Bulletin 1168
September 2008
Evaluation of
Cotton Populations
for Agronomic and Fiber Traits
after Different Cycles of Random Mating
MISSISSIPPI AGRICULTURAL & FORESTRY EXPERIMENT STATION
MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY
•
VANCE H. WATSON, INTERIM PRESIDENT
•
•
MELISSA J. MIXON, INTERIM DIRECTOR
MELISSA J. MIXON, INTERIM VICE PRESIDENT
Evaluation of Cotton Populations for Agronomic and
Fiber Traits after Different Cycles of Random Mating
Jack C. McCarty
Crop Science Research Laboratory
USDA-ARS
Mississippi State University
Johnie N. Jenkins
Crop Science Research Laboratory
USDA-ARS
Mississippi State University
Jixiang Wu
Department of Plant and Soil Sciences
Mississippi State University
Osman A. Gutiérrez
Department of Plant and Soil Sciences
Mississippi State University
Russell Hayes
Crop Science Research Laboratory
USDA-ARS
Mississippi State University
Bulletin 1168 was published by the Office of Agricultural Communications, a unit of the Division of Agriculture,
Forestry, and Veterinary Medicine at Mississippi State University. Copyright 2008 by Mississippi State University.
All rights reserved. This publication may be copied and distributed without alteration for nonprofit educational purposes provided that credit is given to the Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station.
Evaluation of Cotton Populations for Agronomic and
Fiber Traits after Different Cycles of Random Mating
A BSTRACT
Random mating, as one of several breeding approaches, has been used to successfully break linkage blocks in
crops for multiple-trait improvements. In this study, we used 11 cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) lines from
diverse breeding programs as parents to make 55 F2 populations and 55 corresponding populations with cycles
of random mating ranging from 1 to 4. The parents, F2, and random-mated populations were grown and evaluated in field plots in 2005 at Mississippi State University. Generally, the results showed that parents had larger variances and ranges for agronomic and fiber traits measured than F2 hybrids and their corresponding populations at different cycles of random mating. The genetic variances among 55 F2 populations decreased with
increased cycles of random mating. In general, the mean for parents showed significant differences from the
mean of the populations at different cycles of random mating for most traits measured; however, F2 populations
did not differ among different cycles for most traits. High correlations were detected among traits for parents
and F2 populations, but correlations among traits decreased with increased cycles of random mating. Higher
correlations between F2 and random-mated cycle 1 (C0S1) were detected than those among other random-mated
cycles for most traits. The results indicated that the linkage blocks have been broken after one to four cycles
of random mating. The random mating populations should provide a genetic resource for selecting lines with
improved agronomic and fiber traits.
I NTRODUCTION
Simultaneous enhancement of multiple characters
like yield and quality is an important objective for crop
breeders. High-yielding upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) cultivars are usually associated with average
fiber quality traits such as length and strength
(Meredith, 1984). For a long time, this negative genetic association between yield and fiber quality has greatly hampered effective cotton improvement through the
classical plant breeding method of crossing, selfing,
and selecting. Therefore, the employment of an efficient approach to break down such unfavorable genetic
associations is of great importance.
The random-mating procedure, which is different
from the classical breeding approach, has provided an
important means to effectively break the negative asso-
ciations between yield and quality in several self-pollinated crops like tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.)
(Humphrey et al., 1969), sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L.
Moench) (Nordquist et al., 1973), soybean (Glycine
max L. Merr.) (Burton and Brim, 1981), and oats (Frey
and Holland, 1999). Random mating has also been successfully used in cotton to break linkages between
genes responsible for fiber strength and yield (Miller
and Rawlings, 1967). For example, hybridization of
two parents followed by five generations of intercrossing improved yield by 9% while maintaining fiber
strength. The random-mating procedure also has been
used successfully in maize (Zea mays L.), a cross-pollinated crop (Covarrubias-Prieto, 1987). These studies
suggest the success of using a random-mating proce-
Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station
1
dure in the improvement of multiple traits that are negatively associated.
In most cases, random-mating schemes have
involved hand-pollination. When few parents are used,
this may be easy to handle; however, with more than
three parents involved, this method becomes tedious
and time-consuming. Miravalle (1964) proposed a
bulked-pollen method for intermating cotton populations and described his method using four different cotton strains. A random population involving a large
number of parents can provide a better chance to combine multiple traits (genes) of interest that come from
different parental lines.
In our study, we used a set of 11 diverse parental
lines to make a diallel cross producing 55 hybrids. We
randomly mated each population as female using
bulked pollen collected from the 55 populations fol-
M ATERIALS
Materials and Experiments
AND
Eleven parental lines were used in this study: (1)
Acala Ultima, (2) Tamcot Pyramid (Pyramid), (3)
Coker 315 (C315), (4) Stoneville 825 (ST825), (5)
FiberMax 966 (FM966), (6) M-240 RNR (M240), (7)
Paymaster HS26 (HS26), (8) Deltapine Acala 90
(DP90), (9) Phytogen PSC 355 (PSC355), (10) SureGrow 747 (SG747), and (11) Stoneville 474 (ST474)
(Table 1). These 11 parents were selected to represent
diverse breeding programs with acceptable agronomic
and fiber traits. A set of half-diallel crosses among
these parents (55 crosses) was handmade in the summer
of 2002. The 55 crosses (F1 seeds) were sent to a nursery in Mexico for random mating and to produce F2
seeds during the winter of 2002-03.
Following is a description of how the random-
Parent
Acala Ultima
Tamcot Pyramid
Coker 315
Stoneville 825
FiberMax 966
M-240 RNR
Paymaster HS26
Deltapine Acala 90
Sure-Grow 747
Phytogen PSC 355
Stoneville 474
M ETHODS
mated cycles were developed. During the winter of
2002-03 at the nursery in Mexico, each of the 55 crosses was grown in a single row (15 hills, two plants per
hill). When plants started to flower, crosses were initiated. Each day, two prebloom (candle-stage) buds were
covered with a cloth bag on each of the 55 rows. Also
daily, approximately 10 candle-stage buds were emasculated (anthers removed) on each row, and each stigma was covered with a soda straw. On the following
morning, the blooms that had been covered with bags
on the previous day were collected. Pollen was collected from these blooms and completely mixed. The
mixed pollen was used to pollinate emasculated buds
on each of the 55 rows. This procedure was repeated
each day until approximately 100 emasculated flowers
Table 1. Parents used to develop random-mating populations.
Designation
Acala U
Pyramid
C315
ST825
FM966
M240
HS26
DP90
SG747
PSC355
ST474
Provides Pedigree information.
Licensed to Phytogen Seed Company.
1
lowing the method described by Gutierrez et al. (2006).
This process continued for four cycles of random mating. These entries were planted at Mississippi State
University in 2005. Nine agronomic and fiber traits
were measured for each of five different generations
(F2, C0S1, C1S1, C2S1, and C3S1, respectively). These nine
traits were compared after the first cross and four
cycles of random mating. Correlation coefficients
among traits at each cycle of random mating and
among different cycles of random mating for each trait
were evaluated. Multiple comparisons among different
populations at different cycles of random mating also
were conducted. Research provides a detailed insight of
the breakup of genetic associations among traits and
thus should provide valuable information and base populations for multiple-trait improvement in cotton breeding programs.
Developer
CPCSD, Shafter, CA
Texas Agric. Exp. Stn.
Coker Pedigreed Seed Co., Hartsville, SC
Stoneville Pedigreed Seed Co., Stoneville, MS
Bayer Crop Science
USDA-ARS
Paymaster Technologies, Inc., Aiken , TX
Delta & Pine Land Co., Scott, MS
Sure-Grow, Leland, MS
Miss. Agric & Forestry Exp. Stn. 2
Stoneville Pedigreed Seed Co., Stoneville, MS
Reference1
MAFES Bull. 1155 (2006)
Crop Sci. 44:343 (2004)
MAFES Bull. 1155 (2006)
MAFES Bull. 1155 (2006)
MAFES Bull. 1155 (2006)
Crop Sci. 36:820 (1996)
MAFES Bull. 1155 (2006)
MAFES Bull. 1155 (2006)
MAFES Bull. 1155 (2006)
MAFES Bull. 1155 (2006)
MAFES Bull. 1155 (2006)
2
2
Evaluation of Cotton Populations for Agronomic and Fiber Traits after Different Cycles of Random Mating
had been pollinated on each row. When crossed bolls
were open, they were hand-harvested and bulked for
each row. The harvested seed was labeled as randommated cycle C0.
The 55 random-mated cycle C0 populations were
grown in single-row plots (80 feet with approximately
60 plants) at Mississippi State during the summer of
2003. The random-mating crossing procedure
described in the previous paragraph was followed during the crossing period. The harvested crossed bolls
were labeled as random-mated cycle C1. This randommating procedure was repeated, alternating between the
Mexico Winter Nursery and Mississippi State, until
cycle C3 was complete. The initial crosses (F1) and random-mated cycles C0, C1, C2, and C3 were grown at the
winter nursery and self-pollinated, resulting in F2, C0S1,
C1S1, C2S1, and C3S1 seed being produced. The timeline
and populations developed are provided in Table 2.
In 2005, the F2 and four cycles of mating, 11 parents, and five bulked populations each from 55 F2, C0S1,
C1S1, C2S1, and C3S1 were planted at Mississippi State.
The bulk populations were constructed by pooling
equal numbers of seed from each of the 55 populations.
Due to the large number of entries in this experiment,
we divided these entries into five groups with each
group including 55 populations (F2, C0S1, C1S1, C2S1, or
C3S1), 11 parents, and five bulked populations. In each
group, a randomized complete block design with four
replications was applied. Plot size was a single row 12
meters in length with row spacing of 0.97 meter. The
planting was a solid-row pattern. The stand density
Year
2002
2002-03
2003
2003-04
Table 2. Scheme of random-mating population development.
Description
Seed harvested
Plant 11 parents and made
diallel F1 crosses
F1 diallel
Plant C0 seed and made
random mating
Cycle 1
1. Plant F1 diallel crosses
in Mexico and random mated
2. Plant F1 in Mexico and selfed
1. Plant C1 seed and made
random mating
2. Plant C0 and selfed
3. Plant C1 and selfed
2004
Planted C2 seed and made
random mating
2005
Plant F2, C0S1, C1S1, C2S1, C3S1,
F2 bulk, C0 bulk, C1 bulk, C2 bulk,
and C3 bulk, and parents
2004-05
consisted of single plants spaced approximately 10 centimeters apart. The soil was a Leeper silty clay loam
(Fine, smectitic, nonacid, thermic Vertic Epiaquept).
Planting date was May 13, 2005, and machine harvest
date was October 18, 2005.
Normal field cultural practices were followed during the cotton-growing season. Before machine harvest, a 25-boll sample from each plot was collected to
determine the boll weight (BW) and lint percentage
(LP). Seed cotton yield (YLD), measured in kilograms
per hectare (kg/ha), was converted from plot weights.
Lint yield (LY), also measured in kg/ha, was calculated
based on seed cotton yield and lint percentage. The
ginned lint samples were sent to STARLAB, Inc., of
Knoxville, Tennessee, where fiber quality measurements were determined by high-volume instrument
(HVI) testing. Five measurements were made: (1)
micronaire (MIC), a measure of fiber fineness or maturity by resistance to air flow, which is reported in standard micronaire units; (2) elongation (ELO), the degree
of extension or stretch of fibers before breaking during
strength measurement, reported as a percent; (3)
strength (STR), the force required to break a bundle of
fibers with holding jaws separated by 1/8 inch, reported in grams per tex; (4) length (LEN), the average of
the longest 50% of fibers in the sample, reported in
hundredths of an inch and converted to millimeters in
this manuscript; and (5) fiber uniformity (UR), the ratio
of the average length of all fibers to the average length
of the longest 50% of the fibers in the sample, reported
as a percent (Anonymous, 2001).
1. Plant C1 seed and selfed
2. Plant C2 seed and selfed
3. Plant C3 seed and selfed
1.Cycle 0 (C0)
2. F2
(C1)
Location
Time
Miss. State, MS
Summer
Miss. State, MS
Summer
Mexico
Winter/Spring
1. Cycle 2 (C2)
Mexico
Winter/Spring
Cycle 3 (C3)
Miss. State, MS
Summer
Miss. State, MS
Summer
2. Selfed C0 (C0S1)
3. Selfed C1 (C1S1)
1. Selfed C1 (C1S1)
2. Selfed C2 (C2S1)
3. Selfed C3 (C3S1)
Mexico
Winter/Spring
Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station
3
Statistical Analysis
The phenotypic data were analyzed by generations
(parents and F2) and by entries (66 entries) subject to
the ANOVA models. Mean values for each of two generations and for each of 66 entries were calculated
accordingly with least significant difference (LSD) at
0.05 probability level. Correlation coefficients among
traits at each generation and among generations for
each trait were calculated. This part of data analysis
was conducted by SAS 9.0 (SAS Institute, Inc., 2001).
R ESULTS
Descriptive statistics for parents, 55 populations with different cycles of random mating
On average, parents had slightly shorter fibers,
weaker fibers, lower boll weight, and lower seed
cotton yield and lint yield than F2 hybrids, C0S1,
C1S1, C2S1, and C3S1 populations, indicating positive
heterosis among many of these populations (Table
3). The parents had slightly greater values than these
55 populations for fiber uniformity, fiber elongation, fiber micronaire, and lint percentage at different random-mating cycles ranging from C0 to C3.
The standard deviation for the traits measured
was larger for parents than that for the F2 and cycles
LEN
of random mating. The standard deviations for F2
populations were second in magnitude to parents. It
appeared that after at least two cycles of random
mating, the standard deviations for these traits
appeared stable (Table 3).
The ranges among these 11 parents were the
largest for all traits, and generally the ranges among
these 55 populations tended to be smaller with
increasing cycles of random mating as we expected
(Table 3).
Table 3. Descriptive statistics for nine fiber and agronomic traits.1
UR
STR
ELO
MIC
Parents
4.93
0.29
4.00
5.40
Mean
SD
Minimum
Maximum
28.53
1.05
26.29
31.12
82.89
0.75
81.25
84.73
29.95
2.00
26.63
34.50
8.51
0.53
7.63
9.56
Mean
SD
Minimum
Maximum
28.88
0.54
27.5
30.42
82.63
0.55
81.2
83.73
30.19
1.28
27.9
33.7
C0S1 Population
8.31
4.85
0.18
0.18
7.78
4.45
8.73
5.33
Mean
SD
Minimum
Maximum
28.93
0.78
27.37
30.61
82.79
0.75
81.08
84.3
30.37
1.91
27.53
35.88
Mean
SD
Minimum
Maximum
28.94
0.41
27.69
29.72
82.69
0.46
81.55
83.53
30.16
0.96
28.00
32.85
Mean
SD
Minimum
Maximum
28.88
0.38
28.07
29.65
82.61
0.54
81.13
83.7
30.16
0.86
28.3
32.63
Mean
SD
Minimum
Maximum
28.89
0.39
28.13
29.72
82.65
0.47
81.75
83.9
29.98
0.96
28.33
32.1
8.34
0.31
7.68
8.98
F2 Population
4.83
0.22
4.45
5.45
C1S1 Population
8.29
4.88
0.18
0.17
7.85
4.43
8.65
5.35
C2S1 Population
8.31
4.89
0.14
0.15
8.05
4.58
8.68
5.23
C3S1 Population
8.29
4.87
0.14
0.15
7.95
4.55
8.73
5.3
LP
BW
YLD
LY
40.45
1.87
36.42
43.95
4.87
0.43
4.05
5.87
2107
514
742
3360
855
221
284
1422
40.33
0.80
38.71
41.93
5.03
0.28
4.43
5.53
2214
429
1307
3253
893
175
518
1363
2203
306
1527
2826
890
125
618
1144
40.56
1.06
38.23
42.61
40.26
0.76
37.83
42.35
40.41
0.62
38.87
41.87
40.2
0.66
38.75
41.54
5.05
0.4
4.28
5.99
5.07
0.28
4.33
5.47
5.05
0.26
4.31
5.63
5.09
0.26
4.5
5.65
2229
392
1340
3252
2262
382
1286
2990
2216
365
1153
2844
904
162
523
1296
911
156
521
1211
891
148
472
1145
1
LEN = fiber length (mm), UR = fiber uniform ratio (%), STR = fiber strength (g/tex), ELO = fiber elongation (%), MIC = micronaire, LP = lint
percentage (%), BW = boll weight (g), YLD = seed cotton yield (kg/ha), and LY = lint yield (kg/ha).
4
Evaluation of Cotton Populations for Agronomic and Fiber Traits after Different Cycles of Random Mating
Comparisons among five bulked populations and
with 55 populations at different cycles of random mating
In the present study, the five bulked populations, each
equally mixed from 55 populations at different cycles of
random mating, were also grown in each of five groups
due to possible field variations. Multiple comparisons of
these five bulked populations and the mean of 55 populations at each cycle of random mating were conducted for
each group. As we expected, results showed that the five
mixed populations and mean of 55 populations did not
differ with regard to all traits measured except fiber
strength in group 2, lint percentage in group 3, boll
1
2
3
4
5
Replication
weight in group 4, and micronaire and lint percentage in
group 5 (data not shown). The occurrence of these exceptional cases was probably due to genetic sampling of
seeds. However, the mean of 55 populations was significantly different from the mean of 11 parents for most
traits in each of five groups (Table 4). Thus, these results
suggested that additive and dominance effects were mainly responsible for most of these traits measured.
However, the results also indicated the genetic sampling
might cause the slight inconsistence in this study.
Table 4. Generation means for nine fiber and agronomic traits over four replications.1
LEN
UR
STR
P
F2-bulk
LSD 0.05
28.50
28.92
0.21
83.04
82.79
0.26
29.80
30.36
0.51
P
C1S1
LSD 0.05
28.36
28.94
0.19
82.61
82.68
NS
29.70
30.16
NS
P
C0S1
LSD 0.05
P
C2S1
LSD 0.05
P
C3S1
LSD 0.05
28.57
28.88
0.20
28.61
28.89
0.18
28.60
28.88
0.20
83.00
82.63
0.28
82.87
82.64
0.23
82.91
82.60
0.27
ELO
8.46
8.34
0.10
MIC
4.97
4.84
0.08
LP
40.67
40.56
NS
BW
4.82
5.05
0.09
YLD
2005.2
2228.9
188.6
LY
817.0
904.4
77.1
30.11
30.19
NS
8.52
8.31
0.09
4.94
4.84
0.08
40.23
40.33
NS
4.87
5.03
0.09
2313.4
2214.4
NS
936.9
893.1
NS
30.08
29.98
NS
8.51
8.31
0.09
4.90
4.89
NS
40.24
40.41
NS
4.93
5.05
0.09
2031.2
2202.6
202.0
820.3
890.2
81.9
30.05
30.16
NS
8.56
8.29
0.09
8.49
8.29
0.09
4.95
4.88
0.08
4.90
4.87
NS
40.58
40.26
0.29
40.52
40.20
0.28
4.86
5.07
0.11
4.86
5.09
0.10
2133.9
2261.6
178.7
2052.9
2216.4
188.2
867.7
910.7
72.0
831.6
891.2
75.6
LEN = fiber length (mm), UR = fiber uniform ratio (%), STR = fiber strength (g/tex), ELO = fiber elongation (%), MIC = micronaire, LP = lint
percentage (%), BW = boll weight (g), YLD = seed cotton yield (kg/ha), and LY = lint yield (kg/ha).
1
Correlations at parent and different cycles of random mating
Parent
Regarding parents, fiber length was significantly
correlated with uniformity ratio (0.86), fiber strength
(0.50), elongation (-0.58), micronaire (-0.58), and lint
percentage (0.63) (Table 5). Uniformity ratio was significantly correlated with fiber strength (0.56), elongation (-0.33), micronaire (-0.45), lint percentage (0.35),
and boll weight (0.29). Fiber strength was significantly
correlated with micronaire (-0.42) and boll weight
(0.55). Elongation was significantly correlated with
micronaire (0.56) and lint percentage (-0.31).
Micronaire was correlated with boll weight (-0.44).
Lint percentage was significantly correlated with lint
yield (0.42). Lint yield and seed cotton yield were highly correlated with a coefficient of 0.98.
F2 Population
At the F2 generation, fiber length was significantly
correlated with uniformity ratio (0.75), fiber strength
(0.69), micronaire (-0.51), lint percentage (0.56), seed
cotton yield (0.32), and lint yield (0.29) (Table 5).
Uniformity ratio was correlated with fiber strength
(0.53) and lint percentage (0.49). Fiber strength was
correlated with micronaire (-0.36), lint percentage
(0.39), and boll weight (0.48). Elongation was correlated with micronaire (0.43). Lint yield and seed cotton
yield had a high correlation (0.99).
Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station
5
C0S1 Population
After one cycle of random mating, fiber length
had significant correlations with uniformity ratio
(0.61), fiber strength (0.46), and micronaire (-0.48).
Uniformity ratio had significant correlations with
fiber strength (0.54) and fiber elongation (0.44).
Fiber strength was correlated with fiber elongation
(0.39) and boll weight (0.34). Fiber elongation was
significantly correlated with micronaire (0.43). Seed
cotton yield had correlations with boll weight (0.33)
and lint yield (0.99).
C1S1 Population
After two cycles of random mating, fiber length
had significant correlations with uniformity ratio
(0.62), fiber strength (0.31) and lint percentage
(0.28) (Table 5). Uniformity ratio was significantly
correlated with fiber strength and lint percentage.
Fiber strength had correlations with fiber elongation
(0.47). Fiber elongation was significantly correlated
with micronaire (0.40). Micronaire was negatively
correlated with lint percentage (-0.37). Boll weight
was positively correlated with seed cotton yield
(0.39) and lint yield (0.37). Lint yield and seed cotton yield had a high correlation (0.99).
6
C2S1 Population
After three cycles of random mating, uniformity
ratio was correlated with fiber length (0.55) and fiber
strength (0.50) (Table 5). Elongation had significant
correlations with fiber strength (0.44), micronaire
(0.28), and lint percentage (0.27). Micronaire was correlated with lint percentage (0.33). Lint yield and seed
cotton yield had a high correlation (0.99).
C3S1 Population
After four cycles of random mating, fiber length was
correlated with uniformity ratio (0.50), seed cotton yield
(0.33), and lint yield (0.32) (Table 5). Uniformity ratio
had significant correlations with fiber strength (0.28),
fiber elongation (0.29), and boll weight (0.50). Fiber
strength was correlated with elongation (0.30) and boll
weight (0.34). Fiber elongation was correlated with
micronaire (0.40) and lint percentage (0.27). Micronaire
was correlated with lint percentage (0.43) and boll weight
(0.31). Lint percentage and boll weight were positively
correlated (0.29). Boll weight was positively correlated
with seed cotton yield (0.37) and lint yield (0.39). Lint
yield and seed cotton yield had a high correlation (0.99).
In summary, high correlations were detected
among traits for parents and F2 populations while
decreasing with increased cycles of random mating,
indicating that linkage blocks among these traits might
have been broken.
Evaluation of Cotton Populations for Agronomic and Fiber Traits after Different Cycles of Random Mating
Table 5. Correlations among nine traits for parents and bulked populations.1
UR
STR
ELO
MIC
LEN
UR
STR
ELO
MIC
LP
BW
YLD
0.86
0.50
0.56
-0.58
-0.33
-0.19
Parents
-0.58
-0.45
-0.42
0.56
LEN
UR
STR
ELO
MIC
LP
BW
YLD
0.75
0.69
0.53
-0.03
0.24
0.12
F2 Population
-0.51
-0.26
-0.36
0.43
LEN
UR
STR
ELO
MIC
LP
BW
YLD
0.61
0.46
0.54
0.00
0.44
0.39
C0 Population
-0.48
-0.09
-0.08
0.43
LEN
UR
STR
ELO
MIC
LP
BW
YLD
0.62
0.31
0.32
0.08
0.20
0.47
C1 Population
-0.05
0.13
0.16
0.40
0.55
0.18
0.50
-0.19
0.06
0.44
C2 Population
-0.05
0.14
0.22
0.28
LEN
UR
STR
ELO
MIC
LP
BW
YLD
0.50
0.26
0.28
0.14
0.29
0.30
C3 Population
-0.14
0.21
0.18
0.40
LEN
UR
STR
ELO
MIC
LP
BW
YLD
LP
BW
YLD
LY
0.63
0.35
-0.10
-0.31
0.02
0.22
0.29
0.55
-0.25
-0.44
-0.20
0.01
-0.08
-0.14
0.08
0.26
0.25
-0.08
0.08
-0.02
-0.15
0.02
0.26
0.42
-0.11
0.98
0.56
0.49
0.39
-0.22
-0.15
0.20
0.14
0.48
0.13
-0.23
0.03
0.32
0.14
0.18
-0.06
-0.09
0.09
0.19
0.39
0.21
0.23
-0.02
-0.11
0.23
0.19
0.99
0.17
0.22
0.09
-0.20
-0.22
0.18
0.12
0.34
0.01
0.03
0.12
0.13
0.02
0.04
0.13
-0.12
0.01
0.33
0.15
0.04
0.06
0.16
-0.10
0.12
0.31
0.99
0.28
0.34
0.21
-0.20
-0.37
0.20
0.16
0.09
0.12
0.07
0.05
0.23
0.18
0.07
-0.05
-0.02
0.08
0.39
-0.18
0.10
0.23
0.27
0.33
0.05
0.07
0.14
0.03
0.14
0.10
0.07
0.06
0.02
0.14
0.02
0.06
0.18
0.26
0.22
0.10
-0.03
0.03
0.19
0.37
0.99
-0.08
0.02
0.08
0.27
0.43
0.14
0.50
0.34
0.23
0.31
0.29
0.33
0.26
0.09
0.17
0.10
0.05
0.37
0.05
0.07
0.05
0.17
0.05
0.17
0.17
0.99
0.32
0.26
0.10
0.20
0.14
0.14
0.39
1.00
1
Correlation coefficient (≥ 0.27 or ≤ -0.27) is significant at 0.05 and correlation coefficient (≥ 0.34 or ≤ -0.34) is significant at 0.01. LEN = fiber
length (mm), UR = fiber uniform ratio (%), STR = fiber strength (g/tex), ELO = fiber elongation (%), MIC = micronaire, LP = lint percentage
(%), BW = boll weight (g), YLD = seed cotton yield (kg/ha), and LY = lint yield (kg/ha).
Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station
7
Correlations among different cycles of random mating for each trait
Regarding fiber length, F2 populations were correlated
with C0S1 populations (0.65) and C1S1 population (0.28)
(Table 6). C0S1 populations and C1S1 populations had significant correlation (0.40). There were no significant correlations with C2S1 and C3S1 populations or within C2S1 and
C3S1 populations. Regarding fiber uniformity ratio, only the
F2 and C0S1 populations had significant correlation (0.63).
Regarding fiber strength, significant correlations were
detected between the F2 and C0S1 (0.65), F2 and C1S1 (0.43),
and C0S1 and C1S1 (0.31). A significant correlation was also
detected between C1S1 and C3S1 (0.28). Regarding fiber
elongation, significant correlations were detected between
C0S1
F2
C0S1
C1S1
C2S1
0.65
F2
C0S1
C1S1
C2S1
0.63
F2
C0S1
C1S1
C2S1
0.65
F2
C0S1
C1S1
C2S1
0.66
F2
C0S1
C1S1
C2S1
0.55
F2 and C0S1 (0.66), F2 and C1S1 (0.38). Regarding micronaire, significant correlations were detected between F2 and
C0S1 (0.55), F2 and C1S1 (0.34) (Table 6).
Significant correlations were detected for lint percentage between F2 and C0S1 (0.49), F2 and C1S1 (0.45), and F2
and C2S1 (0.40). Significant correlations were detected for
boll weight between F2 and C0S1 (0.44), F2 and C1S1 (0.46),
and C0S1 and C1S1 (0.38). No significant correlations were
detected among different cycles of random mating for both
seed cotton yield and lint yield (Table 6). In summary,
higher correlations between F2 and C0S1 were detected than
those among other generations for most traits.
Table 6. Correlation among different generations for fiber and agronomic traits.1
C1S1
C2S1
Fiber Length (mm)
0.28
0.15
0.40
0.10
Fiber Uniform Ratio (%)
0.19
-0.08
0.10
-0.15
0.10
Fiber Strength (g/tex)
0.43
0.16
0.31
0.15
0.08
Fiber Elongation (%)
0.38
-0.09
0.25
-0.04
-0.16
Micronaire
0.34
0.17
-0.18
-0.10
-0.15
C3S1
C0S1
0.07
0.03
0.17
0.04
F2
C0S1
C1S1
C2S1
0.49
0.15
0.04
-0.21
0.07
F2
C0S1
C1S1
C2S1
0.44
-0.02
0.09
0.28
-0.02
F2
C0S1
C1S1
C2S1
0.16
0.03
0.11
0.06
0.17
F2
C0S1
C1S1
C2S1
0.17
C1S1
C2S1
Lint Percentage (%)
0.45
0.40
0.17
0.10
0.18
Boll Weight (g)
0.46
-0.05
0.38
-0.12
0.13
Seed Cotton Yield (kg/ha)
0.18
-0.25
0.14
0.13
0.03
Lint Yield (kg/ha)
0.19
-0.23
0.12
0.15
0.04
C3S1
0.11
-0.16
0.06
0.21
0.13
0.05
-0.10
0.07
0.10
-0.06
0.02
-0.17
0.11
-0.05
0.06
-0.17
-0.09
0.01
-0.03
0.17
Correlation coefficient (≥ 0.27 or ≤ -0.27) is significant at 0.05 and correlation coefficient (≥ 0.34 or ≤ -0.34) is significant at 0.01.
1
Multiple comparisons among populations for different cycles of random mating
The mean values for 11 parents, five cycles of bulked
populations, and 55 populations with different cycles of
random mating are summarized in Tables 7 to 11.
F2 Hybrid Populations
Twenty-eight F2 hybrids had fiber length greater than
28 mm. Eight out of 55 F2 hybrids had fiber length greater
than 29 mm. Among them, six were from Acala Ultima as
parent and two were from C315 (Table 7). All F2 hybrids
except DP90×M240 had fiber uniformity ratio greater than
8
81%. Nineteen F2 hybrids had uniformity ratio greater than
82%. Ten out of 55 F2 hybrids had fiber strength greater
than 30 g/tex, and six F2 hybrids had fiber strength greater
than 31 g/tex. One F2 hybrid (FM966 × Acala Ultima) had
fiber strength of 35.88 g/tex, which was higher than the
best parent Acala Ultima (33.05 g/tex). Eighteen F2 hybrids
had fiber elongation greater than 8%. Eleven F2 hybrids
had micronaire readings less than 5, and only one hybrid
(PSC355 × M240) had a micronaire greater than 5. The
remaining F2 hybrids were not significantly different from
Evaluation of Cotton Populations for Agronomic and Fiber Traits after Different Cycles of Random Mating
5. More than half of the F2 hybrids (33) had lint percentage
greater than 39%, 18 were greater than 40%, and three
were greater than 41%. No F2 hybrids were less than 39%.
Ten F2 hybrids had boll weights greater than 5 g, while
seven F2 hybrids were less than 5 g. Five F2 hybrids produced more than 2,000 kg/ha of seed cotton, and the
remaining F2 hybrids did not differ from 2,000 kg/ha. Six
F2 hybrids produced more than 800 kg/ha of lint, and one
F2 hybrid (DP90 × HS26) produced more than 900 kg/ha
(Table 7).
C0S1 Population
(after one cycle of random mating)
Twenty-six populations were greater than 28 mm for
2.5% fiber span length, and only one population (ST474 ×
Acala Ultima) was greater than 29 mm. All populations
except HS26 × M240 were greater than 80% for fiber uniformity ratio, 43 were greater than 81%, and nine were
greater than 82% (Table 8). Three populations were greater
than 30 g/tex for fiber strength, and one population was
greater than 31 g/tex. Fourteen populations were greater
than 8% for fiber elongation. Seven populations had a
micronaire value less than 5, and the remaining populations were not different from 5. Thirty populations were
greater than 39% for lint percentage, and five populations
were greater than 40%. All populations had boll weights
greater than 4 g, and two populations were greater than 5
g. No population had a boll weight greater than 5.5 g. Five
populations had seed cotton yields greater than 2,000
kg/ha, and all other populations did not differ from 2,000
kg/ha. Five populations were greater than 800 kg/ha for lint
yield, and one population was greater than 1,000 kg/ha.
Three populations were less than 1,000 kg/ha for lint yield,
and one population was less than 900 kg/ha.
C1S1 Population
(after two cycles of random mating)
After two cycles of random mating, 36 populations
were greater than 28 mm for fiber length, and the remaining populations were not different from 28 mm (Table 9).
All populations were greater than 80% for fiber uniformity ratio, 47 populations were greater than 81%, and seven
populations were greater than 82%. Thirty populations
were greater than 28 g/tex for fiber strength, seven populations were greater than 29 g/tex, and one population
(PSC355 × FM966) was greater than 30 g/tex. Twelve populations were greater than 8% for fiber elongation. Five
populations were less than 5 for fiber micronaire, and one
population was greater than 5. The remaining populations
were not different from 5 for micronaire. Fifty-three populations were greater than 38% for lint percentage, seven
populations were greater than 39%, and three populations
were greater than 40%. Five populations were greater than
5 g for boll weight, and four were less than 5 g. Four populations were greater than 2,000 kg/ha for seed cotton
yield; most of the remaining populations were numerically
greater than 2,000 kg/ha, but this difference was not significant. Four populations were greater than 800 kg/ha for lint
yield.
C2S1 Population
(after three cycles of random mating)
After three cycles of random mating, 28 populations
were greater than 28 mm for fiber length, and no population was greater than 29 mm (Table 10). All populations
were greater than 80% for fiber uniformity ratio, 48 populations were greater than 81%, and nine populations were
greater than 82%. Twenty-seven populations were greater
than 28 g/tex for fiber strength, seven populations were
greater than 29 g/tex, and two populations (ST474 ×
ST825 and ST474 × FM966) were greater than 30 g/tex.
Fourteen populations were greater than 8% for fiber elongation. One population (HS26 × ST825, 4.6) was less than
5 for fiber micronaire, and no population was greater than
5. Fifty-three populations were greater than 38% for lint
percentage, 38 populations were greater than 39%, and
seven populations were greater than 40%. Four populations were greater than 5 g for boll weight, and three populations were less than 5 g. One population (ST474 ×
C315) produced 2,826 kg/ha of seed cotton yield. Four
populations produced more than 700 kg/ha of lint.
C3S1 Population
(after four cycles of random mating)
After four cycles of random mating, 29 populations
were greater than 28 mm for fiber length, and no population was greater than 29mm (Table 11). Fifty-four populations were greater than 80% for fiber uniformity ratio, 50
populations were greater than 81%, and eight populations
were greater than 82%. Thirty-one populations were
greater than 28 g/tex for fiber strength, six populations
were greater than 29 g/tex, and no population was greater
than 30 g/tex. Fifteen populations were greater than 8% for
fiber elongation. Three populations (M240 × Pyramid,
4.63; DP90 × C315, 4.55; and ST474 × DP90, 4.6, respectively) were less than 5 for fiber micronaire, and no population was greater than 5. Fifty-one populations were
greater than 38% for lint percentage, 25 populations were
greater than 39%, and four populations were greater than
40%. Two populations were greater than 5 g for boll
weight, and only one population (SG747 × C315, 4.5 g)
was less than 5 g. One population (ST825 × C315, 2,844
kg/ha) was greater than 2,000 kg/ha for seed cotton yield.
Ten populations were greater than 700 kg/ha for lint, and
one population was greater 800 kg/ha.
Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station
9
Generation
Parent
Bulk
F2
Table 7. Mean comparisons among parents, five bulk populations, and 55 F2 populations.1
Entry
Acala Ultima
Pyramid
Coker 315
ST 825
FM 966
M 240
PM HS26
DP 90
SG 747
PSC 355
ST 474
F2 bulk
C0S1 bulk
C1 S1 bulk
C2 S1 bulk
C3 S1 bulk
Pyramid x Acala
C315 x Acala U
ST825 x Acala U
FM966 x Acala U
M240 x Acala U
HS26 x Acala U
DP90 x Acala U
SG747 x Acala U
PSC355 x Acala U
ST474 x Acala U
C315 x Pyramid
ST825 x Pyramid
FM966 x Pyramid
M240 x Pyramid
HS26 x Pyramid
DP90 x Pyramid
SG747 x Pyramid
PSC355 x Pyramid
ST474 x Pyramid
ST825 x C315
FM966 x C315
M240 x C315
HS26 x C315
DP90 x C315
SG747 x C315
PSC355 x C315
ST474 x C315
FM966 x ST825
M240 x ST825
HS26 x ST825
DP90 x ST825
SG747 x ST825
PSC355 x ST825
ST474 x ST825
M240 x FM966
HS26 x FM966
DP90 x FM966
SG747 x FM966
PSC355 x FM966
ST474 x FM966
HS26 x M240
DP90 x M240
SG747 x M240
PSC355 x M240
ST474 x M240
DP90 x HS26
SG747 x HS26
PSC355 x HS26
ST474 x HS26
SG747 x DP90
PSC355 x DP90
ST474 x DP90
PSC355 x SG747
ST474 x SG747
ST474 x PSC355
LSD 0.05
LEN
31.12
27.62
29.15
28.45
29.91
26.29
27.37
28.51
28.70
28.61
27.81
28.83
29.02
28.45
28.64
28.83
29.21
30.23
30.42
30.61
29.21
29.59
30.10
30.04
29.53
30.48
29.21
28.19
29.08
27.50
27.43
28.19
28.96
28.32
28.32
28.89
30.04
28.19
28.89
29.91
29.15
29.34
28.83
29.78
28.26
28.70
28.51
29.08
29.15
28.13
28.07
28.70
29.34
29.21
29.46
29.85
27.37
27.88
28.26
28.64
28.00
28.89
28.58
28.07
28.45
28.89
29.15
28.38
28.64
28.51
29.08
0.91
UR
84.63
82.75
82.95
82.38
84.50
81.95
82.55
82.28
83.60
83.36
82.50
82.63
82.93
82.45
82.13
82.43
82.93
83.73
84.30
84.08
82.65
83.75
82.50
83.65
83.68
83.93
83.05
82.50
82.83
82.45
82.05
81.63
83.43
82.60
82.55
82.88
83.45
82.03
82.13
83.35
82.50
83.98
82.25
82.63
82.38
81.93
81.85
82.78
83.45
82.33
82.45
82.38
83.30
83.28
83.60
83.65
81.15
81.08
82.78
82.38
82.00
81.88
83.25
82.50
82.20
81.88
82.70
82.58
82.93
83.15
84.05
1.13
STR
33.05
28.45
28.60
27.00
34.50
29.95
29.35
29.58
27.63
30.76
28.95
29.98
30.58
30.98
29.98
30.35
31.63
34.08
32.58
35.88
33.90
32.30
33.60
31.88
31.78
33.98
28.50
27.68
31.48
28.45
30.33
29.38
28.93
29.90
28.78
28.78
32.98
30.28
29.73
29.90
29.98
29.20
27.80
30.50
28.75
30.30
28.25
28.33
29.55
27.78
31.20
32.73
30.50
30.00
33.55
31.88
27.53
28.60
30.93
30.73
28.75
30.45
29.48
30.33
28.93
29.03
30.38
30.28
28.53
28.48
30.70
2.26
ELO
7.90
8.58
7.90
7.68
7.95
9.03
8.85
8.50
8.85
9.28
8.55
8.15
8.40
8.20
8.35
8.35
8.20
8.35
8.35
8.25
8.40
8.40
8.10
8.50
8.95
8.43
7.98
7.90
8.00
8.15
8.63
8.10
8.40
8.73
8.30
7.90
8.10
8.15
8.25
7.98
8.30
8.68
7.90
7.95
7.90
8.35
7.68
8.33
8.50
8.05
8.08
8.35
7.90
8.40
8.60
8.25
8.35
8.05
8.65
8.90
8.35
8.25
8.70
8.83
8.70
8.68
8.68
8.20
8.98
8.85
8.75
0.42
MIC
4.08
5.35
4.68
4.90
4.85
5.25
4.85
5.10
5.10
5.14
5.40
4.75
5.08
4.75
4.80
5.05
4.55
4.50
4.55
4.45
4.70
4.60
4.53
4.50
4.73
4.68
4.58
4.83
4.50
5.13
4.90
4.90
4.68
5.00
4.98
4.65
4.83
4.73
4.95
4.68
4.65
4.83
4.55
5.05
5.03
4.93
4.88
4.90
5.05
5.03
4.88
4.80
4.48
4.95
5.23
4.88
5.18
4.65
5.10
5.45
4.88
4.85
5.00
5.05
4.88
4.73
5.08
4.78
5.10
5.13
5.03
0.35
LP
39.92
39.90
41.21
40.14
43.29
38.03
37.68
40.66
42.32
41.18
43.09
41.07
40.73
40.20
39.82
39.70
41.76
40.90
41.21
42.12
40.01
40.18
41.53
42.06
42.09
42.56
39.66
39.81
39.53
39.05
38.92
40.46
39.17
40.46
41.66
39.96
41.18
39.37
39.27
39.73
41.58
40.49
39.82
40.62
39.15
39.90
41.46
40.89
39.91
40.85
39.46
40.00
40.55
42.12
41.80
42.20
38.23
40.40
41.01
39.91
39.60
39.86
39.79
39.28
40.38
41.16
40.58
41.22
41.78
42.61
41.49
1.25
BW
5.62
4.94
4.73
4.23
5.18
4.94
5.19
4.39
4.66
4.62
4.51
4.74
5.14
5.07
5.11
4.75
5.99
5.63
5.28
5.29
5.54
5.76
5.16
5.52
4.78
4.93
5.14
4.78
5.14
5.02
5.34
4.80
4.32
4.91
5.07
4.94
5.67
5.65
5.33
4.89
5.01
5.06
5.05
5.32
5.43
4.67
4.60
5.04
4.39
4.77
5.24
5.87
4.56
5.16
5.14
5.22
5.02
4.70
5.70
4.97
5.14
4.73
5.00
4.88
5.20
4.42
4.28
4.42
4.49
4.61
4.83
0.40
YLD
1482
1484
2085
1895
1961
2083
1900
2775
1626
2368
2398
1609
2431
1573
1934
2234
1815
2196
1956
2174
2293
2278
2286
2845
2532
1647
1591
1900
2641
1340
1615
1687
1941
2370
1994
2936
2938
1951
2450
2810
2496
2837
2356
2671
2311
1956
2363
2243
2133
1939
2415
2762
1804
2345
2035
2724
2182
2115
2416
2040
1990
3252
1754
2260
2247
1785
2349
1958
2059
2081
2523
831
LY
592
592
859
761
849
792
716
1128
688
976
1033
661
990
632
770
887
758
898
806
916
917
915
949
1196
1066
701
631
756
1044
523
629
683
760
959
830
1173
1210
768
962
1116
1038
1149
938
1085
905
780
980
917
851
792
953
1105
731
988
851
1149
834
854
991
814
788
1296
698
888
907
735
953
807
860
887
1047
340
1
LEN = fiber length (mm), UR = fiber uniform ratio (%), STR = fiber strength (g/tex), ELO = fiber elongation (%), MIC = micronaire, LP = lint
percentage (%), BW = boll weight (g), YLD = seed cotton yield (kg/ha), and LY = lint yield (kg/ha).
10
Evaluation of Cotton Populations for Agronomic and Fiber Traits after Different Cycles of Random Mating
Generation
Parent
Bulk
C0S1
Table 8. Mean comparisons among parents, five bulk populations, and 55 C0S1 populations.
Entry
Acala Ultima
Pyramid
Coker 315
ST 825
FM 966
M 240
PM HS26
DP 90
SG 747
PSC 355
ST 474
F2 bulk
C0S1 bulk
C1 S1 bulk
C2 S1 bulk
C3 S1 bulk
Pyramid x Acala
C315 x Acala U
ST825 x Acala U
FM966 x Acala U
M240 x Acala U
HS26 x Acala U
DP90 x Acala U
SG747 x Acala U
PSC355 x Acala U
ST474 x Acala U
C315 x Pyramid
ST825 x Pyramid
FM966 x Pyramid
M240 x Pyramid
HS26 x Pyramid
DP90 x Pyramid
SG747 x Pyramid
PSC355 x Pyramid
ST474 x Pyramid
ST825 x C315
FM966 x C315
M240 x C315
HS26 x C315
DP90 x C315
SG747 x C315
PSC355 x C315
ST474 x C315
FM966 x ST825
M240 x ST825
HS26 x ST825
DP90 x ST825
SG747 x ST825
PSC355 x ST825
ST474 x ST825
M240 x FM966
HS26 x FM966
DP90 x FM966
SG747 x FM966
PSC355 x FM966
ST474 x FM966
HS26 x M240
DP90 x M240
SG747 x M240
PSC355 x M240
ST474 x M240
DP90 x HS26
SG747 x HS26
PSC355 x HS26
ST474 x HS26
SG747 x DP90
PSC355 x DP90
ST474 x DP90
PSC355 x SG747
ST474 x SG747
ST474 x PSC355
LSD 0.05
LEN
30.48
27.56
29.34
29.02
28.77
26.54
27.81
29.15
28.58
28.89
28.13
28.77
29.59
29.21
29.27
28.77
28.96
29.40
29.21
29.40
28.96
29.02
29.46
29.40
29.27
30.42
28.83
28.26
29.21
28.13
28.45
28.89
29.46
29.15
28.83
28.77
29.72
28.58
28.07
29.53
28.83
28.19
29.21
28.45
28.64
27.69
29.08
29.27
29.27
28.58
28.58
28.83
29.65
29.08
29.46
28.83
27.50
28.70
28.51
28.83
27.69
28.58
28.64
29.40
28.58
28.77
28.96
28.77
28.77
28.51
29.40
0.91
UR
84.73
82.70
83.23
82.83
83.28
81.68
83.13
82.48
83.18
83.35
82.40
83.13
83.48
83.25
82.65
82.30
82.15
83.33
82.90
82.88
82.68
82.98
82.93
83.73
83.43
83.58
83.15
82.70
82.70
82.50
81.95
82.18
83.08
83.43
82.65
82.23
82.35
82.70
81.60
82.68
82.30
82.73
82.43
81.58
82.45
82.53
81.73
81.93
83.10
82.38
81.95
82.73
83.28
83.35
83.43
83.00
81.20
82.20
82.75
82.73
82.05
82.33
83.00
83.65
82.53
82.58
82.28
82.15
82.78
82.35
82.95
1.22
STR
34.33
28.63
28.40
28.28
32.65
29.73
31.93
30.43
27.28
29.99
29.58
30.78
32.33
31.13
29.15
30.28
30.75
31.40
31.70
33.70
31.65
31.33
32.00
31.10
31.45
31.00
30.45
30.63
31.23
30.13
29.68
28.13
28.43
32.75
29.90
29.55
31.35
30.28
28.35
29.98
29.05
29.00
29.10
28.15
29.15
28.13
29.48
27.90
30.63
29.55
30.20
31.53
32.08
31.38
30.83
30.25
30.05
29.78
30.43
31.20
29.10
30.05
30.25
29.48
30.40
29.65
29.95
28.68
28.48
28.18
31.50
2.07
ELO
7.98
8.55
7.95
7.80
7.95
9.13
9.10
8.30
9.08
9.18
8.68
8.50
8.30
8.25
8.25
8.35
8.30
8.20
8.30
8.50
8.35
8.35
8.35
8.30
8.63
8.30
8.30
8.35
7.95
8.45
8.10
8.05
8.23
8.73
8.30
8.25
8.20
8.20
8.15
7.78
8.35
8.35
8.15
8.05
8.20
8.20
8.00
8.10
8.40
8.25
8.15
8.50
8.30
8.58
8.37
8.15
8.35
8.30
8.55
8.68
8.30
8.25
8.50
8.63
8.40
8.30
8.55
8.25
8.55
8.35
8.30
0.39
MIC
4.28
5.35
4.58
5.00
4.73
4.83
5.33
4.93
5.05
5.04
5.25
4.80
4.95
5.10
4.95
4.98
4.70
4.50
4.73
4.88
4.83
4.70
4.80
4.78
4.50
4.58
4.85
4.93
4.60
5.10
4.75
4.88
4.60
5.00
5.00
4.88
4.80
4.95
4.83
4.45
4.65
5.00
4.65
4.75
5.08
5.05
4.60
4.78
4.68
4.80
4.95
4.75
4.90
5.05
4.83
4.88
4.90
4.68
5.23
5.33
5.08
5.00
4.73
4.98
4.80
5.08
5.00
4.98
4.88
4.98
4.90
0.38
LP
40.96
40.34
38.99
39.86
41.37
38.26
36.59
39.95
42.32
40.49
43.44
41.35
40.87
40.02
40.43
40.90
39.16
40.47
41.02
41.93
39.50
41.13
40.07
41.20
41.03
40.72
39.94
40.73
39.68
39.53
40.18
40.12
39.35
39.71
40.72
39.39
40.16
39.24
38.71
39.42
39.80
41.22
40.58
41.48
40.91
40.01
40.31
40.62
39.03
40.15
40.43
39.55
40.33
41.54
41.55
40.54
39.17
39.63
40.11
40.77
40.92
39.09
39.56
40.66
40.85
41.89
41.89
40.68
40.17
41.17
40.43
1.24
BW
5.87
4.96
4.59
4.35
5.39
4.15
5.48
4.72
5.21
4.05
4.85
4.93
5.05
5.39
5.09
4.83
5.10
5.13
5.22
5.53
5.23
5.41
5.18
5.42
4.79
5.25
5.11
4.96
5.17
4.96
5.13
5.29
5.51
5.34
4.62
5.15
5.14
5.34
5.36
5.07
4.93
4.72
4.50
4.95
5.12
4.96
5.07
4.97
4.72
4.60
5.44
5.37
4.99
5.19
5.42
4.61
5.22
4.43
5.32
5.13
4.72
5.12
4.74
4.88
4.95
4.88
4.77
4.83
4.82
4.61
4.50
0.44
YLD
1748
1290
2614
2419
3201
742
2159
2915
3360
2349
2649
2276
1994
1992
2411
2435
2336
1905
2449
2672
2018
2371
1972
2308
2912
2452
2599
1334
2078
2272
2010
1959
1917
2709
2112
2356
1945
2396
2744
2875
2893
2044
1492
2065
2728
2138
2724
2352
2209
1589
1805
2888
2002
1921
2282
1823
2080
1307
2286
1989
1524
2232
1932
2110
2624
1889
3253
2707
2326
2467
1409
783
LY
716
520
1019
964
1324
284
790
1165
1422
950
1151
941
815
797
975
996
915
771
1005
1120
797
975
790
951
1195
999
1038
543
825
898
808
786
754
1076
860
928
781
940
1062
1133
1151
842
605
857
1116
855
1098
956
862
638
730
1142
807
798
948
739
815
518
917
811
623
873
764
858
1072
791
1363
1101
934
1016
570
316
1
LEN = fiber length (mm), UR = fiber uniform ratio (%), STR = fiber strength (g/tex), ELO = fiber elongation (%), MIC = micronaire, LP = lint
percentage (%), BW = boll weight (g), YLD = seed cotton yield (kg/ha), and LY = lint yield (kg/ha).
Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station
11
Generation
Parent
Bulk
C1S1
Table 9. Mean comparisons among parents, five bulk populations, and 55 C1S1 populations.1
Entry
Acala Ultima
Pyramid
Coker 315
ST 825
FM 966
M 240
PM HS26
DP 90
SG 747
PSC 355
ST 474
F2 bulk
C0S1 bulk
C1 S1 bulk
C2 S1 bulk
C3 S1 bulk
Pyramid x Acala
C315 x Acala U
ST825 x Acala U
FM966 x Acala U
M240 x Acala U
HS26 x Acala U
DP90 x Acala U
SG747 x Acala U
PSC355 x Acala U
ST474 x Acala U
C315 x Pyramid
ST825 x Pyramid
FM966 x Pyramid
M240 x Pyramid
HS26 x Pyramid
DP90 x Pyramid
SG747 x Pyramid
PSC355 x Pyramid
ST474 x Pyramid
ST825 x C315
FM966 x C315
M240 x C315
HS26 x C315
DP90 x C315
SG747 x C315
PSC355 x C315
ST474 x C315
FM966 x ST825
M240 x ST825
HS26 x ST825
DP90 x ST825
SG747 x ST825
PSC355 x ST825
ST474 x ST825
M240 x FM966
HS26 x FM966
DP90 x FM966
SG747 x FM966
PSC355 x FM966
ST474 x FM966
HS26 x M240
DP90 x M240
SG747 x M240
PSC355 x M240
ST474 x M240
DP90 x HS26
SG747 x HS26
PSC355 x HS26
ST474 x HS26
SG747 x DP90
PSC355 x DP90
ST474 x DP90
PSC355 x SG747
ST474 x SG747
ST474 x PSC355
LSD 0.05
LEN
29.59
27.50
29.02
28.51
29.15
26.54
27.69
29.02
28.13
28.67
28.13
29.15
29.08
28.77
29.08
28.89
29.15
29.65
28.38
29.59
28.77
29.02
29.02
29.15
29.27
28.89
28.70
27.69
28.89
29.02
28.70
28.00
29.02
28.83
28.77
29.21
28.89
28.58
28.38
28.89
28.96
28.51
29.46
28.45
29.15
28.77
29.34
29.15
28.89
28.51
29.21
28.58
28.83
29.53
29.53
29.15
28.45
29.34
29.04
28.64
28.38
29.40
29.08
29.02
28.77
29.65
29.72
29.15
28.96
28.58
29.08
0.82
UR
83.45
82.18
82.28
83.13
82.88
81.50
82.18
82.68
82.65
83.29
82.53
82.50
82.98
82.50
82.20
82.38
83.03
82.98
82.25
83.43
82.03
83.23
83.08
82.95
82.70
82.70
82.10
82.38
82.38
82.23
82.45
81.85
83.13
82.48
82.75
83.03
83.33
82.43
81.98
82.43
83.00
82.15
83.50
82.45
82.35
82.90
82.88
83.53
83.03
82.00
83.43
82.03
81.55
83.30
82.93
83.15
82.50
82.83
82.53
82.38
82.33
82.83
82.38
83.20
82.68
82.83
82.95
82.25
82.95
82.70
82.83
1.17
STR
31.30
27.80
29.13
28.93
31.93
29.28
31.18
31.13
26.98
31.40
27.70
29.85
30.53
30.38
29.30
28.95
30.33
31.13
30.13
30.93
29.73
30.78
30.45
31.53
30.88
31.70
29.98
29.65
30.95
30.33
31.63
30.25
30.98
29.95
30.53
28.00
30.65
29.35
28.28
29.25
30.48
29.80
30.28
29.83
29.25
28.95
30.90
31.13
29.35
29.33
30.45
30.98
29.85
29.83
32.85
31.23
30.18
30.63
29.43
31.25
28.80
30.80
28.28
29.38
29.25
30.25
30.83
28.20
30.18
29.50
29.93
1.99
ELO
8.05
8.55
7.90
8.15
8.00
9.05
9.18
8.63
8.78
9.54
8.30
8.15
8.45
8.40
8.50
8.25
8.25
8.35
8.35
8.15
8.00
8.45
8.45
8.40
8.45
8.30
8.50
8.35
8.45
8.35
8.40
8.20
8.30
8.48
8.20
8.00
8.20
8.05
8.05
8.20
8.40
8.10
8.35
8.40
7.85
8.10
8.30
8.15
8.30
8.40
8.63
8.20
8.15
8.10
8.58
8.30
8.25
8.20
8.37
8.65
8.05
8.10
8.25
8.35
8.40
8.53
8.40
8.00
8.58
8.45
8.38
0.41
MIC
4.18
5.33
4.55
5.08
4.90
4.98
5.25
5.05
4.80
5.26
5.08
5.00
4.98
4.78
4.95
4.93
4.90
4.80
4.75
4.58
4.65
4.75
5.08
4.88
4.83
4.75
4.83
5.00
4.98
4.80
5.08
4.83
4.90
4.88
4.93
4.90
4.90
4.88
4.93
5.05
4.65
4.88
4.88
4.78
4.53
5.20
5.08
4.78
5.05
5.03
5.18
4.88
4.68
4.88
5.03
4.90
4.88
4.73
4.80
5.35
4.85
4.95
4.68
4.88
4.43
5.05
4.93
4.78
5.08
4.93
5.05
0.34
LP
40.88
40.25
41.48
40.68
42.06
37.58
36.94
40.08
42.28
40.79
43.30
40.82
40.55
41.16
41.39
40.39
41.55
40.11
40.04
41.80
39.99
40.70
42.35
39.96
39.89
40.97
39.75
39.58
40.27
39.74
40.23
39.32
40.31
40.16
40.73
40.08
40.24
39.42
39.79
40.64
39.13
40.92
40.00
40.05
39.50
40.84
40.47
40.15
40.55
40.54
41.05
39.69
40.64
41.19
41.08
40.79
40.11
39.62
40.77
40.05
38.50
39.31
40.06
40.43
37.83
40.55
39.79
40.09
40.84
41.49
40.56
1.28
BW
5.41
4.97
4.57
4.39
5.72
5.17
5.35
4.45
4.76
4.29
4.36
5.12
5.17
5.11
5.12
4.96
5.45
5.47
5.18
5.03
5.24
5.37
5.25
4.75
4.95
5.20
5.26
4.81
4.88
5.44
5.23
4.33
5.41
4.79
4.91
5.30
5.18
5.37
5.25
5.43
4.90
4.71
5.17
5.25
5.17
5.03
5.22
4.91
4.57
4.65
5.40
5.26
4.81
5.45
5.31
4.95
5.09
4.94
4.83
5.20
5.10
5.24
5.03
4.74
5.41
4.43
4.85
5.09
4.90
4.44
5.12
0.42
YLD
1616
1485
2024
1926
2914
2752
1662
2303
2471
2006
2314
2102
2501
2275
2527
1761
2410
2169
2424
2700
2166
2257
2510
1853
2282
1950
2131
1660
1853
1915
1903
1624
2089
2436
2141
2186
2949
2990
2219
2264
2108
1716
2774
2128
1722
2326
2559
1886
2670
1286
2282
2879
2934
2320
2948
2661
2599
2017
2291
2339
2192
2430
2161
1780
2772
2024
1967
2696
2245
1944
2654
791
LY
661
598
839
784
1225
1034
614
923
1045
820
1002
858
1014
936
1046
711
1001
870
971
1129
866
919
1063
740
910
799
847
657
746
761
766
639
842
978
872
876
1186
1179
883
920
825
702
1110
852
680
950
1036
757
1083
521
937
1143
1192
955
1211
1085
1042
799
934
937
844
955
866
720
1049
821
783
1081
917
806
1077
319
1
LEN = fiber length (mm), UR = fiber uniform ratio (%), STR = fiber strength (g/tex), ELO = fiber elongation (%), MIC = micronaire, LP = lint
percentage (%), BW = boll weight (g), YLD = seed cotton yield (kg/ha), and LY = lint yield (kg/ha).
12
Evaluation of Cotton Populations for Agronomic and Fiber Traits after Different Cycles of Random Mating
Generation
Parent
Bulk
C2S1
Table 10. Mean comparisons among parents, five bulk populations, and 55 C2S1 populations.1
Entry
Acala Ultima
Pyramid
Coker 315
ST 825
FM 966
M 240
PM HS26
DP 90
SG 747
PSC 355
ST 474
F2 bulk
C0S1 bulk
C1 S1 bulk
C2 S1 bulk
C3 S1 bulk
Pyramid x Acala
C315 x Acala U
ST825 x Acala U
FM966 x Acala U
M240 x Acala U
HS26 x Acala U
DP90 x Acala U
SG747 x Acala U
PSC355 x Acala U
ST474 x Acala U
C315 x Pyramid
ST825 x Pyramid
FM966 x Pyramid
M240 x Pyramid
HS26 x Pyramid
DP90 x Pyramid
SG747 x Pyramid
PSC355 x Pyramid
ST474 x Pyramid
ST825 x C315
FM966 x C315
M240 x C315
HS26 x C315
DP90 x C315
SG747 x C315
PSC355 x C315
ST474 x C315
FM966 x ST825
M240 x ST825
HS26 x ST825
DP90 x ST825
SG747 x ST825
PSC355 x ST825
ST474 x ST825
M240 x FM966
HS26 x FM966
DP90 x FM966
SG747 x FM966
PSC355 x FM966
ST474 x FM966
HS26 x M240
DP90 x M240
SG747 x M240
PSC355 x M240
ST474 x M240
DP90 x HS26
SG747 x HS26
PSC355 x HS26
ST474 x HS26
SG747 x DP90
PSC355 x DP90
ST474 x DP90
PSC355 x SG747
ST474 x SG747
ST474 x PSC355
LSD 0.05
LEN
30.80
27.31
29.27
28.77
29.21
26.92
27.81
29.08
28.70
28.73
28.07
29.02
28.38
29.08
28.96
28.89
29.08
29.02
29.53
28.58
28.83
29.08
28.77
29.08
28.77
28.83
29.08
28.38
28.70
29.08
29.15
28.38
28.38
28.70
28.38
29.40
28.70
29.08
28.13
29.59
29.27
29.08
29.27
29.08
28.38
28.51
29.34
28.83
29.27
28.83
28.89
28.70
29.15
29.72
29.27
28.58
29.34
29.40
28.32
28.89
28.89
28.26
29.21
28.38
29.27
28.77
29.53
28.38
28.64
28.45
28.51
0.84
UR
84.45
81.50
82.90
83.58
83.13
81.80
82.43
83.58
82.45
83.29
82.45
83.28
82.68
82.60
83.33
82.35
82.98
82.43
82.65
82.60
82.38
82.50
83.38
83.18
82.50
82.18
83.30
82.05
82.90
82.00
82.83
82.10
82.15
81.88
82.30
82.73
82.93
82.83
82.28
83.45
82.88
82.38
83.05
83.90
82.30
82.38
82.45
82.93
82.80
83.03
82.70
82.65
82.83
82.68
83.08
82.95
82.73
83.60
82.28
83.23
83.10
81.90
82.38
82.25
82.93
82.75
82.85
81.93
81.75
82.35
81.98
1.07
STR
33.75
28.03
28.98
29.53
33.30
29.85
30.43
31.20
27.18
30.63
27.98
30.53
30.00
29.98
30.95
28.90
30.05
29.05
30.80
30.33
31.33
30.50
31.30
30.88
30.08
30.15
29.45
28.85
30.90
30.70
29.25
29.15
28.80
30.65
30.20
30.70
29.98
30.35
29.80
30.38
30.28
28.50
29.65
30.98
30.53
29.25
29.68
30.55
30.08
32.03
29.60
29.35
29.28
28.33
30.98
32.10
29.43
31.53
29.75
29.80
31.48
28.50
28.75
28.45
31.33
30.18
29.13
29.65
29.38
28.50
28.48
2.02
ELO
7.83
8.55
8.00
8.10
7.98
8.80
8.90
8.73
8.88
9.56
8.35
8.45
8.30
8.20
8.35
8.00
8.25
8.40
8.10
8.45
8.45
8.35
8.25
8.45
8.30
8.20
8.25
8.20
8.30
8.20
8.25
8.38
8.30
8.40
8.48
8.20
8.30
8.68
8.30
8.10
8.55
8.10
8.35
8.20
8.30
8.30
8.35
8.25
8.30
8.50
8.05
8.48
8.35
8.08
8.43
8.45
8.25
8.45
8.35
8.10
8.50
8.25
8.10
8.20
8.45
8.55
8.20
8.50
8.25
8.25
8.20
0.40
MIC
4.15
4.93
4.68
5.25
4.93
4.83
4.75
5.00
4.98
5.26
5.18
4.85
4.63
4.73
4.75
4.95
4.85
4.88
4.85
4.75
4.88
4.85
5.03
4.83
4.83
5.00
4.73
4.90
5.10
4.65
4.70
4.98
4.98
4.90
4.95
5.10
4.80
5.23
4.95
4.78
5.15
4.88
4.90
5.08
4.85
4.60
4.95
5.05
5.03
4.83
4.78
4.90
5.13
4.75
4.88
4.95
4.58
4.85
5.18
5.05
4.85
4.70
5.03
4.70
4.85
4.90
4.70
5.08
4.65
4.73
4.93
0.36
LP
40.39
39.87
41.10
40.30
41.51
36.42
36.65
40.01
41.93
41.41
43.01
41.19
40.23
40.49
41.02
40.63
40.87
40.55
40.13
40.07
40.32
40.62
41.87
41.20
41.18
40.87
40.18
40.23
40.56
40.18
38.87
39.09
41.30
39.18
40.86
40.30
40.65
40.95
40.53
40.15
41.00
39.98
40.47
40.71
40.26
40.50
40.21
39.30
39.81
39.85
40.38
40.44
40.07
39.89
40.43
41.57
39.15
40.49
41.52
39.82
40.64
39.90
40.76
39.93
40.35
40.91
40.57
41.43
40.70
40.74
40.05
1.16
BW
5.58
4.87
5.00
4.98
5.40
4.98
5.15
4.65
4.78
4.33
4.56
4.41
4.97
4.94
4.90
4.82
5.20
5.32
4.62
5.32
5.55
4.81
5.01
4.31
4.90
5.10
5.41
5.04
4.96
4.98
5.03
4.88
5.21
5.29
5.07
5.63
4.94
5.34
5.22
5.01
4.65
4.88
5.24
5.14
4.96
5.35
4.93
5.27
5.35
5.25
4.92
4.62
5.21
4.78
4.92
5.01
5.02
5.35
5.05
4.91
5.14
4.72
5.53
4.98
5.10
4.66
5.02
4.89
5.02
4.98
4.77
0.38
YLD
1391
1454
2099
2537
2237
2005
1745
1971
2297
2171
2437
1986
2352
1899
1959
2028
2078
1849
2344
2492
1720
2055
1852
2240
2665
2183
2428
1971
1976
1994
2523
1984
2296
2343
2723
2230
1613
2563
2509
1904
2387
2263
2826
2180
2342
2654
2102
1678
2669
2169
2202
1527
2402
1842
2389
2404
1911
2017
1756
2333
2278
2064
2490
2455
2232
2540
2567
2187
2019
1976
1747
911
LY
562
580
863
1023
928
730
639
789
963
899
1048
818
946
769
804
824
849
750
941
999
694
835
776
923
1098
892
976
793
801
801
981
775
948
918
1113
899
656
1050
1017
765
979
905
1144
888
943
1075
845
659
1062
864
889
618
962
735
966
999
748
817
729
929
926
824
1015
980
901
1039
1041
906
822
805
700
370
1
LEN = fiber length (mm), UR = fiber uniform ratio (%), STR = fiber strength (g/tex), ELO = fiber elongation (%), MIC = micronaire, LP = lint
percentage (%), BW = boll weight (g), YLD = seed cotton yield (kg/ha), and LY = lint yield (kg/ha).
Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station
13
Generation
Parent
Bulk
C3 S1
Table 11. Mean comparisons among parents, five bulk populations, and 55 C3S1 populations.1
Entry
Acala Ultima
Pyramid
Coker 315
ST 825
FM 966
M 240
PM HS26
DP 90
SG 747
PSC 355
ST 474
F2 bulk
C0S1 bulk
C1 S1 bulk
C2 S1 bulk
C3 S1 bulk
Pyramid x Acala
C315 x Acala U
ST825 x Acala U
FM966 x Acala U
M240 x Acala U
HS26 x Acala U
DP90 x Acala U
SG747 x Acala U
PSC355 x Acala U
ST474 x Acala U
C315 x Pyramid
ST825 x Pyramid
FM966 x Pyramid
M240 x Pyramid
HS26 x Pyramid
DP90 x Pyramid
SG747 x Pyramid
PSC355 x Pyramid
ST474 x Pyramid
ST825 x C315
FM966 x C315
M240 x C315
HS26 x C315
DP90 x C315
SG747 x C315
PSC355 x C315
ST474 x C315
FM966 x ST825
M240 x ST825
HS26 x ST825
DP90 x ST825
SG747 x ST825
PSC355 x ST825
ST474 x ST825
M240 x FM966
HS26 x FM966
DP90 x FM966
SG747 x FM966
PSC355 x FM966
ST474 x FM966
HS26 x M240
DP90 x M240
SG747 x M240
PSC355 x M240
ST474 x M240
DP90 x HS26
SG747 x HS26
PSC355 x HS26
ST474 x HS26
SG747 x DP90
PSC355 x DP90
ST474 x DP90
PSC355 x SG747
ST474 x SG747
ST474 x PSC355
LSD 0.05
LEN
30.23
27.88
29.34
28.70
29.91
26.35
27.50
29.40
28.45
28.80
28.07
29.08
29.34
29.08
29.08
28.64
28.32
29.34
28.70
29.15
29.15
29.34
28.51
28.77
28.58
28.26
28.96
28.32
29.34
28.70
28.89
28.83
28.07
28.58
28.26
28.96
29.02
28.32
29.15
29.15
28.64
29.15
28.79
28.64
28.77
29.27
29.53
29.08
28.64
28.89
29.46
29.59
29.65
28.70
28.89
28.70
28.26
29.15
28.58
29.40
28.96
28.77
28.58
29.21
28.38
29.21
29.08
28.89
28.64
29.34
28.89
0.86
UR
83.80
82.58
83.38
82.53
83.55
81.25
82.53
83.38
83.13
83.23
82.70
82.45
83.28
82.40
82.15
82.43
82.33
83.70
82.98
82.45
82.53
82.68
81.55
82.65
81.75
83.25
82.65
81.95
82.63
82.25
83.08
82.43
81.13
82.38
82.50
82.95
82.38
82.90
82.35
82.68
82.05
82.68
82.27
82.20
82.70
83.15
83.25
82.75
82.13
83.43
82.90
83.20
83.68
82.65
82.65
82.98
82.50
82.35
82.65
83.35
83.05
81.70
82.88
82.05
81.83
82.50
82.65
81.55
82.90
83.10
83.50
1.17
STR
32.88
28.75
29.15
28.35
33.93
29.50
31.23
31.13
26.63
30.03
29.03
30.10
29.15
29.65
30.18
30.50
29.53
29.53
30.65
30.08
28.58
30.70
30.88
31.60
29.13
30.03
29.88
30.13
29.53
29.28
30.23
29.60
29.50
30.53
30.28
30.30
28.95
30.50
29.65
29.38
28.70
30.85
31.87
30.30
30.40
29.65
31.05
30.75
30.63
29.83
30.43
31.83
30.88
29.83
31.83
29.45
29.48
30.03
29.35
32.63
30.35
30.78
29.90
28.30
29.50
30.68
30.03
29.93
29.73
31.35
30.28
1.97
ELO
7.95
8.35
8.15
7.70
7.63
9.08
9.08
8.40
8.90
9.51
8.70
8.35
8.05
8.35
8.30
8.40
8.45
8.35
8.45
8.13
8.40
8.10
8.45
8.40
8.03
8.35
8.25
7.95
8.40
8.15
8.05
8.30
8.20
8.50
8.25
8.40
8.30
8.40
8.10
8.10
8.15
8.25
8.30
8.15
8.20
8.20
8.35
8.35
8.25
8.53
8.25
8.30
8.45
8.20
8.35
8.40
8.30
8.35
8.05
8.73
8.50
8.20
8.30
8.35
8.45
8.30
8.35
8.40
8.20
8.25
8.30
0.38
MIC
4.00
5.08
4.70
4.98
4.70
5.03
5.05
4.90
4.88
5.29
5.30
5.03
4.73
5.08
4.60
5.15
5.08
4.78
5.30
4.78
4.90
4.90
4.80
4.88
4.73
5.10
4.80
4.80
5.00
4.63
4.68
4.73
4.93
5.00
4.80
5.08
4.78
5.15
4.80
4.55
4.83
4.73
4.93
4.90
5.05
4.68
4.83
4.70
4.83
5.00
4.83
5.03
4.95
4.78
4.93
5.20
5.10
4.85
4.78
4.95
4.78
4.95
4.83
5.05
4.68
5.03
4.75
4.60
4.85
4.88
4.85
0.36
LP
40.39
40.40
42.69
40.07
41.78
37.86
37.21
40.50
40.97
39.92
43.95
40.80
39.01
39.75
39.35
40.93
40.59
40.21
39.83
39.14
40.72
40.67
40.70
40.46
39.83
40.92
40.82
39.40
40.21
40.13
39.37
39.72
41.00
40.33
39.57
40.28
39.41
40.33
39.77
38.98
40.08
38.95
40.63
39.79
40.14
39.69
41.40
39.66
40.32
41.23
39.65
40.02
41.20
39.88
40.73
41.35
40.26
40.07
40.45
39.65
38.75
41.54
40.98
40.12
40.38
40.97
40.69
39.93
39.25
40.12
40.81
1.22
BW
5.50
4.94
4.89
4.72
4.98
5.04
5.41
4.34
4.49
4.47
4.66
5.01
4.96
5.36
5.16
5.23
4.85
5.39
5.16
5.01
5.31
5.46
5.18
5.28
4.72
5.65
5.12
5.13
5.15
4.92
5.14
5.15
4.67
5.20
4.99
5.32
5.02
5.30
4.70
4.71
4.50
5.30
4.98
4.68
5.30
5.30
5.41
5.15
5.46
5.02
4.95
5.06
5.11
4.96
5.28
5.46
4.88
4.74
5.01
5.28
4.81
5.12
5.29
5.06
5.15
5.07
4.61
4.64
5.11
5.51
5.46
0.05
YLD
1373
1250
2250
2354
1673
2268
2221
2000
1971
2729
2492
2181
2561
2812
2467
2605
2202
2280
2245
2468
2560
2593
2508
1748
2348
2112
1855
2054
2046
2536
1971
2227
1153
2360
1266
2844
2069
2301
1870
1779
1769
2571
1585
2603
2237
2705
2704
1890
2347
2520
2373
2211
1673
2527
2433
2556
2061
2176
2358
2712
2283
2139
2226
2448
1759
2313
2030
2515
1663
2519
2605
837
LY
555
505
961
943
699
859
826
810
808
1087
1095
890
999
1118
971
1066
894
917
894
966
1043
1055
1021
707
935
864
757
809
823
1018
776
885
472
952
501
1145
815
928
744
694
709
1001
644
1036
898
1073
1120
749
946
1039
941
885
689
1008
991
1057
830
872
954
1075
885
889
912
982
710
948
826
1004
653
1011
1063
336
1
LEN = fiber length (mm), UR = fiber uniform ratio (%), STR = fiber strength (g/tex), ELO = fiber elongation (%), MIC = micronaire, LP = lint
percentage (%), BW = boll weight (g), YLD = seed cotton yield (kg/ha), and LY = lint yield (kg/ha).
14
Evaluation of Cotton Populations for Agronomic and Fiber Traits after Different Cycles of Random Mating
C ONCLUSION
Parents had larger variances and ranges than F2
hybrids and their corresponding populations at different
cycles of random mating. The genetic variances among
55 F2 populations decreased with the increased cycles
of random mating. The means for parents showed significant differences from the population mean at different cycles of random mating for most traits measured.
On the other hand, F2 populations did not differ among
different cycles for most traits. High correlations were
detected among traits for parents and F2 populations,
while correlations among traits decreased with
increased cycles of random mating. Higher correlations
between F2 and C0S1 were detected than those among
other generations for most traits. Therefore, these
results support the notion that the linkage blocks could
be broken after one to four cycles of random mating.
The random-mating populations should provide a
genetic resource for selecting lines with improved agronomic and fiber traits.
There were no significant differences between
bulked populations and means of 55 populations at different cycles of random mating. This finding suggests
that mixed seed from the 55 populations are equivalent
to represent 55 populations. Even though we only
reported results from 55 populations with up to four
cycles of random mating, the seeds from these populations at six cycles of random mating also will be available in the near future. Breeders should benefit from
these genetic resources in the development of cotton
lines with multiple improved traits through their own
selection scheme.
Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station
15
R EFERENCES
Anonymous. 2001. The classification of cotton.
Agricultural Handbook 566 Revised April 2001.
USDA, AMS, Washington D.C. 20250.
Burton, J.W., and C.A. Brim. 1981. Registration of two
soybean germplasm populations. Crop Sci. 21:801.
Covarrubias-Prieto, J. 1987. Genetic variability in F2
maize populations before and after random mating.
Ph.D. diss. Iowa State Univ. Ames, (Diss
Abstr.48:923-B).
Gutiérrez, O.A., D.T. Bowman, C.B. Cole, J.N.
Jenkins, J.C. McCarty, J. Wu, and C.E. Watson.
2006. Development of random-mated populations
using bulked pollen methodology: Cotton as a
model. J. of Cotton Sci. 10:175-179.
Humphrey, A.B., D.F. Matzinger, and C.C.
Cockerham. 1969. Effects of random intercrossing
in a naturally self-fertilizing species, Nicotiana
tabacum L. Crop Sci. 9:495-497.
16
Meredith, W.R. 1984. Quantitative genetics. P131-150.
In R.J. Kohel and C.F. Lewis (ed.) Cotton. Agron.
Monogr. 24. ASA, CSSA, and SSSA, Madison, WI.
Miller, P.A., and J.O. Rawlings. 1967. Breakup of initial linkage blocks through intermating in a cotton
breeding population. Crop Sci. 7:199-204.
Miravalle, R.J. 1964. A new bulked-pollen method for
cotton cross-pollination. J. Heredity 6: 276-280.
Nordquist, P.T., O.J. Webster, C.O. Gardner, and
W.M. Ross, 1973. Registration of three sorghum
germplasm random–mating populations. Crop Sci.
13:132.
SAS Institute Inc. 2001. Cary, NC.
Evaluation of Cotton Populations for Agronomic and Fiber Traits after Different Cycles of Random Mating
Printed on Recycled Paper
Mention of a trademark or proprietary product does not constitute a guarantee or
warranty of the product by the Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station and
does not imply its approval to the exclusion of other products that also may be suitable.
Discrimination based upon race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, or veteran's status is a violation of federal and state law
and MSU policy and will not be tolerated. Discrimination based upon sexual orientation or group affiliation is a violation of MSU policy and
will not be tolerated.