Biochemical and Molecular Studies on Rhizobium Inoculated Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Genotypes Grown in Eastern U.P.

INTRODUCTION

Pulses play a pivotal role and occupy a unique position in Indian agriculture by virtue of their inherent capacity to grow on marginal lands and provide protein rich diet to the vegetarian mass of the country, consumption of pulses along with cereals increase biological value of protein consumed. Amongst the leguminous crops, chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) occupy an important position due to its nutritive values (17-23% protein) in large vegetarian population of the country (Ali and Kumar, 2006).

Chickpea have been shown to be rich in proteins. However, their contribution in a diet does not depend on its quality as well. The quality of a protein is known to be affected by essential amino acid composition, amino acid imbalance availability of essential amino acids, digestibility and interference in protein utilization by anti-nutritional factors. The amino acid composition of pulses has been widely studied. It has been observed that pulse proteins are mainly deficient in sulphur containing amino acids and tryptophan but are rich in lysine in which cereals are relatively deficient.

In general, chickpea proteins exhibit a wide range of variation in their essential amino acids. Cotyledon, being the major component of seed accounts for 93% of methionine and tryptophan of the whole seed while the seed coat is usually varies poor in these amino acids. The embryo is rich in methionine and tryptophan but it contributes only about 2.5% of their total quantity in seed. Environmental factors under which the pulse crops are growing influence their amino acid composition (Ali et al., 2003).

Chickpea is used for human consumption as well as for feeding animals. It is eaten as both whole fried or boiled and salted or more generally in the form of the spilt pulse (dhal) which is cooked and eaten. Both husks and bits of ‘dhal’ form valuable cattle feed. Green foliage and green grains are also used as vegetables. Straw of gram is an excellent fodder for cattle. Parched gram is either consumed as such, or ground into flour or sattu. Gram flour (besan) is used in the preparation of various types of sweets.

Besides, this medicinal importance can not over looked scurvy patients are advised by the doctor to take germinated gram seed to get rid-off. Malic and oxalic acid collected from green leaves of gram are prescribed for intestinal disorders (CSIR, 1950). Germinated seeds are recommended as a prophylactic agent against deficiency, diseases. Keeping in view of above outmost importance of chickpea pertaining to human health, diversified use and insufficient inferences of the present investigation was undertaken.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The present investigation on “Biochemical and molecular studies on Rhizobium inoculated chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) genotypes grown in eastern U.P.” was carried out at Student’s Instructional Farm and in the laboratory of Department of Biochemistry during Rabi season of 2010-11 and 2011-12. After harvesting, the seeds were collected and stored in desiccators for the analysis of various biochemical parameters.

Reducing sugar content in chickpea seed was determined by the method of Miller (1959). Total sugar content in chickpea seed was determined by the method of Dubois et al. (1956). The non-reducing sugar content in chickpea seed was determined by subtraction of reducing sugar from total sugar. Non-reducing sugar = Total sugar-reducing sugar.

Crude fiber content and Total mineral content in chickpea seed was estimated with the help of method described by Hart and Fisher (1971). Total free amino acid in chickpea seed was determined by the method of Jayraman (1981).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Content of crude fibre in chickpea seed are given in Table 1. Crude fibre content in chickpea ranged from 12.89-13.79% in control, Rhizobium inoculated 13.11-15.03%. Highest crude fibre content was reported in PUSA 362 (13.78%) followed by H82-2 (13.38%), KWR 108 (13.35%) in control, Rhizobium inoculated PUSA 362 (15.00%) followed by H82-2 (14.69%), KWR 108 (14.60%) and lowest value was in KKG 306 (13.00%) followed by L550 (12.90%), KAK 2 (12.86%) in control whereas, Rhizobium inoculated ICCV10 recorded (14.00%) followed by L550(13.15%), KAK 2 (13.10%) during 2010-11. In the second year, maximum crude fiber content was reported in PUSA 362 (13.79%) followed by H82-2 (13.39%), KWR 108 (13.34%) in control, Rhizobium inoculated PUSA 362 (15.05%) followed by H82-2 (14.68%), KWR 108 (14.62%) and lowest value was in KKG 306 (13.00%) followed by L550 (12.92%), KAK 2 (12.91%) in control whereas, Rhizobium inoculated ICCV10 recorded (14.05%) followed by L550 (13.17%), KAK 2 (13.12%) during 2011-12.

Table 1:	Crude fibre contents (%) in chickpea seeds

Table 2:	Total mineral contents (%) i n chickpea genotypes

The results comprising to crude fibre content were found statistically significant for both the years i.e., 2010-11 and 2011-12.The results indicate to close agreement with Abdalla et al. (2013).

Data displayed on total mineral content in chickpea seeds are presented in Table 2. Total mineral content ranged from 3.55-3.79% in control, Rhizobium inoculated 4.14-4.45%.

Table 3:	Total free amino acids (%) in chickpea seeds

Maximum content of total mineral was noticed in PUSA 362 (3.80%) followed by H82-2 (3.75%), Phule G 5 (3.69%) in control, Rhizobium inoculated PUSA 362 (4.45%) followed by H82-2 (4.29%), NDG 54 (4.27%) and lowest value was in ICCV 10 (3.60%) followed by KAK 2 (3.58%), L550 (3.55%), in control whereas, Rhizobium inoculated ICCV 10 recorded (4.20%) followed by KAK 2 (4.16%), L550 (4.14%), during 2010-11. In the second year, maximum total mineral content was reported in PUSA 362 (3.78%) followed by H82-2 (3.75%), NDG 54 (3.71%) in control, Rhizobium inoculated PUSA 362 (4.45%) followed by H82-2 (4.28%), NDG 54 (4.26%) and lowest value was in Pant G 186 (3.60) followed by KAK 2 (3.58%), L550 (3.55%) in control whereas, Rhizobium inoculated Pant G 186 recorded (3.61%) followed by KAK 2 (3.58%) L550 (3.55%) during 2011-12. The results pertaining to total mineral content were found statistically significant for both the years i.e., 2010-11 and 2011-12. The results are closely supported with Amir et al. (2006), Kaur and Singh (2007) and Saxena and Saxena (2011).

The data pertaining to the total free amino acids in chickpea seeds are presented in Table 3. Total free amino acids in chickpea seeds ranged from 2.35-2.51% in control, Rhizobium inoculated 2.38-2.65%. Maximum total free amino acids reported in PUSA 362 (2.50%) followed by H82-2 (2.48%), RSG888 (2.46%) in control, Rhizobium inoculated PUSA 362 (2.65%) followed by H82-2 (2.61%), RSG 888 (2.60%) and lowest value was in Pant G186 (2.33%) followed by L550 (2.31%), C-235 (2.27%), in control whereas, Rhizobium inoculated L550 recorded (2.44%) followed by C-235 (2.41%), KAK 2 (2.38%) during 2010-11. In the second year, maximum total free amino acids were reported in PUSA 362 (2.51%) followed by H82-2 (2.48%), RSG888 (2.47%) in control, Rhizobium inoculated PUSA 362 (2.65%) followed by RSG888 (2.61%), H82-2 (2.60%) and lowest value was in KAK 2 (2.35%) followed by Pant G186 (2.34%), C-235 (2.26%) in control whereas, Rhizobium inoculated L550 recorded (2.45%) followed by C-235 (2.42%), KAK 2 (2.38%) during 2011-12. The results related to total free amino acids were found statistically non significant for both the years i.e., 2010-11 and 2011-12. The results are very much supported with Chaterjee et al. (1977) and Iqbal et al. (2006).

Data on reducing sugar, non-reducing sugar and total sugar in chickpea seed have been presented in Table 4. Highest content of reducing sugar recorded in KWR108 (25.80%) followed by PUSA 362 (25.73%), H82-2 (25.74%) in control, Rhizobium inoculated KWR 108 (25.38%), by H82-2 (25.34%) PUSA 362 (25.30%), non-reducing sugar KWR108 (41.21%) followed by H82-2 (41.11%) PUSA 362 (41.09%) in control, Rhizobium inoculated KWR 108 (40.53%) followed by H82-2 (40.47%), PUSA 362 (40.42%) and total sugar H82-2 (66.85%) followed by PUSA 362 (66.81%) KWR 108 (67.00%) in control, Rhizobium inoculated KWR 108 (65.91%) followed by H82-2 (65.80%), PUSA 362 (65.76%) and the lowest values were recorded genotypes KKG 306 (24.54%) followed by BG 2083 (24.45%) in control, Rhizobium inoculated KKG 306 (24.15%) followed by BG 2083 (24.05%) (reducing sugar), BG 2083 (39.06%) followed by KKG 306 (39.21%) in control, Rhizobium inoculated KKG 306 (38.58%) followed by BG 2083 (38.41%) G 2083 (39.06%) in non-reducing sugar, KKG 306 (63.75%) followed by BG 2083 (63.51%) in control, Rhizobium inoculated KKG 306 (62.73%) followed by BG 2083 (62.46%) in total sugar.

Table 4:	Reducing sugar, non-reducing sugar and total sugar contents (%) in chickpea seeds

It was revealed from table that reducing sugar, non-reducing sugar and total sugar varied significantly both the year (2010-11 and 2011-12). The results indicate to close favour with Shad et al. (2009) and Amir et al. (2006).

CONCLUSION

The variations due to genotypes have been screened out by exploring parameters and found suitability of wide uses of desi and kabuli chickpea. It has resulted most promising varieties viz., desi and kabuli Rhizobium inoculated genotype PUSA 362, KWR 108 and H 82-2. Among these, PUSA 362was found highest enriching of amino acid content. In regard, desi chickpea varieties also augmented new facts on the nutritional aspect in Pusa 362 and KWR 108. Interestingly Pusa 362 variety encountered rich quantum of carbohydrate sugar and crude fibre thereby, it might be recommended for the users at growing and healthy age group of people.