4.7 Article

QTL Mapping and Diurnal Transcriptome Analysis Identify Candidate Genes Regulating Brassica napus Flowering Time

Journal

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms22147559

Keywords

rapeseed; flowering time; QTL mapping; RNA-seq

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31671722]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

By using a DH rapeseed population, five consensus QTLs, including two major ones, related to flowering time were identified. Through RNA-seq and DEG analysis, four candidate genes associated with flowering time were discovered, laying a foundation for genetic regulation of rapeseed flowering time.
Timely flowering is important for seed formation and maximization of rapeseed (Brassica napus) yield. Here, we performed flowering-time quantitative trait loci (QTL) mapping using a double haploid (DH) population grown in three environments to study the genetic architecture. Brassica 60 K Illumina Infinium (TM) single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) array and simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers were used for genotyping of the DH population, and a high-density genetic linkage map was constructed. QTL analysis of flowering time from the three environments revealed five consensus QTLs, including two major QTLs. A major QTL located on chromosome A03 was detected specifically in the semi-winter rapeseed growing region, and the one on chromosome C08 was detected in all environments. Ribonucleic acid sequencing (RNA-seq) was performed on the parents' leaves at seven time-points in a day to determine differentially expressed genes (DEGs). The biological processes and pathways with significant enrichment of DEGs were obtained. The DEGs in the QTL intervals were analyzed, and four flowering time-related candidate genes were found. These results lay a foundation for the genetic regulation of rapeseed flowering time and create a rapeseed gene expression library for seven time-points in a day.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available