Asia
CHAPTER 6.2
Quinoa in the Indian subcontinent
* Corresponding author: Atul Bhargava [email protected]; [email protected]
Authors:
Atul Bhargava1 and Deepak Ohri2
Amity Institute of Biotechnology, Amity University Uttar Pradesh (Lucknow Campus), Gomti Nagar
Extension, Lucknow-227105 (UP), India
1
2
Department of Research, Amity University Uttar Pradesh (Lucknow Campus), Gomti Nagar
Extension, Lucknow-227105 (UP), India
Abstract
The Indian subcontinent is a large land mass covering India, Pakistan, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh and it sustains 20% of the world’ population.
The area is prone to degradation of its natural resources due to intensive cultivation leading to declining soil fertility, changes in water table depth,
deterioration in the quality of irrigation water, and
rising salinity in the region. Much of the population has little access to a protein-rich diet, since
wheat and rice are the principal food grains grown
and consumed in the area. The growing population
necessitates increased food production combined
with a shift towards environmentally sound sustainable agriculture. It is therefore important to select
crops requiring fewer inputs while able to respond
to the nutritional deficiency prevalent in the region.
Quinoa is still an “underutilized” crop, given its nutritional superiority over traditional crops and its
wide adaptability to diverse agronomic conditions,
and its commercial potential in South Asia has remained untapped. Quinoa grain has a high protein
content and good amino acid spectrum, and has an
important role in combating the “silent hunger” of
poor populations with little access to a nutritious
diet. Quinoa’s ability to produce high protein grains
under stressful conditions makes it important for
the diversification of future agricultural systems, especially in the Indian subcontinent. The worldwide
popularity of quinoa and initial promising reports
from Asia make it an important candidate as an alternative crop in this region.
Introduction
The Indian subcontinent is the southern portion of
Asia, mostly situated on the Indian Plate and projecting southwards into the Indian Ocean. It is surrounded by the Himalayas in the north, the Arakanese in the east, the Hindu Kush in the west, and
extends southwards into the Indian Ocean with the
Arabian Sea to the southwest and the Bay of Bengal
to the southeast (Chapman and Baker, 2002). The
region comprises five major states, namely India,
Nepal, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka (Table 1),
and two small countries, Bhutan and the Maldives.
The total area is approximately 4.4 million km2, and
is home to about 22% of the world population. The
Indian subcontinent exhibits enormous diversity in
terms of agroclimatic regions and edaphoclimatic
conditions and includes lofty mountain ranges,
highlands and plateaus, deserts, large fertile river
valley plains, and coastal areas (Balfour, 1976; Shukla et al., 2005a; Saini, 2008).
511
CHAPTER: 6.2 Quinoa in the Indian subcontinent
512
The Indian subcontinent
The Indian subcontinent is in the second stage of
demographic transition, i.e. high birth rates and low
death rates, with a consequently high rate of population growth. India, with 1.27 billion people and a
population density of 382 persons per km2, is the
second most populous country in the world with a
population predicted to rise to > 1.53 billion people
by the end of 2030. Table 1 depicts the population
size, population density and growth rate for all the
countries in the Indian subcontinent. The region is
home to a large number of the developing world’s
poor. According to the World Bank’s recent poverty
estimates, about 571 million people in the region
survive on less than USD1.25 a day, and constitute
more than 44% of the developing world’s poor. The
region also has the largest number of malnourished
children in the world, with malnutrition rates in
some areas higher than in Africa.
The increasing population in this part of the world
demands not only an increase in food grain production but also a shift towards environmentally
sound and sustainable agriculture. During the last
50 years, agriculture has transformed significantly
from subsistence to intensive, requiring farm mechanization and increased labour, as well as greater
inputs of high-yielding varieties, chemical fertilizers and pesticides (Bhargava et al., 2008a). While
yields have increased significantly, farmers have run
up increasing debts (due to input requirements),
undue pressure has been placed on the fragile
agro-ecosystems, and increased homogeneity and
monocropping has resulted in loss of agrobiodiversity as well as frequent crop losses due to pathogen
infestations. The situation is compounded by the
overdependency on a few plant species, with just
12 species providing 75% of the world’s food supplies, and the three major crops (rice, wheat and
maize) providing 50% of the world’s food (Bermejo
and Leon, 1994; FAO, 1996; Heywood, 1999; Thies,
2000). This condition prevails in spite of the fact
that about 7 000 plant species have been cultivated
for hundreds of years and are still in use in various
parts of the world today (IPGRI, 2002). The emphasis on a handful of major crops has narrowed the
number of species upon which global food security
depends and many species are no longer a priority.
The consequences of crop failure resulting from unforeseen stresses, pests and diseases are potentially catastrophic (Prescott-Allen and Prescott-Allen,
1990). There has been a recent impetus in different
aspects of research on underutilized crops, and several important programmes have been undertaken
to promote such crops for agricultural systems, as
an alternative source of nutrition.
Underutilized minor, orphan or neglected crops
are those which were once widely grown and consumed, but have now fallen or are falling into disuse (Hammer et al., 2001). This is often the case
for indigenous plant species (rather than non-native or adapted introductions), which often form a
complex part of the culture and diets of the people
who grow them (Mayes et al., 2012). Underutilized
species are traditionally appreciated by communities for their role in income generation, adaptability
to marginal farming conditions, relevance to local
food culture and diverse nutritional and nutraceutical value (DEFRA, 2005; Mwangi and Kimathi, 2006;
Hawtin, 2007; Bhargava et al., 2008a; Hughes 2009;
Mahyao et al., 2009; Bala Ravi et al., 2010; Shukla
Table 1. Demographic profile of countries of the Indian subcontinent.
Country
Population
Growth rate
India
Pakistan
Bangladesh
Sri Lanka
Nepal
Bhutan
Maldives
1 220 800 359
187 343 000
142 316 000
20 263 723
26 494 504
708 427
394 999
1.41
1.60
1.57
0.91
1.59
1.20
1.30
*FAO and World Bank population estimates.
Fertility rate
(Children born/woman)
2.5
3.58
2.6
2.17
2.95
2.13
1.90
Population density
(Persons/km2)*
411
229
1 174
323
189
19
1 107
CHAPTER: 6.2 Quinoa in the Indian subcontinent
et al., 2010; Padulosi et al., 2011). The exceptional
hardiness of many of these species and their ability to cope with adverse growing and climatic conditions offer great promise in the face of climate
change (Bala Ravi et al., 2006). Use of these species
can make an important contribution to the food
security and well-being of the poor. Underutilized
crops have enormous potential to alleviate hunger
directly, by increasing food production in limiting
environments where the yield of traditional major
crops is severely affected. They can raise nutritional
levels and increase incomes and, therefore, also the
purchasing power of the poor (Mayes et al., 2012).
Chenopods in the Indian subcontinent
Chenopodium is the principal genus in the Chenopodiaceae family, which includes plants such as
sugar beet, beetroot and spinach (Bhargava et al.,
2005a). Chenopods are cosmopolitan in distribution and occur in every part of the world (Hickey and
King, 1988). The genus Chenopodium includes herbaceous (sect. Agathophyton), suffrutescent (sect.
Ambrina) and arborescent (sect. Skottsbergia) perennial species, most of which occur as colonizing
annuals (Wilson, 1990). Ethnic communities in the
subcontinent have always used chenopod leaves to
treat urinary troubles (Bakshi and Sensarma, 1999)
and to remove intestinal worms (Singh et al., 2003).
Ancient Indian medicinal texts describe the plant as
having oleaginous, diuretic and aphrodisiac properties, effective in the treatment of eye diseases, piles
and heart and spleen ailments (Kirtikar and Basu,
2001). The first record of chenopod farming in Asia,
specifically in the Himalayan region, dates back
over 150 years (Roxburgh, 1832; Thomson, 1852).
Chenopods are currently cultivated in the watersheds of the Chenab, Ravi, Beas, Satluj and Yamuna
rivers in the western Himalayas, in the hilly areas
of northern Bengal, watershed of the Teesta River,
and in several states in northeast India (Joshi, 1991;
Partap et al., 1998). C. album, ranked among the
top ten weeds of the world (Holm et al., 1977), is
grown in the northwest Himalayan region as a subsidiary food crop in mixed farming systems, particularly multiple cropping systems (Partap and Kapoor,
1985, 1987). The plant is cultivated in this region
for its nutritionally rich grain, as a fodder crop and
as pot herb (Partap, 1990). Over 90% of families in
the region cultivate chenopods and utilize almost
every plant part for various purposes. In addition
to being used for food, the plant is also used as fuel
and for the preparation of alcoholic drinks (Partap
et al., 1998). However, in the Indo-Gangetic Plains,
C. album is not cultivated but is weeded out from
other crops and sold in local markets for consumption as a pot-herb.
Quinoa and its relevance in the Indian
subcontinent
Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.), an underutilized Andean crop, has gained worldwide attention because of its ability to grow in various stress
conditions, such as soil salinity, acidity, drought
and frost, exhibiting a high level of resistance to
these environmental stress factors (Jacobsen et al.,
2003; Gómez-Pando et al., 2010). Environmental
stresses, such as water stress, temperature stress
and salt stress, also happen to be among the major
productivity constraints in the Indian subcontinent
often causing extensive crop losses. The situation
is compounded by the fact that agriculture is the
mainstay of the economy in most of the countries in
the region. Quinoa is an important food source for
human consumption in the Andean region and has
immense industrial value (Bhargava et al., 2006a;
Fuentes and Bhargava, 2011). The crop grows in
different ecological zones, from sea level to 2 000–
4 000 m asl (Bazile et al., 2013; Fuentes and Bhargava 2011). Quinoa may be classified as “underutilized” in the Indian subcontinent, because, despite
its wide adaptability, rusticity and nutritional superiority, its commercial potential remains untapped.
Much of the population has little access to a proteinrich diet, since rice and wheat are the principal food
crops. Quinoa has a very protein-rich grain with a
good amino acid spectrum, and can, therefore, contribute to a balanced diet and can play an important role in combating the “silent hunger” of poor
populations with little access to proteins (Bhargava
et al., 2006a). Furthermore, improved technologies
and links with other sectors, such as product development and marketing, can help the industry tap
quinoa’s potential for diverse applications.
Genetic resources and field results
The evaluation of quinoa in the Indian subcontinent has produced impressive results with the
crop showing good adaptation and abundant yield.
513
CHAPTER: 6.2 Quinoa in the Indian subcontinent
514
India, located between 8° and 38°N and 68° and
93.5°E, has a very wide range of agroclimatic regions and edaphoclimatic conditions (Bhargava et
al., 2006a). Research on quinoa has been underway
at the National Botanical Research Institute (NBRI),
Lucknow, since the early 1990s. The NBRI is located
at the heart of the Indo-Gangetic Plains (IGP), a region of land covering much of India, Pakistan, Nepal and Bangladesh (Table 1). IGP is characterized
by fertile soils and an abundant water supply (Aggarwal et al., 2004). Research intensified in 2000,
when extensive field trials were performed as part
of a coordinated effort by different departments,
namely genetics and plant breeding, lipid chemistry, plant pathology, experimental taxonomy and
biomass biology (Bhargava et al., 2005b, 2006a,
2007, 2008b, c; Kumar et al., 2006). Trials in the
Indo-Gangetic Plains have shown that the crop can
be successfully cultivated in this region, with many
cultivars giving high yield (Bhargava et al., 2007).
The quinoa experiments in the Indian subcontinent
are primarily based on germplasm obtained from
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
and IPK Gatersleben, Germany. The most comprehensive report from India (Bhargava et al., 2007)
lists germplasm primarily from the South American
countries of Bolivia, Chile, Peru and Argentina (Table 2). A total of 27 germplasm lines of quinoa and
2 lines of C. berlandieri subsp. nuttalliae were evaluated for 12 morphological and 4 quality traits in
Lucknow (26.5°N, 80.5°E, 120 m asl), Uttar Pradesh,
in the crop years 2002/03 and 2003/04. The general weather conditions for both crop years are presented in Table 3. The experimental site had sandy–
loam soil and no chemical fertilizer was applied either before or during the experiment. No fungicides
or insecticides were used during the experiment.
In the IGP, quinoa is usually sown at the onset of
winter, from mid- to late November, and harvested
in February or March, depending on the maturity
period of the variety. The 29 germplasm lines evaluated had an average pre-flowering growth period of
about 82 days and took around 48 days for grain
maturity (Table 4). Thus, the total growth period
in north Indian conditions was less than that reported in South America (110–190 days) (Jacobsen
and Stolen, 1993) and similar to northern Europe
(Jacobsen, 1998). The harvest index presented tremendous variability and ranged from 0.26 to 1.43,
indicating high efficiency of the reproductive parti-
tioning (Table 4) (Bhargava et al., 2007). Seed protein among the lines ranged from 12.55 to 21.02%
with an average of 16.22+0.47%; seed carotenoid
ranged from 1.69 to 5.52 mg/kg with an average of
2.83+0.16 mg/kg (Table 5). The carotenoid content
in the leaves was 230.23–669.56 mg/kg, and was
comparatively higher than in the seeds. The leaf carotenoid content was higher than that reported for
spinach, amaranth and Chenopodium album (Gupta
and Wagle, 1988; Prakash and Pal, 1991; Shukla et
al., 2003; Bhargava et al., 2006b). Of the lines with
high leaf carotenoid, 70% also had high seed carotenoid. Quinoa had a higher protein content than
commonly used cereals and compared favourably
with other underutilized crops like Amaranthus
(Bressani et al., 1987; Shukla et al., 2004, 2005b)
and Fagopyrum (Steadman et al., 2001), and even
some underutilized legumes like Cassia floribunda
(Vadivel and Janardhanan, 2001). The seeds’ high
protein content is indication of the crop’s potential as a low-cost source of protein to eliminate
protein malnutrition in developing countries like
India, where low incomes restrict consumption of
meat and pulses for much of the population. Quinoa could be immensely useful for obtaining highquality protein concentrates to solve the problem
of chronic malnutrition affecting urban and rural
populations in developing countries. An assessment
of the crop’s seed yield potential showed that 41%
of the accessions were high-yielding. Accessions of
Chilean and United States origin showed greater
adaptability to north Indian conditions (Bhargava et
al., 2007). It was suggested that quinoa might serve
as an alternative winter crop for the North Indian
Plains and other subtropical regions with similar
agroclimatic and edaphic conditions (Bhargava et
al., 2007). Quinoa has the potential to play a pivotal
role in the future diversification of agricultural systems in India, not only at the high altitudes of the
Himalayan region as a summer crop, but also in the
North Indian Plains.
Pakistan is located between 24.53°N, 67.00°E and
35.44°N, 74.37°E, and has less than 240 mm of rainfall and 1 066 m3 per caput water availability per annum. It is classed among the high water stress countries of the world (FAOSTAT, 2008; Munir, 2011). The
country has a high proportion of salt-affected soils,
and almost one-third of the total cultivated land has
saline, saline–sodic or sodic soils (Khan, 1998). Pa-
CHAPTER: 6.2 Quinoa in the Indian subcontinent
515
Table 2. Germplasm lines, their source, origin and seed colour
(Reprinted from Bhargava et al. 2007, with kind permission from Elsevier)
Source
Status*
Origin*
Altitude*
(m)
Seed
colour
IPK, Germany
IPK, Germany
IPK, Germany
IPK, Germany
IPK, Germany
IPK, Germany
IPK, Germany
USDA
USDA
USDA
USDA
USDA
USDA
USDA
USDA
USDA
USDA
USDA
USDA
USDA
USDA
USDA
USDA
USDA
USDA
USDA
USDA
Cultivar
Cultivar
Landrace
Cultivated
Cultivated
Cultivated
Cultivar
Cultivated
Cultivated
Landrace
Cultivated
Cultivar
Landrace
Puno, Peru
Bolivia
Cuzco, Peru
Columbia
Oruro, Bolivia
La Paz, Bolivia
La Paz, Bolivia
Cuzco, Peru
La Paz, Bolivia
New Mexico, USA
Jujuy, Argentina
Peru
Jujuy, Argentina
Chile
Chile
Nueva Mexico, USA
Jujuy, Argentina
Peru
Peru
Chile
Peru
La Paz, Bolivia
Chile
Oruro, Bolivia
4000
3200
3800
3800
3030
3700
3000
3800
3870
Light
Dark
Light
Light
Light
Light
Light
Light
Light
Dark
Light
Light
Light
Light
Light
Light
Light
Light
Light
Light
Dark
Dark
Light
Dark
Light
Light
Light
C. berlandieri subsp. nuttalliae PI
568155 (Saff.) Wilson and Heiser
USDA
Landrace
Mexico
1680
Dark
C. berlandieri subsp. nuttalliae PI
568156 (Saff.) Wilson and Heiser
USDA
Landrace
Mexico
2700
Dark
Germplam line
C. quinoa Willd. CHEN 58/77
C. quinoa Willd. CHEN 67/78
C. quinoa Willd. CHEN 71/78
C. quinoa Willd. CHEN 33/84
C. quinoa Willd. CHEN 84/79
C. quinoa Willd. CHEN 92/91
C. quinoa Willd. CHEN 7/81
C. quinoa Willd. PI 614938
C. quinoa Willd. PI 478408
C. quinoa Willd. PI 478414
C. quinoa Willd. PI 596498
C. quinoa Willd. Ames 13219
C. quinoa Willd. Ames 13719
C. quinoa Willd. PI 587173
C. quinoa Willd. PI 510532
C. quinoa Willd. PI 614883
C. quinoa Willd. PI 584524
C. quinoa Willd. Ames 22156
C. quinoa Willd. Ames 13762
C. quinoa Willd. PI 614881
C. quinoa Willd. PI 510537
C. quinoa Willd. PI 510547
C. quinoa Willd. Ames 22158
C. quinoa Willd. PI 510536
C. quinoa Willd. PI 478410
C. quinoa Willd. PI 433232
C. quinoa Willd. Ames 21909
*From germplasm database
kistan has seen significant reductions in crop yields
as a result of: large tracts of salt-affected soils; significant areas of cultivable wastelands with marginal or brackish irrigation water; uncertain climatedependent irrigation sources; poor fertile tracks;
and adverse climatic phenomena (Government of
Pakistan, 2009; Munir, 2011). Climatically resilient
and highly adaptable crops and climate-proof cropping systems are emerging (Munir 2011). As with
other parts of southern Asia, crops such as quinoa
are needed, not only to avoid failure but also to produce sufficient grain to meet dietary needs under
unfavourable conditions (Munir, 2011).
Quinoa was introduced in Pakistan in 2007 in central Punjab to minimize the dependency of the
masses on conventional food (Munir et al., 2012).
In Pakistan, the crop has been successfully culti-
CHAPTER: 6.2 Quinoa in the Indian subcontinent
516
Table 3. Weather conditions during the first and second experiments
(Reprinted from Bhargava et al. 2007, with kind permission from Elsevier)
Temperature (oC)
Max. Min. Mean
Experiment I (2002-2003)
November
December
January
February
March
April
Dew point
(oC)
Wind
(km/hra)
24
18
15
24
30
38
16
11
7
11
16
23
20
15
11
18
23
30
14
10
8
12
13
15
3
4
3
6
7
9
28
21
10
25
34
37
14
11
8
12
17
23
21
16
9
19
26
30
12
11
7
11
13
16
2
4
3
4
5
7
Experiment II (2003-2004)
November
December
January
February
March
April
vated on experimental farms in Faisalabad, Chakwal and Bahawalpur. The University of Agriculture,
Faisalabad, has taken giant steps towards making
this crop a reality in Pakistan (Figure 1). The university trial sites were situated at 184 m asl, in a subtropical region with a rich sandy–loam and loamy
soil texture. Grain yields of up to 2.7 tonnes/ha are
likely to increase further as farmers improve their
understanding of its production and appropriate
technologies (personal communication).
Further quinoa trials in Pakistan have demonstrated
that the seed yield of the different accessions varies
depending on the growing environment, with some
accessions exhibiting good stability in the new environment. The short-statured accessions of Danish origin set seed in the shortest time, while the
Chilean accessions originating from near sea level
produced viable seeds with a medium-duration life
cycle. The fiscal balance sheet showing the coefficient of profitability indicates that quinoa has the
potential to be introduced as a new cash crop in the
region and is a potentially sound choice for farmers with smallholdings (Munir et al., 2012). Quinoa
shows promise as an important new crop for Pakistan agriculture, providing highly nutritive and versatile food products for the population and new raw
material for industry. Cultivation is feasible, particularly in marginal environments afflicted by drought
or salinity stress, currently suffering from very low
productivity (Jacobsen et al., 2002). The crop offers hope in northern Pakistan where conventional
agriculture is difficult due to loss of fertile soil and
the shortage of suitable crops to improve the agricultural economy; quinoa has adaptability to severe
winter conditions and could help alleviate poverty
in such areas. It can also help improve food production in the western dry mountains of Balochistan,
where the degraded land and declining groundwater resources severely hamper production of many
crops. In summary, the assessment of quinoa in
Pakistan shows that it is a potential drought- and
salinity-tolerant crop with a wide range of adaptability under the varying climatic conditions of the
Punjab Province of Pakistan, and it can be recommended for general cultivation once the production
technologies are fully developed (Munir, 2011).
Current state in the Indian subcontinent
Cultivation of quinoa is becoming more widespread
in the Indian subcontinent. The crop has been successfully cultivated in the drought-prone Anantapur
district of Andhra Pradesh within the framework
of “Project Ananta” (Deccan Chronicle, 2013; The
Times of India, 2013). Quinoa was considered suitable for the weather conditions in Anantapur: it
was cultured in the laboratory in February 2013 and
CHAPTER: 6.2 Quinoa in the Indian subcontinent
517
Table 4. Mean performance of 29 lines for 12 morphological traits in Chenopodium
(Reprinted from Bhargava et al. 2007, with kind permission from Elsevier)
Plant
height
(cm)
Leaf
area
(cm2)
Primary
branches
/plant
Days to
flowering
Days to
maturity
Puno, Peru
Bolivia
Cuzco, Peru
Columbia
Oruro, Bolivia
La Paz, Bolivia
La Paz, Bolivia
Cuzco, Peru
La Paz, Bolivia
Neuva Mexico, USA
Jujuy, Argentina
Peru
Jujuy, Argentina
Chile
Chile
73.55
74.55
79.33
101.55
86.00
81.89
85.11
71.00
71.33
83.66
83.77
81.99
82.21
85.33
86.67
70.78
81.33
80.55
117.67
119.44
131.67
144.00
121.67
123.22
133.78
109.33
109.33
134.11
129.00
129.98
120.28
125.78
157.11
109.89
127.00
126.00
45.41
59.63
46.33
42.33
86.97
77.49
123.56
11.27
17.67
78.98
65.87
53.96
115.52
101.03
144.03
54.89
115.89
106.44
15.71
6.12
26.94
9.46
17.47
24.69
22.14
5.67
8.93
21.53
20.82
11.75
25.03
30.91
22.02
12.33
29.64
26.16
16.56
16.70
15.44
16.96
22.11
14.06
28.00
10.00
8.55
20.55
17.33
19.21
27.74
16.74
25.55
21.89
25.00
20.44
C. quinoa Ames 13762
Nueva Mexico, USA
79.33
132.44
123.72
5.00
23.00
C. quinoa PI 614881
C. quinoa PI 510537
C. quinoa PI 510547
C. quinoa Ames 22158
C. quinoa PI 510536
C. quinoa PI 478410
C. quinoa PI 433232
C. quinoa Ames 21909
Jujuy, Argentina
Peru
Peru
Chile
Peru
La Paz, Bolivia
Chile
Oruro, Bolivia
87.11
84.33
82.11
80.89
73.78
82.77
81.00
82.55
127.22
124.00
131.78
131.11
115.22
126.78
130.00
152.44
113.00
100.00
66.67
80.27
31.05
101.10
108.66
82.44
25.00
14.39
16.02
23.25
4.42
17.29
23.01
25.87
24.56
25.44
14.11
21.24
17.53
22.61
20.89
21.00
C. berlandieri subsp.
nuttalliae PI 568155
Mexico
91.33
163.33
139.44
21.44
35.74
C. berlandieri subsp.
nuttalliae PI 568156
Mexico
85.33
152.33
135.44
13.53
29.11
Medio
+S.E.
81.76
+1.18
129.51
+2.51
83.76
+6.79
18.15
+1.44
20.62
+1.08
CD (5%)
CD (1%)
CV
2.41
3.26
7.82
5.14
6.93
10.44
13.90
18.76
43.67
2.94
3.97
42.75
2.21
2.98
28.32
Germplasm lines
Origin
C. quinoa CHEN 58/77
C. quinoa CHEN 67/78
C. quinoa CHEN 71/78
C. quinoa CHEN 33/84
C. quinoa CHEN 84/79
C. quinoa CHEN 92/91
C. quinoa CHEN 7/81
C. quinoa PI 614938
C. quinoa PI 478408
C. quinoa PI 478414
C. quinoa PI 596498
C. quinoa Ames 13219
C. quinoa Ames 13719
C. quinoa PI 587173
C. quinoa PI 510532
C. quinoa PI 614883
C. quinoa PI 584524
C. quinoa Ames 22156
CHAPTER: 6.2 Quinoa in the Indian subcontinent
518
Inflorescence IInflore- Seed
length
cence/
size
(cm)
plant (mm)
Germplasm lines
Origin
C. quinoa CHEN 58/77
C. quinoa CHEN 67/78
C. quinoa CHEN 71/78
C. quinoa CHEN 33/84
C. quinoa CHEN 84/79
C. quinoa CHEN 92/91
C. quinoa CHEN 7/81
C. quinoa PI 614938
C. quinoa PI 478408
C. quinoa PI 478414
C. quinoa PI 596498
C. quinoa Ames 13219
C. quinoa Ames 13719
C. quinoa PI 587173
C. quinoa PI 510532
C. quinoa PI 614883
C. quinoa PI 584524
C. quinoa Ames 22156
C. quinoa Ames 13762
C. quinoa PI 614881
C. quinoa PI 510537
C. quinoa PI 510547
C. quinoa Ames 22158
C. quinoa PI 510536
C. quinoa PI 478410
C. quinoa PI 433232
C. quinoa Ames 21909
Puno, Peru
Bolivia
Cuzco, Peru
Columbia
Oruro, Bolivia
La Paz, Bolivia
La Paz, Bolivia
Cuzco, Peru
La Paz, Bolivia
Neuva Mexico, USA
Jujuy, Argentina
Peru
Jujuy, Argentina
Chile
Chile
Nueva Mexico, USA
Jujuy, Argentina
Peru
Peru
Chile
Peru
La Paz, Bolivia
Chile
Oruro, Bolivia
2.93
1.71
3.39
2.42
1.00
2.25
4.09
1.07
0.84
1.60
2.47
2.64
2.67
2.25
2.24
3.61
2.51
1.60
4.31
3.01
1.44
2.08
3.85
1.79
0.90
4.54
2.12
41.19
91.63
127.73
13.85
117.78
64.11
141.55
11.67
14.65
106.48
90.33
114.66
98.00
68.50
138.22
45.89
137.55
85.55
136.44
114.22
136.00
68.92
40.29
21.03
118.33
74.22
132.22
1.58
1.34
1.97
1.57
2.21
2.01
2.09
1.73
2.17
1.81
2.03
2.06
2.15
2.01
1.51
1.73
1.58
1.93
1.83
2.05
1.78
1.82
1.95
1.93
1.80
1.77
1.83
C. berlandieri subsp.
nuttalliae PI 568155
Mexico
6.47
114.78
1.58
C. berlandieri subsp.
nuttalliae PI 568156
Mexico
4.77
103.39
Mean
+S.E.
2.64
+0.24
CD (5%)
CD (1%)
CV
0.49
0.66
49.62
1000
seed
weight
(g)
1.81
0.78
2.85
2.07
3.57
3.70
3.65
1.87
2.87
3.03
3.08
3.54
3.65
4.09
1.25
1.77
3.02
3.51
2.75
2.94
2.71
3.13
3.17
2.34
2.63
2.28
3.31
Dry
weight/
plant
(g)
6.31
5.75
7.21
3.84
10.47
10.21
28.00
1.11
1.26
14.00
19.89
15.08
32.03
15.47
52.89
3.03
29.86
17.21
35.21
24.16
13.02
12.67
12.70
1.38
29.00
13.11
15.97
Harvest
index
Seed yield
(t/ha)
1.07
0.74
1.43
1.40
1.32
0.88
1.41
1.06
1.19
1.25
0.79
0.73
0.99
0.81
0.29
0.97
0.90
1.21
0.94
1.34
1.32
1.33
1.18
1.28
0.43
1.09
1.15
2.11
3.75
3.27
1.33
3.44
2.25
9.83
0.32
0.47
6.07
3.93
2.80
9.33
3.17
1.68
1.00
6.60
5.03
8.50
8.25
4.39
4.70
4.85
0.67
3.13
3.56
9.08
1.28 28.94
0.26
2.01
1.65
1.37 15.05
0.65
2.32
88.59
+7.81
1.84
+0.03
2.69 16.37
+0.15 +2.24
1.01
+0.06
4.06
+0.52
15.99
21.57
47.48
0.06
0.08
11.41
0.30 4.58
0.41 6.18
31.97 73.85
0.12
0.17
32.16
1.06
1.43
68.34
CHAPTER: 6.2 Quinoa in the Indian subcontinent
519
Table 5. Mean performance of 29 lines for 4 quality traits in Chenopodium
(Reprinted from Bhargava et al. 2007, with kind permission from Elsevier)
Total
chlorophyll
(mg/g)
Seed
carotenoid
(mg/kg)
Seed protein
(%)
389.83
531.03
534.80
230.23
414.73
521.83
632.40
338.23
330.03
588.23
551.07
421.03
466.13
580.43
483.13
434.67
669.56
611.83
519.90
481.23
511.77
416.30
414.63
371.80
480.07
479.47
504.07
1.73
3.12
3.15
1.69
2.30
2.00
3.30
2.84
2.74
3.88
2.68
2.02
1.75
3.86
2.06
3.15
2.87
2.81
2.08
3.33
3.82
2.35
2.40
2.84
1.97
2.13
3.15
13.22
21.02
19.37
16.92
18.84
13.93
17.31
17.83
15.23
17.86
15.09
12.55
17.71
14.66
14.51
19.48
13.01
14.24
15.47
13.89
19.78
20.43
16.09
20.39
13.08
14.23
16.20
1.17
601.90
5.52
13.28
1.20
528.50
4.73
14.82
1.43
+0.06
0.12
0.16
23.07
484.09
+18.37
37.62
50.75
20.42
2.83
+0.16
0.32
0.44
31.80
16.22
+0.47
0.96
1.29
15.90
Germplasm lines
Origin
C. quinoa CHEN 58/77
C. quinoa CHEN 67/78
C. quinoa CHEN 71/78
C. quinoa CHEN 33/84
C. quinoa CHEN 84/79
C. quinoa CHEN 92/91
C. quinoa CHEN 7/81
C. quinoa PI 614938
C. quinoa PI 478408
C. quinoa PI 478414
C. quinoa PI 596498
C. quinoa Ames 13219
C. quinoa Ames 13719
C. quinoa PI 587173
C. quinoa PI 510532
C. quinoa PI 614883
C. quinoa PI 584524
C. quinoa Ames 22156
C. quinoa Ames 13762
C. quinoa PI 614881
C. quinoa PI 510537
C. quinoa PI 510547
C. quinoa Ames 22158
C. quinoa PI 510536
C. quinoa PI 478410
C. quinoa PI 433232
C. quinoa Ames 21909
C. berlandieri subsp. nuttalliae PI
568155
C. berlandieri subsp. nuttalliae PI
568156
Mean
+S.E.
CD (5%)
CD (1%)
CV
Puno, Peru
Bolivia
Cuzco, Peru
Columbia
Oruro, Bolivia
La Paz, Bolivia
La Paz, Bolivia
Cuzco, Peru
La Paz, Bolivia
Nueva Mexico, USA
Jujuy, Argentina
Peru
Jujuy, Argentina
Chile
Chile
Nueva Mexico, USA
Jujuy, Argentina
Peru
Peru
Chile
Peru
La Paz, Bolivia
Chile
Oruro, Bolivia
1.03
1.70
1.82
0.55
1.12
1.68
1.92
1.16
1.19
1.86
1.65
1.32
1.36
1.85
1.34
1.25
2.04
1.86
1.60
1.42
1.59
1.22
1.06
1.09
1.43
1.51
1.55
Mexico
Mexico
Leaf
carotenoid
(mg/kg)
CHAPTER: 6.2 Quinoa in the Indian subcontinent
520
Faisalabad
PAKISTAN
NEPAL
Lucknow
BHUTAN
BANGLADESH
I N D I A
Anantapur
MALDIVES
SRI LANKA
Figure 1. Map showing countries of the Indian subcontinent and sites of field trials of quinoa.
small offshoots planted in March. Its growth was
phenomenal and, despite the severe summer, the
crop yielded well. The time-period from saplings
to maturity was about 150 days (Deccan Chronicle,
2013). The seed, supplied by the Union Ministry
of Agriculture to the AMR-APARD (AMR-Andhra
Pradesh Academy of Rural Development), was
grown in demonstration plots and was revealed to
be a valid alternative to groundnut – a crop with
deteriorating cultivation in the district due to the
progressive decrease in rainfall. The AMR- APARD,
located in Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India, has
focused for over 54 years on building capacity for
sustainable development of the rural poor. The
prospects of quinoa in southern India are being
explored in other areas as well. A number of private companies are planning to extensively cultivate quinoa in Tamil Nadu, Gujarat and Rajasthan
in farmers’ fields (personal communication). The
Humana People to People India is planning to in-
troduce quinoa in central Uttar Pradesh to benefit
marginal farmers and the crop’s performance will
be assessed.
Uses and Markets
The demand for quinoa is increasing in many parts
of India and it is being imported at high prices. In
Andhra Pradesh, quinoa is sold at a price of nearly
INR1 500/kg. “Organic Quinoa”, based in Bangalore,
is marketing quinoa at INR595 per 500 g (INR = Indian rupee). Experimental trials have been successful, with good yields which could give great returns
for the local farmers. Also in Pakistan, demand for
this “magic” crop is growing, but availability is less
due to high cost. If cultivation becomes more widespread, the cost of quinoa can be massively reduced,
making it available for the common man. Moreover,
marginal farmers can also export quinoa to other
countries where demand for the grain is high.
CHAPTER: 6.2 Quinoa in the Indian subcontinent
Dissemination of quinoa in southern Asia
The availability of information is a major constraint
in the promotion of underutilized species (Padulosi
et al., 2002). Factors hampering the development
of underutilized crops include lack of knowledge
(both of quality traits genetics and of agronomy),
lack of interest of farmers afraid of the risks of cultivation, absence of a market, lack of experience and
inadequate financial resources (Polok et al., 2008).
In southern Asia, farmers tend to be less enthusiastic about new crops and show interest only when
high returns are guaranteed. Many farmers practise subsistence agriculture, growing cereal crops
for personal use only. To increase the popularity of
quinoa in the region, priority must be given to the
following:
(i) Initiation of participatory research in all aspects
of the crop, most importantly crop stability and selection of genotypes suited to different agroclimatic
conditions.
(ii) Invoking the interest of farmers by disseminating information to producers regarding the benefits
of the crop in terms of income generation and nutritional security.
(iii) Dissemination of detailed information to farmers regarding cultivation practices, agronomy and
pathology of the crop.
(iv) Sharing information about quinoa cultivation,
agronomic requirements, local uses and values, and
its potential contribution to local food security and
environmental sustainability.
(v) Providing free or subsidized high-quality seeds
to farmers in the early years to relieve them of the
burden of arranging germplasm best suited to local
conditions.
(vi) Providing a marketing infrastructure where
the produce is collected directly from the farmers’
fields, especially in the initial period until a proper
mechanism is in place. Government agencies can
play a major role, setting up strategic alliances with
agencies or organizations with experience in quinoa
marketing, processing and product development.
Improved commercialization creates better opportunities for income generation by marginal farmers
who can hugely benefit from cultivating this crop.
(vii) Inclusion of quinoa in crop insurance schemes
which exist in India for selected crops. This would
instil confidence in producers and make them consider quinoa cultivation as less risky.
(viii) Improving public awareness and raising interest in quinoa to create a favourable environment
for its sustained production and use. This entails a
coordinated effort by governments, research institutions, the private sector and consumers, as both
the public and the producers should be aware of
the benefits that arise from wider use of this crop.
Conclusion
Quinoa is highly adaptive under marginal agroecological and edaphic situations, and can thus
enhance the food and nutritional security of local
communities and improve income in southern Asia.
The crop has great potential to alleviate hunger and
malnutrition in the Indian subcontinent by increasing food production in challenging environments
where major crops are severely limited. However,
this could be achieved by an integrated effort at all
levels: information, awareness, popularization, research and marketing.
References
Aggarwal, P.K., Joshi, P.K., Ingram, J.S.I. & Gupta, R.K. 2004.
Adapting food systems of the Indo-Gangetic plains to global environmental change: key information needs to improve policy
formulation. Environ. Sci. Pol., 7: 487-498.
Bakshi, D.N.G., Sensarma, P. & Pal, D.C. 1999. A Lexicon of Medicinal Plants of India. Naya Prakash, Calcutta.
Bala Ravi, S., Hoeschle-Zeledon, I., Swaminathan, M.S. & Frison, E. 2006. Hunger and Poverty: The Role of Biodiversity.
India and Rome, M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation and
IPGRI. p. 232.
Bala Ravi, S., Hrideek, T.K., Kishore Kumar, A.T., Prabhakaran,
T.R., Bhag Mal & Padulosi, S. 2010. Mobilizing neglected and
underutilized crops to strengthen food security and alleviate
poverty in India. Ind. J. Plant Genet. Res., 23: 110-116.
Balfour, E. 1976. Encyclopaedia Asiatica: Comprising Indian
Subcontinent, Eastern and Southern Asia. Cosmo Publications,
New Delhi.
Bazile, D., Fuentes, F. & Mujica, A. Historical Perspectives and
Domestication. In. A. Bhargava & S. Srivastava, ed. Quinoa:
Botany, Production & Uses. CABI Publisher, Wallingford, UK. p.
16-35. ISBN: 9781780642260.
521
CHAPTER: 6.2 Quinoa in the Indian subcontinent
522
Bermejo, J.E.H. & León, J. 1994. Neglected crops-1492 from a
different perspective. FAO Plant Production and Protection Series No. 26. Rome.
Bhargava, A., Shukla, S. & Ohri, D. 2005a. Medicinal uses of
Chenopodium- a review. J. Med. Arom. Plant Sci., 27: 309-319.
Bhargava, A., Rana, T.S., Shukla, S. & Ohri, D. 2005b. Seed
protein electrophoresis of some cultivated and wild species
of Chenopodium (Chenopodiaceae). Biologia Plantarum, 49:
505-511.
Bhargava, A., Shukla, S. & Ohri, D. 2006a. Chenopodium quinoaan Indian perspective. Industrial Crops and Products, 23: 73-87.
Bhargava, A., Shukla, S., Dixit, B.S., Bannerji, R. & Ohri, D.
2006b. Variability and genotype x cutting interactions for different nutritional components in C. album L. Horticultural Science, 33: 29-38.
Bhargava, A., Shukla, S. & Ohri, D. 2007. Genetic variability
and interrelationship among various morphological and quality traits in quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.). Field Crops
Research, 101: 104-116.
Bhargava, A., Shukla, S. & Ohri, D. 2008a. Genotype x environment interaction studies in Chenopodium album L.: an underutilized crop with promising potential. Communications in Biometry and Crop Science, 3: 3-15.
Bhargava, A., Shukla, S., Srivastava, J., Singh, N. & Ohri, D.
2008b. Chenopodium- a prospective plant for phytoextraction.
Acta Physiologia Plantarum, 30: 111-120.
Bhargava A., Shukla S., Srivastava J., Singh N. and Ohri D. 2008c.
Genetic diversity for mineral accumulation in foliage of Chenopodium spp. Scientia Horticulturae, 118: 338-346.
Bressani, R., Gonzales, J.M., Zuniga, J., Brauner, M. & Elias, L.G.
1987. Yield, selected composition and nutritive value of 14
selections of amaranth grain representing four species. J. Sci.
Food Agric., 38: 347-356.
Chapman, G.P. & Baker, K.M. 2002. The changing geography of
Asia. New York, Taylor & Francis.
Gómez-Pando, L.R., lvarez-Castro, R.A. & Eguiluz-De La Barra,
A. 2010. Effect of salt stress on Peruvian germplasm of Chenopodium quinoa Willd.: a promising crop. J. Agron. Crop Sci.,
196: 391-396.
Government of Pakistan. 2009. Economic Survey of Pakistan.
2008-09. Minister of Finance, Government of Pakistan, 2: 17-19.
Gupta, K. & Wagle, D.S. 1988. Nutritional and antinutritional factors of green leafy vegetables. J Agric. Food Chem., 36: 472-474.
Hammer, K., Heller, J. & Engels, J. 2001. Monographs on underutilized and neglected crops. Genet. Res. Crop Evol., 48: 3-5.
Hawtin, G. 2007. Underutilized plant species research and development activities—review of issues and options. GFU/ICUC.
Rome, International Plant Genetic Resources Institute.
Heywood, V. 1999. Use and potential of wild plants in farm
households. FAO Farm System Management Series No. 15.
Rome. p. 113.
Holm, L., Plunknett, D.L., Pancho, J.V. & Herberger, J.P. 1977.
The World’s Worst Weeds. Distribution and Biology. Honolulu,
University Press of Hawaii.
Hickey, M. & King, C. 1988. 100 Families of Flowering Plants.
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Hughes, J. 2009. Just famine foods? What contribution can underutilized plants make to food security? Acta Horticulturae,
806: 39-47.
IPGRI. 2002. Neglected and Underutilized Plant Species: Strategic Action Plan of the International Plant Genetic Resources Institute. Rome, International Plant Genetic Resources Institute.
Jacobsen, S.E. 1998. Developmental stability of quinoa under
European conditions. Ind. Crops Prod., 7: 169-174.
Jacobsen, S.E. & Stolen, O. 1993. Quinoa- morphology, phenology and prospects for its production as a new crop in Europe.
Eur. J. Agron., 2: 19-29.
Deccan Chronicle. 2013. Miracle grain ideal for Andhra Pradesh.
Deccan Chronicle. August 26, 2013.
Jacobsen, S.-E., Hollington, P.A. & Hussain, Z. 2002. Quinoa
(Chenopodium quinoa Willd.), a potential new crop for Pakistan. In R. Ahmad & K.A. Malik, eds. Prospects for Saline Agriculture. CAB International, UK.
DEFRA [Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs].
2005. Climate change scenarios for India. Investigating the impacts of climate change in India. Defra, London, UK.
Jacobsen, S.-E., Mujica, A. & Jensen, C.R. 2003. The resistance
of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) to adverse abiotic factors. Food Reviews International, 19: 99-109.
FAO 1996. The Global Plan of Action for the Conservation and
Sustainable Utilization of Plant Genetic Resources for Food
and Agriculture (PGRFA), adopted by the International Technical Conference on Plant Genetic Resources (Leipzig, Germany.
June 17–23, 1996). Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations, Rome, Italy.
Joshi, B.D. 1991. Genetic resources of leaf and grain Amaranthus and chenopod. In M.S. Swaminathan & S. Jana, eds. Biodiversity. p. 121-134. Madras, India, Macmillan India Ltd.
FAO. 2008. FAOSTAT database. Available at http://www.fao.
org/economic/ess/publications-studies/statistical-yearbook/
fao-statistical-yearbook-2007-2008/g-human-welfare/en/
Kirtikar, K.R. & Basu, B.D. 2001. Indian Medicinal Plants, Vol. 9.
Oriental Enterprises, Dehradun.
Fuentes, F.F. & Bhargava, A. 2011. Morphological analysis of
quinoa germplasm grown under lowland desert conditions.
Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science, 197: 124-134.
Khan, G.S. 1998. Soil salinity/sodicity in Pakistan. Soil survey of
Pakistan. p 39.
Kumar, A., Bhargava, A., Shukla, S., Singh, H.B. & Ohri, D. 2006.
Screening of exotic Chenopodium quinoa accessions for downy
mildew resistance under mid-Eastern conditions of India. Crop
Protection, 25: 879-889.
CHAPTER: 6.2 Quinoa in the Indian subcontinent
Mahyao, A., Kouame, C., Agbo, E., N’zi, J.C., Fondio, L. & Van
Damme, P. 2009. Socio economic importance of urban markets
supply chains of indigenous leafy vegetables in Cote d’Ivoire. In
H. Jaenicke, J. Ganry, I. Hoeschle-Zeledon & R. Kahane, eds. International Symposium on Underutilized Plants for Food Security, Nutrition, Income and Sustainable Development. Arusha,
Tanzania, January 2009. Acta Horticulturae, 806: 489-496.
Mayes, S., Massawe, F.J., Alderson, P.G., Roberts, J.A., AzamAli, S.N. & Hermann, M. 2012. The potential for underutilized
crops to improve security of food production. J. Exp. Botany,
63: 1075-1079.
Prakash, D. & Pal, M. 1991. Nutritional and anti nutritional
composition of vegetable and grain amaranth leaves. J. Sci.
Food Agric., 57: 573-583.
Prescott-Allen, R. & Prescott-Allen, C. 1990. How many plants
feed the world? Conservation Biology, 4: 365-374.
Roxburgh, W. 1832. Flora Indica: Description of Indian Plants.
Vol. II. W. Thacker & Co., Calcutta with Allen & Co., London.
Saini, H.S. 2008. Climate change and its future impact on the
Indo-Gangetic plain (IGP). e-Journal Earth Science, 1: 138-147.
Munir, H. 2011. Introduction and assessment of Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) as a potential climate proof grain
crop. University of Agriculture, Faislabad, Pakistan. (PhD thesis)
Shukla, S., Pandey, V., Pachauri, G., Dixit, B.S., Bannerji, R. &
Singh, S.P. 2003. Nutritional contents of different foliage cuttings of vegetable amaranth. Pl. Foods Hum. Nutr., 58: 1-8.
Munir, H., Sehar, S., Basra, S.M.A., Jacobsen, H.-J. & Rauf, S.
2012. Growing quinoa in Pakistan as a potential alternative for
food security. In: Resilience of Agricultural Systems Against Crises. September 19-21, 2012, Göttingen-Kassel/Witzenhausen,
Germany.
Shukla, S., Bhargava, A., Chatterjee, A. & Singh, S.P. 2004. Estimates of genetic parameters to determine variability for foliage yield and its different quantitative and qualitative traits in
vegetable amaranth (A. tricolor). J. Genet. Breed., 58: 169-176.
Mwangi, S. & Kimathi, M. 2006. African leafy vegetable evolves
from underutilized species to commercial cash crop. Cali, Colombia, Research Workshop on Collective Action and Market
Access for Smallholders.
Padulosi, S., Hodgkin, T., Williams, J.T. & Haq, N. 2002. Underutilized crops: trends, challenges and opportunities in the 21st
Century. In J.M.M. Engels, V.R. Rao, A. Brown & M. Jackson, eds.
Managing Plant Genetic Resources, p. 323-338. CABI-IPGRI.
Padulosi, S., Heywood, V., Hunter, D. & Jarvis, A. 2011. Underutilized Species and Climate Change: Current Status and Outlook.
In S.S. Yadav, R.J. Redden & J.L. Hatfield, eds. Crop Adaptation
to Climate Change, p. 507-521. Blackwell Publishing Ltd, UK.
Partap, T. 1990. Exploiting underexploited crop plants of
mountain agriculture: Chenopods. In K.W. Riley, N. Mateo, G.C.
Hawtin, R.P. Yadav, eds. Mountain Agriculture and Crop Genetic Resources. New Dehli, Oxford and IBH.
Partap, T. & Kapoor, P. 1985. The Himalayan grain chenopods
I. Distribution and ethnobotany. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 14:
185-199.
Partap, T., Kapoor, P. (1987). The Himalayan grain chenopods
III. An under-exploited food plant with promising potential.
Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 19, 71-79.
Partap, T., Joshi B.D. & Galwey, N.W. 1998. Promoting the conservation and use of underutilized and neglected crops. 22.
Rome, International Plant Genetic Resources Institute.
Polok, K., Korniak, T. & Zielinski, R. 2008. Contribution of molecular genetics for new crops development. In J. Smartt & N.
Haq, eds. New Crops and Uses: Their Role in a Rapidly Changing
World. Southampton, UK, University of Southampton. p. 36-56.
Shukla, A.K., Sharma, S.K., Tiwari, R. & Tiwari, K.N. 2005a. Nutrient depletion in the rice-wheat cropping system of the IndoGangetic Plains. Better Crops, 89: 28-31.
Shukla, S., Bhargava, A., Chatterjee, A., Srivastava, A. & Singh,
S.P. 2005b. Estimates of genetic variability in vegetable amaranth (A. tricolor) over different cuttings. Hortic. Sci., 32: 60-67.
Shukla, S., Bhargava, A., Chatterjee, A., Pandey, A.C. & Mishra,
B.K. 2010. Diversity in phenotypic and nutritional traits in vegetable amaranth (Amaranthus tricolor), a nutritionally underutilized crop. Journal of the Sciences of Food and Agriculture, 90:
139-144.
Singh, V.K., Govil, J.N., Hashmi, S. & Singh, G. 2003. Recent Progress in Medicinal Plants (Vol. 7) Ethnomedicine and Pharmacognosy II. Stadium Press, LLC, USA.
Steadman, K.J., Burgoon, M.S., Lewis, B.A., Edwardson, S.E. &
Obendorf, R.L. 2001. Buckwheat seed milling fractions: description, macronutrient composition and dietary fibre. J. Cereal
Sci., 33: 271-278.
Thies, E. 2000. Promising and Underutilizing Species Crops and
Breeds. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit
(GTZ) GmbH, Eschborn, Germany.
Thomson, T. 1852. Western Himalayas and Tibet. Ratna Pustak
Bhandar, Kathmandu, Nepal.
The Times of India. 2013. Quinoa holds hopes for dry Anantapur. The Times of India. June 2, 2013.
Vadivel, V. & Janardhanan, K. 2001. Nutritional and anti-nutritional attributes of the under-utilized legume, Cassia floribunda. Cav. Food Chem., 73: 209-215.
Wilson, H.D. 1990. Quinua and relatives (Chenopodium sect.
Chenopodium subsect. Cellulata). Econ. Bot., 44: 92-110
523