Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Plant Science Today (PST)

Review Articles

Vol. 13 No. sp9 (2026): Recent Advances in Agriculture

Utilising wild genetic diversity for climate-resilient moth bean (Vigna aconitifolia (Jacq.) Maréchal) improvement through introgression breeding: A review

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.16828
Submitted
17 July 2026
Published
17-10-2026

Abstract

Moth bean (Vigna aconitifolia (Jacq.) Maréchal) is an underutilised, climate-resilient grain legume well adapted to the arid and semi-arid regions of the Indian subcontinent. Despite its exceptional tolerance to drought and heat, its genetic improvement has been constrained by a narrow-cultivated gene pool, limited genomic resources and the underutilisation of wild relatives. As climate change increases the occurrence of abiotic and biotic stresses, broadening the genetic base of moth beans has become essential for developing resilient and high-yielding cultivars. This review critically examines the potential of introgression breeding as a strategic approach for incorporating beneficial alleles from wild Vigna species, including Vigna trilobata (L.) Verdc., Vigna stipulacea (Lam.) Kuntze, Vigna indica T.M.Dixit, K.V.Bhat and S.R.Yadav and Vigna aridicola N.Tomooka & Maxted. Previous reviews have primarily emphasised the nutritional value, genetic diversity and general breeding potential of moth bean, with limited focus on systematic wild relative utilisation and introgression pathways. In contrast, this review integrates wild gene-pool classification, donor-trait relationships, reproductive barriers, linkage drag, pre-breeding strategies and genomics-assisted approaches within a unified breeding framework. It further evaluates the application of marker-assisted backcrossing, advanced backcross quantitative trait loci analysis (QTL), comparative genomics, genomic selection and emerging molecular tools for efficient trait introgression. The synthesis indicates that combining systematic donor characterisation with reproductive barrier management, precision introgression and validated genomic tools can accelerate the deployment of adaptive alleles from wild relatives. Future breeding efforts should prioritise multi-environment validation, high-throughput phenotyping, cost-effective genotyping and targeted utilisation of wild germplasm to broaden the genetic base and develop climate-resilient moth bean cultivars.

References

  1. 1. Abrol IP, Sangar S. Sustaining Indian agriculture-conservation agriculture the way forward. Curr Sci. 2006:1020–5.
  2. 2. Cummings RW. RS Paroda: Reorienting Indian agriculture: challenges and opportunities. Food Secur. 2019;11(4):985–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-019-00955-6
  3. 3. Birthal PS, Srivastava SK, Saxena R, Godara S, Chand P, Kishore P, et al. Indian Agriculture to 2047: Reshaping Policies for Sustainable Development. New Delhi: ICAR-National Institute of Agricultural Economics and Policy Research; 2025.
  4. 4. Food and Agriculture Organization. FAOSTAT production database: Crops and livestock products. Rome: FAO; 2025.
  5. 5. Gruère G, Giuliani A, Smale M. Marketing underutilized plant species for the benefit of the poor: a conceptual framework. Intl Food Policy Res Inst. 2006. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.916572
  6. 6. van Zonneveld M, Rakha M, Tan SY, Chou YY, Chang CH, Yen JY, et al. Mapping patterns of abiotic and biotic stress resilience uncovers conservation gaps and breeding potential of Vigna wild relatives. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):2111. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-58646-8
  7. 7. Heuzé V, Tran G, Lebas F. Sainfoin Moth bean (Vigna aconitifolia). Feedipedia, a programme by INRAE, CIRAD, AFZ and FAO. 2020.
  8. 8. Saravanan M, Ignacimuthu S. Hypocholesterolemic effect of Indian medicinal plants–a review. Med Chem. 2015;5(1):040–9. https://doi.org/10.4172/2161-0444.1000241
  9. 9. Kanishka RC, Gayacharan C, Basavaraja T, Chandora R, Rana JC. Moth bean (Vigna aconitifolia): a minor legume with major potential to address global agricultural challenges. Front Plant Sci. 2023;14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1179547
  10. 10. Singh AK, Singh CK, Sinha S, Gayacharan. Genetics and Omics Approaches for Moth Bean Improvement. In: Legumes: Genetics and Genomics. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore; 2026. p. 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-7538-5_24-1
  11. 11. Rajpal VR, Singh A, Kathpalia R, Thakur RK, Khan MK, Pandey A, et al. The prospects of gene introgression from crop wild relatives into cultivated lentil for climate change mitigation. Front Plant Sci. 2023;14:1127239. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1127239
  12. 12. Verdcourt B. Studies in the Leguminosae-Papilionoideae for the 'Flora of Tropical East Africa': IV. Kew Bull. 1970:507–69. https://doi.org/10.2307/4102859
  13. 13. Takahashi Y, Somta P, Muto C, Iseki K, Naito K, Pandiyan M, et al. Novel genetic resources in the genus Vigna unveiled from gene bank accessions. PLoS One. 2016;11(1):e0147568. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0147568
  14. 14. Suranjika S, Pradhan S, Kalia RK, Dey N. De novo assembly of the whole genome of Moth bean (Vigna aconitifolia), an underutilized Vigna species of India. bioRxiv. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.05.18.540937
  15. 15. Rani J, Dhull SB, Kinabo J, Kidwai MK, Sangwan A. A narrative review on nutritional and health benefits of underutilized summer crop to address agriculture challenges: Moth bean (Vigna aconitifolia L.). Legume Sci. 2023;5(4):e204. https://doi.org/10.1002/leg3.204
  16. 16. Yadav AK, Singh CK, Wankhede DP, Kalia RK, Pradhan S, Ujjainwal S, et al. Combined genome-wide association study and expression analysis unravels candidate genes associated with seed weight in moth bean [Vigna aconitifolia (Jacq.) Marechal]. J Plant Growth Regul. 2025;44(5):1973–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00344-024-11517-2
  17. 17. Candolle A. Origin of cultivated plants. Litres; 2021. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.20259
  18. 18. Maréchal R. Taxonomic study of a complex group of species of the genera Phaseolus and Vigna (Papilionaceae) on the basis of morphological and pollen data, processed by computer analysis. Boissiera. 1978;28:1–273.
  19. 19. Tomooka N, Kaga A, Isemura T, Vaughan D. Vigna. In: Wild crop relatives: genomic and breeding resources. Legume crops and forages. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2010. p. 291–311. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14387-8_15
  20. 20. Shah TI, Rai AP, Ma A. Relationship of phosphorus fractions with soil properties in mothbean growing acid soils of North Western Indian Himalayas. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal. 2019;50(9):1192–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103624.2019.1604730
  21. 21. Choudhary KB, Sharma R, Solanki RK, Mahla HR, Jadon KS, Choudhary M, et al. Genetic relatedness in elite cultivars of moth bean using morpho-agronomic and molecular markers. Legume Res. 2024;47(3). https://doi.org/10.18805/LRF-774
  22. 22. Bhanu AN, Singh MN, Srivastava K. Efficient hybridization procedure for better pod setting in inter-specific crosses involving Vigna species. Adv Plants Agric Res. 2018;8:101–5. https://doi.org/10.15406/apar.2018.08.00298
  23. 23. Yadav AK, Singh CK, Kalia RK, Mittal S, Wankhede DP, Kakani RK, et al. Genetic diversity, population structure and genome-wide association study for the flowering trait in a diverse panel of 428 moth bean (Vigna aconitifolia) accessions using genotyping by sequencing. BMC Plant Biol. 2023;23(1):228. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12870-023-04215-w
  24. 24. Singh G, Gudi S, Amandeep, Upadhyay P, Shekhawat PK, Nayak G, et al. Unlocking the hidden variation from wild repository for accelerating genetic gain in legumes. Front Plant Sci. 2022;13:1035878. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.1035878
  25. 25. Yundaeng C, Somta P, Amkul K, Kongjaimun A, Kaga A, Tomooka N. Construction of genetic linkage map and genome dissection of domestication-related traits of moth bean (Vigna aconitifolia), a legume crop of arid areas. Mol Genet Genom. 2019;294(3):621–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00438-019-01536-0
  26. 26. Dwivedi SL, Chapman MA, A645bberton MT, Akpojotor UL, Ortiz R. Exploiting genetic and genomic resources to enhance productivity and abiotic stress adaptation of underutilized pulses. Front Genet. 2023;14:1193780. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2023.1193780
  27. 27. Pandey MK, Roorkiwal M, Singh VK, Ramalingam A, Kudapa H, Thudi M, et al. Emerging genomic tools for legume breeding: current status and future prospects. Front Plant Sci. 2016;7:455. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.00455
  28. 28. Bhimireddy S, Kumar AN, Vemireddy LN, Reddy CK, Akkareddy S. Possibility for exploitation and identification of rice yield and seed quality orthologs in peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Legume Res. 2026;49(2):292–8. https://doi.org/10.18805/LR-5309
  29. 29. Halladakeri P, Gudi S, Akhtar S, Singh G, Saini DK, Hilli HJ, et al. Meta-analysis of the quantitative trait loci associated with agronomic traits, fertility restoration, disease resistance and seed quality traits in pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan L.). Plant Genome. 2023;16(3):e20342. https://doi.org/10.1002/tpg2.20342
  30. 30. Roorkiwal M, Bharadwaj C, Barmukh R, Dixit GP, Thudi M, Gaur PM, et al. Integrating genomics for chickpea improvement: achievements and opportunities. Theor Appl Genet. 2020;133(5):1703–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00122-020-03584-2
  31. 31. Varshney RK, Close TJ, Singh NK, Hoisington DA, Cook DR. Orphan legume crops enter the genomics era! Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2009;12(2):202–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbi.2008.12.004
  32. 32. Salgotra RK, Stewart CN Jr. Genetic augmentation of legume crops using genomic resources and genotyping platforms for nutritional food security. Plants. 2022;11(14):1866. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11141866
  33. 33. Singh B, Bohra A, Mishra S, Joshi R, Pandey S. Embracing new-generation ‘omics’ tools to improve drought tolerance in cereal and food-legume crops. Biol Plant. 2015;59(3):413–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10535-015-0515-0
  34. 34. Bohra A, Tiwari A, Kaur P, Ganie SA, Raza A, Roorkiwal M, et al. The key to the future lies in the past: insights from grain legume domestication and improvement should inform future breeding strategies. Plant Cell Physiol. 2022;63(11):1554–72. https://doi.org/10.1093/pcp/pcac086
  35. 35. Kaga A, Tomooka N, Egawa Y, Hosaka K, Kamijima O. Species relationships in the subgenus Ceratotropis (genus Vigna) as revealed by RAPD analysis. Euphytica. 1996;88(1):17–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00029261
  36. 36. Sampson HC. Crop plants of the British Empire. Nature. 1936;137:544–5. https://doi.org/10.1038/137544b0
  37. 37. Dana S. Genomic relationship in the genus Vigna and its implications in the breeding programme. In: Breeding methods for the improvement of pulse crops. 1980. p. 357–67.
  38. 38. Biswas MR, Dana S. Phaseolus aconitifolius × Phaseolus trilobus. Indian J Genet Plant Breed. 1976;36(1):125–31.
  39. 39. Chankaew S, Isemura T, Naito K, Ogiso-Tanaka E, Tomooka N, Somta P, et al. QTL mapping for salt tolerance and domestication-related traits in Vigna marina subsp. oblonga, a halophytic species. Theor Appl Genet. 2014;127(3):691–702. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00122-013-2251-1
  40. 40. Bisht IS, Bhat KV, Lakhanpaul S, Latha M, Jayan PK, Biswas BK, et al. Diversity and genetic resources of wild Vigna species in India. Genet Resour Crop Evol. 2005;52(1):53–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10722-005-0286-0
  41. 41. Kana Hau D, Nulik J, Field SP, Kieft J, Ella A, Bahar S, et al. Forty years’ trajectory of forage legume species introduction, adaptation, cultivation and their usage strategies in livestock feeding and farming systems in the semi-arid region of eastern Indonesia: a review. Asian J Agric Biol. 2025. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4934793
  42. 42. Maxted N, Ford-Lloyd BV, Jury S, Kell S, Scholten M. Towards a definition of a crop wild relative. Biodivers Conserv. 2006;15(8):2673–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-005-5409-6
  43. 43. Harlan JR, de Wet JM. Toward a rational classification of cultivated plants. Taxon. 1971;20(4):509–17. https://doi.org/10.2307/1218252
  44. 44. Tomooka N, Vaughan D, Moss H, Maxted N. The Asian Vigna: genus Vigna subgenus Ceratotropis genetic resources. Springer; 2012. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0314-8_3
  45. 45. Zhou C, Wang H, Zhu X, Li Y, Zhang B, Tadege M, et al. Functional genomics: from soybean to legume. Int J Mol Sci. 2025;26(13):6323. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms26136323
  46. 46. Tomooka N, Naito K, Kaga A, Sakai H, Isemura T, Ogiso-Tanaka E, et al. Evolution, domestication and neo-domestication of the genus Vigna. Plant Genet Resour. 2014;12(S1):S168–71. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1479262114000483
  47. 47. Kumar J, Choudhary AK, Gupta DS, Kumar S. Towards exploitation of adaptive traits for climate-resilient smart pulses. Int J Mol Sci. 2019;20(12):2971. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms20122971
  48. 48. Nagaraj NC, Muniyappa V, Satyan BA. Resistance source for mung bean yellow mosaic virus. In: Proceedings of the National Seminar on Disease Resistance in Crop Plants. 1981.
  49. 49. Takahashi Y, Sakai H, Yoshitsu Y, Muto C, Anai T, Pandiyan M, et al. Domesticating Vigna stipulacea: a potential legume crop with broad resistance to biotic stresses. Front Plant Sci. 2019;10:1607. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2019.01607
  50. 50. Dwivedi SL, Scheben A, Edwards D, Spillane C, Ortiz R. Assessing and exploiting functional diversity in germplasm pools to enhance abiotic stress adaptation and yield in cereals and food legumes. Front Plant Sci. 2017;8:1461. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.01461
  51. 51. Kondo N, Tomooka N. New sources of resistance to Cadophora gregata f. sp. Adzukicola and Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. Adzukicola in Vigna spp. Plant Dis. 2012;96(4):562–8. https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-06-11-0463
  52. 52. Chadburn H. Vigna khandalensis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 2012:e.T19892969A20163711.
  53. 53. Raghavan SR. On the nomenclature of Vigna grandis (Dalz. & Gibs.) Verdc. Curr Sci. 1972;41:429.
  54. 54. Umdale SD, Chavan JJ, Ahire ML, Kshirsagar PR, Gaikwad NB, Bhat KV. Vigna khandalensis (Santapau) Raghavan et Wadhwa: a promising underutilized, wild, endemic legume of the Northern Western Ghats, India. Genet Resour Crop Evol. 2018;65(6):1795–807. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10722-018-0657-y
  55. 55. Shamurailatpam A, Wahlang DR, Madhavan L, Yadav SR, Bhat KV, Rao SR. Further observations on chromosome diversity analysis in wild species of Vigna from India. Nucleus. 2015;58(3):225–30. doi:10.1007/s13237-016-0157-4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13237-016-0157-4
  56. 56. Somta P, Jomsangawong A, Yundaeng C, Yuan X, Chen J, Tomooka N, et al. Genetic dissection of azuki bean weevil (Callosobruchus chinensis L.) resistance in moth bean (Vigna aconitifolia [Jacq.] Maréchal). Genes. 2018;9(11):555. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes9110555
  57. 57. Gamage SI, Kaewwongwal A, Laosatit K, Yimram T, Lin Y, Chen X, et al. Tandemly duplicated genes encoding polygalacturonase inhibitors are associated with bruchid (Callosobruchus chinensis) resistance in moth bean (Vigna aconitifolia). Plant Sci. 2022;323:111402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2022.111402
  58. 58. Singh K, Shekhawat N, Singh OV, Choudhary M, Ram D. Identification for sources of resistance to biotic stresses in mothbean [Vigna aconitifolia (Jacq.) Marechal] germplasm. Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci. 2020;9(5):1243–9. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2020.905.138
  59. 59. Meena MK, Dogra I, Sudarsan Y, Sharma AK, Singh D, Sharma V, et al. Identification and characterization of CAT1 gene during drought stress in moth bean [Vigna aconitifolia (Jacq.) Marechal]. J Agric Ecol. 2022;14:164–72. https://doi.org/10.58628/JAE-2214-224
  60. 60. Iseki K, Takahashi Y, Muto C, Naito K, Tomooka N. Diversity of drought tolerance in the genus Vigna. Front Plant Sci. 2018;9:729. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2018.00729
  61. 61. Tanksley SD, Nelson JC. Advanced backcross QTL analysis: a method for the simultaneous discovery and transfer of valuable QTLs from unadapted germplasm into elite breeding lines. Theor Appl Genet. 1996;92(2):191–203. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00223376
  62. 62. Hospital F. Selection in backcross programmes. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2005;360(1459):1503–11. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2005.1670
  63. 63. Anderson E, Hubricht L. Hybridization in Tradescantia. III. The evidence for introgressive hybridization. Am J Bot. 1938:396–402. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1537-2197.1938.tb09237.x
  64. 64. Singh P, Pandey B, Pratap A, Gyaneshwari U, Nair RM, Mishra AK, et al. Genetic and genomics resources of cross-species Vigna gene pools for improving biotic stress resistance in mungbean (Vigna radiata L. Wilczek). Agronomy. 2022;12(12):3000. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12123000
  65. 65. Biodiversity International, GIPB/FAO. 2008.
  66. 66. Sagar KR, Srinivasulu B, Vamsi B. The impact of pre-breeding on vegetable crop improvement: a review. J Exp Agric Int. 2024;46(8):268–82. https://doi.org/10.9734/jeai/2024/v46i82704
  67. 67. Sharma S, Upadhyaya HD, Varshney RK, Gowda CL. Pre-breeding for diversification of primary gene pool and genetic enhancement of grain legumes. Front Plant Sci. 2013;4:309. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2013.00309
  68. 68. Collard BC, Mackill DJ. Marker-assisted selection: an approach for precision plant breeding in the twenty-first century. Philos Trans R SocLond B Biol Sci. 2008;363(1491):557–72. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2007.2170
  69. 69. Varshney RK, Ribaut JM, Buckler ES, Tuberosa R, Rafalski JA, Langridge P. Can genomics boost productivity of orphan crops? Nat Biotechnol. 2012;30(12):1172–6. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.2440
  70. 70. Bohra A, Jha UC, Kishor PK, Pandey S, Singh NP. Genomics and molecular breeding in lesser explored pulse crops: current trends and future opportunities. Biotechnol Adv. 2014;32(8):1410–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2014.09.001
  71. 71. Ni Z, Moeinizade S, Kusmec A, Hu G, Wang L, Schnable PS. New insights into trait introgression with the look-ahead intercrossing strategy. G3 (Bethesda). 2023;13(4):jkad042. https://doi.org/10.1093/g3journal/jkad042
  72. 72. Prabhu KR, Kumar A, Yumkhaibam RS, Janeja HS, Bal K, Talekar N. A review on conventional and modern breeding approaches for developing climate resilient crop varieties. J Appl Nat Sci. 2023;15(3):987. https://doi.org/10.31018/jans.v15i3.4653
  73. 73. Keneni G, Ahmed S. Genetic options for combating biotic stresses in cool-season food legumes. Indian J Genet Plant Breed. 2016;76(4):437–50. https://doi.org/10.5958/0975-6906.2016.00062.6
  74. 74. Sharma S, Mittal RK, Chaudhary HK, Sood VK. Introgression of disease resistance in urdbean (Vigna mungo) by involving its related species. Indian J Agric Sci. 2022;92:1348–52. https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v92i11.124619
  75. 75. Tondonba SP, Khanna VK, Tejaswini VU. Crossability studies and genetic diversity analysis in blackgram (Vigna mungo L. Hepper) using molecular markers. Agrotechnology. 2018;2(7):179. https://doi.org/10.4172/2168-9881.1000179
  76. 76. Mahla HR, Sharma R. An easy method of artificial hybridization in two arid legumes, guar (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba Taub.) and moth bean [Vigna aconitifolia (Jacq.) Marechal]. Indian J Genet Plant Breed. 2022;82(1):109–12. https://doi.org/10.31742/IJGPB.82.1.16
  77. 77. Anushma P, Dhanyasree K, Rafeekher M. Wide hybridization for fruit crop improvement: a review. Int J Chem Stud. 2021;9:769–73. https://doi.org/10.22271/chemi.2021.v9.i1k.11317
  78. 78. Prohens J, Gramazio P, Plazas M, Dempewolf H, Kilian B, Díez MJ, et al. Introgressiomics: a new approach for using crop wild relatives in breeding for adaptation to climate change. Euphytica. 2017;213(7):158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-017-1938-9
  79. 79. Kumari P, Thaneshwari R. Embryo rescue in horticultural crops. Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci. 2018;7(6):3350–8. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2018.706.393
  80. 80. He H, Shiragaki K, Tezuka T. Understanding and overcoming hybrid lethality in seed and seedling stages as barriers to hybridization and gene flow. Front Plant Sci. 2023;14:1219417. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1219417
  81. 81. Boukar O, Abberton M, Oyatomi O, Togola A, Tripathi L, Fatokun C. Introgression breeding in cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.]. Front Plant Sci. 2020;11:567425. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.567425
  82. 82. Huyghe C. In vitro techniques in grain legume crops. Agronomie. 1990;10(1):29–49. https://doi.org/10.1051/agro:19900105
  83. 83. Warchoł M, Czyczyło-Mysza I, Marcińska I, Dziurka K, Noga A, Skrzypek E. The effect of genotype, media composition, pH and sugar concentrations on oat (Avena sativa L.) doubled haploid production through oat × maize crosses. Acta Physiol Plant. 2018;40(5):93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11738-018-2669-9
  84. 84. Encina CL, Regalado JJ. Aspects of in vitro plant tissue culture and breeding of asparagus: a review. Horticulturae. 2022;8(5):439. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae8050439
  85. 85. Zhang F, Hua L, Fei J, Wang F, Liao Y, Fang W, et al. Chromosome doubling to overcome the chrysanthemum cross barrier based on insight from transcriptomic and proteomic analyses. BMC Genomics. 2016;17(1):585. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-016-2939-0
  86. 86. Meena MS, Mishra JP, Meena HN. Popularization of mothbean cultivation. Indian Farming. 2024;74(3):21–5.
  87. 87. Kumawat S. An economics of moth bean processing in Nagaur District of Rajasthan. Ann Arid Zone. 2016;55(1–2):59–61. https://doi.org/10.56093/aaz.v55i1-2.62952
  88. 88. Kumawat S, Singh IP. Trend analysis in market arrivals and prices of moth bean in Rajasthan. Indian J Econ Dev. 2015;11(4):843–50. https://doi.org/10.5958/2322-0430.2015.00092.X
  89. 89. Mahla HR, Choudhary KB, Sharma R, Singh K. Variety CAZRI Moth-4. Indian J Genet Plant Breed. 2024;84(2):315–6.
  90. 90. Indian Council of Agricultural Research. ICAR annual report 2024–25. New Delhi: ICAR; 2025.
  91. 91. Center for Study of Science, Technology and Policy (CSTEP). Climate change projections and vulnerability assessment for Rajasthan. Bengaluru: CSTEP; 2024.
  92. 92. Sharma N, Thakur K, Zinta R, Mangal V, Dalamu, Tiwari JK, et al. Genome editing research initiatives and regulatory landscape of genome edited crops in India. Transgenic Res. 2025;34(1):13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11248-025-00432-1
  93. 93. Annicchiarico P, Nazzicari N, Wei Y, Pecetti L, Brummer EC. Genotyping-by-sequencing and its exploitation for forage and cool-season grain legume breeding. Front Plant Sci. 2017;8:679. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.00679
  94. 94. Razzaq A, Wani SH, Saleem F, Yu M, Zhou M, Shabala S. Rewilding crops for climate resilience: economic analysis and de novo domestication strategies. J Exp Bot. 2021;72(18):6123–39. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erab276
  95. 95. Chavhan RL, Jaybhaye SG, Hinge VR, Deshmukh AS, Shaikh US, Jadhav PK, et al. Emerging applications of gene editing technologies for the development of climate-resilient crops. Front Genome Ed. 2025;7:1524767. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgeed.2025.1524767
  96. 96. Khan T, Shah L, Khan S, Wani OA, Sheikh ZN, Afroza B, et al. Comprehensive review of multiomics applications and remediation of plant heavy metal toxicity. Stress Biol. 2025;5(1):58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44154-025-00233-w
  97. 97. Varshney RK, Kudapa H, Pazhamala L, Chitikineni A, Thudi M, Bohra A, et al. Translational genomics in agriculture: some examples in grain legumes. Crit Rev Plant Sci. 2015;34(1–3):169–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352689.2014.897909
  98. 98. Popoola JO, Aworunse OS, Ojuederie OB, Adewale BD, Ajani OC, Oyatomi OA, et al. The exploitation of orphan legumes for food, income and nutrition security in Sub-Saharan Africa. Front Plant Sci. 2022;13:782140. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.782140
  99. 99. Baloglu MC, Celik Altunoglu Y, Baloglu P, Yildiz AB, Türkölmez N, Özden Çiftçi Y. Gene-editing technologies and applications in legumes: progress, evolution and future prospects. Front Genet. 2022;13:859437. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2022.859437

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.