4.6 Article

Evaluation of rice wild relatives as a source of traits for adaptation to iron toxicity and enhanced grain quality

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 15, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223086

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. foundation fiat panis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Rice wild relatives (RWR) constitute an extended gene pool that can be tapped for the breeding of novel rice varieties adapted to abiotic stresses such as iron (Fe) toxicity. Therefore, we screened 75 Oryza genotypes including 16 domesticated O. sativa genotypes, one O. glaberrima, and 58 RWR representing 21 species, for tolerance to Fe toxicity. Plants were grown in a semi-artificial greenhouse setup, in which they were exposed either to control conditions, an Fe shock during the vegetative growth stage (acute treatment), or to a continuous moderately high Fe level (chronic treatment). In both stress treatments, foliar Fe concentrations were characteristic of Fe toxicity, and plants developed foliar stress symptoms, which were more pronounced in the chronic Fe stress especially toward the end of the growing season. Among the genotypes that produced seeds, only the chronic stress treatment significantly reduced yields due to increases in spikelet sterility. Moreover, a moderate but non-significant increase in grain Fe concentrations, and a significant increase in grain Zn concentrations were seen in chronic stress. Both domesticated rice and RWR exhibited substantial genotypic variation in their responses to Fe toxicity. Although no RWR strikingly outperformed domesticated rice in Fe toxic conditions, some genotypes scored highly in individual traits. Two O. meridionalis accessions were best in avoiding foliar symptom formation in acute Fe stress, while an O. rufipogon accession produced the highest grain yields in both chronic and acute Fe stress. In conclusion, this study provides the basis for using interspecific crosses for adapting rice to Fe toxicity.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available