4.7 Article

Comparative QTL analysis of root lesion nematode resistance in barley

期刊

THEORETICAL AND APPLIED GENETICS
卷 127, 期 6, 页码 1399-1407

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00122-014-2307-x

关键词

-

资金

  1. BLE [28-1-41.030-06]
  2. Egyptian Ministry of Higher Education
  3. Faculty of Agriculture, Kafrelsheikh University, Egypt

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study demonstrates for the first time that resistance to different root lesion nematodes ( P. neglectus and P. penetrans ) is controlled by a common QTL. A major resistance QTL ( Rlnnp6H ) has been mapped to chromosome 6H using two independent barley populations. Root lesion nematodes (Pratylenchus spp.) are important pests in cereal production worldwide. We selected two doubled haploid populations of barley (Igri x Franka and Uschi x HHOR 3073) and infected them with Pratylenchus penetrans and Pratylenchus neglectus. Nematode multiplication rates were measured 7 or 10 weeks after infection. In both populations, continuous phenotypic variations for nematode multiplication rates were detected indicating a quantitative inheritance of resistance. In the Igri x Franka population, four P. penetrans resistance QTLs were mapped with 857 molecular markers on four linkage groups (2H, 5H, 6H and 7H). In the Uschi x HHOR 3073 population, eleven resistance QTLs (P. penetrans and P. neglectus) were mapped with 646 molecular markers on linkage groups 1H, 3H, 4H, 5H, 6H and 7H. A major resistance QTL named Rlnnp6H (LOD score 6.42-11.19) with a large phenotypic effect (27.5-36.6 %) for both pests was mapped in both populations to chromosome 6H. Another resistance QTL for both pests was mapped on linkage group 5H (Igri x Franka population). These data provide first evidence for common resistance mechanisms against different root lesion nematode species. The molecular markers are a powerful tool for the selection of resistant barley lines among segregating populations because resistance tests are time consuming and laborious.

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

4.7
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