4.7 Article

Bigenic epistasis between QTLs for heading date in rice analyzed using single segment substitution lines

Journal

FIELD CROPS RESEARCH
Volume 178, Issue -, Pages 16-25

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.fcr.2015.03.020

Keywords

Epistasis; Heading date; QTL-by-environment interaction; Rice; Single segment substitution lines

Categories

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31461143014]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Accumulating evidences suggested that epistasis, interactions between genes, is an important component of the genetic determination of quantitative traits. In present study, four F-2 populations derived from pair wise crosses between 5 single segment substitution lines in the HJX74 background, harboring single QTL for heading date including Hd3a, RFT1 OsFTL13, OsMADS50(IR64) and OsMADS50(Lemant) were used to characterize the epistasis between QTLs and QTL-by-environment interaction (QEI). Epistasis was found to be present between Hd3a and OsMADS50(IR64), Hd3a and OsMADS50(Lemmt), and RFT1 and OsMADS50(IR64). The interaction between Hd3a and OsFTL13 was not detected by single environment analysis but detected by across-environment combined analysis. Genetic analysis using a bigenic model showed that the additive and dominant effects were more important than the overall epistatic effects for all pairs of QTLs. The additive-by-additive and additive-by-dominant effects were more important than the dominant-by-dominant effect. QEIs were significant for Hd3a, RFT1, OsMADS50(IR64) and OsMADS50(Lemont) but not for OsFTL13. The additive-by-environment and dominant-by-environment interaction effects were significant while the epistasis-by-environment interaction was not. Utilization of the known major QTLs for heading date in breeding through gene pyramiding needs take epistasis into consideration. (c) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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