Agric. Rev., 24 (4) : 235 - 249, 2003

TARAMIRA (ERUCA SATIVA) AND ITS IMPROVEMENT - A REVIEWE.V. Divakara Sastry

Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics,S K N College of Agriculture,

Rajasthan Agricultural University, Jobner - 303 329. India

ABSTRACTTaramira Is an important 011seed crop of drier regions of north-western India. The oil is not

directly eaten, although It Is mixed with mustard oil to Increase the pungency of the later. It originatedin Mediterranean region. It has 2n-22 chromosomes which are very small. Genetic improvement islimited in this crop, although some varieties are available. Very recently a variety RTM-314 has beenrele. for the general cultivation. Taramlra has good traits particularly conferring disease resistancewhich can be transferred to Brassica campestris and B. juncea both are important crops. Some effortsare underway in this regard with limited success. -

Taramira (Eroea sativa Mill) is a lowgrowing, annual oilseed crop with dull green,deeply cut. compound leaves. The leaves arecharacterized by a distinctive spicy, pungentflavour resembling horseradish. The plant wasconsidered by early writers as a good salad herb,but not to be eaten alone. Ancient Egyptiansand Romans both have considered the leavesin salad to be an aphrodisiac. Taramira alsoknown as· rocket in European countries is amember of the family brassicaceae. Plaxton'sbotanical dictionary (Hereman, 1868) lists itunder Eruca tournefort and writes that thename should have originated from the word'uro' meaning to burn, because the seeds havea burning taste and' when applied· to the skirtcauses blisters. Taramira is generally grown onmarginal lands of north and north west Indiaand is generally known by different names.Singh (1958) states that this is known as tara,tera, schwan, seoha, duan turra, tirwa, merha,merkai, chara and ushan in Uttar Pradesh; assondha in Gwalior (Madhya Pradesh) and astara or simply as taramirain PUnjab. In Europeit is known as rocket salad, rocket, roquuetteor arrugula, where this is generally grown foryoung leaves which are eaten as green salad.In trade terms taramira is generally put undermustard group. The name "rocket" derivesfrom the French roquette, a diminutive formof the Latin eruca, the Italian ruccetta, and

medieval French Provencal roqueto (From thewebsite of University of Florida), Althoughtaramira oil is not edible because of its chemicalcomposition, it is generally mixed with mustardoil to give more pungency to the later a traitpreferred in mustard oil (Table 1). Chief usesof taramira are limited to its use as massageoil, or in industries for the production oflubricants and blown oil (Singh, 1958). The oilcake is used as a feed for cattle. Cattle fed ontaramira cake are reported to be free from ticks(Singh, 1958). Administration of taramira oilhas reduced the effects of diabetes mellitus inrats (EI Missiry and EI Gindy, 2000). Unanisystem of medicine has preparations madefrom taramira (Ghauri and Afridi, 1997).

Rocket is widely cultivated in Europeand its cultivation has reached to Americasthrough migration (Pignone, 1997).Mohamedien (1995) reports that particularecotypes of rocket are used as salad in Egypt.In Europe the name rocket is applied to anumber of species belonging to genus Erueaand Dip/otaxis(Dias, 1997 and Pignone 1997)of which the commonly grown Eroca speciesis Eroea sativa Mill. while the commonly grownDip/otaxisspecies are D. tenuifo/ia (L) DC andD. muralis(L.) DC (Pignone, 1997). Dip/otaxisspecies are commonly known as wild rocket(Bianco and Boari, 1997), In Europe the useof rocket as food has been in vogue since time

:.'·~6 AGRICULTURAL REVIEWS

Table 1. Composition of taramira oil in comparison to mustard (Sharma et al. 1991}

Component Sarson ('I-'ll) Rai (%) Taramira (%)

Erucic acid 57.2 41.5 46.3Oleic acid 20.2 32.3 28.7Linoleic acid 14.5 18.1 12.4Saturated falty acids 6.0 5.4 10.5

immem9rial, its use is gaining importance even;nore in recent times (Bianco, 1995). As suchits cultivation as a vegetable is still limited andthe market demand is often met by harvestingthe plants from the wild rather than bycuitivating it, particularly in Italy (Bianco andBoari, 1997). In Asia, particularly in Indiareports on its use as salad are not known. InAsia major growing area is in India followedby a limited are in Pakistan. In India a majorportion of area is in the state of Rajasthan withlimited areas in Gujarat and Haryana. InRajasthan it is cultivated over an area of 26746ha with an annual production of 10033 tonnes(Anonymous, 2001-2). The area andproduction fluctuates widely (Fig. 1). It wascultivated on a record area of 281 thousandha in the year 1987-88. There is an increasingtendency to grow mustard in the traditionaltaramira areas owing to development ofirrigation facilities (Fig. 1). During normalrainfall mustard is preferred over taramira whichcontributes to the wide fluctuation in the areaand production over years because of theplanting which depends mainly on rains, where.Perusal of Fig. 2 amply supports the stated fact.Looking into its ability to tolerate drought andaphid resistance, presently efforts are underwayto transfer these traits into economicallypreferred Brassicas like Brassica campestris(Agnihotri et aI., 1990; Sikdar et aI., 1990).Even in UK some efforts are being done todevelop transgenics of Brassica which havethe flavour of Eroca in the leaves (Magrath andMithen, 1997).

Origin and TaxonomyTaramira is believed to be a native of

Southern Europe and North Africa (Bailey,

1949; Prakash, 1980). Yarnell (1956) reportsthat taramira was abundant in the gardens ofEurope in t~ 16th century, while there is norecord about its introduction into Indian Sub­continent (Prakash, 1980). Introduction intoUnited States took place before 1854 but couldnot become popular there (Sturtevant, 1915).

The taxonomic position of taramira inthe earlier times was very confusing. It was firstput in the genus Brassica and named Brassicaerucoides (Roxburgh, 1832), while Hooker(1872) referred to it as Brassica eroca. Plaxton(Hereman, 1868) described it as Erucatournefort and lists about 3 species namelyErvca hispida, Eroca sativa, and Eroca vesicaria.Seven subspecies namely a/ba-g/abra, a/ba­pi/osa. erucoides, exotica, flava g/abra, .flavapi/osa and turgida were listed in Eroca sativa.Plaxton (Hereman, 1868) further stated thatamong these Eruca hispida originated inNaples, Eruea vesicaria from Spain, while allthe subspecies of Eroca sativa originated fromSouthern Europe. Basically all these speciesare hardy annuals with white to yellow flowers.Miller has put in a separate genus Eroca (Tutinet al, 1964). There is confusion with regardto different species of the genus Eroca. Gomez­Campo (1980) lists about four species in genus£ruea while Matsuzawa and Sarashima (1986)report presence of ten species under Eroca.Tsunoda et al (1980) report the maintenanceof three species namely Eroca veseicarai (L)Cav., from Zargoza, Spain; £mca pinnatifida(Desf.) Pomel from Morocco and Eroca sativa(Miller) from Alexandra, Egypt at the Facultyof Agriculture, Tohuku University. Vesperinas(1995) has established through interspecificcrosses the separate nature of E. sativa and E

t

IxI

:=:8~

Vol. 24, No.4, 2003

,{~l:1.;>

q,~'6l ~

D~m

..c:'6l :q

'iij-'

'%1.. c::::"'<5' C

'-~ ~&><5'~

iii

~;9_.

~

%.""6' =

'C

~.'

c,

"'"4'61._ ,~.

I!' . -.-~

....0.,~6

~

'"'!'~~ -=:"-'SW

~. -°0 ~

6'~~ --~,

:J.

~. "'"'~,~

~

~iiI ..-<

OJ..~ I~,"

~"'iii

237

l\) w 00

.0S

epte

mbe

rra

infa

ll-.-

Oct

ober

rain

fall

-1-

Mus

tard

area

Tar

amir

aar

ea

- - - - -»

gC

)

IIIF5

-..

l!!C

<!:j C

--~ r- :l:

l

-~

-~

q

j-"

0

2D1I

l20

01

.Q

oo

i iI

~.ll

J"\0

o.

...-

0'.

_..

....

.•..•--.~

0//

~._--------,___.

4'

•-_

.....

.......

...~

......B

..--I

I-_

....

7I'.

0:-,-

.,O---,--:~.--.--"...::;::::.~~-.----.-.--.--z-..,-.c,

,,~~

I19

8419

851g

all

1987

1988

1gag

19Q

)19

91lQ

Q219

9319

9419

9519

9t1

lQG7

,.

19G(

/tI50250

IC

orre

lati

ons:

0

Tar

clln

Jra-

area

-Sep

t.ra

infa

ll'"

0.3

38

6

2001

'fard

rnir

a-ar

ea-G

ct.

rain

fall

=0

.54

53

Mus

tard

-are

a-S

ept.

rain

fall

=0

.52

25

Mus

tard

-are

a-G

ct.

rain

fall

=0

.15

10

I.1

50E .§

. == -E10

0J"

'iii

I'c:::

I0

I\

/\

~0

Yea

rs

Fig.

2.A

rea

ofR

apes

eed-

mus

tard

and

tara

mir

aan

dra

infa

llof

Sep

tem

ber

and

Oct

ober

mon

ths

inJa

ipur

regi

onof

~jasthan

stat

e

~1I1l

LCo

-

O!l

"j

e.c

·0~

I,ll

-

.,S

•

£rua

Jve

sica

ria

ssp.

sativ

a(M

ill.)

The

b.

mlim

III

rnIn

11m

mIn

pmrn

m

Kal

iotip

icfo

rmul

a=

sm'"

+B

m+

2sm

(2n=

22)

Hap

loid

complemt~I~1

iell~rh

16

73

flm

UI

0.(0

00

1-0sl - ,

.,<l

-1.S

Eruc

ave

sica

ria

ssp.

pinn

etill

de(D

eaf.)

Em

b.an

dM

aize

~ lAm

~.l.In

mm

I~m

mm

mm

111In

Kar

iotip

icfo

rmul

a=

sm'"

+B

rn+

2sm

(2n=

22)

Hap

loid

com

plem

ent

leng

th18

.43

~lrn

~ f') +> Z ~ +> f') o o w

Fig.

3.Id

iO<.

Jram

mnt

icre

pmse

ntdt

ion

ofth

eha

ploi

dco

mpl

emen

tof

£ruc

aspe

cies

(131

angf

orti

and

Ven

ora,

1997

)

f')

W \0

240 AGRICULTURAL REVIEWS

vesicaria. In India only Eroea sativa is grown. incompatibility is complex (Lewis, 1979;Information with regard to other species is Wallace, 1979) and is because of the interactionnot available. between the specific 'S' alleles (Shivanna,Morphology 1985). Verma et a/. (1985) have also shown

It is an annual, one metre tall plant the existence of partial self-incompatibility alongand is an out breeder with sporophytic type of with self-incompatibility. Sharma et a/. (1985)self-incompatibility (Singh, 1958; Prakash, were able to overcome self-incompatibility in1980). Detailed morphological description of Eroea sativa by treating the stigma with lectinsthis crop was given by Singh (1958). At the. before making pollination. Bud pollination isfirst glance the plant looks similar to mustard routinely done to overcoJ1le self incompatibilitybut the siliqua may help to distinguish it fro~ . in the maintenance of germplasm (Sharmamustard. The plants are comparatively light . et a/. 1991).green in comparison to mustard. Siliqua is Leonardis et a/. (1997) have studiedabout 2.5 cm in length with a flat mensiform the seed morphology using specializedseedless beak whose width is about half the technique and scanning electron microscopy.size of valves. The pods are bilocular. and the They reported clear cut differences in the seedseeds are in a double row of series 'in each morphology of different species of the genuscompartment of the fruit which is the specific Eroea studied. The morphological data arefeature of this crop (Singh, 1958). It has an oil presented in Table 2. The seeds exhibitedcontent ranging from 30-35%. The major greater morpho-biometric interspecificcomponent of oil is Erucic acid (about 46%). homogeneity and clearly distinguishes the E111Ca

Flowers open in the morning generally species from Diplotaxis. The most importantwhen it is warm i.e. around 9 AM. The opening discriminative character between these twomay be delayed during cool periods, cloudy or genera is represented by seed length, whichrainy days. Cross pollination is by insects and varies from 1.30 to 1.55 mm in Eruea. Similarabout 100 species of insects were found visiting results were also reported by Xiu Zhen et a/.the flowers in Punjab, of which Apis florea. (1977 and 1998).Andrena .ilerda and !!alictus sp. wereot Cytologyforemost Importance (Smgh, 1958). Like other members of Brassic:lceae,

Based upon the system of Kakizaki .. the' genus Eruea have small chromosomes(1930), Narsingdas (1958) reported thatthe making its study difficult. The diploidself incompatibility found in taramil1i is of chromosome number of Eroea sativa is 22gametophytic system. This report is uniqu~as,·(Alam, 1936, Yarnell, 1956: Mukherjee, 1973;in general, the Grucifers exhibit sporoph~ic Pt:akashapd Tsunoda, 1983) and the haploidsystem of self-incompatibility (Thomsol1, 1957; set is geherally referred to "E" genome (PrakashHaruta, 1962). Later, through extensive and Tsunoda, 1983). Eleven bivalents areexperimentation, Verma et al. (1977) have regularly formed at Metaphase I and secondaryshown the existence of sporophytic type self- associations between bivalents are also foundincompatibility which is also supported by Lewis (Alam, 1936; Verma and Chauhan, 1985).(1977). While Lewis (1977) and Verma et a/. Based upon these secondary associations, Alam(1977) have shown the self-incompatibility to (1936) concluded that the basic number in thisbe controlled by 2 to 3 genes, Verma and Lewis species may be six. This inter-bivalent(1977) have shown the self-incompatibility to association, according to Verma and Chauhanbe invoked by four genes. The system of (1985), reflects cryptic structural alterations/

Vol. 24. No.4. 2003 241

Table 2. The average dimensions of seed and seed morphology (Leonardis et al. 1997)

Parameter Eruca pinnatilida var aura £ruca vesican'a EnJca sativa

Very evidentVery evidentCovered withfunicular tissueReticulum withvcry narrow luminaFrom ycllow brownto grecn olive

Widely ellipticalFrom subcircular tosubrhombic0.3 mmwideAs long as thecotyledonous.curved. subacute

0.3 mmwideAs long as thecotyledonous.curved. subacuteSub obtuseVery evidentVery evidcntCovered withfunicular tissueReticulum withvery narrow luminaFrom yellow brownto green olive

EllipticalTightly elliptical

0.25mmwideAs long as thecotyledons. sub obtuse

Sub obtuseVcry evidentVery evidentCovered with a widewing of funicular tissueReticulum withnarrow laminaEgg yellow

Radicular shapeRadicular extremity

Side outlineTransverse outline

Tegument

Seed length (mm) 1.47 1.35 1.44Seed width (mm) 0.99 0.83 1.04Seed thIckness (mm) 0.55 0.77 0.80Shape Ovate From widely From ovatc to

elliptical to widely ellipticalwidely ovateWidely ellipticalSubcircular

Colour

Cotyledollolls extremityBasal cutRadicular and cotyledonous furrowHilum and micropyle

rearrangements in the genomic organization.

Comparing the ideotypes, Mukherjee(1973) showed Eruca to be related to Brassica.Mukherjee (1973) classified the chromosomesinto 4 classes- class 'A' having longchromosomes with two constrictions (primaryand secondary) of which Eruca has one pair.Class 'B' - comparatively long to medium sizedchromosomes with median to sub- medianprimary constriction of which 8 pairs arepresent in Eruca and class 'C' -shortchromosome with median to sub medianprimary constriction for which only one pair ispresent in Eruca. Partial homology betweenyenomes of Eruca and Brassica has beenreported by Mizushima (1950) and a fertilehybrid between Eruca sativa and Brassicacampestris with 5 bivalents attributable toallosynthetic pairing has also been obtainedindicating a distant evolutionary relationshipbetween Eruca and Brassica. Inter generichybrids of EllIca sativa with various Brassicaspecies were obtained by Matsuzawa andSmashima (1986).

Blangiforti and Venora (1997) havestudied the karyotype using specialized imageanalysis system and dedicated soft ware 'Karyo95'. The results obtained are presented in Fig3. While the three species studied by theseworkers had same chromosome number,2n=22, the speculation of the degree ofkaryotype evolution indicated that Eruca speciesto have evolved more than Dip/a/axis.

Genetics and Crop ImprovementConcerted efforts for improving the

yielding ability of taramira are limited as thecrop was always given less importance. Theimprovement work before 1979 was sporadicand isolated (Prakash, 1980). As is expected,the germplasm collections have also not beenbuilt up. Thus, the material used in severalstudied is generally local.

Establishment of an ad-hoc scheme atS.K.N.College of Agriculture. Jobner under asanction from Indian Council of AgriculturalResearch in 1979 was the beginning ofsystematic effort to improve the yielding ability

242 AGRICULTURAL REVIEWS

of this crop (Anonymous, 1986). The majorobjectives of the project was to make extensivecollections of germplasm and its evaluation.As a result, extensive collections (516) weremade from various parts of the country. Thesame project was later on converted into AllIndia Coordinated Research Project on OilseedsProject (Taramira Unit) in the year 1987 atthe S.K.N.College of Agriculture, Jobner.

Germplasm holdings and evaluation:International Plant Genetic Resources

Institute ((PGRI), Rome established Rocket

Genetic Resources Network in 1994.Summarizing the holdings of RocketGermplasm world over Pignone (1997) writesthat the gene banks of Gatersleban (lnstitut fUrPflanzengentik und kulturflanzenforschung),Germany, Horticultural Research Institute atWellesbourne, UK and Ames, Iowa (USA) havegood collections of Eroca. The composition ofEroca germplasm in the genebank located atBraunschweig, Germany is summarized in Fig.4.

....

~<Jr-

~

Fig. 4. Holdings of £mea listed in the rocket network database

The details of Indian collections" ofEruca germplasm are summarized in Table 3.These germplasm collections are maintainedboth at S K N College of Agriculture, Jobnerand at National Research Centre on Rape Seedand Mustard, Sewar (Bharatpur), Rajasthan.Duhoon and Koppar (1998) have indicatedMewat region of Rajasthan and Chambal regionspanning over Rajasthan and Madhya Pradeshstates of India as the hot spots of variability forE. sativa. Exploration should therefore beconducted in these regions to collect the naturalvariilbility.

VariabilityA wide range of variability is available

for various characters of taramira (Table 4).Although considerable variability is available forsiliqua per plant, branches per plant, plantheight and yield, the variation for days toflowering and maturity and oil content is,however, very much limited (Table 4). Geneticadvance for secondary branches per plant. podsper plant and seed yield per plant is high. Therealized gains however have not been verypromising as these do not follow theexpectations (Table 4). This is because of higheffect of environment and the interactionbetween genotype x environment. Low geneticadvance has been reported for oil content(Sharma et ai, 1991). Similar results have also

Vol. 24, No.4, 2003

Table 3. Collection of taramira germplasm in India (Bhandari and Chandel, 1997)

Organization Year of collection Areas explored

243

No. ofsamplesgathered

S K N College of Agricuhure,Jobner

NBPGR. New Delhi

1980

19821983

19841986198719881989·90

Parts of Rajasthan

North-weatern and central IndiaJammu region, MP, Kachch region inGujarat and PuneSemi arid regions of HaryanaNortheastern RajasthanSouthern RajasthanSoutheast RajasthanSoutheast and Western Rajasthan

516

6410

26161116

650

Table 4. Range, coefficient of variation, heritability and genetic advance in taramira (Sharma et al, 1992)

Character Range C.v. Hetiability Genetic(h2) advance

Days to 50'X, flowering 50.00-55.67 3.40 22.89 1.61Days to maturity 118.61-124.33 1.56 12.89 0.41Plant height (em) 49.37-84.07 16.59 9.73 3.39Pnmary branches per plant 3.70-6.63 19.23 9.60 3.74Secondary branches per plant 3.37-16.20 33.01 50.36 34.22Pods per plant 59.17-181.83 22.78 70.04 32.86Pod length (em) 1.60-2.27 9.27 41.11 7.98Seeds per pod 13.07-26.87 23.66 8.94 4.98Test weight (em) 2.02-3.90 14.45 60.69 17.94Seed yield per plant (g) 2.57-9.25 33.65 49.48 34.25Seed yield per plot (g) 144.4-401.1 24.23 60.54 31.47Oil content (%) 32.23-36.43 3.22 41.68 2.78

been reported from an extensive evaluationdone at Hisar (Anonymous, 1991). Yadavetal (1998) reported that secondary branches/plant had the highest coefficient of variation,followed by 1000-seed weight and primarybranches/plant. Heritability was high for 1000­seed weight, siliqua length, seeds/siliqua andseed yield/plant.

Divergence analysis in taramira bySodani et al (1990) showed that grouping oflines in different clusters was not related to theirgeographic origin. Siliquae/plant, seed yield/plant and plot, and test weight contributedmaximum towards total divergence. In anotherstudy of genetic divergence based onmetroglyph analysis by Meena (1996) indicated

that all the genotypes could be grouped intothree distinct groups- (il group 1- high yielders,(ii) group 11- consisted of moderate yielders and(iii) group-Ill consisted of low yielders. The lowyielders basically had lower values for siliqualength and number of seeds per siliqua. Thehigh yielders on the other hand had aboveaverage biological yield.

In a similar study Rathore (1996)reported that thetwo groups, highyielders andlow yielders, differed in number of primarybranches per plant, besides secondary branchesper plant.

Evaluation of oil content and fatty acidcomposition of 100 genotypes of Esativa byYadav et al (1998) showed the oil content to

244 AGRICULTURAL REVIEWS

Table 5. Correlations of seed yield with various morph~logical traits

Character Source

Days to 50% floweringDays to maturityPlant heightPrimary branches/plantSecondary branches/plantSilique/plantSiliqua lengthSeeds per siliquaTest weightOil content

Sastry et al (1991)

-0.0670.196"0.346"0.255"0.249"0.861"0.101-0.004-0.169-0.134

Meena (1996)

0.0560.0580.0310.2120.2160.261'0.1350.1960.1050.020

Rathore (1996)

O.Qll-0.002-0.0590.274'0.337"0.282"0.067-0.0200.119

, Significant at P=O.OS and "Significant at P=O.Ol.

range from 31.8&- 41.31%. They (Yadavet aI., 1998) reported large variation in erucica~id (26.7 - 52.4%), oleic acid (14.1- 23.491,),linoleic acid (6.9 - 15.79'6), linolenic acid (8.3- 15.31}h) and eicosenoic'acid (9.3 - 18.3%).Yaniv etal. (1998) on the other hand reportedthe contents of erucic acid and eicosenoic acidcontents t9 vary from 33 to 451j.6 and 7.31j.6 to9.8%, respectively, in collection of E. sativafrom Israel.

Character associationsThe seed yield per plant and per plot·

were significantly and positively correlated withdays to maturity, plant height, primary branchesper plant, secondary branches per plant andsilique per plant (Table 5). These charactershave also shown significant positive associationamong themselves (Sodani et al.. 1990 andYadav et al, 1998).

In this crop, pods per plant has highestpositive and direct effect on seed yield followedby secondary branches, pod length and plantheight while oil content had highest negativedirect effect on seed yield. hence, moreweightage should be given to pods per plantwhile making selection to breed high yieldingvarieties in taramira. Secondary branches perplant, plant height and pod length are the othercharacters which should be considered in aselection program for seed yield as these have

positive direct effect on seed yield per plant.The above characters also had a wide range of .variability, which offers wide scope forimprovement of taramira by indirectly selectingfor these characters (Meena, 1996 andRathore. 1996). Among the fatty acids. erucicacid was negatively correlated with oleic acid(r=0.7096), linoleic acid (r=0.5102), linolenicacid (r=0.6010) while oleic acid was positivelyassociated with linoleic acid (r=0.2397) as perthe report of Yadav etal (1998).

Maintenance of germplasmThe main constraints in Eruca

germplasm maintenance are- low seedgermination, oily seeds. capsules opening atmaturity, possibility of contamination with localpollen and possibility of increasing self­incompatibility (Pignone, 1997). Germinationhas not been a problem at S K N College ofAgriculture, Jobner in the maintenance ofgennplasm. Cryopreservation did not affectgermination in f.illCd spp. (Martinez-Labordeet a!. 1998).

Taramira being cross pollinated cropwith self-incompatibility. maintenance 01germplasm is a problem. Bud pollination maybe used to overcome self-incompatibility, thismethod however, is not desirable as it leads togenetic erosion. Use of muslin cloth bagscovering 10 plants helps in lessening genetic

Vol. 24. No.4. 2003 245

erosion. This method is being used routinelyat S K N College of Agriculture, Jobner.

Seeds of taramira can be stored atroom temperature for two seasons and this willto some extent, help maintain the populationstructure by lessening generation interval.

Genetics of yield and yield related traitsInformation on the genetics of yield

and its related traits in taramira are scanty. Ina ten parent diallel, Kumar and Yadav (1986 aand b) have shown that dominance was foundto be significant for yield and its componenttraits excepting for siliqua length for whichadditive components were important. Kumaret al. (1988) have reported preponderance ofnon-additive gene effects for primary branches/plant under normal and saline environments,although both additive as well as non-additiyegene effects were involved in the inheritanceof the above as well as other yield traits,however, the inheritance pattern was influencedby the environment as observed by the changesin the direction and magnitude of the geneeffects depending on the soil conditions. Themain shoot length and seed yield/plant wereinfluenced by additive genes on normal soil,whereas by non additive genes on the alkalisoil (Kumaret al, 1988).

Nehra and Sastry (1995) havereported complex inheritance for seed yield andits component traits. Trend between per seperformance and the varietal Heterotic effectswere negatively correlated.

Varietal development:As has been pointed out earlier, only

limited work has been done for the geneticimprovement of taramira. Prakash (1980)points that in the earlier stages, varietalimprovement has been through mass selection,but later, development of poly crosses,synthetics and composites were attempted. Asa result, two varieties namely, ITSA (maturingin 169 days) and T-27 (maturing in 150 days)

were released for general cultivation. ITSAreleased in Punjab in the year 1961, for rainfedirrigated conditions on every type of soil, is areselection from Lyallpur Local. T 27 firstreleilsed in 1974 in Haryana state for light soilsunder rainfed conditions, is a direct selectionfrom Gurgaon Local (Tunwar and Singh,1985). Only these two varieties are availablefor commercial cultivation. Recently a varietyRTM 314 has been developed by Dr.E.V.Divakara Sastry and his colleagues at S KN College of Agriculture, Jobner which hasbeen released and notified by Central VarietalRelease Committee, New Delhi, India. This istherefore the first to be released after a gap ofalmost 2V2 decades.

Keeping in view the limitation imposed'by the lack of variability in the germplasmcollection, crop improvement programs needsto be designed in such a way· that they canexploit the available variability in the germplasmmost effectively manner. With this objective infocus, at S K N College of Agriculture, Jobner,both intra and inter population improvementprogrammes are in progress.

I. Population Improvement:(a) Intra·Population Improvement

1. Selection of individual·plants basedon the performance of half-sib progeny in thepromising population of the germplasmcollection has been used as a method and RTM~1 and RTM-2 are the examples of success ofthis method. It is expected that thesepopulations can be further improved throughrecurrent selection for earliness, oil content andseed yield.

In a study using 150 half-sib familiesgenerated from RTM-314, a variety oftaramira, Sastry and Yadav (1999) havereported that the estimates of a 2A and a 2p forplant height, number of secondary branches,number of siliquae per plant and number ofseeds per siliquae were very low. The estimatesof heritability (narrow sense) were very high

246 AGRICULTIJRAL REVIEWS

for plant height, number of secondarybranches, number of siliquae per plant andnumber of seeds per siliquae. The expectedselection gain between families was lO\Ver incomparison to expected gain from within familyselection.

2. Selection based on SI progenies canalso be used as an effective method and can beinitiated in some of the original or derivedpopulations to achieve improvement in thedesired characters.

3. Full sib selection program todevelop superior progenies is another methodwhich can be used.

Development of composits like JOB­TC-l and JOB-TC-2 are the examples of interpopulation improvement (Table 6). In JOB­TC-2 greater emphasis was placed on earliness.Efforts in the population improvementprogramme need to be strengthened andselection criteria has to be improved.

Table 6. Performance of taramira composites at Jobner, Rajasthan(Average over three years. Sharma etaI.. 1991) .

Component Maturity (daYS) Seed yield (kg hal Downey mildewincidence (%)

JOB-TC-IJOB-TC·"T·27 (check)

146.0148.8151.49

822.%940.73824.77

45.4456.1150.21

Mutation breeding and PolyploidyMutation breeding has not been

attempted in this crop as yet, some reports onpolyploidy are hO\Vever, available but are moreof academic interest. The induced tetraploidsobtained using colchicine treatment werevigorous having bigger siliqua, seeds, stomataand pollen grains (Singh, 1958; Labana eta1.,1977). The tetraploid was found to bemeiotically unstable, resulting in. laggards andgametes with an unbalanced number ofchromosomes (Labana et aI, 1977).

Evaluation for disease and pest resistanceTaramira is resistant to aphids and

white rust and efforts to transfer these traitsinto other crucifers are frequently attempted.Evaluation of germplasm against Fusariumwiltand downy mildew has indicated that none ofthe lines are immune for both the diseases(Sharma et aI, 1991). Classification of linesaccording to their resistance are presented inTable 7. All the accessions of E sativa werefound to be resistant to white rust by Bansaletal (1997) and presence of resistance in someaccessions of cruca against Leptosphaeria

macuJans(Tewari etal, 1995), mustard aphid(Vekaria and Patel, 2000; Chander andBakhetia, 1998; Agrawal etal, 1996).

Intergeneic and interspecific hybridizationCrosses of Eruca sativa with other

species of the family Brassicaceae have beenattempted since long with varying results. Theobjectives of the hybridization also varied;hO\Vever, of late it is mainly to transfer usefulagronomic characters of Eruca to other species.

Few FI plants were obtained whenintergeneric crosses between £ruca sativa andBrassica campestris using B. campestris asmother parent (Mohammad et al., 1931).Roberts etal (1999), on the other hand foundthat the hybrids to be morphologicallyintermediate to the parents and were sterile.PMC analysis indicated highly unstablechromosome pairing and segregation patternsand the occurrence of bridges and fragments.Matsuzawa and Sarashima (1986) andAgnihotri et aI. (1990) also attempted similarcrosses and using embryo rescue obtainedviable hybrid plants. Agnihotri et al (1990)confirmed the hybridity of these

Reaction

Vol. 24. No.4, 2003

Table 7. Disease resistance in tararnlra (Sharma et al, 1991)

lines showing reaction for

Downey mildew Fusarium wilt

247

ImmuneTolerant

Moderately tolerant

Moderately susceptible

SuceptibleHighly susceptible

NilRTM-2-1, RTM-127, 166.316,355.238,397,110,360

Job-TC-2, RTM-521. 522,523. TMH-48

ITSA, RTM-33, 21, 314,115,141, TMH-24, 25, 52, T-27TMH-48, ITSA. Job-TC-2, RTM-lNil

NilRTM-465, T-27, RTM-466,Job-TC-l, RTM-397, 112,461,360, 126, 101, Job-TC-2,RTM-521,522TMH-24, 25, 46, 48, RTM-33,501,316,357,288,314,110,141, 1RTM-127, 2-1, 398, 515, 306,355, 115, 2, Job-TC-2RTM-462Nil

morphologically, cytologically and by DNAanalyses. Sikdar et al (1990) obtained hybridplants from Eruca sativa and Brassica junceathrough protoplast fusion. In a similar study,Bijral and Sharma (1999) found the hybridswith B. juncea to be self fertile and producedsufficient quantity of seed when backcrossedto both parental species. Hybrids were alsoobtained with B. oleracea (Nagaharu et al.1937; Matsuzawa and Sarashima, 1986) andB. L"hinensis-(Mizushima, 1950). Unfortunatelythe hybrids obtained from most of these crosseswere not stable and no useful plants could beobtained from the above crosses. Matsuzawael al. (1999) attempted interspecifichybridization of E sativa with B. campestristo develop a new cytoplamically male sterility(CMS) system in B. campestris. Male sterile

alloplasmic plants were selected andma:b.ta:berl q:>to F6 generation. In F7 and F8

generations these male sterile plants were bredto B campestris. the southern blot analysisshowed the male sterile plants to containcytoplasm of E sativa. This study provides anovel way to produce CMS plants in B.campestris. Intergeneric crosses of Eroca sativawith several Brassica spp was also attemptedby Prasad et aJ. (1997) and Bang et al (1997)with almost similar conclusions as reportedabove.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThe author gratefully acknowledges

the help extended by the staff of AICRPO­Taramira Unit at S K N College of Agriculture,Jobner and the staff at the Library, CCSHAU,Hisar.

REFERENCESAglllhotri, A. at al (1990). Plant Breeding.. 104: 281-289.Agrawal. N. C't,il (1996). Ann. Agric. Res., 17(1): 104-106.Alam. Z. (1936). Ann. Bot., 100: 85-102.Anom/mous (1986). Final Report of Ad-hoc Scheme on Processing Rape-seed and Mustard Improvement, Agricultural

Production-Research Center for Taramira.S K N College of Agriculture, Jobner.Anonymous (1991). Catalogue on rapeseed-Mustard germplasm. ICAR Unit of the Project Co-ordinator (Rapeseed

and Mustard), ICAR. HAU, Hisar.Anonymous (2001-02). Vital AgriculturalStatistics. Department of Agriculture, Rajasthan, Jaipur, India.Bailey. L.H. (1949). Bot. Rev.. 22: 81-66.Bang, S.w. etal (1997). CruciferaeNewsJ., No.19: 15-16.I3ansal, V.K. et al. (1997). PI. Genet. Res. News/., No. 109: 25-26.Bhandari, D.C. and Chandel, K.P.S. (1997). In: Rocket: A Mediterranean Crop for the WorM. IPGRI, Rome Italy.

pp 67-75.

248 AGR~ULTURALRE~EWS

Bian'co, V.V. (1995). In: Rocket Genetic Resources Network. Report 01the First Meeting, 13-1.5November 1994.IPGRI, Rome, Italy. pp 35-57.

Bianco, V.v. and Boari, F. (1997). In: Rocket: A Mediterranean Crop lor the Wonft IPGRI, Rome Italy. pp 41-49.Bijral, J.S. and Sharma, T.R. (1999). Crudlerae News/., No. 21: 33-34.B1angiforti, S. and Venora, G. (1997). In: Rocket: A Mediterranean Crop lor the World IPGRI, Rome Italy. pp 36-40.Chander, H. and Bakhetia, D.R.C. (1998). J. Insect Sci., 11(1): 19-25.Dias. J.C.S. (1997). In: Rocket: A ~editerranean Crop lor the Wonft IPGRI, Rome Italy. pp 81-85.Duhoon, S.S. and Koppar, M.N. (1998). Genet. Res. ElIOlution., 45(4): 317-323.E1-Missiry, MA and E1-Gindy, A.M. (2000). Ann. Nutri. Metabo!., 44(3): 97-100.Ghauri, E.G. and Afoot. K (1977). BangladeshJ. Sci./ndust Res., 32(1): 39-43.Gomez-Campo, C. (1980). In: Morphology andMorpho-taxonomy 01the Tribe Brassicae. Japan Scientific Societies

Press, Tokyo. pp 5.Haruta, T. (1962). TakuPl. Br. ExperimentaiStationRes. BuH.. 2: 1-169.Hereman, S.I. (1868). Plaxton's Botanical Dictionary. Bradbury Evans and Co. London. pp 225.Hooker. J.D. (1872). The flora 01British India. Part I. L.Reew and Co., Covent Garden, London. pp 158.Kakizaki, Y. (1930). Japanese. J. Bot., 5: 134-208.Kumar, D. and Yadav, I.S. (1986a).lndianJ. Agric. Sci., 56: 167-70.Kumar, D. and Yadav, I.S. (1986b). IndianJ. Agric. Sci., 56: 229-33.Kumar, D. etal. (1986). IndianJ. Agric. Sci., 58(1): 11-15.Kumar, D. eta!. (1988).lndianJ. Agric. Sci., 58(1): 11-15.Labana, K.S. etal. (1977). Croplmprov.. 4: 41-47.Leonardis, W.. et al. (1997). In: Rocket: A Mediterranean Crop lor the World IPGRI, Rome Italy. pp 25-35.Lewis, D. (1977). Proc. Roy. Soc. London B.. 196: 161-170.Lewis, D. (1979). In: Verma, S.C. eta!. (1985). Croci!eraeNewsl., No. 10: 82-86.Magrath, R. and Mithen, R. (1997). In: Rocket: A Mer/iterranean Crop lor the Wonft IPGRI. Rome Italy, pp 23-24.Martinez-Laborde, J.B.; Pita, J.M. and Perez-Garcia, F. (1998). PI. Genet. Res. News/., No. 114: 47-48.Matsuzawa, Y. and Sarashima, M. (1986). CroeileraeNews/.. No.11: 17.Meena, BK (1996). M.Sc.(Ag.) Thesis, Rajasthan Agricultural University, Bikaner.Mizushima. U. (1950). TohokuJ. Agric. Res., 1: 1-14.Mohamedien, S. (1995). In: Rocket Genetic Resources Network. Report 01the First Meeting, 13-1.5Nottelllellt 'I.

1994. IPGRI, Rome Italy.Mohammad, A. etal. (1931). Indian. J. Agric. Sci.• 1: 109-131.Mukherjee, P. (1973). Cytologia,40: 727-734.Nagaharu, U. eta!. (1937). Cjtt%gia Fuji/Jub., pp 437-447.Narsingdas (1958). In: Rapeseedand Mustard. ICOC, New Delhi. pp 47-51.Nehra, M.R. etal. (1989). Trans. ISDT., 14: 149-153.Pignone, D. (1997). In: Rocket: A Mediterranean Crop lor the Worb: IPGRI, Rome Italy. pp 2-12.Prakash, S. (1980). In: Brasska Crops and Wih'AUies. Japan Scientific Socieities Press, Tokyo. pp 162.Prakash. S. and Tsunoda, S. (1983). In: Cy!ogenticsoiCropPlant.s. Mac Millan India Ltd. New Delhi. pp 481·5nPrasad, C. eta!. (1997). Crocilerae.NewsJ.. No.19: 27-28.Rathore, V.S. (1996). M.Sc.(Ag.), Thesis, Rajasthan Agricultural University, Bikaner.Rathore. V.S. (1998). Evaluation 01taramira (Eruca sativaMi4 germp!asm loryieldandits component traits. USC

(Ag.) thesis, Rajasthan Agricultural University, Bikaner.Roberts, M.B., eta/. (1999). CrudleraeNewsl.. No. 21: 41-42.Roxburgh. W. (1832). Rora India III. Thacker Spink and Co. Calcutta. pp 119-125.Sharma, N. eta!. (1985). CroeiferaeNewsl., No 10: 82-86.Sharma, R.K. et al. (1991). Taramira: Importance. Research and Constraints. S K N College of Agriculture, JobIlCr.

(Mimeol.Shivanna, KR. (1985). In: Genetic Manipulations for Crop Jmprovement(Chopra, V.L ed.). Oxford and ISH, Delhi.

pp 127-159.Sikdar, S.R. eta/. (1990). Theor. App/. Genet, 79: 561-567.Singh, D. (1958). Rapeseed and Mustard. Indian Central Oilseeds Committee, New Delhi.Sodani, S.N. eta!. (1990).lndianJ. Genet.. 50: 9-12.Sturtevant, E.L (1915). In: New York Agriculture ExperimentalStation. Twenty Seventh AnnualReport 1915.

New york.Thompson, K.F. (1957). J. Genet., 55: 45-60.

Vol. 24, No.4, 2003 249

Tsuncx:la; S. et a/. (1980). BrassiClJ Crops and Wild ABies. Japan Scientific Societies Press, Tokyo.Tunwar, N.S.andSingh, S.V. (1985). Harx/bookonCultivars. The Central Seed Committee, Department of Agriculture

and Co-Operatlon, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, New Delhi.Tutin. T.G. et a/. (1964). Rora Europaea, 1hJl Cambridge University Press. pp 340.Vekaria, M'v. and Patel, G,M. (2001). Indian J. Entomol., 62(1): 37-42.Verma, S.C. and Chauhan, P.C. (1985). Crucilerae News/., No. 10: 30-32.Verma, S.c. and Lewis, D. (1977). In: AdvancesinPJantReprrxluctJvePhysi%gy, (MalikC.P., ed.). Kalyani Publishers,

New Delhi. pp 180-188.Verma, S.C. eta/. (1977). Proc. Roy. Soc. London B., 96: 131·159.Verma, S.C. et a/. (1985). Crocilerae News/., No. 10: 82-86.Vesperinas, E.S. (1995). Proc.1995CongressoltheSpanish WeedScienceSociety. Huesca, Spain, 14-15 November,

1995. pp 153-156.Wallace, D.H. (1979). Crucilerae News/., No. 10: 82·86Xiu Zhen, Q. eta/. (1997). OiICropsolChina, 19(2): 54-56.Xiu Zhen, Q. et a/. (1998). Acta Agrooomica Sinica., 24: 338-342.Yadav, I.S. eta/. (1998). CrucileraeNews/., No. 20: 97-98.Yadav, T.P. eta/. (l99S). J. Food Sci. Tech., 35: 557·558.Yadava, J.S. eta/. (2001). Ann. Bioi., 17: 1-20.Yaniv. Z. eta/. (1998). Ecooo. Bot, 52: 394-400.Yarnell. S.H. (1956). Bot. Rev., 22: 81-166.