| Literature DB >> 24948032 |
Berline Fopa Fomeju, Cyril Falentin, Gilles Lassalle, Maria J Manzanares-Dauleux, Régine Delourme1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Several major crop species are current or ancient polyploids. To better describe the genetic factors controlling traits of agronomic interest (QTL), it is necessary to understand the structural and functional organisation of these QTL regions in relation to genome duplication. We investigated quantitative resistance to the fungal disease stem canker in Brassica napus, a highly duplicated amphidiploid species, to assess the proportion of resistance QTL located at duplicated positions.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24948032 PMCID: PMC4082613 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2164-15-498
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Genomics ISSN: 1471-2164 Impact factor: 3.969
Figure 1Number of resistance-associated markers identified with three different linear models. A panel of 116 winter oilseed rape varieties was used for marker-resistance association analysis. The General Linear Model is a simple linear model, the K Compressed Mixed Linear Model (CMLM) includes the relatedness between individuals of the panel and the KP CML model includes the relatedness and structure of the panel. The number in italics below the model name indicates the total number of markers identified with that model. Marker-trait associations were identified with a type I error of 0.05.
Figure 2Regression of the expected –log (p value) on the observed –log (p value). A Q-Q plot was used to compare the distribution of observed associations (blue dots) with statistics expected under the null hypothesis of no associations (represented by the red line) for the three linear models: a General Linear model (A), K Compressed Mixed Linear model (B) and a KP Compressed Mixed Linear model (C). The negative log10(p) was used instead of the p value so that the most significant markers are located at the top right corner of the graphs. A distribution close to the null hypothesis for most of the markers indicated a good control for false positives since it is expected that only a small number of tested markers are truly associated with the resistance.
Figure 3Genome-wide association analysis of resistance to stem canker in a population of 116 oilseed rape cultivars. The K Compressed Mixed Linear model (A) takes into account the kinship between the varieties while the KP Compressed Mixed Linear model (B) takes into account the kinship and the structure of the varieties within the panel. Negative log10 of p-values were plotted against the genetic distance in cM on the 19 B. napus linkage groups (from 1 to 10: LGs A01 to A10; from 11 to 19: LGs C01 to C09). The horizontal line indicates the genome-wide association significance threshold.
Distribution of genomic regions associated to stem canker resistance in relation to the organisation of duplicated blocks in the genome
| Regions with resistance associated markers | Regions with resistance associated markers on only one copy of a block | Regions with resistance associated markers on at least two copies of a block | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | Same duplicated regions | Neighbouring duplicated regions | |||
| Number of blocks | 23 | 9 | 14 | 6 | 8 |
| Number of genomic regions with resistance associated markers | 64 | 9 | 55 | 28 | 27 |
| Total number of duplications of the blocks in | 124 | 40 | 84 | 34 | 50 |
| Percentage of duplications with resistance associated markers | 51.6 | 22.5 | 65.5 | 82.3 | 54.0 |
Resistance-associated markers detected in strictly duplicated regions
| AK block | LG | SNP markers | Interval size (cM) | Marker density in the interval | Linkage disequilibrium | A. | Co-localisation of RAM with previously detected QTL (number of RAM) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total SNP | Number of RAM | Mean r 2 | Percentage of r 2 value > 0.2 | ||||||
| E | A2 | 53 | 3 | 7.90 | 0.15 | 0.28 | 40.13 | AT1G65980-AT1G70790 | 3 |
| A7 | 97 | 27 | 40.00 | 0.41 | 0.10 | 13.57 | AT1G67300-AT1G80680 | 0 | |
| C2 | 17 | 2 | 4.70 | 0.28 | 0.53 | 51.37 | AT1G68370-AT1G68410 | 0 | |
| C6 | 92 | 16 | 37.90 | 0.41 | 0.24 | 37.11 | AT1G67230-AT1G74920 | 12 | |
| J | A3 | 29 | 2 | 9.60 | 0.33 | 0.18 | 29.56 | AT2G33830-AT2G35680 | 2 |
| A4 | 55 | 6 | 28.90 | 0.53 | 0.11 | 15.63 | AT2G32810-AT2G43230 and AT3G58500.1 | 1 | |
| A5 | 97 | 11 | 46.20 | 0.48 | 0.11 | 16.07 | AT2G32650-AT2G42680 | 4 | |
| C3 | 49 | 2 | 12.70 | 0.26 | 0.14 | 19.98 | AT2G38570 | 2 | |
| C4a | 45 | 10 | 50.80 | 1.13 | 0.08 | 9.19 | AT2G36490-AT2G46680.1 | 9 | |
| C4b | 34 | 3 | 24.80 | 0.73 | 0.16 | 28.70 | AT2G35500-AT2G40570 | 0 | |
| R | A2 | 27 | 2 | 26.70 | 0.99 | 0.11 | 10.83 | AT5G17770-AT5G19360 | 2 |
| A3 | 53 | 5 | 29.30 | 0.55 | 0.20 | 29.68 | AT5G02050.1-AT5G15150 and AT5G20890 | 0 | |
| A10 | 92 | 9 | 47.40 | 0.52 | 0.10 | 13.90 | AT5G15950-AT5G20970 | 0 | |
| C3 | 46 | 4 | 29.40 | 0.64 | 0.13 | 21.37 | AT5G17790-AT5G18960 | 1 | |
| C9 | 20 | 3 | 61.70 | 3.09 | 0.11 | 11.58 | AT5G13850-AT5G13870 | 0 | |
| T | A8 | 5 | 2 | 2.20 | 0.55 | 0.73 | 100.00 | AT4G14230.1-AT4G14320 | 1 |
| C4 | 4 | 4 | 0.80 | 0.20 | 0.53 | 100.00 | AT4G13780-AT5G14330 | 0 | |
| U | A1 | 80 | 5 | 60.30 | 0.75 | 0.07 | 8.58 | AT4G28230-AT4G28380 | 5 |
| A3 | 64 | 4 | 20.10 | 0.31 | 0.09 | 10.66 | AT4G18050-AT4G18197 | 2 | |
| A8 | 36 | 16 | 22.90 | 0.64 | 0.21 | 35.89 | AT4G25610-AT4G34135 | 16 | |
| C1 | 60 | 1 | 60.70 | 1.01 | 0.09 | 10.01 | AT4G33330 | 1 | |
| C3 | 25 | 6 | 24.10 | 0.96 | 0.23 | 33.54 | AT4G20390-AT4G34450 | 4 | |
| C7 | 54 | 1 | 26.70 | 0.49 | 0.09 | 13.07 | AT4G18050.1 | 1 | |
| W | A2 | 65 | 39 | 14.80 | 0.23 | 0.29 | 52.77 | AT5G49810-AT5G59840 | 0 |
| A3 | 17 | 2 | 12.80 | 0.75 | 0.20 | 28.68 | AT5G53140-AT5G60220 | 2 | |
| A10 | 29 | 1 | 5.10 | 0.18 | 0.18 | 27.59 | AT5G53530 | 0 | |
| C2 | 21 | 4 | 10.00 | 0.48 | 0.14 | 23.33 | AT5G54690-AT5G57580 | 0 | |
| C3 | 43 | 2 | 10.00 | 0.23 | 0.20 | 34.44 | AT5G50920 | 0 | |
For each duplicated regions on which resistance-associated markers (RAM) were identified, information is provided about the number and proportion (in parentheses) of resistance-associated markers, the size of the intervals with RAM, the marker density and the linkage disequilibrium in the interval. The correspondence of resistance-associated markers with A. thaliana gene intervals is also shown. The co-localisation of resistance-associated markers with previously identified QTL (in a double haploid and/or a connected population also from our laboratory) is indicated.
Figure 4Distribution of resistance-associated markers located in strictly duplicated regions of the genome. The coloured segments correspond to the six duplicated blocks, as defined by Schranz et al. [17], on which associated markers were identified in regions collinear to the same A. thaliana sequence interval. All the known duplications of these six blocks in the B. napus genome are shown. The number of resistance-associated markers identified on each block is indicated in parenthesis. The absence of a number indicates that no association was identified in the region. The resistance QTL identified in bi-parental or connected populations by linkage mapping on the copies of the 6 duplicated blocks are represented by stars on the right of the linkage groups. Orange stars indicate co-localisation of associated markers and previously identified QTL, black stars indicate loci where QTL were detected but where no resistance associated marker was identified. Linkage groups are organized according to the colinearity between the A and C genomes. The orientation of the arrows indicates the orientation of the colinearity between the genomic regions.