Next Article in Journal
Detection Method and Experimental Research of Leafy Vegetable Seedlings Transplanting Based on a Machine Vision
Previous Article in Journal
Influence Evaluation of Enzyme Treatments on Aroma Profile of White Wines
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Agro-Morphological and Biochemical Characterization of Korean Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) Landraces

National Agrobiodiversity Center, National Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Rural Development Administration, Jeonju 54874, Republic of Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agronomy 2022, 12(11), 2898; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12112898
Submission received: 4 November 2022 / Revised: 16 November 2022 / Accepted: 17 November 2022 / Published: 20 November 2022

Abstract

:
Sorghum landraces are essential for developing cultivars with improved properties, such as disease tolerance, yield and metabolite content. In this study, 139 genotypes (136 Korean sorghum landraces and 3 control cultivars) collected from various provinces were investigated using eleven agronomical and five biochemical traits. The landraces showed little variation in their qualitative agronomical traits. In contrast, quantitative agronomical and biochemical traits differed significantly among the landraces. It was discovered that 16 landraces matured ahead of all control cultivars. Furthermore, 26 landraces had significantly higher thousand seed weights (TSWs) than two of the control cultivars, including Nampungchal (30.63 g) and Sodamchal (30.53 g), whereas only 1 landrace had a significantly higher TSW than the other control cultivar, Wheatland (37.93 g) (p < 0.05). The levels of total tannin content (TTC), total phenolic content (TPC), 2,2′-azino-bis(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid) diammonium (ABTS) radical cation scavenging activity, 1,1-diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) radical scavenging activity and ferric reducing antioxidant power (FRAP) were in the ranges of 0.12–428.95 mg CE/g, 1.17–10.23 mg GAE/g, 1.64–67.60 mg TE/g, 0.48–31.99 mg AAE/g and 0.63–21.56 mg AAE/g, respectively, and were all affected by collection area, seed weight and seed color. Landraces from northern provinces were discovered to have higher metabolite contents. Furthermore, large seeds had higher TTC and TPC levels as well as DPPH, ABTS and FRAP activities than medium and small seeds, except for the TTC and FRAP, which were significantly different. In terms of seed color, white seeds had significantly lower metabolite contents and antioxidant activities and were notable in principal component analysis. Correlation analysis revealed positive and significant associations between biochemical traits, as well as between panicle-related agronomic traits. In general, the landraces with superior characteristics could be ideal candidates for sorghum breeding programs.

1. Introduction

Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) is an economically important cereal crop that is grown all over the world. It is a member of the Poaceae (or Grass) family, which includes some of the world’s most important crops, such as wheat, maize, rice and barley [1,2]. According to the most recent Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) data, approximately 59 million tons of sorghum were produced in 2020 alone, with the top three producing countries being the United States, Nigeria and Ethiopia [3].
Sorghum seeds are known for their nutritional value because they are high in minerals, vitamins, proteins, fiber and carbohydrates and are thus used for human consumption and as animal feed [4,5]. Moreover, other non-nutritional and health-promoting metabolites such as phenolic compounds, tannins and phytosterols are abundant [2,6,7]. Several pharmacological studies have shown that sorghum seeds have antioxidant, antiobesity, anticancer and anti-inflammatory properties due to these metabolites. Because sorghum seeds are gluten-free, they are recommended for celiac and gluten-intolerant patients [6,8]. All of these factors may have contributed to the increased use of sorghum in the food, pharmaceutical and aquaculture industries [8].
As the global population grows, increased food production is expected to meet the growing global demand [9]. However, climate change and associated abiotic and biotic factors are posing challenges to the production of several crops, including sorghum [10,11]. As a result, researchers are constantly working to develop improved sorghum cultivars with high productivity and adaptability, rich metabolite contents and high disease tolerance [12]. Therefore, multidisciplinary studies that assist the breeding process are always needed [13,14].
Crop breeding and genetic improvements in general incorporate several technologies related to DNA markers, marker selection and genetic engineering. Several specific genes regulate the characteristics of agronomic traits, which influence their selection during breeding programs [15]. Moreover, various environmental factors influence the agronomical characteristics and metabolite contents of sorghum genotypes [16,17]. Several previous studies investigated the effects of these factors, such as temperature, cultivation conditions, stresses, diseases and genotype differences, among others, on agronomical characteristics and metabolite contents using phenotypic and genotypic methods in sorghum genetic resources [7,18,19,20]. Assessing the variation of such traits using a large collection of genotypes provides valuable information and aids in the development of high-quality cultivars [9,13]. Previous research has found a high level of genetic diversity in sorghum landraces from Ethiopia, India, China and Sudan, among other places [21,22,23,24,25].
Since 1987, the National Agrobiodiversity Center of the National Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Rural Development Administration (RDA, Jeonju, Republic of Korea), has been collecting and researching the diversity of local landraces as well as several crops of different origins for future use and conservation [26]. Despite this, genetic diversity assessments of sorghum landraces from the Republic of Korea have received little attention [27,28]. The goal of this study was to investigate the diversity of 136 recently cultivated Korean sorghum landraces by comparing their agronomical traits, biochemical contents and antioxidant activities with those of three control cultivars. The findings of this study can aid in the identification of well-performing landraces with distinct agronomic traits, high levels of metabolite content and enhanced biological activity for use in future breeding programs as well as in distribution to farmers.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Chemicals and Reagents

All the chemicals and reagents that were used were of analytical grade (purity > 99.8%) and were applied as obtained. Water and methanol were purchased from Fisher Scientific (Pittsburgh, PA, USA), and sulfuric acid was obtained from DAEJUNG Chemicals (Siheung-si, Korea). The other chemicals and reagents, including catechin, gallic acid, L-ascorbic acid, anhydrous sodium carbonate (Na2CO3), vanillin, Folin–Ciocalteu phenol reagent, potassium ferricyanide, trichloroacetic acid, ferric chloride, 2,2′-azino-bis(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid) diammonium salt (ABTS), 6-hydroxy-2,5,7,8-tetramethylchroman-2-carboxylic acid and 1,1-diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) radical were obtained from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO, USA).

2.2. Sorghum Materials, Cultivation and Preparation

The seeds of the 136 sorghum landraces were obtained from the gene bank at the National Agrobiodiversity Center (Jeonju, Republic of Korea). The seeds were sown on 17 June 2021, in an experimental field found at the center (latitude/longitude: 30°49′38.37″ N/127°09′7.78″ E). In brief, for each accession, ten seeds were sown in 100 × 180 cm row plots (90 cm apart) on clay loam soil with a 20 cm seed-to-seed spacing. N-P-K fertilizer was applied in a 9:7:8 (kg/10a) ratio, and the growing conditions were uniformly maintained for all landraces. Two popular Korean sorghum cultivars (Nampungchal and Sodamchal) and one US sorghum cultivar (Wheatland) were also grown under similar conditions and used as controls. The growing season lasted until October of the same year. The average temperature and accumulated precipitation in June, July, August, September and October were 23.0 and 145.3; 27.2 and 255.1; 25.9 and 454.8; 22.9 and 162.1; and 16.4 °C and 37.0 mm, respectively, during the cultivation year. The average humidity was 71.6% in June, 74.3% in July, 78.0% in August, 74.4% in September and 70.4% in October. The agronomical features of the sorghum were inspected and recorded during the growth period. Matured seeds were hand-harvested and classified according to their collection area (Chungcheongbuk-do, Chungcheongnam-do, Gangwon-do, Gyeonggi-do, Gyeongsanbuk-do, Gyeongsangnam-do, Incheon, Jeollabuk-do and Jeollanam-do) and seed coat color (brown, orange, red, yellow, white and mixed) to view the influence of each on metabolite contents and antioxidant activities. The seeds were classified based on their thousand seed weights as large (>30 g), medium (25–30 g) and small (<25 g). Seed samples from each sorghum genotype were dried at 40 °C for 7 days in a post-harvest crop dryer (TJHP-1003, Jungang Jeongmil, Korea), powdered using a grinder (2010 Geno Grinder, SPEX, Metuchen, NJ, USA) and stored at −20 °C in sealed plastic bags pending extraction.

2.3. Extraction of Seed Samples

Seed samples were extracted in triplicate for each genotype following a previously described protocol with some changes [29]. Initially, 1 g of powdered seed sample was placed in a 45 mL extraction tube, and 5 mL of 80% aqueous methanol was added. The solution was then vortexed followed by sonication in a 25 °C water bath. After 45 min, the mixture was removed, cooled and centrifuged (3134× g) for 15 min before being filtered through a 0.45 μm syringe membrane filter, and the supernatant was retained. For the residue, the extraction procedure was repeated once more. In preparation for analysis, the combined supernatant was stored at a low temperature (−20 °C) and was used for the determination of total tannin content, total phenolic content and antioxidant activities within 72 h after the extraction. During each assay, measurements were conducted in triplicate for every sample, and the absorbance was measured using an Eon Microplate Spectrophotometer (Bio-Tek, Winooski, VT, USA).

2.4. Determination of Total Tannin Content (TTC)

The total tannin content was determined using the method proposed by Price et al. [30] with some modifications. Briefly, a vanillin–HCl reagent was prepared by mixing equal volumes of methanol solutions of 8% HCl and 1% vanillin. Then, 100 μL of sample extract and 200 μL of vanillin–HCl reagent were mixed in a 96-well plate followed by incubation for 20 min at room temperature in the dark. Then, absorbance was measured at 500 nm against methanol as a blank. Catechin was used as a standard to plot a calibration curve (y = 0.0313x + 0.0167, R2 = 0.9987), and the TTC is reported as milligrams of catechin equivalent per gram of dried seed weight (mg CE/g).

2.5. Determination of Total Phenolic Content (TPC)

The total phenolic content was determined spectrophotometrically using the Folin–Ciocalteu method [31]. In brief, 100 μL of seed extract was mixed in the dark with an equal volume of Folin–Ciocalteu reagent. After 3 min of incubation at 25 °C, the mixture was treated with 100 μL of 2% Na2CO3 solution. After 30 min of reaction in the dark, the absorbance was measured at 750 nm. Methanol was used as a blank, and the TPC is expressed as milligrams of gallic acid equivalent per gram of dried seed weight (mg GAE/g) using gallic acid as a standard (y = 9.5155x − 0.1955, R2 = 0.9999).

2.6. Determination of Antioxidant Activities

The antioxidant activities of sorghum seed extracts were estimated using three in vitro assays that followed our recently published protocols [31], with some modifications, as detailed below. During each assay, a methanol solution was used as a control.

2.6.1. 1,1-Diphenyl-2-Picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) Radical Scavenging Activity

Initially, 100 μL of the sorghum seed extract was mixed with an equal volume of freshly prepared DPPH solution (150 μM). The mixture was then incubated for 30 min in the dark at 25 °C, and the absorbance was measured at 517 nm. Ascorbic acid was used as a standard (y = 4686.5x − 2.9918, R2 = 0.9989), and the DPPH radical scavenging activity is expressed in milligrams of ascorbic acid equivalent antioxidant capacity per gram of dried seed weight (mg AAE/g).

2.6.2. 2,2′-Azino-Bis(3-Ethylbenzothiazoline-6-Sulfonic Acid) Diammonium Radical Cation (ABTS•+) Scavenging Activity

Initially, a stock solution of ABTS•+ was prepared by dissolving ABTS (7 mM) in potassium persulfate (K2S2O8, 2.45 mM). The mixture was incubated for 16 h at room temperature (~25℃) and was diluted with water until reaching an absorbance of 0.700 ± 0.02 at λmax 734 nm. During the assay, 150 μL of ABTS•+ solution was mixed with 10 μL of the sorghum seed extract and was incubated at 25 °C in darkness. After 3 min, the absorbance was measured at 734 nm. Trolox was used as a standard (y = 371.93x − 1.3987, R2 = 1.000), and the ABTS•+ scavenging activity was calculated as milligrams of Trolox equivalent antioxidant capacity per gram of dried seed weight (mg TE/g).

2.6.3. Ferric Reducing Antioxidant Power (FRAP) Assay

Initially, 60 μL of the sorghum seed extract was mixed with 150 μL of freshly prepared phosphate buffer (pH: 6.6, 0.2 M) and 150 μL of 1% potassium ferricyanide solution (K3Fe(CN)6) and incubated for 20 min at 50 °C. The mixture was then centrifuged at 13,000 rpm for 10 min with 150 μL of 10% trichloroacetic acid added. The supernatant (100 μL) was diluted with equal parts distilled water and 0.1% ferric chloride solution (20 μL). After 10 min of incubation, the absorbance at 700 nm was measured. Ascorbic acid was used as a standard (y = 4.318x + 0.0061, R2 = 0.9999), and the FRAP activity results are reported in mg AAE/g.

2.7. Statistical Analysis

The results are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation (SD) of three measurements. An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was computed using xlstat-software (Addinsoft, New York, NY, USA), followed by Duncan’s multiple range test to statistically determine significant differences between measurements at a level of p < 0.05. R-software (version 4.0.2, r-project) was used to generate box plots, correlation matrices and principal component analysis plots.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Agro-Morphological Characteristics

Agronomic traits are influenced by differences in genetic makeup, growing conditions, location, cultivation year and environmental factors, as described before, and hence are the primary sources of information to determine genetic diversity among plant genotypes [32,33]. For each sorghum genotype, four qualitative and seven quantitative agronomical features were documented from field examinations and laboratory inspections. Table S1 (Supplementary Materials) contains the qualitative agronomic data collected for each genotype along with their introduction (IT) number, and Figure 1 summarizes their relative frequencies. Endosperm type, panicle type, panicle density and seed color were among the qualitative characteristics documented, and the majority of them showed little variation among the sorghum genotypes. Except for four landraces (IT1000910, IT162843, IT270349 and IT329089) and one control cultivar (Wheatland, CA, USA), the remaining landraces (97%) had glutinous endosperm (Table S1, Figure 1a). Previous research has indicated that glutinous sorghum grains are ideal for winemaking and ethanol production due to their high amylopectin content [34,35]. Panicle-related characteristics such as panicle type and panicle density are strongly related to yield and are important traits to consider in breeding programs [36,37]. The sorghum genotypes in this study had either dense, loose or medium panicle density, with the former being the most common (88%) (Figure 1b). Among the control cultivars, Nampungchal had a dense panicle density, Wheatland had a loose panicle density and Sodamchal had a medium panicle density (Table S1). The majority of landraces (61%) had a compact panicle type, with the extremely spreading type (18%) coming in second (Figure 1c). The control cultivars, Nampungchal and Wheatland, also developed a compact panicle, whereas Sodamchal had a medium panicle type (Table S1). Sorghum genotypes with a compact and dense panicle are preferred because they are associated with a higher yield, and thus, many of the sorghum landraces could provide good breeding options [36,37].
Seed color was another trait that varied greatly, with a total of six different colors observed (Figure 1d and Figure S1). The dominant seed color was orange, which was developed by 72% of the landraces and all of the control cultivars. Furthermore, 10% of the landraces had yellow seed colors, 6% had white seed colors and 6% had brown seed colors. The remaining 2% and 4% of landraces had red and mixed seed colors, respectively. In general, the observed color variation agreed with previous reports [5,38,39,40]. These previous studies have also shown that seed color variation affects the distribution of health-promoting metabolites and their pharmacological properties. Furthermore, it influences the preferences of consumers, farmers and breeders. As a result, the various seed colors observed in our study may provide a diverse range of options for various stakeholders.
Quantitative agronomical traits such as days to panicle (or heading) (DP), days to maturity (DM), stem height (SH), stem thickness (or diameter) (ST), panicle length, panicle width (PW) and thousand seeds weight (TSW) were also found to vary. The DH and DM were in the ranges of 40–74 and 77–113 days, respectively (Figure 2, Table 1). Wheatland was the fastest control cultivar to develop a panicle (in 47 days) and mature (in 88 days) among the controls, followed by Nampungchal and Sodamchal. One of the research goals in sorghum breeding is the development of early maturing genotypes [41]. In this study, 16 landraces were found to develop a panicle (in ≤46 days) and fully mature (in ≤83 days) earlier than all control cultivars, suggesting that they could be valuable resources during the development of early maturing sorghum cultivars. The variations in stem height and thickness ranged from 55.33 to 297.67 cm and 12.72 to 25.76 mm, respectively, with a five and two-fold difference (p < 0.05) (Table S2). Only 1 landrace (IT331878) had a significantly shorter stem length (55.33 cm) than the three control cultivars in this study. Compared with the three control cultivars, only 2 landraces (IT331936 and IT322549) had significantly higher stem thickness (>24.52 mm) (Table 1). Previous research found that plant height is related to the vegetative nature as well as the maturity period of sorghum [42]. As a result, genotypes with thick and tall stems are highly preferred for seed quality and yield, and accessions such as IT221619, IT235856, IT340260, IT340261 and IT208566 (with SH > 200 cm and ST > 20 mm) could be ideal candidates [42,43]. The PL and PW are also important quantitative traits because they are related to yield [36,37]. Significant differences in PL and PW were observed among the sorghum landraces in this study p < 0.05). PL and PW were in the 16–51.33 cm and 35.50–160.43 mm ranges, respectively, with means of 25.69 cm and 78.45 mm. Nampungchal, Wheatland and Sodamchal were the control cultivars, with PLs of 22.33, 21.33 and 27.00 cm and panicle widths of 88.16, 47.95 and 81.13 mm, respectively. As a result, 17.64% of the landraces had lower PL but higher PW than the three control cultivars. TSW was another quantitative trait with significant variation (p < 0.05). It ranged from 21.90 to 38.20 g, with a mean of 28.62 g. TSW was comparable in Nampungchal (30.63 g) and Sodamchal (30.53 g) but significantly higher in Wheatland (37.93 g) (p < 0.05). Only 1 landrace (IT113294) had a significantly higher TSW (38.20 g) than all three control cultivars. In contrast, 26 landraces had significantly higher TSW than Nampungchal and Sodamchal cultivars (p < 0.05) (Table 1). Seed weight is an important agronomic trait used to determine sorghum grain size. It is also closely related to sorghum seed yield, grain quality, metabolite content and pharmacological properties and thus influences consumer, farmer and breeder preferences [44,45]. As a result, the observed TSW variations among the sorghum landraces could provide a wealth of options in these regards. In general, this study reveals the wide-ranging variations in agro-morphological characteristics of the sorghum landraces. Landraces with distinct characteristics and superior performances to the control cultivars may be suitable candidates for the sorghum breeding program.

3.2. Biochemical Contents and Antioxidant Activities

The levels of phenolic and tannin contents, as well as antioxidant activities, are some of the determinant factors of sorghum seed quality on account of their health-promoting and disease-protecting properties [12]. Significant differences in metabolite contents and antioxidant activities were observed between the sorghum landraces (Table 2 and Table S2). The TTC and TPC levels were 0.12–428.95 mg CE/g and 1.17–10.23 mg GAE/g, respectively (p < 0.05). In comparison with the control cultivars, 14.71 and 6.62% of the landraces contained higher levels of TTC and TPC, respectively, than Sodamchal (TTC: 241.15 mg CE/g, TPC: 5.74 mg GAE/g) and Nampungchal (TTC: 323.39 mg CE/g; 6.31 mg GAE/g) cultivars. Only seven landraces had a lower TTC than Wheatland (58.61 mg CE/g), and seven landraces had a lower TPC (1.82 mg GAE/g). Choi et al. [39] previously studied 11 local varieties in Korea and reported a TPC range of 1.56–11.99 mg GAE/g, which is comparable with our findings. Yoon et al. [46] reported a much lower TPC range (89.08–363.06 μg GAE/g) in Korean Sorghum accessions, whereas Ghimire et al. [47] found a much higher TPC range (18.98–171.50 mg GAE/g). In other research, Abdelhalim et al. [48] found a TPC and TTC in Sudanese landraces ranging from 9.5–76.8 mg AGE/g and 7.9–37.3 mg/g, respectively, and Rhodes et al. [38] discovered a TPC ranging from 0.00 to 37.46 mg GAE/g in sorghum genotypes that were collected from different countries. These findings indicate a wide range of TPC and TTC levels in sorghum genotypes, which could be attributed to differences in the number of genotypes investigated, cultivation conditions and extraction and analysis protocols [29,38]. Hence, the landraces that showed pronounced biochemical properties could be ideal candidates to produce cultivars with improved health benefits.
The antioxidant activities of the different sorghum genotypes also varied significantly (p < 0.05, Table 2). The ABTS, DPPH and FRAP activities were 1.64–67.60 mg TE/g, 0.48–31.99 mg AAE/g and 0.63–21.56 mg AAE/g, respectively. The ABTS, DPPH and FRAP activities of the control cultivars were each in the order of Nampungchal > Sodamchal > Wheatland, which could be associated with their level of TPC and TTC. In comparison with the control cultivars, 12 landraces showed higher ABTS, DPPH and FRAP activities than Nampungchal and Sodamchal cultivars, and hence, these landraces could be important resources (Table 2). Interestingly, landraces with higher TPC and TTC levels had higher antioxidant activity, which corresponds with previous findings [47]. Landrace IT270349, for example, which had the highest TPC level, displayed the highest ABTS and DPPH activities, both of which were significantly different from the other landraces (p < 0.05). The same landrace had the second highest FRAP activity (20.38 mg AAE/g). The highest FRAP activity was found in landrace IT340261, which had the second highest TTC level (415.58 mg CE/g) (p < 0.05). In general, the sorghum landraces showed significant variation in TPC, TTC and antioxidant activities. The landraces with better performances could be ideal candidates for breeding and distribution.

3.2.1. Selected Landraces with Unique Seed-Related Characteristics

Table 3 depicts some distinct sorghum landraces with widely varying days to maturity and TSW, TPC and TTC levels compared with the control cultivars. The DM range was 36 days between early and late maturing landraces, with eleven landraces having a DM of more than 105 days and three having a DM of lower than 80 days. These early maturing landraces have the potential to make a significant contribution. The TSW range was 16.30 g from highest to lowest, with three landraces having a TSW greater than 35.00 g and four having a TSW less than 23.00 g. Landrace IT113294, which outweighed all control cultivars and landraces, could be an important parental candidate. There were extremely large differences between the high and low contents of TTC and TPC. The TTC differed by over 3000-fold, whereas the TPC differed by about 9-fold. Eleven landraces had a TTC greater than 350 mg CE/g, and twelve landraces had a TPC greater than 8.5 mg GAE/g, both of which were greater than all three control cultivars. In contrast, seven landraces had a TTC less than 50 mg CE/g, and another seven had a TPC less than 2.50 mg GAE/g. In general, these distinct landraces could serve as parents in the development of early maturing, large-seeded or high TPC and TTC sorghum cultivars [25,44].

3.2.2. Effect of Collection Area on Biochemical Contents and Antioxidant Activities

The boxplots in Figure 3a show variations in biochemical contents and antioxidant activities according to differences in collection area, and significant differences (p < 0.05) were discovered. The corresponding numerical values can be seen in Table S3.
Gyeonggi-do landraces had the highest average TTC and TPC (273.73 mg CE/g and 7.39 mg GAE/g, respectively) levels, whereas Gyeongsangnam-do landraces had the lowest (148.34 mg CE/g and 3.48 mg GAE/g, respectively) (p < 0.05). The average ABTS, DPPH and FRAP levels showed similar variations, with Gyeonggi-do landraces having the highest (32.20 mg TE/g, 22.10 mg AAE/g and 12.60 mg AAE/g, respectively) and Gyeongsangnam-do landraces having the lowest (13.00 mg TE/g, 5.75 mg AAE/g and 4.66 mg AAE/g, respectively) activities (p < 0.05). Gangwon-do landraces showed the second highest average TPC level (6.39 mg GAE/g), DPPH activity (28.77 mg AAE/g) and ABTS activity (17.84 mg TE/g). In contrast, landraces from Jeollabuk-do and Jeollanam-do had the second and third lowest biochemical contents and antioxidant activities, respectively, except for TPC, which was reversed (Figure 3, Table S3). As a result of their high levels of metabolites and strong antioxidant activities, landraces from northern provinces such as Gyeonggi-do and Gangwon-do could be important materials. The effect of the collection area on metabolite content and antioxidant activity has been studied for a variety of dietary plants [49,50]. Such studies in sorghum genotypes, on the other hand, are uncommon, especially in the Republic of Korea. Only Yoon et al. [46], as far as we are aware, attempted to evaluate the levels of TPC and DPPH antioxidant activities of Korean sorghum accessions collected from different provinces, as previously described. Ghimire et al. [47] compared Korean sorghum accessions to genotypes from other countries in another study. As a result, this study could provide the most up-to-date information on the effect of the collection area on TPC, TTC and antioxidant activity variations in sorghum genotypes.

3.2.3. Effects of Seed Color and Weight on Biochemical Contents and Antioxidant Activities

Sorghum grains are available in a variety of colors, including white, yellow, red and black. A genomic study revealed that the accumulation or absence of several metabolites in the pericarp determines sorghum seed colors, which in turn strongly influences the overall level of metabolites in sorghum seeds [51]. This study also found differences in the level of metabolite contents and antioxidant activities between the landraces following seed color variation. Red (247.04 mg CE/g) and yellow (6.87 mg GAE/g) sorghum seeds had the highest average TTC and TPC, respectively (Figure 3b, Table S4). White sorghum, on the other hand, had the lowest TTC (62.34 mg CE/g) and TPC (2.31 mg GAE/g), both of which were significantly different from the other groups (p < 0.05). Previous studies have also stated that white sorghum seeds have low metabolite contents. For example, Rhodes et al. [38] discovered a significantly lower TPC level in white sorghum seeds compared with red, yellow and brown seeds, which corroborates our findings. The level of TTC in white sorghum seeds was also reported to be significantly lower [5]. Other findings, regarding the effect of seed color, can be read in a recent review by Xu et al. [40]. Similar observations were found concerning antioxidant activities. White landraces had the lowest average antioxidant activities, including ABTS (8.17 mg TE/g), DPPH (2.80 mg AAE/g) and FRAP (2.16 mg AAE/g), which were all significantly different from the other seed colors (p < 0.05). Brown sorghum landraces, with the second lowest average TTC (158.53 mg CE/g) and TPC (4.22 mg GAE/g) levels, also had the second lowest ABTS (19.14 mg TE/g), DPPH (9.26 mg AAE/g) and FRAP (6.31 mg AAE/g) activities. In addition to the effect of seed color, our findings support the role of high levels of phenolic compounds in increased antioxidant activity [5,6,12]. Overall, white sorghum seeds might not be good candidates in terms of metabolite content and antioxidant activity.
Seed weight is an important agronomic characteristic that has been used as a parameter in the breeding of sorghum [52]. Although several studies have revealed the effect of seed weight on metabolite content and antioxidant activity in other crops and cereals, similar studies on sorghum are scarce. In this study, the effect of seed weight on the TPC, the TTC and antioxidant activities was investigated. The average TTC level decreased in the order of large seeds (428.95 mg CE/g) > medium seeds (415.58 mg CE/g) > small seeds (383.50 mg CE/g), but the variation between each was not significantly different. The variation in the TPC level, which showed a similar pattern of variation of large seeds (2.25 mg GAE/g) > medium seeds (1.57 mg GAE/g) > small seeds (1.17 mg GAE/g), showed an approximately two-fold difference between large and small seeds (p < 0.05) (Figure 3c, Table S4). Interestingly, all antioxidant activities also followed a similar pattern, with large seeds showing the highest activities and small seeds showing the lowest. DPPH and FRAP activities differed significantly between large and small seeds (p < 0.05). In general, this study demonstrates that seed weight could influence the metabolite contents and antioxidant activities of sorghum grains (Figure 3c).

3.3. Principal Component (PCA) and Correlation Analyses

PCA is an unsupervised multivariate analysis tool used to evaluate the similarity or association of plant genotypes. Furthermore, it is widely used in conjunction with Pearson’s correlation analysis to determine the relationship between variables [53]. In this study, PCA and correlation analyses were performed on the entire quantitative data set. Four components in the PCA had eigenvalues greater than one, with the first two (PC1 and PC2) accounting for 65.21% of the total variability (Figure 4, Table 4).
Metabolite contents and antioxidant activities were the most important contributors to the variations observed along PC1. Agronomic traits, such as SH (23.19%), PL (27.17%) and PW (25.68%), on the other hand, contributed the most to the variation observed along PC2. The grouping of sorghum landraces from the Gyeongsangnam-do, Jeollabuk-do and Jeollanam-do provinces (Figure 4a) and white landraces (Figure 4c) along the PC2 axis were the most critical features in the PCA. As previously stated, these landraces had low levels of TPC and TTC as well as decreased antioxidant activities. Furthermore, the loading plot revealed that the antioxidant activities were closely related to the TTC and TPC (Figure 4d).
The levels of association between metabolite contents, antioxidant activities, and agronomic traits were examined using correlation analysis (Figure 4e). The TTC, TPC, DPPH, ABTS and FRAP all had significant and positive correlations with each other (r ≥ 0.68, p < 0.001), and such associations have been reported in several studies [7,21,54]. Among the agronomical traits, DP and DM had the strongest correlation (r = 0.94, p < 0.001). Similarly, SH, PW and PL showed positive and significant correlations (r ≥ 0.67, p < 0.001) with each other, which agrees with many previous reports [14,20,23]. In line with the reports of Sarshad et al. [20], the TSW had a weak or negative correlation with the rest of the other variables. In general, the multivariate and correlation analysis results support the idea that agronomic characteristics, metabolite contents and antioxidant activities could be used to discriminate a large population of sorghum genotypes based on origin, seed color and seed weight.

4. Conclusions

This study reveals significant differences in agronomical traits, metabolite contents and antioxidant activities in a large population of Korean sorghum landraces, signifying that the landraces differed genetically. Panicle width, panicle length and thousand seed weight were among the most important agronomical traits that showed significant variations. Furthermore, collection area, seed weight and seed color all had a significant effect on the variations in the total tannin content, total phenolic content and antioxidant activities, and they could thus be used to distinguish a large population of sorghum genotypes. This study also identifies unique landraces with distinct properties and superior performances compared with the control cultivars, which breeders could request and use to produce high-quality sorghum cultivars. Future research focusing on metabolite profiling and genome-wide association studies is highly recommended to gain a better understanding of the observed variations at the molecular level.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/agronomy12112898/s1, Figure S1: Representative sorghum seed samples; Table S1: Qualitative agronomic properties of sorghum genotypes cultivated in Korea; Table S2: Statistical data of analysis of variance indicating the variation in biochemical and agronomical traits among sorghum genotypes; Table S3: Variation in metabolite contents and antioxidant activities in sorghum landraces according to the collection area; and Table S4: Variation in metabolite contents and antioxidant activities in sorghum landraces according to seed color and seed weight.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, funding acquisition and supervision, J.Y., S.L., H.Y. and Y.-M.C.; methodology and writing—original draft preparation, K.T.D.; investigation, M.-J.S. and H.Y.; resources, Y.L., H.Y. and X.W.; writing—review and editing, K.T.D.; project administration, J.Y. and S.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This project was supported by the Research Program for Agricultural Science and Technology Development (Project No. PJ015827) of the National Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Rural Development Administration (Jeonju, Korea).

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the article or Supplementary Materials.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Davidson, R.M.; Gowda, M.; Moghe, G.; Lin, H.; Vaillancourt, B.; Shiu, S.H.; Jiang, N.; Robin Buell, C. Comparative transcriptomics of three Poaceae species reveals patterns of gene expression evolution. Plant J. 2012, 71, 492–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Girard, A.L.; Awika, J.M. Sorghum polyphenols and other bioactive components as functional and health promoting food ingredients. J. Cereal Sci. 2018, 84, 112–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Statistical Database; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2020; Available online: www.fao.org/faostat (accessed on 18 October 2022).
  4. Kolozsvári, I.; Kun, Á.; Jancsó, M.; Palágyi, A.; Bozán, C.; Gyuricza, C. Agronomic Performance of Grain Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) Cultivars under Intensive Fish Farm Effluent Irrigation. Agronomy 2022, 12, 1185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Xiong, Y.; Zhang, P.; Warner, R.D.; Fang, Z. Sorghum Grain: From Genotype, Nutrition, and Phenolic Profile to Its Health Benefits and Food Applications. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2019, 18, 2025–2046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Awika, J.M.; Rooney, L.W. Sorghum phytochemicals and their potential impact on human health. Phytochemistry 2004, 65, 1199–1221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Shen, S.; Huang, R.; Li, C.; Wu, W.; Chen, H.; Shi, J.; Chen, S.; Ye, X. Phenolic Compositions and Antioxidant Activities Differ Significantly among Sorghum Grains with Different Applications. Molecules 2018, 23, 1203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Aruna, C.; Visarada, K.B.R.S. Other industrial uses of sorghum. In Breeding Sorghum for Diverse End Uses; Woodhead Publishing: Sawston, UK, 2018; pp. 271–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Tian, X.; Engel, B.A.; Qian, H.; Hua, E.; Sun, S.; Wang, Y. Will reaching the maximum achievable yield potential meet future global food demand? J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 294, 126285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Mundia, C.W.; Secchi, S.; Akamani, K.; Wang, G. A Regional Comparison of Factors Affecting Global Sorghum Production: The Case of North America, Asia and Africa’s Sahel. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Reddy, B.V.S.; Kumar, A.A.; Ramesh, S.; Reddy, P.S. Sorghum Genetic Enhancement for Climate Change Adaptation. In Crop Adaptation to Climate Change, 1st ed.; Yadav, S.S., Redden, R.J., Hatfield, J.L., Lotze-Campen, H., Hall, A.E., Eds.; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2011; pp. 326–339. [Google Scholar]
  12. Hou, F.; Su, D.; Xu, J.; Gong, Y.; Zhang, R.; Wei, Z.; Chi, J.; Zhang, M. Enhanced Extraction of Phenolics and Antioxidant Capacity from Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench) Shell Using Ultrasonic-Assisted Ethanol–Water Binary Solvent. J. Food Process. Preserv. 2016, 40, 1171–1179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Shehzad, T.; Okuizumi, H.; Kawase, M.; Okuno, K. Development of SSR-based sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) diversity research set of germplasm and its evaluation by morphological traits. Genet. Resour. Crop Evol. 2009, 56, 809–827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Bouargalne, Y.; Ben Mrid, R.; Bouchmaa, N.; Zouaoui, Z.; Benmrid, B.; Kchikich, A.; El Omari, R.; Kabach, I.; Mohamed, N. Genetic diversity for agromorphological traits, phytochemical profile, and antioxidant activity in Moroccan sorghum ecotypes. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 5895. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Hao, H.; Li, Z.; Leng, C.; Lu, C.; Luo, H.; Liu, Y.; Wu, X.; Liu, Z.; Shang, L.; Jing, H.-C. Sorghum breeding in the genomic era: Opportunities and challenges. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2021, 134, 1899–1924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Ravi Kumar, S.; Hammer, G.L.; Broad, I.; Harland, P.; McLean, G. Modelling environmental effects on phenology and canopy development of diverse sorghum genotypes. Field Crops Res. 2009, 111, 157–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Kardeş, Y.M.; Kaplan, M.; Kale, H.; Yılmaz, M.F.; Karaman, K.; Temizgül, R.; Akar, T. Biochemical composition of selected lines from sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L.) landraces. Planta 2021, 254, 26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Wu, G.; Johnson, S.K.; Bornman, J.F.; Bennett, S.J.; Fang, Z. Changes in whole grain polyphenols and antioxidant activity of six sorghum genotypes under different irrigation treatments. Food Chem. 2017, 214, 199–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Tari, I.; Laskay, G.; Takács, Z.; Poór, P. Response of sorghum to abiotic stresses: A review. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 2013, 199, 264–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Sarshad, A.; Talei, D.; Torabi, M.; Rafiei, F.; Nejatkhah, P. Morphological and biochemical responses of Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench under drought stress. SN Appl. Sci. 2021, 3, 81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Abdelhalim, T.S.; Kamal, N.M.; Hassan, A.B. Nutritional potential of wild sorghum: Grain quality of Sudanese wild sorghum genotypes (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench). Food Sci. Nutr. 2019, 7, 1529–1539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Chen, B.; Wang, C.; Wang, P.; Zhu, Z.; Xu, N.; Shi, G.; Yu, M.; Wang, N.; Li, J.; Hou, J.; et al. Genome-wide association study for starch content and constitution in sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench). J. Integr. Agric. 2019, 18, 2446–2456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Mengistu, G.; Shimelis, H.; Laing, M.; Lule, D.; Mathew, I. Genetic variability among Ethiopian sorghum landrace accessions for major agro-morphological traits and anthracnose resistance. Euphytica 2020, 216, 113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Badigannavar, A.; Girish, G.; Ganapathi, T.R. Genetic variation for seed phosphorus and yield traits in Indian sorghum landraces and varieties. Crop J. 2015, 3, 358–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Nagesh Kumar, M.V.; Ramya, V.; Govindaraj, M.; Sameer Kumar, C.V.; Maheshwaramma, S.; Gokenpally, S.; Prabhakar, M.; Krishna, H.; Sridhar, M.; Venkata Ramana, M.; et al. Harnessing Sorghum Landraces to Breed High-Yielding, Grain Mold-Tolerant Cultivars with High Protein for Drought-Prone Environments. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 659874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Lee, G.A.; Lee, S.Y.; Lee, H.S.; Ma, K.H.; Gwag, J.G.; Kim, Y.G.; Lee, J.R. Development of microsatellite markers at the National Agrobiodiversity Center in Korea for the genetic assessment of underutilized crops. Plant Genet. Resour. Characterisation Util. 2014, 12, 125–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Choe, M.; Do-Yeon, K.; Jee-Yeon, K.; Seok-Bo, S.; Han, S.-I.; Chu, J. Heterosis and Combining Ability of F1 Hybrid Grain Sorghum in Korea (Sorghum bicolor L.). Korean J. Breed. Sci. 2019, 51, 367–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Bhandari, S.R.; Lee, Y.-S. The Contents of Phytosterols, Squalene, and Vitamin E and the Composition of Fatty Acids of Korean Landrace Setaria italica and Sorghum bicolar Seeds. Korean J. Plant Resour. 2013, 26, 663–672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Palacios, C.E.; Nagai, A.; Torres, P.; Rodrigues, J.A.; Salatino, A. Contents of tannins of cultivars of sorghum cultivated in Brazil, as determined by four quantification methods. Food Chem. 2021, 337, 127970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Price, M.L.; Van Scoyoc, S.; Butler, L.G. A Critical Evaluation of the Vanillin Reaction as an Assay for Tannin in Sorghum Grain. J. Agric. Food Chem. 1978, 26, 1214–1218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Choi, Y.M.; Yoon, H.; Shin, M.J.; Lee, Y.; Hur, O.S.; Lee, B.C.; Ha, B.K.; Wang, X.; Desta, K.T. Metabolite contents and antioxidant activities of soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merrill) seeds of different seed coat colors. Antioxidants 2021, 10, 1210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Shahrajabian, M.H.; Sun, W.; Cheng, Q. Molecular breeding and the impacts of some important genes families on agronomic traits, a review. Genet. Resour. Crop Evol. 2021, 68, 1709–1730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Diallo, C.; Rattunde, H.W.F.; Gracen, V.; Touré, A.; Nebié, B.; Leiser, W.; Dzidzienyo, D.K.; Sissoko, I.; Danquah, E.Y.; Diallo, A.G.; et al. Genetic diversification and selection strategies for improving sorghum grain yield under phosphorous-deficient conditions in West Africa. Agronomy 2019, 9, 742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Ke, F.; Zhang, K.; Li, Z.; Wang, J.; Zhang, F.; Wu, H.; Zhang, Z.; Lu, F.; Wang, Y.; Duan, Y.; et al. Transcriptomic analysis of starch accumulation patterns in different glutinous sorghum seeds. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 11133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Gorbet, D.W.; Weibel, D.E. Inheritance and Genetic Relationships of Six Endosperm Types in Sorghum. Crop Sci. 1972, 12, 378–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Malambo, L.; Popescu, S.C.; Horne, D.W.; Pugh, N.A.; Rooney, W.L. Automated detection and measurement of individual sorghum panicles using density-based clustering of terrestrial lidar data. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 2019, 149, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Tolk, J.A.; Schwartz, R.C. Do more seeds per panicle improve grain sorghum yield? Crop Sci. 2017, 57, 490–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Rhodes, D.H.; Hoffmann, L.; Rooney, W.L.; Ramu, P.; Morris, G.P.; Kresovich, S. Genome-wide association study of grain polyphenol concentrations in global sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench] germplasm. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2014, 62, 10916–10927. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Choi, S.C.; Kim, J.M.; Lee, Y.G.; Kim, C. Antioxidant Activity and Contents of Total Phenolic Compounds and Anthocyanins According to Grain Colour in Several Varieties of Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench. Cereal Res. Commun. 2019, 47, 228–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Xu, J.; Wang, W.; Zhao, Y. Phenolic compounds in whole grain sorghum and their health benefits. Foods 2021, 10, 1921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Kenga, R.; Alabi, S.O.; Gupta, S.C. Combining ability studies in tropical sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench). Field Crops Res. 2004, 88, 251–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Shukla, S.; Felderhoff, T.J.; Saballos, A.; Vermerris, W. Field Crops Research The relationship between plant height and sugar accumulation in the stems of sweet sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench). Field Crops Res. 2017, 203, 181–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Qingshan, L.; Dahlberg, J.A. Chinese sorghum genetic resources. Econ. Bot. 2001, 55, 401–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Amelework, B.; Shimelis, H.; Laing, M. Genetic variation in sorghum as revealed by phenotypic and SSR markers: Implications for combining ability and heterosis for grain yield. Plant Genet. Resour. Characterisation Util. 2017, 15, 335–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. vom Brocke, K.; Trouche, G.; Weltzien, E.; Barro-Kondombo, C.P.; Gozé, E.; Chantereau, J. Participatory variety development for sorghum in Burkina Faso: Farmers’ selection and farmers’ criteria. Field Crops Res. 2010, 119, 183–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Yoon, S.-T.; Jeong, I.-H.; Han, T.-K.; Kim, Y.-J.; Yu, J.-B.; Yang, G.; Ye, M.-H.; Baek, S.-W.; Kim, K.-W. Evaluation of Crop Characteristics of Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L.) Germplasm for the Selection of Excellent Resources. Korean J. Plant Resour. 2016, 29, 479–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Ghimire, B.K.; Seo, J.W.; Yu, C.Y.; Kim, S.H.; Chung, I.M. Comparative study on seed characteristics, antioxidant activity, and total phenolic and flavonoid contents in accessions of Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench. Molecules 2021, 26, 3964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Abdelhalim, T.S.; Abdelhalim, N.S.; Kamal, N.M.; Mohamed, E.E.; Hassan, A.B. Exploiting the potential of Sudanese sorghum landraces in biofortification: Physicochemical quality of the grain of sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench) landraces. Food Chem. 2021, 337, 127604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Zhou, Y.; Chen, X.; Zhu, S.; Sun, M.; Zhou, X. Understanding the flavor signature of the rice grown in different regions of China via metabolite profiling. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2022, 102, 3010–3020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Abdelrahman, M.; Hirata, S.; Yamada, T.; Sawad, Y.; ElSyaed, M.; Yamada, Y.; Sato, M.; Hira, Y.M.; Shigyo, M. Comprehensive Metabolite Profiling in Genetic Resources of Garlic (Allium sativum L.) Collected from Different Geographical Regions. Molecules 2021, 26, 1415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Davis, H.; Su, X.; Shen, Y.; Xu, J.; Wang, D.; Scott Smith, J.; Aramouni, F.; Wang, W. Phenotypic Diversity of Colored Phytochemicals in Sorghum Accessions with Various Pericarp Pigments, 2nd ed.; Elsevier Inc.: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; ISBN 9780128137680. [Google Scholar]
  52. Han, L.; Chen, J.; Mace, E.S.; Liu, Y.; Zhu, M.; Yuyama, N.; Jordan, D.R.; Cai, H. Fine mapping of qGW1, a major QTL for grain weight in sorghum. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2015, 128, 1813–1825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Sarfraz, Z.; Shah, M.M.; Iqbal, M.S.; Nazir, M.F.; Al-Ashkar, I.; Rehmani, M.I.A.; Shahid Iqbal, M.; Ullah, N.; El Sabagh, A. Rendering Multivariate Statistical Models for Genetic Diversity Assessment in A-Genome Diploid Wheat Population. Agronomy 2021, 11, 12339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Moraes, É.A.; Marineli, R.D.S.; Lenquiste, S.A.; Steel, C.J.; de Menezes, C.B.; Queiroz, V.A.V.; Maróstica Júnior, M.R. Sorghum flour fractions: Correlations among polysaccharides, phenolic compounds, antioxidant activity and glycemic index. Food Chem. 2015, 180, 116–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Frequency (%) of endosperm type (a), panicle density (b), panicle type (c) and seed color (d) in sorghum landraces.
Figure 1. Frequency (%) of endosperm type (a), panicle density (b), panicle type (c) and seed color (d) in sorghum landraces.
Agronomy 12 02898 g001
Figure 2. Boxplots showing variations in quantitative agronomical traits in sorghum landraces.
Figure 2. Boxplots showing variations in quantitative agronomical traits in sorghum landraces.
Agronomy 12 02898 g002
Figure 3. Variations in metabolite contents and antioxidant activities in sorghum landraces according to the collection area, seed color and seed weight. Different letters on box plots in a category show significantly different means. ABTS: 2,2′-azino-bis(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid) diammonium radical cation scavenging activity; CB: Chungcheongbuk-do; CN: Chungcheongnam-do; DPPH: 1,1-Diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl radical scavenging activity; FRAP: Ferric reducing antioxidant power; GB: Gyeongsangbuk-do; GG: Gyeonggi-do; GN: Gyeongsangnam-do; GW: Gangwon-do; IN: Incheon; JB: Jeollabuk-do; JN: Jeollanam-do; TPC: Total phenolic content; TTC: Total tannin content.
Figure 3. Variations in metabolite contents and antioxidant activities in sorghum landraces according to the collection area, seed color and seed weight. Different letters on box plots in a category show significantly different means. ABTS: 2,2′-azino-bis(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid) diammonium radical cation scavenging activity; CB: Chungcheongbuk-do; CN: Chungcheongnam-do; DPPH: 1,1-Diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl radical scavenging activity; FRAP: Ferric reducing antioxidant power; GB: Gyeongsangbuk-do; GG: Gyeonggi-do; GN: Gyeongsangnam-do; GW: Gangwon-do; IN: Incheon; JB: Jeollabuk-do; JN: Jeollanam-do; TPC: Total phenolic content; TTC: Total tannin content.
Agronomy 12 02898 g003
Figure 4. Score plot of sorghum landraces according to collection area (a), seed weight (b) and seed color (c). Loading plot of variables (d) from PCA, and correlation matrix of quantitative variable (e). *** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05. DM: Days to maturity; DP: Days to panicle; PL: Panicle length; PW: Panicle width; SH: Stem height; ST: Stem thickness; TSW: Thousand seed weight. Full names for the remaining abbreviations can be seen in Figure 3 footnotes.
Figure 4. Score plot of sorghum landraces according to collection area (a), seed weight (b) and seed color (c). Loading plot of variables (d) from PCA, and correlation matrix of quantitative variable (e). *** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05. DM: Days to maturity; DP: Days to panicle; PL: Panicle length; PW: Panicle width; SH: Stem height; ST: Stem thickness; TSW: Thousand seed weight. Full names for the remaining abbreviations can be seen in Figure 3 footnotes.
Agronomy 12 02898 g004
Table 1. Quantitative agronomic properties of sorghum genotypes cultivated in Korea.
Table 1. Quantitative agronomic properties of sorghum genotypes cultivated in Korea.
IT-NumberDP (Days)DM (Days)SH (cm)ST (mm)PL (cm)PW (mm)TSW (g)
IT0283655090120.33 ± 6.02 ah-as23.78 ± 0.98 a-d20.17 ± 2.02 u-ab70.59 ± 7.53 q-aj26.50 ± 0.36 bb-be
IT1000104682150.00 ± 5.72 u-y15.26 ± 0.73 ah-as25.67 ± 3.79 j-s86.90 ± 7.26 j-t29.83 ± 0.12 z-ad
IT1000184682169.33 ± 1.25 r-s15.22 ± 0.21 ah-as27.83 ± 2.25 g-n76.04 ± 3.25 n-ag31.47 ± 0.62 o-p
IT1000244283152.67 ± 5.44 u-x15.96 ± 0.41 ad-ar28.00 ± 1.00 g-n82.79 ± 11.65 k-x29.37 ± 0.34 ad-ah
IT100045468295.33 ± 5.73 ax-ba22.04 ± 0.77 c-h31.33 ± 1.15 d-h62.70 ± 2.66 y-al24.20 ± 0.16 br-bt
IT1000464683115.67 ± 2.05 aj-au18.81 ± 0.57 j-ae29.83 ± 1.04 e-j64.30 ± 7.20 v-al25.00 ± 0.90 bl-bo
IT1000474890121.33 ± 3.40 ah-as21.75 ± 0.12 c-j23.33 ± 0.58 o-y74.20 ± 2.92 n-ai32.47 ± 0.17 f-i
IT1000734683182.33 ± 3.09 m-r17.77 ± 0.47 p-al31.33 ± 1.53 d-h73.83 ± 2.75 o-ai27.70 ± 0.45 aq-av
IT1000745091109.67 ± 3.86 ap-ax20.04 ± 0.98 f-u22.33 ± 1.15 q-aa72.61 ± 2.10 o-ai31.47 ± 0.12 o-p
IT1000904683177.33 ± 3.30 o-r16.82 ± 0.94 x-ap26.33 ± 0.58 i-q71.47 ± 2.39 p-aj24.37 ± 0.34 bq-bs
IT10014362101249.67 ± 4.50 c-e19.61 ± 0.02 g-y29.33 ± 2.89 f-k88.03 ± 5.48 i-r22.93 ± 0.05 bu
IT1001774683159.33 ± 8.65 s-u16.37 ± 0.00 z-aq37.67 ± 2.08 c81.57 ± 14.54 k-aa26.83 ± 0.05 ay-bb
IT1030994078109.67 ± 2.87 ap-ax12.72 ± 1.46 as21.00 ± 1.73 t-aa45.94 ± 3.84 al-am27.10 ± 0.16 aw-az
IT1034524885177.00 ± 2.16 o-r15.78 ± 1.87 ae-ar23.33 ± 1.15 o-y90.73 ± 10.50 i-p29.17 ± 0.17 ae-ai
IT1034964890192.33 ± 8.18 l-n17.77 ± 0.96 p-al30.33 ± 0.58 e-i99.48 ± 5.34 f-k30.40 ± 0.29 t-y
IT1039704283193.67 ± 6.94 l-m14.55 ± 0.27 am-as24.67 ± 0.58 l-u68.15 ± 6.67 s-aj30.00 ± 0.22 x-aa
IT1045745693168.67 ± 8.96 r-s18.54 ± 0.88 l-af37.67 ± 4.51 c120.50 ± 12.72 b-e28.17 ± 0.57 an-ar
IT1045944682100.33 ± 1.70 au-ba21.28 ± 0.45 d-n29.33 ± 1.53 f-k71.44 ± 3.57 p-aj27.00 ± 0.08 ax-ba
IT1049634683178.00 ± 2.83 n-r20.08 ± 0.09 f-u35.00 ± 3.00 c-d91.50 ± 8.57 i-o28.73 ± 0.26 ai-al
IT1132944283139.67 ± 3.86 w-ae16.25 ± 1.27 ab-aq21.00 ± 1.00 t-aa69.77 ± 10.44 q-aj38.20 ± 1.73 a
IT1349764890141.67 ± 2.36 w-ab18.47 ± 0.32 l-af27.33 ± 1.53 g-o79.47 ± 3.46 l-ac30.83 ± 3.12 q-t
IT1582645091145.67 ± 4.19 u-z18.13 ± 0.53 o-aj23.00 ± 1.00 o-z73.04 ± 2.72 o-ai27.63 ± 5.12 as-av
IT1582655291122.33 ± 3.68 ag-ar17.77 ± 0.39 p-al24.00 ± 1.73 m-w55.02 ± 4.47 ai-al27.47 ± 5.50 au-ax
IT1628435395119.67 ± 10.66 ah-as19.68 ± 0.92 g-y23.33 ± 2.08 o-y73.43 ± 3.79 o-ai31.80 ± 6.22 k-o
IT162877539078.67 ± 4.50 bb18.46 ± 0.30 l-af21.67 ± 1.53 m-w58.08 ± 3.33 af-al29.07 ± 6.12 af-aj
IT1805495082242.67 ± 2.05 d-f15.31 ± 0.39 ah-as35.00 ± 5.29 r-aa85.32 ± 9.17 j-u24.10 ± 8.22 bs-bt
IT1806145090120.33 ± 2.05 ah-as16.73 ± 0.37 x-ap23.00 ± 3.61 c-d62.05 ± 2.42 z-al24.63 ± 8.05 bo-br
IT1857605699129.33 ± 0.94 aa-al16.43 ± 0.16 z-aq21.33 ± 1.53 o-z64.26 ± 1.64 v-al28.10 ± 8.16 ao-as
IT1857964277205.67 ± 7.36 j-l13.57 ± 0.19 aq-as35.00 ± 1.00 c-d75.01 ± 6.02 n-ah28.03 ± 8.17 ao-as
IT1858074986186.83 ± 3.97 m-o14.99 ± 0.61 al-as29.92 ± 1.28 e-j81.74 ± 1.72 k-z26.92 ± 8.10 ay-bb
IT1858125083206.33 ± 6.65 j-l13.53 ± 0.60 aq-as32.67 ± 2.08 d-f88.00 ± 21.34 i-r22.37 ± 8.09 bv
IT1858134282202.67 ± 2.49 j-l15.38 ± 0.73 ag-as29.00 ± 1.00 f-l75.10 ± 7.43 n-ah24.07 ± 8.12 bs-bt
IT1858164277194.33 ± 2.05 l-m13.16 ± 0.91 ar-as31.33 ± 1.53 d-h74.82 ± 5.13 n-ah26.53 ± 8.12 ba-bd
IT1954426299144.67 ± 5.73 u-aa20.15 ± 0.36 f-t22.67 ± 2.08 p-z80.21 ± 6.46 l-ab30.83 ± 9.12 q-t
IT2085604784174.67 ± 4.11 o-r14.08 ± 0.76 ao-as31.67 ± 2.08 d-g87.80 ± 7.99 i-s29.43 ± 0.25 ab-ag
IT20856262101289.67 ± 6.85 a18.90 ± 0.65 j-ad51.33 ± 3.06 a99.63 ± 11.69 f-k25.33 ± 0.05 bj-bm
IT2085665695256.33 ± 17.21 c-d20.69 ± 0.16 e-p37.67 ± 5.13 c83.56 ± 4.10 k-v27.27 ± 0.12 av-ay
IT2085675091112.67 ± 3.68 am-av17.51 ± 0.18 q-an22.67 ± 1.15 p-z63.62 ± 4.64 w-al36.90 ± 0.08 b
IT2085685084171.67 ± 0.47 p-s17.09 ± 0.29 t-an31.67 ± 0.58 d-g74.42 ± 9.67 n-ai29.07 ± 0.31 af-aj
IT2089015391213.00 ± 14.31 i-j17.81 ± 0.62 p-al35.50 ± 2.60 c-d86.64 ± 7.19 j-t25.20 ± 0.08 bk-bn
IT22161962104294.67 ± 10.50 a23.34 ± 0.03 a-e31.67 ± 1.53 d-g95.76 ± 5.89 g-m27.67 ± 2.17 ar-av
IT2302975697138.33 ± 6.24 x-af18.90 ± 0.76 j-ad23.00 ± 2.00 o-z73.58 ± 5.21 o-ai32.23 ± 3.12 h-k
IT2358505090139.33 ± 10.21 w-ae19.95 ± 0.74 f-v26.33 ± 2.52 i-q77.14 ± 4.11 m-ag26.50 ± 3.33 bb-be
IT23585662101250.00 ± 21.21 c-e22.76 ± 0.34 b-f37.33 ± 4.93 c102.99 ± 11.63 e-j30.87 ± 3.12 q-t
IT25188262101185.00 ± 2.45 m-q20.05 ± 0.90 f-u23.00 ± 1.00 o-z106.43 ± 7.40 e-i33.97 ± 5.17 d
IT2625535395167.67 ± 2.05 r-t17.60 ± 0.43 q-al21.67 ± 2.08 r-aa71.05 ± 4.01 q-aj31.90 ± 6.08 j-o
IT2625545090131.67 ± 9.03 z-aj22.03 ± 0.61 c-h20.67 ± 1.15 t-aa74.15 ± 4.58 n-ai29.30 ± 6.08 ae-ah
IT26255762104157.33 ± 3.30 s-v20.19 ± 0.85 f-s23.67 ± 1.53 n-x71.51 ± 6.23 p-aj32.00 ± 6.08 i-n
IT2625665393129.33 ± 7.36 aa-al13.62 ± 0.66 aq-as24.67 ± 4.04 l-u70.35 ± 5.94 q-aj26.10 ± 6.16 bd-bg
IT2625705093154.67 ± 1.89 t-w16.81 ± 0.18 x-ap20.00 ± 1.00 v-ab63.58 ± 4.43 w-al23.87 ± 6.09 bt
IT2625764890125.67 ± 1.70 ac-ap17.89 ± 0.52 p-al20.67 ± 2.52 t-aa61.23 ± 5.98 ab-al25.57 ± 6.25 bh-bk
IT2649985391150.67 ± 0.47 u-x20.23 ± 0.81 f-s25.67 ± 1.53 j-s74.81 ± 2.89 n-ah25.67 ± 6.12 bg-bk
IT2703435090121.33 ± 1.89 ah-as18.54 ± 0.94 l-af22.67 ± 1.53 p-z57.32 ± 2.35 ag-al25.00 ± 7.08 bl-bo
IT2703464885126.67 ± 4.03 ab-an20.58 ± 0.28 e-q22.00 ± 1.00 q-aa74.93 ± 4.92 n-ah25.43 ± 7.12 bj-bl
IT2703495691115.33 ± 4.50 ak-au18.93 ± 0.18 j-ad22.67 ± 1.15 p-z58.59 ± 5.66 ae-al24.90 ± 7.08 bm-bp
IT2703667010993.33 ± 2.49 ay-ba22.60 ± 0.71 b-g28.00 ± 1.00 g-n76.32 ± 7.73 n-ag25.00 ± 7.08 bl-bo
IT2784445093109.67 ± 5.31 ap-ax19.18 ± 0.46 h-ac22.67 ± 0.58 p-z69.80 ± 5.59 q-aj28.07 ± 7.12 ao-as
IT2784455393114.00 ± 3.27 ak-av16.73 ± 0.49 x-ap23.00 ± 2.00 o-z77.97 ± 3.62 m-ae29.60 ± 7.08 aa-ae
IT2863995290113.00 ± 2.94 am-av16.40 ± 0.36 z-aq21.67 ± 1.15 r-aa65.56 ± 1.05 u-ak23.07 ± 8.12 bu
IT2864035290127.67 ± 3.09 ab-am17.39 ± 0.77 r-an18.67 ± 2.31 z-ab52.26 ± 4.79 aj-al32.10 ± 8.14 h-m
IT2864125391140.67 ± 0.94 w-ae17.19 ± 0.75 s-an18.00 ± 1.00 aa-ab69.33 ± 6.31 q-aj30.43 ± 8.12 t-x
IT2864235090108.33 ± 4.99 aq-ay18.55 ± 0.10 l-af20.67 ± 2.08 t-aa67.63 ± 3.82 t-aj28.07 ± 8.12 ao-as
IT2864245290105.33 ± 8.34 as-ba17.93 ± 0.90 p-al20.67 ± 1.15 t-aa75.08 ± 8.85 n-ah25.00 ± 8.08 bl-bo
IT2864465391132.67 ± 7.04 z-ai21.98 ± 0.55 c-i23.00 ± 1.00 o-z80.22 ± 1.33 l-ab29.43 ± 8.05 ac-ag
IT28644870109212.33 ± 6.13 i-j17.75 ± 0.31 p-al42.33 ± 2.52 b151.42 ± 6.65 a28.78 ± 8.12 ai-al
IT29719262101130.00 ± 8.16 a-ak13.92 ± 0.20 ap-as21.33 ± 1.53 s-aa78.55 ± 4.73 m-ad29.63 ± 9.52 aa-ae
IT3000325391125.33 ± 3.40 ad-ap17.77 ± 0.44 p-al20.00 ± 0.00 v-ab59.10 ± 1.93 ad-al29.90 ± 0.08 z-ac
IT3000885693122.33 ± 2.05 ag-ar17.77 ± 0.11 p-al21.33 ± 2.31 s-aa57.81 ± 3.67 ag-al28.90 ± 0.16 ah-ak
IT3208935695110.00 ± 6.38 ao-ax15.04 ± 1.27 ak-as19.67 ± 3.21 w-ab63.11 ± 8.82 x-al27.93 ± 2.12 ap-au
IT3208975390107.67 ± 5.56 aq-az14.54 ± 0.42 an-as18.00 ± 2.00 aa-ab64.50 ± 4.18 v-al30.90 ± 2.08 q-t
IT32089870106224.67 ± 10.87 h-i14.90 ± 1.41 al-as34.00 ± 3.61 c-e126.51 ± 16.19 b-d35.30 ± 2.16 c
IT32251056100141.00 ± 8.60 w-ad17.56 ± 0.54 q-an21.33 ± 1.53 s-aa66.36 ± 1.75 u-ak30.20 ± 2.22 u-z
IT3225135090117.00 ± 2.94 ai-at16.35 ± 0.15 aa-aq25.00 ± 1.00 k-t68.18 ± 1.23 s-aj26.67 ± 2.12 az-bc
IT3225304888120.00 ± 4.55 ah-as19.80 ± 0.78 f-x24.33 ± 1.15 m-v66.23 ± 6.20 u-ak30.97 ± 2.17 q-s
IT3225314890126.00 ± 4.08 ab-ao21.46 ± 0.87 d-l22.67 ± 1.53 p-z67.96 ± 7.41 t-aj33.90 ± 2.16 d
IT3225335088113.33 ± 5.25 al-av19.32 ± 0.35 h-ab23.33 ± 1.53 o-y66.60 ± 4.08 u-ak27.13 ± 2.12 aw-az
IT3225465090123.00 ± 4.90 af-aq17.53 ± 0.11 q-an20.33 ± 1.53 u-aa61.91 ± 7.01 aa-al27.30 ± 2.16 av-ay
IT3225497010692.67 ± 1.89 az-ba25.76 ± 0.35 a26.00 ± 2.78 i-r113.10 ± 2.54 d-g25.70 ± 2.16 bg-bj
IT3225545291108.00 ± 5.89 aq-ay15.33 ± 0.88 ag-as20.33 ± 0.58 u-aa59.89 ± 5.65 ac-al30.90 ± 2.08 q-t
IT32255562105121.33 ± 0.94 ah-as17.10 ± 0.90 t-an23.33 ± 0.58 o-y86.51 ± 12.07 j-t32.13 ± 2.17 h-l
IT32255868109129.33 ± 6.13 aa-al17.58 ± 0.20 q-am20.67 ± 1.15 t-aa83.32 ± 3.96 k-w29.13 ± 2.17 ae-aj
IT32257062105106.67 ± 4.64 ar-ba15.17 ± 0.25 aj-as20.67 ± 1.15 t-aa58.18 ± 4.85 ae-al31.67 ± 2.17 l-o
IT32257163105109.67 ± 3.30 ap-ax17.34 ± 0.79 r-an21.67 ± 1.53 r-aa67.98 ± 7.64 t-aj30.57 ± 2.17 r-v
IT3225725290110.67 ± 3.30 an-ax19.12 ± 0.20 h-ac22.67 ± 2.31 p-z62.53 ± 2.20 y-al24.83 ± 2.12 bn-bq
IT3225785290111.67 ± 3.40 am-aw19.10 ± 0.77 h-ac23.00 ± 1.73 o-z57.60 ± 3.66 ag-al29.53 ± 2.05 aa-af
IT32258057101149.67 ± 2.87 u-y20.72 ± 0.64 e-p22.00 ± 1.00 q-aa71.31 ± 10.06 p-aj31.03 ± 2.12 p-r
IT3226137411396.33 ± 2.05 aw-ba20.38 ± 0.93 f-r28.33 ± 1.53 g-m72.75 ± 5.08 o-ai26.03 ± 2.17 be-bh
IT3226215699145.67 ± 4.19 u-z19.93 ± 0.67 f-w25.00 ± 1.73 k-t71.97 ± 1.29 o-aj26.03 ± 2.17 be-bh
IT3226225299127.67 ± 3.40 ab-am21.29 ± 0.68 d-n23.33 ± 0.58 o-y76.57 ± 4.43 m-ag28.20 ± 2.22 an-aq
IT3290085090116.67 ± 0.47 ai-at19.37 ± 0.23 h-aa22.00 ± 1.73 q-aa67.70 ± 2.78 t-aj28.70 ± 2.08 ai-am
IT3290264890120.67 ± 2.87 ah-as18.53 ± 0.11 l-af23.33 ± 0.58 o-y69.60 ± 2.58 q-aj28.53 ± 2.12 ak-ao
IT32904763105243.00 ± 1.63 d-f18.94 ± 0.23 j-ad26.33 ± 4.16 i-q110.10 ± 6.12 d-h29.43 ± 2.12 ac-ag
IT32904862106170.67 ± 9.88 q-s15.20 ± 0.85 ai-as42.00 ± 1.00 b135.68 ± 11.22 b28.10 ± 2.16 ao-as
IT32904957100256.67 ± 15.46 c-d16.87 ± 0.51 v-ap37.33 ± 5.13 c159.93 ± 24.19 a26.30 ± 2.29 bc-bf
IT3290505391233.33 ± 17.00 f-h17.76 ± 0.85 p-al33.67 ± 1.53 c-e130.97 ± 13.41 b-c29.60 ± 2.08 a-ae
IT3290534788141.33 ± 4.92 w-ac18.65 ± 0.25 l-ae24.67 ± 2.52 l-u58.85 ± 3.17 ad-al32.30 ± 2.16 g-j
IT3290565698135.00 ± 6.16 y-ah18.62 ± 0.19 l-ae22.33 ± 1.53 q-aa82.50 ± 6.57 k-x34.10 ± 2.16 d
IT3290635290110.33 ± 2.49 ao-ax18.08 ± 0.50 o-ak20.00 ± 0.00 v-ab57.76 ± 3.83 ag-al28.13 ± 2.17 ao-as
IT3290645290114.67 ± 1.70 ak-av18.27 ± 0.46 m-ah19.67 ± 0.58 w-ab59.06 ± 6.24 ad-al28.63 ± 2.12 aj-an
IT3290745693114.00 ± 7.87 ak-av17.79 ± 0.96 p-al24.00 ± 2.65 m-w77.81 ± 7.09 m-af28.23 ± 2.12 am-ap
IT3290764788126.67 ± 2.36 ab-an18.24 ± 0.29 n-ai23.33 ± 2.52 o-y71.70 ± 3.14 p-aj22.03 ± 2.12 bv-bw
IT32907763105174.33 ± 12.50 o-r24.32 ± 0.73 a-c24.00 ± 2.65 m-w73.69 ± 7.32 o-ai30.50 ± 2.16 s-w
IT3290785090130.00 ± 3.27 aa-ak18.38 ± 0.90 m-ag24.00 ± 2.65 m-w75.83 ± 6.20 n-ag25.50 ± 2.16 bi-bk
IT3290825390125.00 ± 3.56 ae-ap18.84 ± 0.91 j-ae26.00 ± 1.00 i-r68.06 ± 3.69 t-aj27.70 ± 2.16 aq-av
IT32908570107203.33 ± 4.71 j-l18.75 ± 1.32 j-ae30.00 ± 2.00 e-j93.49 ± 15.44 h-n27.47 ± 2.12 au-ax
IT329089489095.67 ± 6.65 ax-ba21.32 ± 0.48 d-m28.00 ± 1.00 g-n55.74 ± 11.74 ah-al21.90 ± 2.08 bw
IT3290904788112.00 ± 1.63 am-av16.62 ± 0.59 y-ap20.67 ± 1.15 t-aa57.75 ± 3.78 ag-al24.47 ± 2.17 bp-bs
IT3291085698240.67 ± 8.99 e-g18.18 ± 0.32 o-aj37.33 ± 5.51 c157.67 ± 8.11 a27.50 ± 2.08 at-aw
IT3291205698112.33 ± 5.25 am-av17.66 ± 0.82 p-al22.00 ± 1.00 q-aa65.71 ± 4.62 u-ak32.57 ± 2.09 f-h
IT3291245390103.00 ± 3.56 at-ba18.54 ± 0.71 l-af21.67 ± 2.08 r-aa63.87 ± 4.87 v-al32.73 ± 2.21 f-g
IT3318745290120.00 ± 4.24 ah-as18.54 ± 0.56 l-af23.00 ± 1.00 o-z66.09 ± 3.00 u-ak27.97 ± 3.12 ap-at
IT331878569555.33 ± 4.11 bc17.36 ± 0.64 r-an16.00 ± 2.00 a-b35.50 ± 3.60 am27.07 ± 3.17 aw-az
IT3318824788127.00 ± 8.04 ab-am16.85 ± 0.48 w-ap22.33 ± 2.08 q-aa68.96 ± 7.34 q-aj32.87 ± 3.54 e-f
IT3318895090113.67 ± 3.30 al-av17.28 ± 0.62 s-an19.00 ± 2.65 y-zb58.52 ± 3.06 ae-al29.93 ± 3.05 y-zb
IT3318944788108.33 ± 2.87 aq-ay17.73 ± 0.90 p-al19.33 ± 0.58 x-ab58.10 ± 3.56 ae-al28.33 ± 3.31 al-ap
IT3318964890125.33 ± 4.64 ad-ap17.03 ± 0.86 u-ao21.67 ± 1.53 r-aa67.22 ± 8.47 t-ak26.00 ± 3.08 bf-bh
IT3318994888127.00 ± 2.45 ab-am19.04 ± 0.35 h-ac22.67 ± 0.58 p-z67.80 ± 7.06 t-aj24.47 ± 3.05 bp-bs
IT33190457100137.67 ± 9.84 x-ag21.46 ± 0.87 d-l27.33 ± 2.08 g-o84.99 ± 7.80 j-u26.30 ± 3.08 bc-bf
IT33190762100243.67 ± 10.66 d-f19.71 ± 0.48 g-x26.00 ± 3.61 i-r103.28 ± 16.24 e-j33.30 ± 3.16 e
IT33192162105143.33 ± 1.25 v-aa21.69 ± 0.98 c-k22.33 ± 3.21 q-aa67.46 ± 6.86 t-aj34.03 ± 3.12 d
IT33192262104102.00 ± 2.83 at-ba23.43 ± 0.11 a-e24.67 ± 3.51 l-u82.13 ± 12.36 k-y30.13 ± 3.12 v-z
IT3319367010999.33 ± 0.94 av-ba25.32 ± 0.68 ab27.00 ± 1.00 h-p99.56 ± 9.56 f-k25.93 ± 3.05 bf-bi
IT3319374790114.00 ± 2.16 ak-va17.53 ± 0.08 q-an22.00 ± 2.65 q-aa65.64 ± 4.55 u-ak32.87 ± 3.12 e-f
IT3319385799137.33 ± 4.11 x-ag18.99 ± 0.42 i-ad21.67 ± 1.53 r-aa88.22 ± 5.34 i-q30.00 ± 3.08 x-aa
IT3319624790122.67 ± 3.30 af-ar18.17 ± 0.02 o-aj20.00 ± 2.00 q-aa63.06 ± 11.44 x-al30.03 ± 3.09 w-aa
IT3319634790120.67 ± 1.70 ah-as15.27 ± 0.92 ah-as21.67 ± 2.08 r-aa68.49 ± 6.70 r-aj28.93 ± 3.05 ag-ak
IT3319784784186.33 ± 2.62 m-p15.54 ± 0.55 af-as30.33 ± 1.53 e-i88.16 ± 3.94 i-r31.63 ± 3.26 m-o
IT33198862101174.00 ± 9.93 o-r17.25 ± 0.16 s-an34.00 ± 0.00 c-e160.43 ± 25.98 a31.13 ± 3.12 p-q
IT33201462104263.33 ± 4.71 b-c19.45 ± 0.10 h-z30.00 ± 2.00 e-j113.09 ± 11.40 d-g30.67 ± 3.26 q-u
IT3320245695196.67 ± 17.00 k-m18.66 ± 0.66 l-ae22.67 ± 2.31 p-z73.75 ± 3.28 o-ai29.80 ± 3.08 z-ad
IT3320424788114.33 ± 4.03 ak-av18.64 ± 0.25 l-ae23.00 ± 1.73 o-z71.07 ± 2.36 q-aj29.00 ± 3.08 ag-ak
IT3320465698184.67 ± 11.12 m-q19.62 ± 0.97 g-y27.00 ± 2.65 h-p88.53 ± 8.46 i-q31.67 ± 3.12 l-o
IT34026074109271.33 ± 13.82 b23.33 ± 0.04 a-e26.00 ± 3.46 i-r115.44 ± 12.22 c-f27.97 ± 4.25 ap-at
IT34026171109228.50 ± 6.36 g-h21.13 ± 0.88 d-o37.50 ± 3.12 c120.62 ± 5.66 b-e25.40 ± 4.07 bj-bl
ITK2765214788209.00 ± 7.87 j-k16.13 ± 0.73 ac-aq34.67 ± 2.08 c-d98.08 ± 7.60 f-l31.60 ± 2.08 n-o
IT2313104790108.00 ± 6.53 aq-ay18.72 ± 0.36 k-ae22.33 ± 3.21 q-aa69.63 ± 1.79 q-aj28.90 ± 3.08 ah-ak
Nampungchal5698132.00 ± 3.56 z-ai18.53 ± 0.33 l-af22.33 ± 2.08 q-aa88.16 ± 5.45 i-r30.63 ± 2.09 r-u
Wheatland478877.00 ± 0.82 bb21.04 ± 0.54 d-o21.33 ± 2.31 s-aa47.95 ± 3.83 ak-am37.93 ± 2.17 a
Sodamchal6210491.67 ± 2.49 ba24.52 ± 0.38 a-c27.00 ± 1.00 h-p81.13 ± 7.89 k-aa30.53 ± 3.21 r-v
Total range40–7477–11355.33–294.6712.72–25.7616.00–51.3335.50–160.4321.90–38.20
Total mean53.4893.10147.8318.4025.6578.3128.71
CV (%)13.628.4132.4913.7622.6527.6710.80
Different superscript letters in a column indicate significantly different means (p < 0.05). DP: Days to panicle; DM: Days to maturity; ST: Stem thickness; SH; Stem height; PL: Panicle length; PW: Panicle width; TSW: Thousand seed weight.
Table 2. Total metabolite contents and antioxidant activities of sorghum genotypes.
Table 2. Total metabolite contents and antioxidant activities of sorghum genotypes.
IT-NumberTTC
(mg CE/g)
TPC
(mg GAE/g)
ABTS
(mg TE/g)
DPPH
(mg AAE/g)
FRAP
(mg AAE/g)
IT028365179.94 ± 5.09 av-aw7.65 ± 0.07 n24.15 ± 1.19 ap-av13.93 ± 0.17 aq-as10.91 ± 0.11 w-z
IT100010140.75 ± 4.48 bd-be3.24 ± 0.01 bk6.87 ± 0.40 bl-bm3.22 ± 0.05 bi-bj2.17 ± 0.03 b-c
IT100018120.16 ± 1.61 bf3.01 ± 0.05 bl4.92 ± 0.28 bn2.44 ± 0.10 bk1.76 ± 0.05 b-c
IT10002445.76 ± 0.00 bn3.81 ± 0.04 bi10.06 ± 0.73 bj4.49 ± 0.05 bg3.43 ± 0.01 az-ba
IT10004583.46 ± 0.35 bi-bj3.29 ± 0.07 bk7.68 ± 0.26 bl3.24 ± 0.09 bi-bj2.26 ± 0.09 bb-bc
IT10004647.00 ± 2.30 bn3.72 ± 0.03 bi-bj10.07 ± 0.65 bj4.01 ± 0.05 bh3.25 ± 0.12 az-ba
IT100047180.93 ± 3.00 av-aw6.00 ± 0.01 am-ap20.97 ± 0.19 ay-ba9.76 ± 0.20 ax-az6.95 ± 0.20 au-av
IT10007380.73 ± 1.05 bj5.10 ± 0.04 ba17.51 ± 0.81 bd-be8.11 ± 0.32 bb6.04 ± 0.12 aw
IT100074140.50 ± 3.35 b-e6.05 ± 0.07 al-an20.75 ± 0.26 ay-ba10.29 ± 0.13 az7.55 ± 0.12 at-au
IT10009091.64 ± 1.95 bh-bi5.86 ± 0.04 ao-ar20.58 ± 0.45 az-ba10.27 ± 0.20 az7.14 ± 0.12 au-av
IT100143282.86 ± 1.95 r-v8.83 ± 0.11 e-f31.51 ± 1.08 t-x17.41 ± 0.26 za-ac13.07 ± 0.48 m-o
IT10017766.16 ± 1.15 bl-bm4.64 ± 0.02 bd16.07 ± 0.40 bf-bg6.67 ± 0.09 bd-be4.96 ± 0.12 ax-ay
IT103099377.60 ± 3.79 e2.44 ± 0.04 bn8.03 ± 0.07 bk-bl3.08 ± 0.02 bj2.27 ± 0.04 bb-bc
IT103452122.64 ± 4.05 bf4.32 ± 0.06 be18.44 ± 0.38 bc-bd7.92 ± 0.09 bb5.97 ± 0.23 aw
IT10349676.45 ± 2.13 bj-bk3.99 ± 0.06 bh16.65 ± 0.15 be-bf7.99 ± 0.32 bb5.48 ± 0.18 aw-ax
IT103970151.91 ± 4.05 bb-bc4.26 ± 0.07 be-bf17.30 ± 0.28 bd-bf3.66 ± 0.00 bh-bi6.01 ± 0.07 aw
IT104574114.89 ± 3.28 bf-bg4.11 ± 0.09 bf-bh17.73 ± 0.57 bc-be6.24 ± 0.07 be5.39 ± 0.19 aw-ax
IT10459446.94 ± 1.15 bn2.70 ± 0.01 bm9.25 ± 0.20 bj-bk15.88 ± 0.21 ak-am2.86 ± 0.03 ba-bb
IT10496361.32 ± 0.18 bl-bm3.60 ± 0.02 bj14.86 ± 0.41 bg-bh9.86 ± 0.13 ax-ay5.43 ± 0.17 aw-ax
IT113294119.97 ± 0.93 bf2.31 ± 0.03 bn-bo7.39 ± 0.36 bl-bm1.75 ± 0.00 bl2.12 ± 0.01 bc
IT134976344.81 ± 12.25 g-i5.92 ± 0.11 an-aq32.62 ± 0.14 p-t13.65 ± 0.10 ar-as13.71 ± 0.33 k-m
IT158264162.52 ± 2.27 ay-ba4.84 ± 0.01 bb-bc25.29 ± 0.38 aj-ap9.93 ± 0.12 ax-ay10.51 ± 0.59 y-ab
IT158265224.06 ± 0.90 ai-am4.89 ± 0.03 bb26.67 ± 0.23 ah-ak10.03 ± 0.17 ax-ay10.77 ± 0.17 x-aa
IT162843398.27 ± 2.08 c4.09 ± 0.05 bf-bh22.03 ± 0.03 aw-ay8.85 ± 0.14 ba8.45 ± 0.15 an-as
IT16287726.24 ± 1.23 bo1.57 ± 0.02 br1.64 ± 0.01 bo0.48 ± 0.01 bn0.63 ± 0.02 bd
IT180549197.05 ± 3.31 ar-au5.11 ± 0.02 ba27.28 ± 0.14 af-ai11.11 ± 0.10 aw11.40 ± 0.33 t-x
IT180614350.38 ± 2.73 gh4.70 ± 0.01 bc-bd25.11 ± 0.46 al-aq9.33 ± 0.20 az-ba9.28 ± 0.10 af-al
IT185760217.93 ± 2.74 al-am5.63 ± 0.05 as-av31.07 ± 0.14 u-y12.68 ± 0.01 at13.17 ± 0.12 m-o
IT18579669.09 ± 1.23 bk-bl2.86 ± 0.03 bl-bm13.23 ± 0.12 bi3.91 ± 0.03 bh4.67 ± 0.20 ay
IT185807164.88 ± 1.20 ax-az3.62 ± 0.04 bj18.23 ± 0.40 b-d7.27 ± 0.18 b-c8.01 ± 0.28 aq-at
IT185812186.88 ± 2.24 au-av4.73 ± 0.06 bb-bd24.62 ± 0.24 an-at9.52 ± 0.15 ay-az10.24 ± 0.16 za-ad
IT185813154.72 ± 0.59 az-bc4.08 ± 0.06 bf-bh20.24 ± 0.23 ba-bb7.81 ± 0.13 bb8.54 ± 0.12 an-ar
IT185816132.16 ± 2.66 be4.64 ± 0.03 bd23.05 ± 0.42 au-ax9.58 ± 0.04 ay-az9.69 ± 0.05 ac-ai
IT195442209.30 ± 1.75 an-ap6.21 ± 0.07 aj-al33.17 ± 0.10 o-r14.53 ± 0.13 ao-ap14.39 ± 0.23 ij
IT20856083.33 ± 1.01 bi-bj2.91 ± 0.05 bl13.30 ± 0.66 bi5.38 ± 0.23 bf5.54 ± 0.11 aw-ax
IT208562195.93 ± 1.68 as-au6.45 ± 0.04 ac-ah34.42 ± 0.18 m-o15.43 ± 0.27 am-an17.02 ± 0.20 d-f
IT208566108.77 ± 6.85 bg4.24 ± 0.21 be-bf19.97 ± 1.01 ba-bb8.26 ± 0.56 bb8.79 ± 0.56 ak-ap
IT208567171.99 ± 6.12 aw-ay5.23 ± 0.05 ay-ba27.30 ± 0.37 af-ai11.04 ± 0.22 aw11.37 ± 0.08 t-x
IT208568198.72 ± 1.04 aq-at3.98 ± 0.05 bh19.02 ± 0.45 bb-bc6.99 ± 0.24 bc-bd7.84 ± 0.32 as-at
IT208901178.53 ± 2.13 av-aw4.04 ± 0.04 bg-bh20.33 ± 0.03 ba-bb7.25 ± 0.04 bc7.84 ± 0.39 as-at
IT221619196.35 ± 1.68 ar-au6.67 ± 0.01 x-aa36.21 ± 0.44 j-k16.02 ± 0.22 ai-al17.30 ± 0.30 c-f
IT230297265.22 ± 3.43 yz6.24 ± 0.03 ai-ak33.34 ± 0.08 n-q14.18 ± 0.01 ap-aq14.41 ± 0.29 i-j
IT235850241.58 ± 9.33 ad-ag7.76 ± 0.26 m-n37.16 ± 0.83 i-j17.23 ± 0.67 aa-ad12.00 ± 0.38 r-t
IT235856209.41 ± 4.10 an-ap7.46 ± 0.12 o33.34 ± 0.64 n-q16.82 ± 0.34 ad-ag11.90 ± 0.40 r-u
IT251882264.96 ± 4.97 yz9.00 ± 0.05 c-d43.88 ± 0.20 b24.83 ± 0.86 f15.20 ± 1.02 h
IT262553149.72 ± 2.06 bc-bd5.55 ± 0.09 au-av24.90 ± 0.52 al-ar10.85 ± 0.22 aw8.28 ± 0.22 ap-as
IT262554146.97 ± 2.37 bc-bd5.52 ± 0.04 av-aw25.55 ± 0.17 aj-ap10.94 ± 0.12 aw7.86 ± 0.21 as-at
IT262557199.50 ± 1.17 ap-at7.33 ± 0.04 o-q35.54 ± 0.37 k-m16.59 ± 0.17 ae-ah11.43 ± 0.39 t-x
IT262566223.16 ± 5.06 aj-am6.01 ± 0.09 am-ap27.71 ± 0.21 ae-ah12.04 ± 0.13 au8.56 ± 0.28 am-ar
IT262570282.29 ± 9.34 s-v6.47 ± 0.04 ab-ah32.31 ± 0.08 p-u13.65 ± 0.12 ar-as9.26 ± 0.13 af-am
IT262576194.55 ± 1.35 at-au5.21 ± 0.07 ay-ba24.41 ± 0.18 ao-au9.92 ± 0.06 ax-ay7.16 ± 0.32 au-av
IT264998261.94 ± 1.03 yz-ab7.18 ± 0.03 q-s35.39 ± 0.30 k-m15.88 ± 0.14 ak-am10.76 ± 0.28 x-aa
IT270343295.76 ± 2.37 p-q7.76 ± 0.06 m-n38.71 ± 0.32 g-h17.24 ± 0.00 aa-ad11.96 ± 0.09 r-t
IT270346288.34 ± 4.12 q-t7.22 ± 0.03 q-r35.97 ± 0.28 j-l15.93 ± 0.02 aj-am11.33 ± 0.31 t-x
IT270349383.50 ± 5.09 d-e10.23 ± 0.08 a67.60 ± 1.06 a31.99 ± 0.16 a20.38 ± 0.31 b
IT2703660.48 ± 0.00 bp1.17 ± 0.01 bs2.56 ± 0.14 bo0.89 ± 0.02 bm-bn0.89 ± 0.01 bd
IT278444209.68 ± 3.83 an-ap7.26 ± 0.07 p-r38.23 ± 3.18 hi15.92 ± 0.15 aj-am11.19 ± 0.13 u-y
IT278445277.06 ± 1.35 u-x8.24 ± 0.04 j39.87 ± 0.22 e-g18.61 ± 0.13 x13.54 ± 0.42 l-n
IT286399350.22 ± 4.87 g-h3.61 ± 0.02 bj27.24 ± 0.53 ag-ai11.37 ± 0.16 av-aw7.93 ± 0.47 ar-at
IT286403227.28 ± 4.49 ai-al6.16 ± 0.08 ak-am25.77 ± 0.90 aj-ao12.58 ± 0.07 at8.60 ± 0.39 ak-ar
IT286412260.29 ± 2.72 za-ab6.61 ± 0.07 y-ad26.16 ± 0.54 ai-am13.43 ± 0.17 as10.29 ± 0.26 za-ac
IT286423178.05 ± 5.39 av-aw5.92 ± 0.13 an-aq25.22 ± 2.36 ak-ap12.18 ± 0.14 at-au8.98 ± 0.03 ai-ap
IT286424179.98 ± 6.65 av-aw5.97 ± 0.07 an-ap26.25 ± 0.32 ai-al12.29 ± 0.02 at-au8.82 ± 0.10 aj-ap
IT286446253.96 ± 3.50 aa-ac7.67 ± 0.03 n34.65 ± 0.32 l-n17.28 ± 0.18 aa-ad12.27 ± 0.17 p-r
IT286448267.16 ± 12.85 x-z9.31 ± 0.12 b41.50 ± 0.36 c-d27.00 ± 0.81 c16.80 ± 0.57 f-g
IT297192231.28 ± 1.85 ag-aj6.89 ± 0.04 u-w32.24 ± 0.75 p-u21.80 ± 0.22 mn12.16 ± 0.34 q-s
IT300032293.24 ± 2.52 p-r6.29 ± 0.07 ah-ak29.25 ± 0.65 za-ad19.94 ± 0.31 tu10.77 ± 0.13 x-aa
IT300088220.08 ± 2.96 ak-am5.07 ± 0.06 ba21.77 ± 0.26 ax-az14.61 ± 0.06 ao-ap7.81 ± 0.10 as-at
IT320893300.13 ± 5.94 o-p5.45 ± 0.04 av-ax23.41 ± 0.18 ar-aw15.95 ± 0.29 aj-am8.75 ± 0.16 ak-ap
IT320897262.66 ± 10.61 y-aa6.81 ± 0.04 v-x30.89 ± 0.35 u-y21.40 ± 0.06 no12.27 ± 0.16 p-r
IT320898161.00 ± 3.92 az-bb5.47 ± 0.19 av-ax22.10 ± 0.60 aw-ay16.31 ± 0.49 ag-ak9.31 ± 0.33 af-ak
IT322510230.64 ± 2.39 ah-ak6.60 ± 0.01 za-ad28.40 ± 0.63 ac-ag21.01 ± 0.23 o-q11.78 ± 0.26 r-u
IT322513281.40 ± 1.26 s-v7.19 ± 0.04 q-r35.51 ± 0.16 k-m22.59 ± 0.06 kl13.55 ± 0.19 l-m
IT322530343.04 ± 2.18 h-i5.45 ± 0.02 h-i24.09 ± 0.73 ap-av16.26 ± 0.22 ah-ak9.00 ± 0.26 ai-ao
IT322531300.29 ± 3.06 o-p5.86 ± 0.05 ao-ar26.07 ± 0.19 ai-an17.70 ± 0.03 z-aa9.82 ± 0.02 ab-ag
IT322533243.45 ± 0.91 ac-af5.58 ± 0.04 at-av23.16 ± 0.12 at-ax16.25 ± 0.04 ah-ak9.95 ± 0.09 ab-af
IT322546299.01 ± 0.99 o-p6.64 ± 0.12 x-ac28.47 ± 0.62 ac-ag20.72 ± 0.16 p-s11.90 ± 0.42 r-u
IT322549329.11 ± 2.75 j-k8.58 ± 0.06 h40.45 ± 0.26 d-f23.55 ± 0.05 g-i17.58 ± 0.63 c-e
IT322554218.16 ± 1.96 al-an6.59 ± 0.10 za-ae29.71 ± 0.30 y-ad21.09 ± 0.06 o-p12.23 ± 0.34 p-r
IT322555277.55 ± 8.10 t-w7.90 ± 0.10 k-m36.81 ± 0.51 jk23.42 ± 0.09 g-i15.23 ± 0.09 h
IT322558308.13 ± 4.01 n-o8.57 ± 0.01 h39.54 ± 0.25 e-h23.51 ± 0.04 g-i17.64 ± 0.14 c-d
IT322570229.52 ± 2.84 ah-ak6.76 ± 0.07 w-z29.26 ± 0.39 za-ad21.85 ± 0.18 m-n12.37 ± 0.17 p-r
IT322571270.51 ± 1.04 w-z7.42 ± 0.03 o-p33.52 ± 1.12 n-p22.79 ± 0.25 j-k13.92 ± 0.36 j-l
IT322572214.79 ± 1.71 am-ao6.46 ± 0.09 ab-ah28.75 ± 0.82 ab-af19.67 ± 0.08 u-v11.19 ± 0.08 u-y
IT322578313.26 ± 4.24 m-n6.79 ± 0.12 w-y31.71 ± 0.94 r-w21.27 ± 0.13 o12.30 ± 0.08 p-r
IT322580428.95 ± 4.73 a8.77 ± 0.10 e-g40.80 ± 0.61 c-e23.57 ± 0.02 g-h17.68 ± 0.48 c
IT3226130.12 ± 0.00 bp2.04 ± 0.02 bp1.84 ± 0.05 bo0.95 ± 0.01 bm-bn0.63 ± 0.03 bd
IT322621174.29 ± 4.34 aw-ax5.71 ± 0.02 ar-au25.28 ± 0.37 aj-ap17.04 ± 0.06 ab-ae9.14 ± 0.15 ag-an
IT322622248.90 ± 2.83 ac-ae6.89 ± 0.10 u-w31.90 ± 0.76 q-v22.46 ± 0.33 k-l12.71 ± 0.71 o-q
IT329008282.70 ± 6.18 r-v7.37 ± 0.11 o-q29.36 ± 1.41 za-ad20.30 ± 0.21 s-t11.03 ± 0.15 v-y
IT329026266.55 ± 1.78 y-z6.64 ± 0.01 x-ac24.87 ± 0.30 al-as18.60 ± 0.13 x9.72 ± 0.26 ac-ah
IT329047252.18 ± 9.59 ab-ac8.67 ± 0.21 f-h38.30 ± 0.76 hi27.55 ± 0.48 b15.29 ± 0.94 h
IT329048233.93 ± 12.59 af-ai8.40 ± 0.02 i34.40 ± 0.27 m-o25.79 ± 0.26 e14.79 ± 0.16 hi
IT329049266.55 ± 3.20 y-z7.20 ± 0.05 q-r28.42 ± 0.19 ac-ag20.94 ± 0.10 o-q11.71 ± 0.21 r-v
IT329050151.08 ± 3.68 bb-bc6.40 ± 0.07 ae-ai23.67 ± 0.25 aq-av17.41 ± 0.11 z-ac9.85 ± 0.11 ab-ag
IT329053409.72 ± 8.46 b7.43 ± 0.12 o-p28.95 ± 0.88 aa-ae20.54 ± 0.35 q-s10.77 ± 0.41 x-aa
IT329056353.76 ± 11.25 g7.87 ± 0.02 l-m32.73 ± 0.87 p-t22.79 ± 0.34 j-k11.82 ± 0.16 r-u
IT329063249.76 ± 1.05 ac-ad7.09 ± 0.04 r-t26.78 ± 0.48 ah-aj19.33 ± 0.05 v10.31 ± 0.21 za-ac
IT329064197.43 ± 4.41 aq-au6.50 ± 0.11 aa-ag22.69 ± 0.51 av-ax16.53 ± 0.28 ae-ai9.68 ± 0.22 ac-ai
IT329074335.03 ± 6.28 ij8.81 ± 0.02 e-f36.08 ± 0.62 jk26.99 ± 0.11 c15.23 ± 0.19 h
IT329076238.61 ± 0.79 ae-ah7.00 ± 0.05 s-u28.27 ± 0.31 ad-ag18.28 ± 0.27 x-y9.90 ± 0.27 ab-af
IT329077320.82 ± 3.76 k-m8.89 ± 0.09 d-e36.18 ± 0.64 jk26.28 ± 0.28 d14.23 ± 0.19 i-k
IT329078201.95 ± 1.83 ap-at6.91 ± 0.11 u-w26.76 ± 0.36 ah-aj17.68 ± 0.25 z-aa10.18 ± 0.12 aa-ae
IT329082193.88 ± 1.27 at-au6.77 ± 0.13 w-z24.71 ± 0.15 am-as16.86 ± 0.25 ac-af9.49 ± 0.45 ae-aj
IT32908533.67 ± 1.24 bo2.31 ± 0.01 bn-bo24.44 ± 0.21 ao-au3.93 ± 0.19 bh2.09 ± 0.10 bc
IT329089156.90 ± 2.69 az-bc4.20 ± 0.08 be-bg14.13 ± 0.68 bh-bi8.94 ± 0.14 ba5.11 ± 0.15 ax-ay
IT329090249.43 ± 5.65 ac-ad5.31 ± 0.06 ax-az18.37 ± 0.22 bc-bd11.83 ± 0.17 au-av7.01 ± 0.14 au-av
IT329108171.92 ± 2.57 aw-ay6.44 ± 0.11 ad-ah23.62 ± 0.35 aq-av16.46 ± 0.14 af-aj9.56 ± 0.38 ad-ai
IT329120296.27 ± 1.58 p-q8.04 ± 0.15 k-l31.62 ± 0.48 s-w21.92 ± 0.08 m-n12.27 ± 0.17 p-r
IT329124283.19 ± 0.00 r-u6.38 ± 0.07 af-aj24.05 ± 0.28 ap-av15.69 ± 0.20 al-am8.49 ± 0.18 an-as
IT331874365.79 ± 0.79 f8.06 ± 0.09 k33.04 ± 0.15 o-s21.90 ± 0.28 m-n12.33 ± 0.23 p-r
IT331878346.50 ± 6.44 g-h9.08 ± 0.04 c39.22 ± 0.27 f-h27.77 ± 0.13 b16.31 ± 0.23 g
IT331882323.87 ± 3.38 k-l6.05 ± 0.07 al-ao30.35 ± 0.36 w-aa21.27 ± 0.12 o10.51 ± 0.22 y-ab
IT331889272.22 ± 4.46 v-y5.93 ± 0.07 an-aq29.84 ± 0.22 y-ac20.85 ± 0.33 o-r9.81 ± 0.19 ab-ag
IT331894342.15 ± 4.57 h-i5.36 ± 0.02 aw-ay25.12 ± 0.77 al-aq18.30 ± 0.15 x-y8.59 ± 0.25 al-ar
IT331896346.59 ± 2.61 g-h6.60 ± 0.01 y-ad30.47 ± 0.16 v-z23.01 ± 0.01 i-k12.33 ± 0.19 p-r
IT331899224.65 ± 6.13 ai-am5.15 ± 0.08 az-ba21.89 ± 0.22 ax-az17.95 ± 0.43 y-z8.68 ± 0.18 ak-aq
IT331904318.37 ± 7.54 l-m7.33 ± 0.12 o-q32.72 ± 0.29 p-t23.69 ± 0.05 g-h14.72 ± 0.30 h-i
IT331907285.36 ± 3.45 r-u6.99 ± 0.02 t-v31.80 ± 0.38 r-w23.54 ± 0.04 g-i13.31 ± 0.19 l-o
IT331921198.21 ± 1.76 aq-at6.65 ± 0.08 x-ab29.71 ± 0.86 y-ad23.15 ± 0.09 h-j12.03 ± 0.29 q-t
IT331922334.88 ± 0.87 i-j7.13 ± 0.04 r-t30.97 ± 0.26 u-y23.55 ± 0.08 g-i12.92 ± 0.10 n-p
IT331936388.25 ± 7.24 d7.99 ± 0.07 k-l36.99 ± 0.35 i-j23.69 ± 0.01 g-h16.99 ± 0.24 e-f
IT331937206.90 ± 1.53 ao-ar5.57 ± 0.12 at-av26.20 ± 0.42 ai-am19.24 ± 0.13 v-w9.68 ± 0.20 ac-ai
IT331938265.83 ± 2.39 y-z6.45 ± 0.06 ac-ah28.74 ± 0.70 ab-af22.57 ± 0.12 k-l11.76 ± 0.17 r-u
IT331962282.52 ± 2.39 r-v6.35 ± 0.10 ag-aj28.41 ± 0.73 ac-ag22.10 ± 0.06 l-m11.48 ± 0.46 s-w
IT331963224.48 ± 7.33 ai-am5.25 ± 0.03 ay-ba22.06 ± 0.21 aw-ay17.66 ± 0.14 z-aa8.34 ± 0.20 ao-as
IT331978153.66 ± 0.50 ba-bc4.62 ± 0.01 bd17.80 ± 0.11 bc-be15.01 ± 0.08 an-ao6.84 ± 0.13 av
IT331988197.32 ± 3.70 aq-au5.82 ± 0.05 ap-ar23.39 ± 0.36 as-aw19.58 ± 0.09 u-v9.06 ± 0.12 ah-an
IT332014239.74 ± 5.67 ad-ah6.66 ± 0.01 x-ab30.15 ± 0.26 x-ab23.01 ± 0.15 i-k12.72 ± 0.15 o-q
IT332024253.94 ± 7.18 aa-ac6.59 ± 0.14 za-ae28.58 ± 0.72 ac-ag22.74 ± 0.16 j-k12.26 ± 0.25 p-r
IT332042291.57 ± 10.51 p-s5.75 ± 0.11 aq-at25.30 ± 0.45 aj-ap19.36 ± 0.14 v9.06 ± 0.46 ah-an
IT332046206.19 ± 4.11 ao-as5.76 ± 0.05 aq-as25.67 ± 0.21 aj-ao20.35 ± 0.08 r-t9.92 ± 0.20 ab-af
IT340260285.53 ± 1.96 r-u6.56 ± 0.02 aa-af29.40 ± 0.40 za-ad22.62 ± 0.14 j-l11.72 ± 0.44 r-v
IT340261415.58 ± 1.00 b8.62 ± 0.01 gh41.89 ± 0.79 c23.80 ± 0.01 g21.56 ± 0.52 a
K27652193.95 ± 1.53 bh2.25 ± 0.06 bo9.79 ± 0.45 bj5.10 ± 0.07 bf3.57 ± 0.03 az
IT231310208.06 ± 17.61 an-aq4.85 ± 0.38 bb-bc30.66 ± 2.47 v-z14.01 ± 1.35 aq-ar9.76 ± 0.99 ac-ah
Nampungchal323.36 ± 0.73 k-l6.31 ± 0.03 ag-ak39.85 ± 0.42 e-g18.79 ± 0.17 wx13.72 ± 0.35 k-m
Wheatland58.61 ± 2.15 bm1.82 ± 0.14 bq6.14 ± 0.31 bm-bn1.05 ± 0.05 bm1.90 ± 0.07 bc
Sodamchal241.15 ± 3.30 ad-ag5.74 ± 0.07 aq-at36.79 ± 0.17 jk17.57 ± 0.33 z-ab12.41 ± 0.33 p-r
Total range0.12–428.951.17–10.231.64–67.600.48–31.990.63–21.56
Total mean224.355.9626.4115.5510.06
CV (%)41.1229.9336.1344.6140.04
Means in a column with different superscript letters are significantly different (p < 0.05). ABTS: 2,2′-azino-bis(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid) diammonium radical cation scavenging activity; DPPH: 1,1-Diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl radical scavenging activity; FRAP: Ferric reducing antioxidant power; TPC: Total phenolic content; TTC: Total tannin content.
Table 3. Selected unique sorghum landraces with low and high DM, TSW, TTC and TPC levels.
Table 3. Selected unique sorghum landraces with low and high DM, TSW, TTC and TPC levels.
Days to Maturity Thousand-Seed Weight Total Tannin Content Total Phenolic Content
Landrace>105 Days Landrace>35.00 g Landrace>350 mg CE/g Landrace>8.5 mg GAE/g
IT322613113IT11329438.20IT322580428.95IT27034910.23
IT331936109IT20856736.90IT340261415.58IT2864489.31
IT340260109IT32089835.30IT329053409.72IT3318789.08
IT270366109<23.00 gIT162843398.27IT2518829.00
IT340261109IT10014322.93IT331936388.25IT3290778.89
IT286448109IT18581222.37IT270349383.50IT1001438.83
IT322558109IT32907622.03IT103099377.60IT3290748.81
IT329085107IT32908921.90IT331874365.79IT3225808.77
IT322549106 IT329056353.76IT3290478.67
IT329048106 IT180614350.38IT3402618.62
IT320898106 IT286399350.22IT3225498.58
<80 days <50 mg CE/gIT3225588.57
IT10309978 IT10004647.00<2.5 mg GAE/g
IT18579677 IT10459446.94IT1030992.44
IT18581677 IT10002445.76IT1132942.31
IT32908533.67IT3290852.31
IT16287726.24K2765212.25
IT2703660.48IT3226132.04
IT3226130.12IT1628771.57
IT2703661.17
Wheatland88 37.93 58.61 1.82
Nampungchal98 30.63 323.36 6.31
Sodamchal104 30.53 241.15 5.74
Table 4. Contributions of variables in the first four principal components.
Table 4. Contributions of variables in the first four principal components.
VariablesPC1PC2PC3PC4
TTC10.216.783.480.05
TPC16.371.052.930.02
ABTS16.101.034.620.16
DPPH16.001.161.160.70
FRAP17.160.134.230.03
Days to panicle8.677.9616.260.15
Days to maturity10.095.3018.520.03
Stem height0.1423.1910.221.62
Stem thickness3.400.4323.9716.33
Panicle length0.1827.176.421.29
Panicle width1.4425.681.281.85
Thousand seed weight0.240.116.9077.76
Eigenvalue5.052.781.291.06
Variability (%)42.0623.1610.738.86
Cumulative (%)42.0665.2175.9484.80
Full names for the abbreviations can be seen in Figure 3 footnotes.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Lee, S.; Choi, Y.-M.; Shin, M.-J.; Yoon, H.; Wang, X.; Lee, Y.; Yi, J.; Desta, K.T. Agro-Morphological and Biochemical Characterization of Korean Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) Landraces. Agronomy 2022, 12, 2898. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12112898

AMA Style

Lee S, Choi Y-M, Shin M-J, Yoon H, Wang X, Lee Y, Yi J, Desta KT. Agro-Morphological and Biochemical Characterization of Korean Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) Landraces. Agronomy. 2022; 12(11):2898. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12112898

Chicago/Turabian Style

Lee, Sukyeung, Yu-Mi Choi, Myoung-Jae Shin, Hyemyeong Yoon, Xiaohan Wang, Yoonjung Lee, Jungyoon Yi, and Kebede Taye Desta. 2022. "Agro-Morphological and Biochemical Characterization of Korean Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) Landraces" Agronomy 12, no. 11: 2898. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12112898

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop