonpea and cowpea genotypes for bruchid resistance. M.Sc. (Agri) Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad.
Pandey AK, Burlakoti RR, Kenyon L and Nair RM. 2018. Sustainable management of fungal diseases of mungbean: a review. Frontiers in Environmental Science 6: 53.
Ragul S and Manivannan N. 2024. Bruchid: a serious pest on pulse crops—control measures and breeding advancements. Agricultural Reviews 45: 290–296.
Samyuktha S, Venugopal S, Karthikeyan A, Vanniarajan C, Senthil N, Hepziba S and Malarvizhi D. 2020. Vulnerability of popular mungbean varieties to Callosobruchus maculatus. Journal of Entomology and
Zoology Studies 8: 146–151.
Samyuktha SM, Malarvizhi D, Mariyammal I, Karthikeyan A, Seram D, Dhasarathan M, Hepziba JS, Sheela V, Hemavathy TA, Kavithamani D and Kavitha S. 2023. Identification of mungbean genotypes resistant to South Indian bruchid strain. Agriculture 12: 1050.
Sarkar S and Bhattacharyya S. 2015. Screening of greengram genotypes for bruchid resistance. Legume Research 38: 704–706.
Singh G, Singh I, Taggar GK, Rani U, Sharma P, Gupta M and Singh S. 2020. Introgression of productivity and resistance traits in pigeonpea. Physiology and Molecular Biology of Plants 26: 1399–1410.
Somta C, Somta P, Tomooka N, Ooi PAC, Vaughan DA and Srinives P. 2008. New sources of mungbean resistance to bruchids. Journal of Stored Products Research 44: 316–321.
Somta P, Chen J, Yundaeng C, Yuan X, Yimram T, Tomooka N and Chen X. 2019. SNP-based linkage map and QTL analysis for bruchid resistance in black gram. Scientific Reports 9: 3930.
Soumia P, Srivastava C, Dikshit H and Pandi GGP. 2017. Screening greengram accessions for resistance against pulse beetle. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences India Section B 87: 551–558.
Sowmya T, Durga K, Venkateshwaran K and Keshavulu K. 2016. Screening of greengram genotypes against pulse beetle. Journal of Food Legumes 29: 136–141.
Togola A, Ongom PO, Mohammed SB, Fatokun C, Tamò M and Boukar O. 2024. Host plant resistance to insects in pulse crops. In: Plant Resistance to Insects in Major Field Crops. Springer Nature, Singapore. pp 169–182.
Tomooka N, Lairungreang C, Nakeeraks P, Egawa Y and Thavarasook C. 1992. Development of bruchid resistant mungbean using wild germplasm. Plant Breeding 109: 60–66.
Vinay TK, Savitha BK, Indu Rani C, Suganthy M and Ashokkumar GPJ. 2025. Rewilding agriculture: utilising wild relatives to enhance legume traits. New Zealand Journal of Crop and Horticultural Science 53(5): 1–22.
Yao Y, Cheng X and Ren G. 2015. Ninety-day study of bruchid-resistant mungbean cultivars in rats. Food and Chemical Toxicology 76: 80–85.
