4.5 Article

Map- vs. homology-based cloning for the recessive gene ol-2 conferring resistance to tomato powdery mildew

Journal

EUPHYTICA
Volume 162, Issue 1, Pages 91-98

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10681-007-9570-8

Keywords

fluorescence in situ hybridization; homology-based cloning; integrated linkage map; map-based cloning; Oidium neolycopersici; Solanum lycopersicum

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The recessive gene ol-2 confers papilla-associated and race-non-specific resistance to tomato powdery mildew caused by Oidium neolycopersici. In order to facilitate marker assisted selection (MAS) in practical breeding programmes, we identified two simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers and one cleaved amplified polymorphic sequence (CAPS) marker which are linked to the resistance locus and co-dominantly inherited. Aiming to provide a base for ol-2 positional cloning, we used a large segregating F(2) population to merge these markers with all the ol-2 linked amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP (R)) markers previously identified in an integrated genetic map. By screening a tomato bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) library, we detected two BAC clones containing two expressed sequence tags (ESTs) homologous to the gene mlo, responsible for powdery mildew resistance in barley, as well as an ol-2-linked marker. Chromosomal mapping by Fluorescence in situ Hybridization (FISH) revealed major signals of the two BAC DNAs in the pericentromeric heterochromatin of the short arm of chromosome 4, in the same region where the ol-2 gene was previously mapped. The genetic and cytogenetic co-localisation between ol-2 and tomato mlo-homologue(s), in addition to the similarity of ol-2 and mlo resistances for both genetic and phytopathological characteristics, suggests that ol-2 is likely a mlo-homologue. Thus, a homology-based cloning approach could be more suitable than positional cloning for ol-2 isolation.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available