4.3 Article

Partial Dominance, Overdominance, Epistasis and QTL by Environment Interactions Contribute to Heterosis in Two Upland Cotton Hybrids

期刊

G3-GENES GENOMES GENETICS
卷 6, 期 3, 页码 499-507

出版社

GENETICS SOCIETY AMERICA
DOI: 10.1534/g3.115.025809

关键词

QTLs; heterosis; partial dominance; overdominace; epistasis; Upland cotton

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31171591]
  2. National High Technology Research and Development Program [2011AA10A102]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Based on two recombinant inbred line (RIL) populations, two corresponding backcross (BC) populations were constructed to elucidate the genetic basis of heterosis in Upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). The yield, and yield components, of these populations were evaluated in three environments. At the single-locus level, 78 and 66 quantitative trait loci (QTL) were detected using composite interval mapping in RIL and BC populations, respectively, and 29 QTL were identified based on mid-parental heterosis (MPH) data of two hybrids. Considering all traits together, a total of 50 (64.9%) QTL with partial dominance effect, and 27 (35.1%) QTL for overdominance effect were identified in two BC populations. At the two-locus level, 120 and 88 QTL with main effects (M-QTL), and 335 and 99 QTL involved in digenic interactions (E-QTL), were detected by inclusive composite interval mapping in RIL and BC populations, respectively. A large number of QTL by environment interactions (QEs) for M-QTL and E-QTL were detected in three environments. For most traits, average E-QTL explained a larger proportion of phenotypic variation than did M-QTL in two RIL populations and two BC populations. It was concluded that partial dominance, overdominance, epistasis, and QEs all contribute to heterosis in Upland cotton, and that partial dominance resulting from single loci and epistasis play a relatively more important role than other genetic effects in heterosis in Upland cotton.

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

4.3
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