Genetic Variability and Heritability of Ten Locally Collected and Advanced Sugarcane Genotypes at Metahara Sugar Estate

Transcription

1 Genetic Variability and Heritability of Ten Locally Collected and Advanced Sugarcane Genotypes at Metahara Sugar Estate Feven Million Asfaw Feven Million Asfaw Ethiopian Sugar Corporation Research and Development Center Wonji, Ethiopia Abstract: Ten locally collected and advanced sugarcane genotypes were evaluated along with two standard check under three different salinity levels (1.3, 4.4, 6.5ds/m) using Randomized complete block design with three replications at Metahara sugar in 2014/ 2016 to estimate phenotypic and genotypic coefficients of variation, heritability and genetic advance for some important characters in sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L). Data were collected from the four central rows of each plot for number millable cane,cane height, cane diameter, single stalk weight, cane yield, sucrose percent cane and sugar yield. The analyses of variance showed that there was significant difference between the genotypes under 1.3ds/m, 4.4ds/m and 6.5ds/m salinity levels for most of the traits indicating the presence of ample genotypic variation among the studied genotypes. Under 1.3ds/m salinity level genotypic variance was higher than environmental variance number of millable stalks number, stalk length, single cane weight and cane yield. Genotypic variance was higher than environmental variance number of millable stalks number, stalk length, cane diameter, single cane weight, cane yield and sugar yield under 4.4ds/m and 6.5ds/m salinity levels. High GCV and PCV were recorded for number of millable stalk, cane yield and sugar yield under all the three salinity levels (1.3, 4.4, and 6.5d/m) except under 1.3ds/m cane yield were low. High GCV and PCV indicated that selection may be effective based on these characters and their phenotypic expression would be good indication of the genotypic potential. Genotypic coefficient of variation alone is not a correct measure to know the heritable variation present and should be considered together with heritability estimates. High heritability were recorded for characters such as variance number of millable stalks number, stalk length, single cane weight, cane yield and sugar yield. Maximum genetic advance as percent of mean was observed for variance number of millable stalks number, stalk length, cane diameter, single cane weight, cane yield and sugar yield. Keywords: Genetic Advance, Genetic Variability, Heritability, Salinity.com 1

2 1. INTRODUCTION Sugarcane is genetically one of the most complex crops. Sugarcane cultivars used in breeding programs are interspecific hybrids between the domesticated species Saccharum officinarum and the wild relative S. spontaneum, followed by repeated backcrossing to S. officinarum. The interspecific origin, the high ploidy level (> 8) and the high chromosome number (> 100) of these cultivars, with 80% S. officinarum and 10% S. spontaneum (Grivet et al., 1996), contribute to the genetic complexity of sugarcane. The first commercial sugarcane production in Ethiopia has started in 1954 owned by the Dutch company called Handels-Vereening Amsterdam (HVA) in Wonji. The company has begun the development of plantation on 5,000 ha. Later in 1962, the company constructed the second sugar factory in Wonji Shoa with the cane plantation of 2000 ha. Other sugarcane plantations were established at Metahara (> 10,000 ha) in 1969 and Finchaa (> 8000 ha) in 1998 (Abera and Tesfaye, 2001). Since the start the sugar industry of Ethiopia has been relying on importation of sugarcane varieties from many source countries to satisfy the varietal requirements of the sugarcane plantations. So far more than 300 sugarcane varieties has been imported and preserved in germplasm conservation garden located at Wonji. Importing variety per se is not an easy task. Moreover, all the introduced varieties may not become successful commercial cultivars. There is luck of information on these imported varieties vis a vis pedigree, identity of the varieties, etc., which is very difficult to trace as many of the clones are of old generation and significant number are of unknown sources. In spite of a long history of the varieties since introduced no systematic effort has been made to understand the morphogenetic behavior of traits of these cultivars. Sugarcane varieties in commercial cultivation are complex polyploidy. The heterozygous and polyploidy natures of this crop have resulted in generation of greater genetic variability. The information on the nature and the magnitude of variability present in the genetic material is of prime importance for a breeder to initiate any effective selection program. Genotypic and phenotypic coefficients of variation along with heritability as well as genetic advance are very essential to improve any trait of sugarcane because this would help in knowing whether or not the desired objective can be achieved from the material (Tyagi and Singh, 1998). The amount of variability present in breeding material plays an important role in the progress of improvement of crop plants through selection. Further, its expression is likely to be influenced by the environmental conditions. So, the information available at one location may not necessarily be applicable to another. Therefore, the knowledge of variability is desirable for a breeder before making any selection program. All the breeding methods and strategies for crop improvement are fundamentally based on the availability of genetic variability in the populations. Genetic variability and heritability are useful parameters that can help the breeder during different stages of crop improvement. The success of breeding program will depend largely on the extent of genetic variability and heritability for important economic traits in early generation populations. Since the estimate of heritability alone gives no indication of the amount of progress expected from selection, the heritability estimate along with genetic advance is needed in predicting resultant effect from selecting the best individuals (Johnson, et al,. 1955). The present study was, therefore carried out to know the nature and extent of genetic variability, heritability and genetic advance in some important traits of twelve sugarcane genotypes. 2. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 2.1 Description of Study Area The experiment was carried out from November 2014 to February2016 at Metahara sugar estate. It is at situated to N and E with an altitude of 1500 meters above sea level. The average rainfall is 543mm. the mean annual maximum and minimum temperature are C and 17.50C respectively. The annual mean rainfall of this area is about 550mm/annum, and the mean maximum and minimum relative humidity is 88 and 37.7%, respectively (Ambachew, 2005). The clay soil cover more than 90% of the estate and it is grouped into four distinct textural groups as heavy clay, clay, clay over loamy and loamy soil (Tate, 2009)..com 2

3 2.2 Experimental Materials and Design Ten locally collected sugarcane genotypes (Nech Ageda, Kay Ageda1, Andegna Dereje Canada Shenkora, Engda, Moris, Holland, Yemilat Nech Shenkora, Kay Ageda 2, Nech Shenkora and Kay Ageda/Shenkora) were evaluated along with standard checks NCO 334 and B under three salinity levels of the sugar estate. These advanced genotypes were found to be the best performing genotypes among the locally collected and characterized genotypes. Experiment was laid out in randomized complete block design with three replication on three different sites situated far away from each other within the plantation and selected based on three salinity levels 1.3, 4.4 and 6.5 dsm-1. Each experimental plot had six rows with 6 meters length and 1.45 meter width (52.2 m2). The distance between adjacent plots and replications was 2.0 and 3.0 meters, respectively. The genotypes were planted in October 2014 and were grown using furrow irrigation. All agronomic practices were kept normal for the three salinity levels. 2.3 Data Collected and Analysis Data were collected from the four central rows for sprouting percentage, number of tillers, stalk count, stalk length (m), stalk diameter (cm), single stalk weight (kg), cane yield(ton/ha), brix% juice, pol%, recoverable sugar percent and sugar yield. The data collected data was subjected to the analysis of variance (ANOVA) of the Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) using the GLM procedure of SAS (statistical analysis system) version 9.0 (SAS, 2002). Comparison of treatment means was performed using the Least Significant Difference (LSD) at 5% probability. The quantitative data recorded in this study was subjected to analysis of variance using statistical procedures described by Gomez and Gomez (1984) with the help of statistical analysis software (SAS, 2002). Least significance difference (LSD) mean comparison method at 5% level of significance was used to separate the treatment means and compare the effects of salinity levels. The phenotypic and genotypic variances for each trait were estimated from the CRBD analysis of variance. The expected mean squares under the assumption of random effects model was computed from linear combinations of the mean squares and the phenotypic and genotypic coefficient of variations as per Burton and Devane (1953). Genotypic variance (σ2g) = (MSg MSe)/r Environmental variance (σ2e) = Mse Where, MSg and MSe are the mean sum of squares for the genotypes and error in the analysis of variance, respectively r is the number of replications. The phenotypic variances were estimated as the sum of the genotypic and environmental variances. Phenotypic variance (σ2ph) = σ2g + σ2e The genotypic and phenotypic coefficients of variability were calculated according to the formulae of Singh and Chaundary (1977). Genotypic Coefficient of Variation (GCV) = (σg/grand mean) * 100 Phenotypic Coefficient of Variation (PCV) = (σph / grand mean) * 100 Heritability in broad sense (hb2) for all characters was computed as per the following formula adopted from Allard (1960). hb2=σ2g/σ2ph*100 Genetic advance as per cent of mean (GAM) GAM (%) = Genetic advance (GA) divided by General mean of population (Gm) 100 Table 1. Analysis of Variance Source of Variation Degree of Freedom Mean Square Expected Mean Square Replication r-1 Msr σ2e + gσ2r Genotypes g-1 MSg σ2e + rσ2g Error (r-1)(g-1) Mse σ2e Where r=number of replications, g=number of genotypes Msr= mean square due to replications, MSg= mean square due to genotypes; Mse=mean square of error; σ2g, σ2r and σ2e are variances due to genotype, replication and error..com 3

4 Source of variation 3. RESEARCH RESULT AND DISCUSSION 3.1 Variances Genetic variability is one of the important considerations in any crop improvement which is needed to study in detail. Variability is measure by estimation of genotypic and phenotypic variance (σ2g and σ2p), genotypic and phenotypic coefficient of variation (GCV and PCV), heritability, genetic advance and genetic advance as per cent of mean. These parameters help in selection for improvement of desired characters. Environment plays an important role in the expression of phenotype. The phenotypic variability which is observable includes both genotypic (heritable) and environmental variation (non-heritable). Hence, variability can be observed through biometric parameters like GCV, heritability (broad sense) and genetic advance. The analysis of variance for all the characters showed that genotypes included in the test differed significantly (p 0.01) with respect to all characters studied (Table 2). This indicated that there was presence of sufficient variability in the material studied under the three salinity levels and all the genotypes differed each other with regard to the characters that opened a way to proceed for further improvement through simple selection (Punia, 1982). Table 2. Combined analysis of variance for 12 sugarcane genotypes across three salinity levels Df Number of tillers Number of millable stalk Plant height Stalk diameter Single stalk weight Cane yield Sugar recovery Salinity *** *** 4.85 *** 0.68 *** 6.29*** *** *** ** Genotype ns *** 0.38 *** 0.56 *** 0.57*** *** 2.41 ns *** G x S *** *** 0.08 *** 0.01 ns 0.16*** *** 3.26 *** *** Error Mean CV Where ns = non-significant,*, **, *** significant at 0.05, 0.01, Probability level respectively. The genotype by salinity levels was also statistically significant for all traits evaluated except stalk diameter indicates the tested genotypes did not perform persistently over the three salinity level Some genotypes performed best under certain salinity level, while others performed best under other salinity levels, indicates that some genotypes have specific adaptation to a certain salinity level. This result agrees with that of Mebrathom et al., (2014) who found significant difference between 12 sugarcane genotypes and significant Salinity and Genotype x Salinity interaction at Metahara Sugar Estate. Under the three salinity levels (1.3, 4.4 and 6.5ds/m) salinity level the analysis of variance showed significant differences for genotypes (G) in all characters considered (Table 3). This was similar with results obtained by Mebrathom et al., (2014) where the genotypes were very diverse; significant differences were observed in all agronomic traits at three salinity levels (1.6ds/m, 4.4ds/m and 6.4ds/m). Sugar yield.com 4

5 Source of variation Table 3. Analysis of variance for 12 sugarcane genotypes across three salinity levels at Metahara Number of tillers Number of millable stalk 1.3ds/m salinity level Plant height Stalk diameter Single stalk weight Cane yield Sugar recovery Sugar yield Genotype *** *** 0.36 *** 0.18 * 0.51 *** *** 3.97 ** *** Replication Error Mean CV ds/m salinity level Genotype *** *** 0.14 *** *** 0.23 *** *** 2.78 ** *** Replication Error Mean CV ds/m salinity level Genotype *** *** 0.03 *** 0.21 *** 0.15 *** *** 2.16 * *** Replication Error Mean CV Where ns = non-significant,*, **, *** significant at 0.05, 0.01, Probability level respectively. 3.2 Mean Comparison Mean comparisons were done for cane yield (ton ha-1) and sugar yield (ton ha-1). Genotype Holland (179.91) followed by Nech Shenkora (177.97), Kay Ageda1 (171.37), the check NCO 334 (170.37) and Moris (167.75) were the highest yielders under 1.3ds/m salinity level. Genotype Holland (158.27t/ha), NCO 334 ( t/ha), Moris ( t/ha) and Kay Ageda1 ( t/ha) gave the highest cane yield (tons/ha) under 4.4ds/m salinity level but there were not statistically significant difference between them. And under 6.5ds/m salinity level genotype Moris ( t/ha) and the check NCO 334 (94.53) were the top yielders. The result of this experiment also showed that most of the top yielding genotypes have the highest millable cane and better stalk weight. The difference in these traits among sugarcane genotypes is due to their difference in genetic constitution and their response to soil salinity factors. These traits have been widely studied by Nsassar et al. (2005), El-Shefai and Ismail (2006), Manjunath et al. (2007), Abo El-Ghait (2000) and El-Sogheir and Ismail (2006). For sugar yield genotypes Nech Ageda (24.23), Holland (24.01) and KayAgeda1 (23.03) gave the highest sugar yield under 1.3ds/m salinity level. Under 4.4ds/m salinity level genotypes Moris (15.09), the check NCO-334 (14.9), Holland (14.58) and Kay Ageda1 (14.46) gave the highest sugar While At 6.5ds/m salinity level genotypes Moris (10.44), NCO 334 (7.71) and Holland (6.72) were the best (Table 3). This result also agrees with the results of Nasir et al. (2000) and Nadioo et al. (2004) revealed that the effect of soil salinity was significant on sugar yield and as the salinity level increases the sugar yield also decreases. Therefore, those genotypes which performed best in cane and sugar yield under the salinity level where they grown and achieved the highest value were found to be promising genotypes in cane and sugar yield..com 5

6 Table 4. Cane and sugar yield of twelve sugarcane genotypes across three salinity levels No Genotypes Cane Yield (t/ha) Sugar yield (t/ha) 1.3ds/m 4.4ds/m 6.5ds/m 1.3ds/m 4.4ds/m 6.5ds/m 1 Nech Ageda ab cd e a 6.97 f 4.26 efg 2 Kay Ageda ab a c a ab 5.89 cd 3 Andegna Dereja Canada Shenkora bc bc e bc cde 3.89 efgh 4 Engda e d f d 7.62 f 2.92 h 5 Moris ab a a b a a 6 Holland a a c a a 6.72 bc 7 Yemilat Nech Shenkora d d f d 8.05 ef 3.57 fgh 8 Kay Ageda abc b cd a cd 4.80 def 9 Nech Shenkora c cd de bc 8.77 def 5.15 de 10 Kay Ageda/ Shenkora de cd f cd 6.67 f 3.14 gh 11 B ab b de a bc 5.98 cd 12 NCO ab a b a a 7.72 b Mean LSD CV Genetic and Phenotypic Variability and Heritability Under 1.3ds/m, 4.4ds/m and 6.5ds/m Salinity at Metahara Under all the three salinity levels 1.3, 4.4 and 6.5ds/m salinity levels after partitioning phenotypic variance, it was found that genotypic variance was higher than the environmental variance for all characters except for sugar recovery and sugar yield studied (Table 2). These results indicate that a negligible role was played by the environmental factors in the inheritance of these characters in sugarcane. Genotypic variance for millable cane was reported also by other researchers (Balasundarum and Bhagyalakshmi, 1978; Nair et al., 1980). The genotypic variance were lower than the environmental variance for sugar recovery and sugar traits under 1.3ds/m salinity levels for the others two salinity levels (4.4ds/m and 6.5ds/m salinity level) only sugar recovery percent had lower genotypic variance indicating a low genetic diversity and a greater influence of the environment on the phenotypic performance of these traits. The estimates for phenotypic coefficient of variation (PCV) were higher than for genotypic coefficient of variation (GCV) in all the traits, indicating greater influence of environment on genetic variation. As stated by Shivasubramanian and Menon (1973) the PCV and GCV values are ranked as low, medium and high with 0 to 10%, 10 to 20% and >20% respectively likewise, Under 1.3ds/m salinity level highest phenotypic and genotypic coefficient of variation were observed for number tillers (PCV = 41.76%, GCV = 39.23%) followed by number of millable stalk (PCV = 30.8%, GCV = 29.4%). Cane length, single stalk weight and cane yield were medium in PCV and GCV, while Cane diameter were low under 1.3ds/m salinity level. Highest phenotypic and genotypic coefficient of variation were observed for number of millable stalk (PCV = 34.31%, GCV = 33.40%) followed by number of cane yield and sugar yield (PCV = 32.13%, GCV = 29.98%); and under 6.5ds/m salinity level high PCV and GCV were recorded for sugar yield (PCV = %, GCV = 39.48%) followed by number of millable cane (PCV = 37.00%, GCV = 36.00%) and cane yield (PCV = 33.10%, GCV = 33.20%) (Table5). High genotypic and phenotypic coefficients of variation for and millable cane number were reported earlier by Singh and Sangwan (1980). The estimates for phenotypic coefficient of variation (PCV) were higher than for genotypic coefficient of variation (GCV) in all the traits, indicating greater influence of environment on genetic variation. High GCV and PCV indicated that selection may be effective based on these characters and their phenotypic expression would be good indication of the genotypic potential (Singh et al., 1994). In.com 6

7 general the estimated values of PCV were higher than GCV for all the characters studied under all the three salinity levels indicating role of environment on the performance of genotypes. 3.4 Heritability It is interesting to note that the differences between GCV and PCV values were minimum implying least influence of environment and additive gene effects indicating genotypes can Heritability is a measure of the extent of phenotypic variation caused by the action of genes. It is a good index of the transmission of characters from parents to their offspring (Falconer, 1989). For making effective improvement in the characters for which selection is practiced, heritability has been adopted by large number of workers as a reliable indicator. The estimates of heritability help plant breeder in selection of elite genotypes from diverse genetic population. Estimates of heritability are more advantageous when expressed in terms of genetic advance. Hanson (1963) stated that heritability and genetic advance Hanson (1963) stated that heritability and genetic advance are two complementary concepts. How ever it is not necessary that a character showing high heritability will also exhibit high genetic advance (Johnson et al., 1955). Genotypic coefficient of variation is not a correct measure to know the heritable variation present and should be considered together with heritability estimates. Heritability values are categorized as low (0-30%), moderate (30-60) and high (60% and above) as stated (Robinson, 1949). Accordingly high heritability estimates were recorded for number of tillers, number of millable cane, cane length, single stalk weight, cane yield and sugar yield under all the three salinity levels (1.3, 4.4 and 6.5ds/m) which indicates a greater contribution of the genotype to the trait expression. This suggests that simple selection for these traits would be effective. It is reported that a high heritability estimate for single cane weight (Nasir et al., 1980; Singhetal.,1994). Table 5. Variability and Heritability for 12 sugarcane genotypes under three salinity levels 1.3ds/m salinity level parameters Tillers Stalk count Cane Cane S.stalk Cane Sugar Sugar length diameter weight yield recovery yield σ 2 g σ 2 ph σ 2 e GCV PCV hb GAM Mean ds/m salinity level σ 2 g σ 2 ph σ 2 e GCV PCV hb GAM Mean ds/m salinity level σ 2 g σ 2 ph σ 2 e GCV PCV hb GAM Mean com 7

8 3.5 Genetic Advance Heritability estimates along with expected genetic gain is more useful than the heritability value alone in predicting the resultant effect for selecting the best genotypes (Johnson et al., 1955). According to Johnson et al. (1955), genetic advance as percent of mean (GAM) was categorized as high (>20%), moderate (10-20) and low (0-10). Accordingly, under 1.3ds/m salinity level maximum genetic gain (as percent of mean) was observed for a number of tillers (75.8%) followed by millable cane number (58%) and under 4.4 and 6.5 ds/m salinity levels number of millable cane, cane yield and sugar yield (67.15 and 73.55%, and 50.20% and and 75.95%) indicating that there exists a scope to improve cane yield to a considerable extent by adopting suitable breeding procedures. High genetic advance (as percent of mean) for single cane weight was also reported by Sahi et al. (1977), Tyagi and Singh (1998). Stalk diameter had high heritability with moderate genetic advance. Pandey (1989) had earlier reported the low genetic advance with moderate to high amount of heritability for stalk diameter suggesting a little scope in the improvement of this character. The results suggest that selection should be practiced on the basis of number of tiller, millable cane number, cane length and single cane weight for higher cane yield under 1.3 and 4.4 ds/m salinity level, where as for 6.5ds/m salinity level number of tiller, millable cane number, and single cane weight Improvement in these traits would lead to a significant improvement in yield in limited selection cycles. Under the three salinity levels (1.3, 4.4 and 6.5 ds/m salinity levels) Number of tillers, millable cane, cane length, single stalk weight, cane yield and sugar yield showed high heritability coupled with high genetic advance. Hence, direct selection can be done through these characters for future improvement of varieties Selections might be considerably difficult or virtually impractical for a character with low heritability (less than 0.4) due to the masking effect of environment on genotypic effects (Singh, 1993). 4. CONCLUSION In present investigation, characters viz. number of tillers, number of millable cane, cane length single stalk weight, cane yield and sugar yield exhibited high heritability along with high genetic advance as percent of mean and highest GCV and PCV under 1.3ds/m salinity level. High PCV, GCV, heritability and genetic advance as percent of mean were recorded for Number of tillers, number of millable cane, cane yield and sugar yield moreover high heritability and genetic advance were recorded for cane length and single stalk weight under 4.4ds/m salinity level. High variability at genotypic and phenotypic level offers more scope of selection in these characters. For traits that expressed high to medium heritability, simple selection would be effective method of sugar cane variety selection since these traits are highly heritable. It was revealed that high heritability along with high genetic advance as percent of mean and highest GCV and PCV were exhibited for number of tillers, number of millable cane, cane yield and sugar yield under 6.5ds/m salinity level moreover, high heritability were also recorded for cane length, cane diameter and single stalk weight. High genetic advance estimates were observed for number of tillers followed by number of millable cane, sugar yield, cane yield and single cane weight; number of millable cane, cane yield, sugar yield, number of tillers and single stalk weight; sugar yield followed by number of millable stalk, cane yield, number of tillers and single stalk weight under 1.3, 4.4 and 6.5ds/m salinity levels respectively. Therefore, High Heritability along with high genetic advance as percent of mean indicating that selection would be effective for these characters according to their salinity levels as there is preponderance of additive gene action in expression of these characters. 5. REFERENCES 1. Abera Tafesse and Tesfaye, H.M. (Eds), 2001.Review of sugarcane research in Ethiopia:II. Protection ( ) Ethiopian Sugar Industry Support Center Research and Training Service, Wonji. 2. Balasundarum, N and KV Bhagyalkshmi Variability, heritability and association among yield and yield components in sugarcane. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 48: El- Shefai A.M.A. and Ismail A.M.A Effect of Row Spacing On Yield and Quality of Some Promising Sugarcane Varieties. Egypt. J. Of Appl. Sci. 21(11). 4. Falconer, D. S. (1989). Introduction to quantitative genetics. 3rd edition Longman. New York 5. Johnson, H.W., Robinson, H.F. and Comstock, R. E. (1955).com 8

9 6. Mebrahtom, Hussein.M and Heluf.G, Screening of introduced sugarcane genotypes for their salinity tolerance based on yield components at Metahara Sugar Estate, Ethiopia. Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Sciences, Vol. 2(5): May Nasir, N.M, Qureshi, R. H. Aslam, M. and Javaid Akhtar Screening of sugarcane lines selected through hydroponic studies in naturally salt-affected field. Pakistan sugar Journal. Vol. 15 No. 4pp Nassar A.M., El- Sogheir K.S and Ramadan B.S.H Effect of Nitrogen Levels on Yield and Juice Qualities of Some Sugarcane varieties (Sachharrum Spp., L). Sugar Crops Res. Inst. Res. Centre, Giza Egypt. J. Agric. Rec., 83(2): Pandey, RA Variability study in the hybrid progenies of sugarcane (Saccharum complex). Bhartiya Sugar (Oct.): Punia, MS Studies on variability, heritability and genetic advance of some quality attributes in sugarcane. Indian Sugar 31: Sahi, BK, SS Shah and KA Patel Variability in early varieties of sugarcane in plant and ratoon crops. Indian J. Genet. Plant. Breed. 37: Singh, B. D., Plant Breeding Principles nd Methods. Kalyani Publishers, New Delih, India. 13. Shivasubramanian S and Menon M. Heterosis and inbreeding depression in rice. Madras Agricultural Journal 60 (1973): Tyagi, SD and DN Singh Studies on genetic variability for stalk characters in sugarcane. Indian Sugar XL VIII: Copyright 2018 International Journal of Scientific Researcher Group.com 9