4.6 Article

Identification and validation of RAPD and SCAR markers linked to the gene Er3 conferring resistance to Erysiphe pisi DC in pea

期刊

MOLECULAR BREEDING
卷 22, 期 2, 页码 193-200

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11032-008-9166-6

关键词

Erysiphe pisi; marker assisted selection; Pisum fulvum; Pisum sativum; powdery mildew; resistance

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Three genes, er1, er2 and Er3, conferring resistance to powdery mildew (Erysiphe pisi) in pea have been described so far. Because single gene-controlled resistance tends to be overcome by evolution of pathogen virulence, accumulation of several resistance genes into a single cultivar should enhance the durability of the resistance. Molecular markers linked to genes controlling resistance to E. pisi may facilitate gene pyramiding in pea breeding programs. Molecular markers linked to er1 and er2 are available. In the present study, molecular markers linked to Er3 have been obtained. A segregating F-2 population derived from the cross between a breeding line carrying the Er3 gene, and the susceptible cultivar 'Messire' was developed and genotyped. Bulk Segregant Analysis (BSA) was used to identify Random Amplified Polymorphic DNA (RAPD) markers linked to Er3. Four RAPD markers linked in coupling phase (OPW04_637, OPC04_640, OPF14_1103, and OPAH06_539) and two in repulsion phase (OPAB01_874 and OPAG05_1240), were identified. Two of these, flanking Er3, were converted to Sequence Characterized Amplified Region (SCAR) markers. The SCAR marker SCW4(637) co-segregated with the resistant gene, allowing the detection of all the resistant individuals. The SCAR marker SCAB1(874), in repulsion phase with Er3, was located at 2.8 cM from the gene and, in combination with SCW4(637), was capable to distinguish homozygous resistant individuals from heterozygous with a high efficiency. In addition, the validation for polymorphism in different genetic backgrounds and advanced breeding material confirmed the utility of both markers in marker-assisted selection.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据