Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Study reveals biofortification potential of pigeonpea to enhance micronutrients like calcium and iron.
Biofortification is a promising strategy for enhancing the micronutrient content of staple crops to combat hidden hunger. Pigeonpea [ Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.], a climate‐resilient legume, has significant potential to address nutritional deficiencies by providing essential micronutrients such as calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), iron (Fe) and zinc (Zn). This study evaluated 185 reference set accessions and 15 elite pigeonpea genotypes of diverse maturity groups from early (121–150 days) to late maturity (> 180 days) for their grain and cotyledon (dal) micronutrient content. Field trials were conducted during rainy 2023 at three diverse locations. Significant variation (Prob.Chisq < 0.0001) was observed among genotypes, with a two‐fold difference in grain calcium content (GCaC) (1678.22–2506.27 ppm) and grain magnesium content (GMgC) (1327.04–2106.89 ppm), while grain iron content (GFeC) (30.46–34.22 ppm) and grain zinc content (GZnC) (27.83–36.10 ppm) exhibited moderate variation. GCaC and GMgC showed high estimates of heritability (h 2 = 76.00%). Following the cluster analysis, 200 genotypes were grouped into five unique clusters. The largest cluster, Cluster II, had 72 genotypes, followed by Clusters III and IV, both of which had 43 genotypes. Principal component analysis revealed the key micronutrients contributing to genetic variation among the studied pigeonpea genotypes. The accumulation pattern of micronutrients in whole grain followed the order: Ca > Mg > Zn > Fe, whereas a dominant consumable form (dal) showed the trend of Fe > Zn > Mg > Ca. Direct selection for high cotyledon micronutrient would be an effective strategy over selection based on whole grain micronutrient content. The identified micronutrient‐specific and dense genotypes can be used as potential donors for establishing biofortification breeding in pigeonpea.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kalyan et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: