4.6 Article

Detection of Fusarium head blight resistance QTLs using five populations of top-cross progeny derived from two-row x two-row crosses in barley

Journal

MOLECULAR BREEDING
Volume 22, Issue 4, Pages 517-526

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11032-008-9195-1

Keywords

barley; Fusarium head blight; Hordeum vulgare L.; scab; quantitative trait loci

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Fusarium head blight (FHB) resistance was evaluated in five recombinant inbred (RI) populations. The RI populations consisted of top-cross progeny derived from a diallel set of crosses. Each of five two-row barley lines differing in response to FHB were crossed with 'Harbin 2-row'. FHB severity was scored on an 11-point scale, where resistant = 0 and susceptible = 10, based on the 'cut-spike test'. Disease data were obtained for each population for 2 or 3 years. Linkage maps comprised of expressed sequence tag (EST) markers were developed for each population and used for quantitative trait locus (QTL) detection. Thirty two QTLs were detected using all data sets (individual populations and years). Thirteen QTLs were detected using averages across years; 10 of these were consistent across the individual year and average data sets. These QTLs clustered at 14 regions, with clusters on all chromosomes. At 11 of these clusters, Harbin 2-row contributed FHB resistance alleles. No QTLs were detected near the row type (vrs1) locus in any of the five RI populations, suggesting that the FHB resistance QTL in this region reported in two-row x six-row crosses may be pleiotropic effect of vrs1. QTL were coincident with the flowering type locus (cly1/Cly2) on chromosome 2H in every population. Some QTL x QTL interactions were significant, but these were smaller than QTL main effects. Considering the pleiotropic effect of spike morphology on FHB resistance, future FHB resistance mapping efforts in barley should focus on cross combinations in which alleles at vrs1 are not segregating.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available