See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/232031970

Evaluating rice germplasm for iron and zinc concentration in brown rice and
seed dimensions

Article · March 2012

CITATIONS READS

35 2,267

7 authors, including:

Kotla Anuradha Agarwal Surekha

University of Nevada, Reno Directorate of Rice Research
28 PUBLICATIONS 206 CITATIONS 31 PUBLICATIONS 361 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Prasad Adari Mallikarjuna Swamy

International Rice Research Institute Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research
23 PUBLICATIONS 123 CITATIONS 105 PUBLICATIONS 1,532 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

DRR rice poject View project

Oryza sativa and recognition mechanisms, grain filling View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Thingnganing Longvah on 02 September 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of Phytology 2012, 4(1):19-25
ISSN: 2075-6240
Available Online: http://journal-phytology.com/

Evaluating rice germplasm for iron and zinc concentration in brown rice and seed
dimensions
K. Anuradha1, Surekha Agarwal1, Anil K Batchu1, A Prasad Babu1, B P Mallikarjuna Swamy1, T. Longvah2, N.Sarla*1

1Directorate of Rice Research, Hyderabad, India

2National Institute of Nutrition, Hyderabad, India

Abstract
The lack of micronutrients such as Fe and Zn in staple food crops is a widespread nutrition and health problem in developing
countries. Biofortification is one of the sustainable approaches, for improving the Fe and Zn content and their bioavailability in
rice grain. Screening germplasm for Fe and Zn content is the initial step of biofortification. We analyzed brown rice of 126
accessions of rice genotypes for Fe and Zn concentration. Iron concentration ranged from 6.2 ppm to 71.6 ppm and zinc from
26.2 ppm to 67.3 ppm. Zn concentration and grain elongation (-0.25) was significantly correlated. The wild accessions had
the highest Fe and Zn. Thus, wild species are a good source for biofortification of popular rice cultivars using conventional,
acceptable, non transgenic methods.

Keywords: Iron, Zinc, germplasm screening, biofortification, brown rice

INTRODUCTION
rice samples of brown and milled rice were evaluated for Fe and Zn
Rice is a major food staple and energy source of more than during 2006-2008 by Martinez et al. [8]. They found that brown rice
half the world population, being the major source of carbohydrate had 10-11 ppm Fe and 20-25 ppm Zn while milled rice had 2-3 ppm
and even protein. However, rice is a poor source of essential Fe and 16-17 ppm Zn. Banerjee et al. [9] screened 46 rice lines
micronutrients such as Fe and Zn [1]. Micronutrient malnutrition, and including cultivated and wild accessions and showed that wild rice
particularly Fe and Zn deficiency affect over three billion people accessions have higher grain Fe and Zn concentration.
worldwide, mostly in developing countries [2, 3]. Micronutrient-dense cultivars can be selected from within
Production of varieties containing high amounts of existing germplasm, or can be generated de novo through genetic
bioavailable Fe would improve Fe nutrition in regions where iron modification. Plant breeders involved in breeding staple food crops
deficiency is prevalent [4]. It is necessary to improve both the net Fe with more Fe, Zn need to identify donor parents carrying the target
& Zn concentration and their bioavailability in rice grain for improving traits. Perl’s Prussian Blue and DTZ staining method are
the Fe & Zn intake in populations dependent on rice as a staple food. standardized for Fe and Zn estimation respectively to conduct the
Food fortification has been recommended as one of the preferred initial screening of genotypes. Although these methods are simple
approaches for preventing and eradicating iron and zinc deficiency and inexpensive but qualitative instead of quantitative [10]. Accurate
[5]. Scientists have coined the term “biofortified” for genotypes that estimation of Fe and Zn concentration is normally achieved through
deliver increased levels of essential minerals or vitamins. inductively coupled plasma-optical emission spectrophotometry (ICP-
Biofortification, when applied to staple crops, such as rice, is a OES) or atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS) [11]. Around 75% of
sustainable approach, provided that access to the technology in the total grain Zn was reported to be present in the endosperm of brown
form of seeds is unrestricted. rice [12], while Takahashi et al. [13] revealed that Zn is most
In addition to agronomical management, selecting genotypes abundant in the embryo and in the aleurone layer using X-ray
with high efficiency of Fe & Zn accumulation in the endosperm and fluorescence imaging. Fe has been localized in the aleurone layer
their bioavailability from existing germplasm collection may be an and in the embryo using histochemical techniques [14,15,16] and in
efficient and reliable way to deliver Fe nutrition benefits to farmers the endosperm by X-ray fluorescence imaging [13].
and local population [6]. Germplasm has been screened for high Fe A distinction has to be made between content and
and Zn in many crops including rice. Cheng et al. [7] screened 113 concentration. The content of iron and zinc in rice depends on the
rice landraces from 12 provinces of China. They reported that grain size. Aromatic long grain basmati lines are known to be high
japonica rice had higher Fe than that of indica rice variety. 11,400 in iron content. The high or low content of mineral elements in grain
largely determine the nutrient value of rice. Zhang et al. [17] showed
that single grain selection of narrow grains tends to increase the
Received: Nov 13, 2011; Revised: Dec 17, 2011; Accepted: Jan 13, 2012. content of Zn, Mn and P; long grains tends to increase the content of
*Corresponding Author Fe and Mn; short grains tend to increase content of Zn and P while
selection of single plants with bigger grain weight tends to increase
Dr. N. Sarla the content of P.
Principal Scientist, The objectives of the present study were to (i) screen rice
Directorate of Rice Research, Hyderabad, India
germplasm for iron and zinc concentration in brown rice (ii) analyze
Tel: +91-40-24591225; Fax: +91-40-24591217 the correlation between Fe and Zn concentration and seed
Email: [email protected], [email protected] dimensions, if any and (iii) identify lines with high Fe and Zn
20 K. Anuradha et al.,

concentration. using Atomic Absorption spectrophotometer at National Institute of

Nutrition, Hyderabad, India (AAS, Varian). Seeds from all varieties
MATERIALS AND METHODS were dehusked gently using a palm dehusker. Concentration was
Samples expressed in parts per million (ppm). A minimum of two replications
from each of the cultivars and wild accessions were analyzed for the
126 accessions including 7 accessions of two wild species two micronutrients. The triacid method of digestion was followed.
used for the present study are given in Table1. All accessions are The variation in replications for each sample did not exceed ± 4ppm
maintained at Directorate of Rice Research (DRR), Hyderabad, India. for Fe and ± 2 ppm for Zn. The mean of the two replicates is
All accessions were grown in DRR field during kharif 2006 and seed presented in results (Table 1).
harvested from these lines was used. Some accessions were listed
twice or more as their seeds were collected in different lots to study RESULTS
the extent of variation.
126 accessions including cultivated indica and japonica rice
Image analysis for seed morphological traits cultivars, germplasm accessions and wild rice genotypes were
analyzed for Fe and Zn concentration in brown rice. Fe concentration
65 accessions were selected and used for image analysis. ranged from 6.2 ppm to 71.6 ppm and Zn concentration ranged from
11 parameters were analyzed for the measurement of seed (with 26.2 ppm to 67.3 ppm. Both Fe and Zn were high in wild rice
husk) using Biovis PSM image analysis system for plant science and genotypes and least in japonica. The mean value of Fe concentration
agriculture. The parameters analyzed were length, width, area, in all wild varieties was 27.5 ppm ranging from 11.9 ppm in SL-12 to
perimeter, density, roundness, compactness, elongation, roughness, 71.5 ppm in SL-32. The mean value of Zn concentration in all wild
perimeter/length, perimeter/width. accessions was 50.7 ppm ranging from 31.7 ppm in SL-12 to 67.2
ppm in SL-48. Five wild accessions had both Fe and Zn in high
Fe and Zn concentration analysis concentration among which SL-32 had 71.5 ppm Fe and 61.1 ppm
Zn (Table 1).
Fe and Zn concentration in all the accessions was analyzed
Table 1. Iron and Zinc concentration of brown rice in 126 rice accessions

Fe Zn Fe Zn Fe Zn
S.No Accession (ppm) (ppm) S.No Accession (ppm) (ppm) S.No Accession (ppm) (ppm)
1 ADT-36 8.3 37.2 43 Jalmagna 12.4 51 85 Pusa Sugandha 9.5 33.1
2 ADT-41 10.5 42 44 Jaya 7.3 30.9 86 Pusa Sugandha 10.6 35
3 Aghoni bora 8.2 51.6 45 Jaya 10 25.2 87 PY-3 14.9 40
4 Amulya 8.2 35 46 Jyoti 40.3 27.1 88 Rasi 16 36.8
5 Annada 48.4 36.1 47 Kalanamak 19.9 31.1 89 Sabita 14.1 36.1
6 ASD-16 41.3 45.8 48 Kanehna 13 48.7 90 Salivahna 14 42.8
7 Athira 6.6 34.8 49 Kasturi 15 45.7 91 Sasyasri 14.3 53.4
8 Badsha Bhog 11.9 36.1 50 Kavitha 23.2 36.9 92 SLC 11 15.1 34.5
9 Basmati-370 12.7 44.7 51 KJT-5 12 33 93 SLC-2 6.8 29.4
10 Benibhog 16.6 51.3 52 KJT-jaya 10.3 36 94 SLC-5 13.1 34.3
11 Bhararie 12.7 44.2 53 KRH-2 9.5 38.4 95 Sugandhamati 9.1 39.2
12 BPT-5204 13.4 47.8 54 Krishnahamsa 14.3 46.6 96 Sukaradhan 11.7 32.9
13 BSI-115 8.8 31.8 55 Krishnahamsa 13.1 40.7 97 Sarjoo-52 13.9 30.4
14 CH-45 40.9 41.1 56 Lalat 16.1 48.6 98 Suraksha 12.7 45.8
15 Chittimuthyalu 12.3 47.4 57 Leimaphou 14 38.8 99 Swarna 32.1 58.2
16 Co-47 8.5 39.7 58 Madhukar 11.5 42.2 100 Swarnadhan 24.8 46.9
17 Cohondoresolu 6.9 26.2 59 Mahsuri 11.1 29.8 101 Swarnaprabha 8.3 37.9
18 Dhanrasi 9.6 45.7 60 Mahsuri 13.3 42.3 102 Taraori Basmati 12.2 37.9
19 Dinesh 10 38.8 61 Mandya vijaya 8.4 29.4 103 Taraori Basmati 26.8 38.4
20 DRR-H2 14.7 42.9 62 Mansarovar 10.9 35.5 104 Thapanthi 9.1 36.2
21 Dular 13.7 33.9 63 MTU-1010 24.6 34.3 105 Tulasi 11.9 32.1
22 Govinda 11.3 38.2 64 N-22 30.3 43.2 106 TKL-9 26.8 38.6
23 GR-101 11.6 41.4 65 NDR-6278 23.7 37.9 107 TL J-1 17.7 47.4
Journal of Phytology 2012, 4(1): 19-25 21

24 GR-4 12.2 45.5 66 NDR-80 28 32.4 108 TN 1 13.6 40.7

25 GR-4 8.3 33 67 NDR97 10.1 36.6 109 Triguna 9 31.4
26 GR-5 10.2 40.2 68 Nidhi 14.7 38.4 110 Aishvarya 13.3 40.4
27 HKR120 12.3 36.7 69 Nootripathu 10.1 49.3 111 TRY-5 11.9 44.3
28 HKR-126 33.9 38.8 70 Norungan 8.6 62.7 112 Vajrama 15.6 40.9
29 HKR-46 8.4 32.2 71 Pusa Basmati 14 30.7 113 Varallu 13.1 32.6
30 HPR 2143 12.7 31.6 72 Pusa Basmati 18 46.7 114 Vibhava 7.2 31.7
31 HPR 2036 11.6 39.7 73 PA-6201 7.2 41.9 115 Vijetha 1001 14 35.7
32 HR-12 29.4 47.2 74 Phalguna 10.7 27.9 116 Vikramarya 12.1 46.6
33 IET-10750 12.8 38.8 75 Punshi 13.8 37.8 117 Vivekdhan 82 16.3 35.4
34 INRC-10192 9.7 34.8 76 Phovidhi 14.3 33.9 118 Vivekdhan-62 9.5 36.8
35 IR-29 20.3 58.9 77 PR-106 25.4 35.1 119 W 10 B 27.1 29.9
36 IR-36 18.7 47.6 78 PR-113 11.7 44.5 120 SL 17 (IRGC-105318) 27.6 51
37 IR-36 9.8 39.4 79 PRBYO 02266 12.8 45.8 121 SL-29 (IRGC-106099) 12.3 41.2
38 IR-50 8.9 39.5 80 PSD-3 11.7 30.3 122 SL-32(IRGC-106187) 71.6 61.2
39 IR-64 15.5 38.7 81 Puja 12.5 35.7 123 SL-18(IRGC-105320) 27.9 57.8
40 IR-64 11.1 38.9 82 Purnendu 17.5 34.3 124 SL-12(IRGC-81848) 12 31.7
41 IR-72 12.1 39.6 83 Pusa Sugandha-1 23.1 53.5 125 SL-48(IRGC-86476) 21.2 67.3
42 Jalmagna 10.2 33.5 84 Pusa Sugandha 12.8 35.6 126 SL-55(IRGC-106086) 20.6 45.3

The highest concentration in cultivars was 14.8 ppm for Fe Beni bhog had high Zn (>50ppm). Out of 126 accessions only 8 lines
and 39.4 ppm for Zn. The Fe concentration in cultivated varieties had >30 ppm Fe and 12 lines had >50 ppm Zn. When 8 high Fe lines
ranged from 6.6 ppm in Athira to 48.3 ppm in Annada and Zn were analysed for Zn, it was found that these lines also had high Zn
concentration ranged from 25.1 ppm in Jaya to 62.7 ppm in (>30 ppm). On the other hand when 8 high Zn lines were analysed
Norungan. Among cultivated varieties Annada, ASD-16, CH-45, Jyoti, for Fe, only three lines Swarna, SL-32 and SL-18 had high Fe
HKR-126, Swarna, N-22 had high Fe (>30 ppm) and Norungan, IR- (>25ppm) (Fig. 1).
29, Swarna, Jalmagna, Sasyasri, Pusa-Sugandha-1, Aghonibora,

Fig 1. Concentration of Zn in high Fe lines (a) and Fe in high Zn lines (b)

22 K. Anuradha et al.,

9 accessions were screened more than once for Fe and Zn Seeds of 65 rice varieties out of 126 accessions were also
concentration, as their seeds were collected in different lots to analysed for seed dimensions using image analysis (Table 2). Seed
determine the extent of variation. Fe concentration varied greatly length varies from 7.8 mm in Vivekdhan-62 & Beni bhog to 10.7 mm
from 8.3 to 12.2 ppm in GR-4, 11.1 to 13.3 ppm in Mahsuri, 13.1 to in Sugandhamati and Pusa Basmati and seed width varies from 3
14.3 ppm in Krishnahamsa, 14 to 18 ppm in Pusa Basmati, 12.2 – mm in GR-4 to 4.8 mm in Nidhi. Pearson correlation coefficient was
26.8 ppm in Taraori basmati, 9.8 – 18.7 ppm in IR-36, 11.1 -15.5 determined for 13 grain parameters used in the study and Fe and Zn
ppm in IR-64, 7.3 -10 in Jaya and 9.3-23.1 ppm in Pusa Sugandha. concentration of 65 germplasm accessions (Table 3). Only one
But on the other hand Zn concentration was quite consistent in the correlations between Zn and elongation (-0.25) was significant.
duplicate samples of all the 9 accessions.

Table 2. Morphological observation of seeds from 65 accessions

S. No. Name Area Length Width Peri- Density Round Compa- Elong Rough- Peri/ Peri/
(mm) (mm) (mm) meter -ness ctness -ation ness Length Width
(mm)
1
Dinesh 22.9 7.9 4.0 21.5 222.7 0.6 20.3 2.0 1.1 2.7 5.4
2
Annada 22.6 7.9 3.8 20.3 213.9 0.7 18.4 2.1 1.1 2.6 5.4
3
HKR -120 25.3 9.7 3.6 24.4 217.9 0.5 23.7 2.7 9.5 2.5 6.9
4
Krishnahamsa 22.3 9.3 3.3 23.3 204.0 0.5 24.6 2.9 5.1 2.5 7.2
5
Badshahbhog 14.5 6.3 3.2 16.8 206.3 0.6 19.6 2.0 1.1 2.7 5.3
6
Mahsuri 22.3 9.2 3.3 22.9 218.2 0.5 23.5 2.8 11.5 2.5 6.9
7
PY - 3 22.7 8.7 3.7 22.3 216.5 0.6 22.0 2.4 1.1 2.5 6.0
8
Sarjoo -52 21.5 8.6 3.3 22.1 210.4 0.6 23.0 2.6 1.1 2.6 6.7
9
ASD - 16 20.7 7.9 3.6 20.8 217.9 0.6 22.3 2.2 1.1 2.7 5.9
10
PR - 106 26.2 9.4 3.7 25.2 204.6 0.5 24.7 2.6 3.9 2.7 6.8
11
HPR - 2143 24.4 10.0 3.5 24.2 216.7 0.5 24.1 2.9 7.8 2.4 7.0
12
Vijetha 29.4 9.7 4.2 26.2 204.1 0.5 23.5 2.3 3.3 2.7 6.3
13
Jyoti 23.7 8.4 3.8 21.4 207.6 0.6 19.4 2.2 6.6 2.6 5.6
14
Purundu 21.9 8.3 3.5 21.7 217.9 0.6 21.8 2.4 4.2 2.6 6.2
15
IR - 29 24.7 9.3 3.6 23.4 220.6 0.6 22.3 2.6 5.4 2.5 6.6
16
Nidhi 26.7 10.1 4.8 27.6 209.6 0.5 28.7 2.4 45.9 2.7 6.3
17
Varallu 19.3 9.0 3.1 22.2 197.0 0.5 26.0 3.0 7.2 2.5 7.5
18
Vajram 25.3 9.5 3.6 25.5 205.3 0.5 27.6 2.8 9.6 2.7 7.4
19
Kasturi 26.9 10.0 3.9 25.9 193.0 0.5 25.3 2.7 1.1 2.6 6.9
20
Vikramarya 32.4 10.0 4.7 26.8 201.8 0.6 22.5 2.2 17.3 2.7 5.8
21
HPR - 2036 22.2 9.0 3.4 23.0 218.0 0.5 24.3 2.7 4.5 2.5 6.9
22
Phalguna 34.5 10.2 4.7 28.0 207.8 0.6 23.5 2.3 4.5 2.7 6.2
23
TLJ-1 26.3 9.0 3.9 23.4 206.1 0.6 21.0 2.3 1.1 2.6 6.0
24
GR - 4 16.4 7.3 3.0 18.3 212.5 0.6 20.4 2.5 4.5 2.5 6.2
25
Govindha 23.8 9.7 3.3 24.0 210.4 0.5 24.6 2.9 1.1 2.5 7.3
26
Manasarovar 21.4 7.9 3.6 20.3 212.3 0.7 19.5 2.2 4.0 2.6 5.6
27
Sasyasri 26.2 9.3 3.9 24.2 207.6 0.6 22.7 2.4 4.8 2.6 6.2
28
Kanehna 22.8 7.9 3.9 20.3 218.6 0.7 18.1 2.0 1.1 2.6 5.2
29
Suraksha 23.1 8.7 3.7 23.9 205.3 0.5 25.4 2.4 12.0 2.7 6.5
30
PR- 113 28.2 9.1 4.4 25.9 205.3 0.5 24.2 2.1 1.2 2.9 6.0
31
NDR -80 21.3 8.3 3.5 21.7 210.1 0.6 22.5 2.4 1.1 2.6 6.2
32
IR-36 21.9 8.0 3.7 21.4 202.9 0.6 21.0 2.2 4.1 2.7 5.7
33
Sukradhan 22.8 9.3 3.4 26.1 209.4 0.4 30.9 2.8 7.9 2.8 7.6
 Journal of Phytology 2012, 4(1): 19-25 23

34
Lalat 25.3 9.6 3.6 25.4 209.6 0.5 26.0 2.7 5.5 2.6 7.1
35
HKR - 126 22.3 9.6 3.2 24.2 208.5 0.5 26.7 3.1 9.6 2.5 7.8
36
CH - 45 22.9 8.5 3.6 22.1 212.9 0.6 21.8 2.4 7.8 2.6 6.1
37
IR - 72 22.1 8.8 3.3 22.1 217.7 0.6 22.4 2.6 1.1 2.5 6.6
38
Triguna 22.7 9.5 3.2 23.7 215.7 0.5 25.1 3.0 3.6 2.5 7.5
39
Athira 25.0 9.2 3.7 22.9 198.5 0.6 21.2 2.5 5.0 2.5 6.3
40
KJT-5 27.1 10.0 3.8 26.1 212.6 0.5 25.3 2.7 4.8 2.6 7.0
41
Leimaphou 30.1 9.6 4.4 26.7 205.1 0.5 24.0 2.3 7.6 2.8 6.3
42
GR - 101 26.2 9.2 3.8 23.8 219.7 0.6 21.6 2.5 3.1 2.6 6.3
43
Shalivahana 25.2 8.1 4.3 22.9 208.7 0.6 21.0 1.9 8.1 2.8 5.4
44
Beni bhog 20.6 7.8 3.6 20.5 216.9 0.6 20.5 2.2 9.6 2.6 5.7
45
TN1 25.3 8.6 3.9 22.5 206.6 0.6 20.0 2.2 4.1 2.6 5.8
46
IET - 10750 28.3 9.6 4.0 25.1 197.3 0.6 22.5 2.4 1.1 2.6 6.3
47
PSD -3 27.5 10.4 3.6 25.8 223.1 0.5 24.4 2.9 10.7 2.5 7.2
48
Phovidi 24.6 9.5 3.6 23.3 220.7 0.6 22.1 2.7 4.1 2.5 6.6
49
DRRH-2 25.7 9.7 3.7 25.0 212.7 0.5 24.8 2.7 1.1 2.6 7.0
50
KRH - 2 22.6 9.2 3.3 22.6 220.5 0.6 22.7 2.8 7.2 2.5 6.9
51
PA 6201 20.6 9.0 3.0 22.2 221.2 0.5 24.1 3.0 4.1 2.5 7.3
52
IR - 50 22.2 8.7 3.4 21.3 217.8 0.6 20.6 2.6 1.1 2.4 6.3
53
Sugandhmati 26.4 10.7 3.6 27.8 209.2 0.4 29.9 3.1 20.9 2.6 7.9
54
GR - 5 22.5 8.9 3.4 22.0 216.5 0.6 21.8 2.7 1.1 2.5 6.5
55
Vivekdhan 62 21.2 7.8 3.7 21.0 215.0 0.6 21.7 2.1 5.5 2.7 5.7
56
Amulya 23.9 9.0 3.6 22.5 209.7 0.6 21.4 2.5 10.1 2.5 6.3
57
ADT - 36 21.9 8.7 3.5 22.1 200.8 0.6 22.5 2.5 4.6 2.5 6.4
58
Aishwarya 24.2 9.1 4.0 25.6 198.2 0.5 28.4 2.3 6.9 2.8 6.5
59
HKR - 46 20.6 8.0 3.5 20.1 214.3 0.6 19.8 2.3 3.9 2.5 5.8
60
Vibhava 19.3 8.5 3.1 21.1 210.0 0.5 23.2 2.8 15.4 2.5 6.9
61
Co - 47 23.1 8.1 3.8 20.7 218.1 0.7 18.7 2.1 4.4 2.5 5.5
62
HR-12 25.0 9.6 3.6 24.2 196.5 0.5 23.8 2.7 4.1 2.5 6.7
63
Pusa Basmati 26.9 10.7 3.5 26.6 207.1 0.5 26.6 3.1 9.3 2.5 7.7
64
Dhanrasi 21.8 8.1 3.6 21.3 219.7 0.6 21.2 2.3 5.0 2.6 6.0
65
Tulasi 21.5 8.4 3.5 20.9 215.3 0.6 20.5 2.4 4.1 2.5 6.0

Table 3. Pearson correlation coefficient among Fe & Zn concentration, grain area, length, width, perimeter, density, roundness, compactness, elongation, roughness,
Fe Zn Area Length Width Perimeter Density Peri/ Peri/
(ppm) (ppm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mean) Roundness Compactness Elongation Roughness Length Width
Fe (ppm) 1.00
Zn (ppm) 0.08 1.00
Area(mm) -0.06 0.02 1.00
Length(mm) -0.15 -0.13 0.74** 1.00
Width(mm) -0.12 0.15 0.78** 0.27 1.00
Perimeter(mm) -0.12 -0.06 0.85** 0.91** 0.53** 1.00
Density(mean) -0.07 -0.04 -0.27* -0.20 -0.27* -0.33** 1.00
Roundness 0.19 0.14 -0.30* -0.76** 0.06 -0.75** 0.28* 1.00
Compactness -0.12 -0.12 0.29* 0.69** 0.01 0.74** -0.29* -0.97** 1.00
Elongation -0.16 -0.25* -0.01 0.64** -0.54** 0.37** 0.03 -0.74** 0.64** 1.00
Roughness -0.09 -0.07 0.19 0.35** 0.31* 0.39** -0.07 -0.40** 0.46** 0.16 1.00
Peri/Length 0.08 0.17 0.33* -0.11 0.65** 0.30* -0.34** -0.06 0.20 -0.59** 0.11 1.00
Peri/Width -0.16 -0.23 0.10 0.71** -0.42** 0.53** -0.09 -0.88** 0.82** 0.96** 0.20 -0.34** 1.00
peri/length, peri/width of 65 different rice germplasm accession.
24 K. Anuradha et al.,

DISCUSSION Zinc values is the phloem sap loading and unloading rates within the
reproductive organs [22]. Different seed lots of the same accession
Plant breeding programs in biofortification of staple food crops had different Fe Zn concentration even though they were harvested
such as rice and wheat require screening of germplasm, varieties from the same plot. Thus there is a range of Fe and Zn concentration
and elite lines having Fe and Zn-dense grains to be used as donor and no fixed values quite akin to the trait yield.
parents [18]. An increase in concentration of Fe and Zn in grain is a Secondly, soil properties also influence the grain Fe and Zn
high-priority research area. Exploitation of large genetic variation for concentration. The pH, organic matter content and Fe/Zn levels of
Fe and Zn existing in cereal germplasm is an important approach to native soil showed significant effects on grain Fe and Zn content [23].
minimize the extent of Fe and Zn deficiencies in developing world. Iron and zinc when applied to soil singly significantly increased the
Maximum micronutrients are frequently present in some landraces seed weight per plant in soybean [24]. Mishra et al., [25] studied the
and /or genetically distant wild varieties [19]. effect of biofertilizers on nutrient content of cultivated variety of
Among the germplasm screened for Fe & Zn concentration, fenugreek. They showed non significant changes in Fe and Zn
the highest values were obtained in the wild accessions. Among wild content on application of biofertilzers. Fe concentration is known to
accessions SL-32 (O. nivara) was found to be high for both iron and vary with location but Zn values appear to be more consistent [23].
zinc. It is interesting to note that all the wild accessions had high zinc Also, the range of variation is much more for Fe concentration than
but only one had high iron. Some cultivars such as Annada had high for Zn. Environment, genotype and genotype × environment
Fe and Norungan had high zinc. Our results are consistent with interaction significantly affected Fe concentration in rice grains [26].
study by Banerjee et al. [9] who estimated Fe and Zn While grain Fe content showed significant genotype × environment
concentration in 46 rice accessions including 3 wild genotypes O. interaction effect, Zn content of brown rice was significantly
nivara, O. latifolia and O. officinalis. They showed that wild influenced by native soil properties [9, 23, 26]. Thus, in general grain
accessions had high iron and zinc. In addition they also got 3 zinc appears to be more consistent than grain Fe content.
homozygous breeding indica genotypes having high grain Fe and Zn Sellappan et al. [15] suggested that the number of aleurone
concentration. Four lines MTU1010, IR64, Nagina22 and Swarna layers, size of the embryo and size of the caryopsis determines the
were common between their and our study. When compared, these quantity of important micronutrients such as iron, zinc in the grains.
lines had different Fe and Zn concentration. In our study, Fe The high genetic correlation between grain characteristics and some
concentration in these four lines MTU1010, IR64, Nagina22 and mineral element contents can be used to conduct indirect selection
Swarna was 24.6, 13.4, 12.6 and 8.4 ppm and Zn concentration was of a grain characteristic for mineral element content in a breeding
34.3, 38.8, 26.8 and 13.9 ppm respectively while Fe was 8, 8, 9 and program [17]. In our study, seed dimensions were not significantly
13 ppm and Zn was 18, 20, 13 and 26 ppm in their study. correlated with high iron and zinc. In wheat, it was shown that
In another study 220 rice genotypes were analysed for Fe and smaller seeds of Aegilops longissima had upto twice higher iron and
Zn and indica and aromatic rice varieties with high Fe and Zn content zinc content than durum wheat cultivar with larger seeds [27]. The F2
were identified [19]. Out of these 220 rice genotypes 13 accessions seeds and amphidiploids despite being large showed 42%–70%
were common with our study. Indica and aromatic varieties had high higher Fe and 60%–80% higher Zn indicating better genetic systems
Fe but not Zn [19] but our results show that these accessions had for uptake, translocation and sequestration into seeds influence Fe
high Zn but not Fe. Anandan et al., [20] reported that the content of and Zn rather than seed size.
Fe and Zn in traditional genotypes were significantly higher than that
of improved cultivars. These result show that there is a significant CONCLUSION
genetic diversity or variation in the existing rice germplasm. We
observed that the high Fe lines (>30ppm) also had high Zn but the In conclusion, it was found that the wild accessions O. nivara
high Zn lines (>40ppm) did not have high Fe. This interesting and O. rufipogon had the highest Fe and Zn in brown rice. Some
observation is also supported by our results from 128 Backcross cultivars such as Annada, ASD16, CH45, HKR126, Nagina22 also
Introgression Lines (BILs) from the cross of BPT5204 x O. nivara had more than 30ppm of both Fe and Zn. Lines with high Fe
(unpublished data). The top 5 high Fe BILs also had high Zn but the invariably had high Zinc but not vice versa. Zn concentration was
top 5 high zinc BILs did not have high Fe. The same was also significantly correlated to grain elongation. That the wild species are
observed in 126 BILs derived from the cross Swarna x O. nivara [21]. a good source of high Fe and high Zn is supported by our
It is clear from previous work and our results that there are no subsequent unpublished work on BILs derived from Swarna x
fixed values of Fe and Zn for an accession. These can vary O.nivara and BPT5204 x O.rufipogon [20] and high iron and zinc
depending on sample lots even from one accession as seen in the lines have been developed.
eight lines for which we had more than one sample. The position of
grain on the panicle may also influence its Fe and Zn levels but there ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
are no such detailed studies on Fe Zn distribution within the panicle.
Variations in Fe and Zn values in different samples of the same The work was financially supported by Indian Council for
accession can also arise due to presence or absence of embryo in Agricultural Research, Govt. of India, Network project on functional
grains, time of harvest or different digestion or analytical methods. genomics of crops-project 3019 (NPTC/FG/05/2672/33). We thank
This variation in Iron and Zinc values is also due to homeostasis Dr. S. Robin, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, for seeds of
regulating their translocation, absorption, and transport within the Norungan and Nootripathu. We thank Dr. B.C. Viraktamath, Project
plant system [3]. Another factor contributing to difference in Iron and Director, DRR, for discussions, constant encouragement and support.
Journal of Phytology 2012, 4(1): 19-25 25

REFERENCES caryopsis structure in relation to distribution of micronutrients

(iron, zinc, b-carotene) of rice cultivars including transgenic
indica rice. Plant Sci 177: 557–562
[1] Bouis, H.E. and R.M. Welch. 2010. Biofortification—a
sustainable agricultural strategy for reducing micronutrient [16] Sivaprakash, K.R., S. Krishnan, S.K. Datta and A.K. Parida.
malnutrition in the global south. Crop Sci. 50: S20–32 2006. Tissue-specific histochemical localization of iron and
ferritin gene expression in transgenic indica rice Pusa Basmati
[2] Sperotto, R.A., T. Boffa, G.L. Duartea, L.S. Santosb, M.A.
(Oryza sativa L.). J Genet 85:157–60
Grusakc and J.P. Fett. 2010. Identification of putative target
genes to manipulate Fe and Zn concentrations in rice grains. J [17] Zhang, M.W., B.J. Guo and Z.M. Peng. 2005. Genetic effects
Plant Physiol 167:1500–1506 on grain characteristics of indica black rice and their uses on
indirect selections for some mineral element contents in grains.
[3] Welch, R.M. and R.D. Graham. 2004. Breeding for
Genet Resour Crop Ev 52: 1121–1128
micronutrients in staple food crops from a human nutrition
perspective. J Exp Bot 55:353–64 [18] Stangoulis, J. 2010. Technical aspects of zinc and iron
analysis in biofortification of the staple food crops, wheat and
[4] Meng, F., Y. Wei and X. Yang. 2005. Iron content and
bioavailability in rice. J Trace Elem Med Biol 18:333–338 rice. World Congress of Soil Science, Soil Solutions for a
Changing World 1 – 6 August 2010, Brisbane, Australia
[5] Mehansho, H. 2006. Iron Fortification Technology Development:
New Approaches. J Nutr 136: 1059–1063 [19] Brar, B., S. Jain, R. Singh and R.K. Jain. 2011. Genetic
diversity for iron and zinc contents in a collection of 220 rice
[6] Prom-u-thai, C., L. Huang, R.P. Glahn, R.M. Welch, S. Fukai (Oryza sativa L.) genotypes. Indian J Genet Plant Breed 71(1):
and B. Rerkasem. 2006. Iron (Fe) bioavailability and the 67-73
distribution of anti-Fe nutrition biochemicals in the unpolished,
polished grain and bran fraction of five rice genotypes. J [20] Anandan, A., G. Rajiv, R. Eswaran and M. Prakash. 2011.
Genotypic Variation and Relationships between Quality Traits
Sci Food Agric 86:1209–1215
and Trace Elements in Traditional and Improved Rice (Oryza
[7] Cheng, C.J., C.J. Lan, S.A. Ping, J.Z. Qiang and H.L. Zhi. 2009. sativa L.) Genotypes. J Food Sci 76(4): H122–H130
Difference of Iron Contents in Rice Landraces. J Plant Genet
Resources DOI: CNKI:SUN:ZWYC.0.2009-01-012 [21] Swamy, B.P.M., K. Kaladhar, K. Anuradha, A.K. Batchu, T.
Longvah, B.C. Viraktamath and N. Sarla. 2011. Enhancing iron
[8] Martínez, C.P., J. Borrero, R. Taboada, J.L. Viana, P. Neves, and zinc concentration in rice grains using wild species.
L. Narvaez, V. Puldon, A. Adames and A. Vargas. 2010. ADNAT Convention and International Symposium on
Rice cultivars with enhanced iron and zinc content to improve Genomics and Biodiversity”, CCMB, Hyderabad (23 – 25th Feb
human nutrition. 28th International Rice Research Conference, 2011) (P- 71).
8-12 November 2010, Hanoi, Vietnam OP10: Quality Grain,
Health, and Nutrition. [22] Welch, R.M. 1986. Effects of nutrient deficiencies on seed
production and quality. Adv Plant Nut 2:205-247.
[9] Banerjee, S., D.J. Sharma, S.B. Verulkar and G. Chandel. 2010.
Use of in silico and semiquantitative RT-PCR approaches to [23] Chandel, G., S. Banerjee, S. See, R. Meena, D.J. Sharma and
S.B. Verulkar. 2010. Effects of Different Nitrogen Fertilizer
develop nutrient rich rice (Oryza sativa L.). Ind. J. Biotechnol
9(2): 203-212 Levels and Native Soil Properties on Rice Grain Fe, Zn and
Protein Contents. Rice Science 17(3): 213−227
[10] Bhattacharjee, V.G.R., K.N. Rai, K.L. Sahrawat, T. Longvah.
2008. A simple and rapid screening method for grain zinc [24] Ghasemian V., A. Ghalavand, A Soroosh zadeh and A Pirzad,
2010. The Effect of Iron, Zinc and Mangnese on Quality and
content in pearl millet. J SAT Agric Res. 6
Quantity of Soybean Seed. J Phytol 2: 73-79.
[11] Choi, E.Y., R. Graham and J. Stangoulis. 2007. Semi-
quantitative analysis for selecting Fe- and Zn-dense genotypes [25] Mishra N., C.P. Singh and U.S. Mishra, 2011. Effect of Bio-
fertilizers on Bio-nutrients, Nitrogen, Total Protein, Extractable
of staple food crops. J Food Comp Anal 20: 496–505
Lipid and Mineral Contents of Cultivated Variety of Fenugreek
[12] Jiang, W., P.C. Struik, H. Van Keulen, M. Zhao, L.N. Jin and (Trigonella foenum graecum Linn.). J Phytol 3 (11): 15-17
T.J. Stomph. 2008. Does increased zinc uptake enhance grain
zinc mass concentration in rice? Ann Appl Biol 53:135–47 [26] Suwarto and Nasrullah. 2011. Genotype×Environment
Interaction for Iron Concentration of Rice in Central Java of
[13] Takahashi, M., T. Nozoye, N. Kitajima, N. Fukuda, A. Hokura Indonesia. Rice Science 18(1): 75−78
and Y. Terada. 2009. In vivo analysis of metal distribution and
expression of metal transporters in rice seed during [27] Tiwari, V.K., N. Rawat, K. Neelam, G.S. Randhawa, K. Singh,
germination process by microarray and X-ray fluorescence P. Chhuneja and H.S. Dhaliwal. 2008. Development of
Triticum turgidum subsp. durum – Aegilops longissima
Imaging of Fe, Zn, Mn, and Cu. Plant Soil 325:39–51
amphiploids with high iron and zinc content through unreduced
[14] Prom-u-thai, C., B. Dell, G. Thomson and B. Rerkasem. 2003. gamete formation in F1 hybrids. Genome 51:757-766
Easy and rapid detection of iron in rice grain. Sci Asia 29:203–
7
[15] Sellappan, K., K. Datta, V. Parkhi and S.K. Datta. 2009. Rice

View publication stats