Morphological characterization and genetic barcoding of kuttiatoor mango accessions M.R. Dinesh*1, K.V. Ravishankar2, D.C. Sunil Gowda1 and M. Sankaran1 1Division of Fruit Crops, 2Division of Biotechnology, ICAR-Indian Institute of Horticultural Research, Hesaraghatta Lake post, Bengaluru-560089. *E-mail: drmrdinesh@gmail.com ABSRACT A survey conducted during 2013-14 to collect and characterize the Kuttiattoor mango accessions from Kerala, revealed large unique variability in morphological, biochemical and DNA barcode data. All the accessions were polyembryonic with fruit maturity during February-March. The mature fruit length (cm), width (cm) and leaf length (cm) ranged from 5.10 – 9.60 (cm), 4.60 – 8.40 (cm) and 12.47- 30.40 (cm) respectively. Key words: Polyembryony, DNA barcode, mango, characterization Short Communication INTRODUCTION Mango (Mangifera indica L.) originated from the Indo-Burma region and the genus Mangifera has more than 60 species world-wide, the highest diversity being found in the Malayan Peninsula, Borneo and Sumatra (Bompard,1993). Mango has enormous variability at the levels of wild types and cultivars in India. The updated list now contains the names of 1682 cultivars (Pandey and Dinesh, 2010). Among the seven centres of mango variability including wild and seedling types of M. indica L. in India, humid tropical southern peninsular India is an important one (Yadav, & Rajan, 1993). A survey was carried out in this region at Kuttiattoor, Thaliparamba Tehsil, Kannur District, Kerala, during 2013-14 to collect, characterize and document the unique mango grown by the farmers of this village. During the survey, 10 unique mango a ccessions wer e selected r a ndomly ba sed morphological and fruit chara cters which were recorded as per the Bioversity International descriptors (1989, Table1). Large variability was observed to exist among the accessions for 9 leaf characters and 19 fruit characters. The fruits were medium fibrous, juicy and having thin peel. The mature fruit length (cm), width (cm) and leaf length (cm) ranged from 5.10 – 9.60 (cm), 4.60 – 8.40 (cm) and 12.47- 30.40 (cm) respectively (Table 1). All the Kuttiatoor accessions were polyembryonic as it is common in mango varieties derived from Southeast Asian ancestry (Iyer, 1991), which bear fruits more heavily and more consistently than monoembryonic varieties. DNA barcoding is considered to be a useful tool for identification of plant species and also to study the evolutionary relationship among the species within the genera. The DNA barcodes of 10 accessions (fig 1) were different from one another as reported by Li et al., (2015). Kuttiattoor mango accessions were thus unique with early harvesting and qualify for registration with the Protection of Plant Varieties & Farmers’ Rights Authority. J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 13(1) : 122-125, 2018 122 123 J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 13(1) : 122-125, 2018 Dinesh et al Ta bl e 1. M in im um d es cr ip to rs o f K ut tia tt oo r m an go a cc es si on s F ar m er n am e Su re nd ra K ar th ya ya ni G op al an G op al an K ut ti at to or P ra bh ak ar an D ee pa k A bd ul a IR R IT I K ut ti at to or (P la nt -1 ) (P la nt - 2) (P la nt - 1) sc ho ol ri sh al ka ya ch ec k po st K ar th ay an i A U P Sa m pl e -1 (P la nt - 2) (P la nt 1 ) C ha ra ct er is tic s K ut tia tto or -2 ku tti at to or -3 ku tti at to or -4 K ut tia tto or -5 ku tti at to or -7 K ut tia tto or -8 ku tti at to or -9 K ut tia tt oo r- 10 K ut tia tto or -1 1 K ut tia tt oo r- 12 Y ou ng l ea f: in te ns ity o f an th oc ya ni n co lo ra tio n 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 (b ef or e fu ll ex pa ns io n of o ld es t le af o f th e ne w f lu sh ): 1 A bs en t L ea f bl ad e: l en gt h (c m ) 19 .2 0 19 .2 7 12 .4 7 16 .7 0 12 .9 7 15 .4 7 12 .9 0 14 .1 7 30 .4 0 16 .2 7 L ea f bl ad e: w id th ( cm ) 5. 87 7. 67 4. 17 5. 47 3. 23 4. 43 4. 10 5. 20 8. 97 5. 60 L ea f bl ad e: r at io l en gt h/ w id th : 5 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 3 3 Sm al l & 5 M ed iu m L ea f bl ad e: s ha pe : 3 O va te & 7 O bl on g 7 3 7 3 3 3 7 7 7 3 L ea f bl ad e: c ol ou r1 L ig ht g re en , 2 M ed iu m 3 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 gr ee n, 3 D ar k gr ee n L ea f bl ad e: t w is tin g: 1 A bs en t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 L ea f bl ad e: s ha pe o f ba se : 2 O bt us e an d 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 R ou nd ed L ea f bl ad e: s ha pe o f ap ex : 3 A cu te 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Pe tio le : le ng th ( cm ) 3. 5 2. 17 1. 67 2. 30 3. 73 3. 00 1. 63 1. 27 5. 50 3. 37 M at ur e fr ui t ch ar ac te ri st ic s L en gt h (c m ) 9. 4 8. 10 7. 40 8. 00 6. 00 5. 10 8. 50 9. 60 6. 10 8. 30 W id th ( cm ) 8. 4 7. 30 6. 80 6. 60 5. 30 4. 60 7. 70 8. 00 5. 50 7. 00 C ol ou r of s ki n: 2 O nl y gr ee n & 3 G re en 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 an d ye llo w D en si ty o f le nt ic el s: 3 S pa rs e, 5 M ed iu m , 5 5 5 7 3 7 5 5 7 3 7 D en se C ol ou r co nt ra st b et w ee n le nt ic el s an d sk in : 5 5 5 7 5 7 5 5 7 5 5 M ed iu m , 7 S tr on g Si ze o f le nt ic el s: 5 M ed iu m 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 R ou gh ne ss o f su rf ac e (c or ki ne ss ) ca us ed b y 9 9 9 9 1 9 1 1 9 9 le nt ic el s: 1 A bs en t, 9 Pr es en t Pr es en ce o f ca vi ty a t st al k: 1 A bs en t , 9 P re se nt 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 D ep th o f ca vi ty a t st al k: 1 Sh al lo w 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Pr es en ce o f ne ck :1 A bs en t, 9 Pr es en t 1 1 1 1 1 9 9 1 1 1 124 Characterization of Kuttiatoor mango accessions Sh ap e of v en tr al s ho ul de r: 1 R ou nd ed u pw ar d 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Sh ap e of d or sa l sh ou ld er : 1 R ou nd ed u pw ar d 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Pr es en ce o f gr oo ve i n ve nt ra l sh ou ld er : 1 A bs en t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 B ul gi ng o n ve nt ra l sh ou ld er : 1 A bs en t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Pr es en ce o f si nu s: 9 P re se nt 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 D ep th o f si nu s: ( 3 Sh al lo w ) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 B ul gi ng p ro xi m al o f st yl ar s ca r: 1 A bs en t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Po in t a t st yl ar s ca r: 1 A bs en t 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 T im e of f ru it m at ur ity : 1 V er y ea rl y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 (* A s pe r th e D U S G ui de lin es o n M an go , P PV & F R A , 2 00 8) J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 13(1) : 122-125, 2018 F ig .1 . D N A b ar co de s of k ut tia tto or m an go a cc es si on s 125 REFERENCES Bompar d, J. M. (1993). T he genus Mangifera rediscovered: the potential contribution of wild species to mango cultivation. Acta Horti.341, 69-77. Iyer, C.P.A. (1991). Recent advances in varietal impr ovement in mango. Acta Hor t. 291, 109–32. Li, X., Yang Yang, Robert J. Henry, Maurizio Rossetto, Yitao Wang and Shilin Chen.2015. Plant DNA barcoding: from gene to genome. Biol. Rev. 90: 157–166.pp doi: 10.1111/brv.12104 (MS Received 02 April 2018, Revised 24 May 2018, Accepted 30 June 2018) Pandey, S.N., & and Dinesh, M.R. (2010). Mango, Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi, pp. 30-97. PPV & FRA (2008).Guidelines for conduct of test for DUS Mango (Mangifera indica L.), Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers Right Authority, GOI, NASC Complex, DPS Marg, New Delhi- 110012, p.17 Yadav, I. S., & and Rajan, S. (1993). Genetic Resources of Mango. Advances in Horticulture, Vol. 1. Fruit, part1, (Eds) K.L. Chadha and O.P. Pareek, eds. Malhotra Publishing House, New Delhi, p.77-93. Dinesh et al J. Hortl. Sci. Vol. 13(1) : 122-125, 2018