4.7 Article

Mapping of a gene responsible for the difference in amylopectin structure between japonica-type and indica-type rice varieties

期刊

THEORETICAL AND APPLIED GENETICS
卷 104, 期 1, 页码 1-8

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s001220200000

关键词

indica rice; japonica rice; amylopectin; starch; starch synthase

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The present investigation revealed that the alk and gel(t) genes, which cause the differences between a japonica rice variety Nipponbare and an indica rice variety Kasalath in terms of the disintegration of endosperm starch granules in alkali solution and their gelatinisation in a 4 M urea solution, respectively, cosegregated, in backcross inbred lines derived from a cross between the two varieties. The segregation pattern of the profile for amylopectin chain-length, which was distinguished by enrichment in short chains of DPless than or equal toII and depletion in intermediate-size chains of 12less than or equal toDPless than or equal to24 in japonica as compared with indica, was exactly the same as those of the above physico-chemical properties of starch granules, and the gene was designated as acl(t). Gene-mapping analysis showed that the starch synthase Ha (SSIIa) gene is located at the alk locus on chromosome 6 in the rice genome. These results lead us to the possibility that different alleles of the SSIIa gene are responsible for differences in amylopectin structure between the two varieties, in that SSIIa plays a distinct role in the elongation of short chains within clusters (A+B-1 chains) of amylopectin. It is proposed that the activity of SSIIa in japonica rice is reduced in amount or functional capacity relative to the activity of this enzyme in indica rice. This, in turn, would explain why starch from japonica rice has a lower gelatinisation temperature than starch from indica rice and is more susceptible to disintegration in alkali or urea. The evidence for this hypothesis is that the alk(t), gel(t), acl(t) and SSIIa genes all map to the same locus.

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