Subscribe Now Subscribe Today
Research Article

Performance of F1 and F2 Hybrids of Cotton (Ggossypium hirsutum L.) for Yield and Yield Components

M. Iqbal, K. Hayat, R.T. Ahmad and N.I. Khan
Facebook Twitter Digg Reddit Linkedin StumbleUpon E-mail

The objective of this study was to evaluate the potential of F2 hybrids by comparing them with parents, commercial varieties and F1, s for yield, yield components and fibre quality. The genetic design was half diallel, consisting of five parents and additional five direct crosses were attempted to study inbreeding depression (CIM-496, MNH-554, FH-901, FH-945, LRA-5166, 10 F1 and 10 F2). The difference among genotypes were determined. The highest yielding parent was CIM-496 with 3521 kg ha-1 followed by MNH-554 with 3268 kg ha-1. While the variety FH-901 with 2391 kg ha-1 showed minimum yield among the parents. The cross combinations MNH-786 x VH-144, MNH-554 x LRA-5166 and CIM-499 x LRA-5166 showed minimum inbreeding depression i.e., -39.72, -27.85 and -22.72 for seed cotton yield, yield components and fibre traits than expected inbreeding depression i.e., 50.0%. General combining ability mean squares were significant for all traits and specific combing ability mean squares were also significant for all traits. The GCA effects were higher than SCA effects for all traits, which indicates that additive gene action is prevailing with dominant gene action for expression of these traits. The variety FH-901 was the best general combiner for the yield and yield components. It is concluded that F2 can be used for availing the heterosis after evaluating the proper cross combinations, be reduced.

Related Articles in ASCI
Similar Articles in this Journal
Search in Google Scholar
View Citation
Report Citation

  How to cite this article:

M. Iqbal, K. Hayat, R.T. Ahmad and N.I. Khan, 2007. Performance of F1 and F2 Hybrids of Cotton (Ggossypium hirsutum L.) for Yield and Yield Components. Asian Journal of Plant Sciences, 6: 678-683.

DOI: 10.3923/ajps.2007.678.683



Cotton is a nearly self pollinated crop (less than 1% cross pollination) in our environment due to indiscriminate use of insecticides. The improvement in its plant type can be brought through hybridization. It brings together certain superior genes from different promising cotton strains. Combining ability is a tool to predict combining potentials of different strains for various traits and to select the best from them. Using heterosis to increase yield of cotton has been objective of breeders, but no use in world except in countries where a vast labour force was available to make emasculation and crosses by hand, (Chaudhry, 1977b). In India at least 40% of cotton production is from intra-specific hybrid of G. hirsutum and 8% of its production is from G. hirsutum x G. barbadense hybrids (Chaudhry, 1977b). The yield increase of hybrid over the better parents or best commercial varieties due to sufficient magnitude of heterosis. Meredith (1998) using recent data showed heterosis of 21.4% for F1 hybrid and 10.7% for F2 but heterosis of fibre properties was small averaging from 0-2% and concluded that both F1 and F2 hybrids can produce significantly higher yields than the best yielding parents or the commercial cultivars. In Pakistan the hybrid of NIAB Karishma x CIM-435 was given to the growers for testing in the field which showed 10.5 increase in seed cotton yield over the best parent and best commercial variety as NAIB Karishma was the best variety during 1999-2000 (Anonymous, 2000). The magnitude of heterosis has been documented by Loden and Richmond (1951), Davis (1978), Meredith (1984), Baru (1995), Meyer (1975), Sheetz and Quisenberry (1986) and Iqbal et al. (2003). Breeding research needs to address all possibilities to increase yield, including the use of heterosis. The average cotton yield for Pakistan and world has showed no increase since 1992 (Chaudhry, 1977a). The major limiting factor to use heterosis in cotton is the lack of an efficient, dependable crossing system. The discovery of male sterile cytoplasm (Olvery, 1986) and restorer factor Weaver and Weaver (1977) give encouragement to breeders that hybrids in cotton are obtainable. However the complexities of developing good combiner with dependable fertility restoration percent are major problems for hybrid production. To avoid inconsistency of results from male sterile and restorer factor and cost of producing F1 seed, the commercial use of F2 hybrids has been proposed by Olvery (1986) and Iqbal et al. (2003). One method circumventing this inconsistence is to use male gametocytes (Sheetz and Quisenberry, 1986). However, due to lack of dependable and economic method of controlling the insect pattern carrier, it still has not been practical to produce F1 hybrids. The several well designed studies showed the potential for using F2 hybrids. Tang et al. (1993) evaluated yield performance of 64 F2’ s from four environment and reported 11.8% higher yields than that of commercial verities. Weaver (1984) reported 13.2 and 7.1% heterosis over mid parents for F1 and F2, respectively. The advantage of use F2, s is that it might have a broad range of adaptation than commercial varieties due to genetic variations. Reid (1995) reported that F2 superiority over their best parents was only detected under stress conditions. Baure and Gereen (1996) also reported F2, s greater superiority over their best parents was in lower yielding sites. Iqbal et al. (2003) revealed that F2 generation can also be cultivated in field for use of heterotic vigor and cost of seed production can be decreased. The objective of this study was to compare the yield and fibre properties of F1, F2 and combining ability of the genotypes.


A half diallel genetic design consisting of five parents, 10 F1 and 10 F2 hybrids grown in three replications at Cotton Research Station, Multan during 2003-2004. In addition to ten F2 hybrids of diallel, five promising direct crosses were also included for testing inbreeding depression. The F1 seeds were produced by hand crosses, F2 seeds were produced by selfing the hybrids 2004-2005. The parents were CIM-496, MNH-554, LRA- 5166, FH-901 and FH-945. The experimental design was Randomized Complete Block Design with three replications. Standard cultural methods for Multan region were used. The parents and F1 were grown in four rows plot of 30ft long, while each genotypes of F2 was grown in ten rows plot of 30ft long. Ten single guarded plant samples were hand harvested from each replication of F1 and parent, while 50 guarded plants were hand harvested from each replication of F2. These samples were used to determine the boll weight, lint % and fibre quality traits. The seed cotton yield ha-1 was determined from the total plot weight while combining ability (both general combining ability and specific combining ability) analysis were made using the method given by Griffing (1956) (method-2, model-2).


The objective of this study was to compare consistency of performance of F1 and F2 generations. Mean yield, yield components and fibre properties for five parents, are given in Table 1, which showed wide genetic differences for all characters under study among parents. The yield superiority of F1 hybrid over F2 and their parents is presented in (Table 2). Usually the heterosis denoted mid parent value H but the major interest in present study was the yield comparison of F2 hybrid with F1 and established variety i.e., CIM-496, which covered about 40% area in Punjab (Anonymous, 2005, 2006). The highest yielding varieties CIM496 averaged 3521 kg ha-1. The increase and decrease percentage in yield of F2 hybrid over F1 and standard varieties is given in Table 2, from which it is evident that several F2 hybrids were superior in yield to well established variety CIM-496. The highest yielding F2 hybrid MNH - 786xVH-144, CEDIXxCIM-499 and LRA-5166xCIM-499 yielded seed cotton 6013.6, 5864 and 5857.3 kg ha-1, respectively. Assuming that dominant gene action causes the Heterosis, the F2 yield is expected to loss 50% of the heterosis expressed by F1. The maximum hybrid vigor loss for yield was observed -42.12% in cross MNH-554xLRA-5166 followed by CIM-499xLRA-5166 and CIDEXxCIM-446 showed -39.7 and -27.85% loss of heterosis for yield, respectively. While the minimum hybrid vigor loss for yield was recorded -3.04 and -5.54% for CIDEXxCIM-499 and MNH-554xFH-945, respectively. The highest yielding F2 hybrids MNH-786xVH-144, CEDIXxCIM-499 and LRA-5166xCIM-499 loose -12.03, -42.12 and -39.72% hybrid vigor over F1 but the yield was quite higher than the best commercial variety CIM-496. The increase in yield of these three F2 hybrid was 34.41, 15.41 and 14.65% over CIM-496, respectively. The inbreeding depression of highest yielding F1 hybrids was about what was expected on a 50% decrease in dominance from F1 to F2. Several crosses however shown little inbreeding depression in Table 2. Meyer (1975), Sheetz and Quinseberry (1986) and Iqbal et al. (2003), have reported high yielding F2 hybrids that produced greater yield than expected on the basis of their F1 and parental performance. This deviation of F2 from expected could be due to non-additive gene action other than dominance or plant competition with in the plant population.

Table 1: Mean yield, yield components and fiber properties of five parents

Table 2: Mean yield, yield components and comparison of F1, F2 and STD

Table 3: Mean square of various plant characters of cotton of 5x5 diallel
*Significant, **Highly significant

The results of present studies showed, for total yield and yield components of F2 hybrids could be competitive with established commercial variety. The percent increase for yield components and fibre quality traits over best commercial variety of F1 and F2 population is presented in Table 2. These above mentioned crosses showed heterosis for almost all traits under consideration from commercial variety except for GOT (%) and staple length. Meredith (1984) summary of 18 states research experiment on heterosis in cotton reported on an average total yield heterosis of 18.5%. The hybrid vigor loss in F2, for cross CEDIX x CIM-499 and MNH-554 x FH-945 was -3.04 and - 5.54 for seed cotton yield, respectively. The hybrid MNH786 x VH144 showed highest yield loosed hybrid vigor - 6.25, -3.05, -12.03, -2.16, -2.13 %, for boll weight, boll no, seed cotton yield, GOT and staple length, respectively (Table 2). The hybrid vigor loss for LRA-5166 x FH-901 was -2.94, -8.41, -12.92, -8.39 and -1.41 for boll weight, No. of boll, yield , G.O.T. and staple length respectively (Table 2). Similarly inbreeding depression for MNH-554 x LRA-5166 was - 8.17, -1.77, -42.12, -6.36 and -3.33% for boll weight., boll no, seed cotton yield, GOT and staple length, respectively (Table 2). These results indicated that inbreeding depression for these crosses is less than 50% for all traits under study. It is also concluded from these results that F2 generation can also be cultivated in field for the use of heterotic vigor and cost of seed production can be decreased. The results are also in according to the previous findings of Meyer (1975), Sheetz and Quinseberry (1986) and Iqbal et al. (2003). The significant deviation of F2 in hybrid vigor (Inbreeding depression) from expected 50% could be due to non additive gene action other than dominance. From these results it can also be concluded that F2, s can produce better combination of yield and fibre quality e.g., CIM-499 x LRA-5166, LRA-5166 x FH-901. On the basis of genetic variation within F2, it might have broader range of adaptation than conventional varieties and F1. So the question concerning the stability across environments of parents, F1, F2 remains open as it will require a greater range of climate, soils, pest management and environments to determine while F2 hybrids are more adoptable than their parents in F1 hybrids. In general the inter actions of yield components with environments were of lesser magnitude than for total yield. From Table 3 and 4 it is evident that GCA variances were significant for all the traits and SCA variances were also significant at p = 0.05%. The variety FH-945 is the best general combiner for No. of bolls per plant, boll weight, seed cotton yield, GOT and staple length and similarly FH-901 is good general combiner for earliness (NFB), but MNH-554 is also good combiner for GOT (Table 5). The cross combinations MNH- 554 x LRA- 5166, LRA-5166 x CIM-499, are valuable crosses for seed cotton yield and its components as these crosses had high SCA effect for seed cotton yield and its components (Table 6). These results suggested that at least one parent should be well adopted for developing hybrid having high yield. The crosses MNH-554 xFH- 901, CIM- 499 xFH- 901 and LRA- 5166 x FH- 901 showed low inbreeding depression had also low specific combining ability for all traits under study (Table 2 and 6). As SCA effect are due to dominant gene action, if dominant gene action will be present the expected inbreeding depression in F2 will be 50%. As in these three crosses the value of SCA effect is low indicating that other than dominant gene action is prevailing due to the reason, inbreeding depression for these three crosses is less than 50%. As in these three crosses FH- 901, which has the high GCA effect for seed cotton yield, NFB and boll weight.

Table 4: Mean square of combining ability analysis in 5x5 diallel crosses of cotton
*Significant, **Highly significant

Table 5: Estimation of general combining ability effects for yield, yield components and fibre tester in a set of 5x5 diallel crosses among five cotton varieties

Table 6: Estimation of special combining effects for yield, yield components and fiber tester in a set of 5x5 diallel crosses among five cotton varieties

Table 5, indicating that FH-901 is a good general combiner for above mentioned traits. For hybrid vigor choosing of second parent is bit more difficult. No pattern of variety related for the selection for second parent was evident. An expectation exists when fibre quality is major breeding objective, then one must choose at least one parent that has above average fiber properties. The genetic differences among the potential parents required high heterosis, it is no assurance that diverse parents will produce high heterosis. It is not essential that diverse parents should have high hybrid vigour than commercial variety. Further research has to be conducted to identify the parents/hybrids that show high hybrid vigour in F1 and maintained in F2 with low inbreeding depression for commercial utilization of F2 hybrids to overcome the CLCV and other field problems.

1:  Anonymous, 2002. Annual progress report of CCRI. Multan, 1990.

2:  Anonymous, 2006. Crop reporting department. Report, 2005-2006.

3:  Baru, A.K., 1995. Hybrid cotton results and prospectus. Proceedings of the Challenging the Future World Cotton Research Conference, Brisbane Australia, February 14-17, 1999, CSIRO, Australia, pp: 335-341.

4:  Baure, P.J. and C.C. Gereen, 1996. Evolution of F2 genotype of cotton for conservation tillage. Crop Sci., 36: 655-658.

5:  Chaudhry, M.R., 1997. Cotton yields standing. The lint cotton. Advisory Committee Recorder XY, pp: 3-7.

6:  Chaudhry, M.R., 1977. Commercial cotton hybrid. The Lint Cotton Advisory Committee Recorder XY.

7:  Davis, D.D., 1978. Hybrids cotton: Specific problem and potential. Adv. Agron., 30: 129-157.

8:  Griffing, B., 1956. Concept of general and specific combining ability in relation to diallel crossing systems. Aust. J. Biol. Sci., 9: 463-493.
Direct Link  |  

9:  Iqbal, M., M.Z. Iqbal, M.A. Chang and K. Hayat, 2003. Yield and fibre quality potential for second generation cotton hybrids. Pak. J. Bio. Sci., 6: 1883-1887.
Direct Link  |  

10:  Loden, H.D. and T.R. Richmond, 1951. Hybrid vigor in cotton. Cytogenesis aspect and practical application. Econ. Bot., 5: 387-408.

11:  Meredith, Jr. W.R., 1984. Quantitative Genetics. In: Cotton Agronomy, Kohel, R.J. and C.F. Lewis (Eds.). CSSA, Madison, Wl., USA., pp: 131-150.

12:  Heterosis in Cotton. 1998. Heterosis in Cotton. Heterosis in Crop. CIMMYT. Workshop ASA and CSSA Madison Wl., USA, pp: 101-102.

13:  Meyer, V.G., 1975. Male sterility from Gossypium hurkenssi. J. Herred., 66: 23-27.

14:  Olvery, J.M., 1986. Performance and potential of F2 hybrids. Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Producation Resource Confernce, January 4-9, 1986, Las Vegas, NV., USA., pp: 101-102.

15:  Reid, P.F., 1995. Performance of F1 and F2 Hybrid Between Australia and USA Commercial Cotton Cultivars. In: Challenging the Future, Constable, G.A. and N.W. Forester (Eds.), World Cotton Research, Brisbane Australia, pp: 346-349.

16:  Sheetz, R.H. and J.E. Quisenberry, 1986. Heterosis and combining ability effects on upland cotton hybrids. Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Producation Resource Confernce, January 4-9, 1986, Las Vegas, NV., USA., pp: 94-98.

17:  Tang, B., J.N. Jenkis, T.C. Mecanty and C.E. Walson, 1993. F2 hybrid of host plant germplasm and Cotton Cultivation. Heterosis and combining ability for lint yield and yield components. Crop Sci., 33: 700-705.

18:  Weaver, B., M. and J.B. Weaver, 1977. Inheritance of pollen fertility restoration in cytoplasmic male sterile upland cotton. Crop Sci., 17: 497-499.

19:  Weaver, J.B. and Jr., 1984. Agronomic Properties of F1 Hybrid and Open Pollinated F2,s among Twelve Cultivars of Cotton Confernce Atlanta. GA., Nat. Cotton Council of Am., Memphis, TN., pp: 8-12.

©  2021 Science Alert. All Rights Reserved