4.7 Article

Mapping of homoeologous chromosome exchanges influencing quantitative trait variation in Brassica napus

Journal

PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY JOURNAL
Volume 15, Issue 11, Pages 1478-1489

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/pbi.12732

Keywords

Genome rearrangements; homoeologous exchange; genetic mapping; quantitative trait loci; single nucleotide polymorphism

Funding

  1. ERA-CAPS project Evo-Genapus 'Evolution of genomes: Structure-function relationships in the polyploid crop species Brassica napus' [SN 14/17-1]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Genomic rearrangements arising during polyploidization are an important source of genetic and phenotypic variation in the recent allopolyploid crop Brassica napus. Exchanges among homoeologous chromosomes, due to interhomoeologue pairing, and deletions without compensating homoeologous duplications are observed in both natural B.napus and synthetic B.napus. Rearrangements of large or small chromosome segments induce gene copy number variation (CNV) and can potentially cause phenotypic changes. Unfortunately, complex genome restructuring is difficult to deal with in linkage mapping studies. Here, we demonstrate how high-density genetic mapping with codominant, physically anchored SNP markers can detect segmental homoeologous exchanges (HE) as well as deletions and accurately link these to QTL. We validated rearrangements detected in genetic mapping data by whole-genome resequencing of parental lines along with cytogenetic analysis using fluorescence insitu hybridization with bacterial artificial chromosome probes (BAC-FISH) coupled with PCR using primers specific to the rearranged region. Using a well-known QTL region influencing seed quality traits as an example, we confirmed that HE underlies the trait variation in a DH population involving a synthetic B.napus trait donor, and succeeded in narrowing the QTL to a small defined interval that enables delineation of key candidate genes.

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