| Literature DB >> 25112204 |
Maria Buerstmayr1, Lydia Matiasch, Fabio Mascher, Gyula Vida, Marianna Ittu, Olivier Robert, Sarah Holdgate, Kerstin Flath, Anton Neumayer, Hermann Buerstmayr.
Abstract
KEY MESSAGE: We detected several, most likely novel QTL for adult plant resistance to rusts. Notably three QTL improved resistance to leaf rust and stripe rust simultaneously indicating broad spectrum resistance QTL. The rusts of wheat (Puccinia spp.) are destructive fungal wheat diseases. The deployment of resistant cultivars plays a central role in integrated rust disease management. Durability of resistance would be preferred, but is difficult to analyse. The Austrian winter wheat cultivar Capo was released in the 1989 and grown on a large acreage during more than two decades and maintained a good level of quantitative leaf rust and stripe rust resistance. Two bi-parental mapping populations: Capo × Arina and Capo × Furore were tested in multiple environments for severity of leaf rust and stripe rust at the adult plant stage in replicated field experiments. Quantitative trait loci associated with leaf rust and stripe rust severity were mapped using DArT and SSR markers. Five QTL were detected in multiple environments associated with resistance to leaf rust designated as QLr.ifa-2AL, QLr.ifa-2BL, QLr.ifa-2BS, QLr.ifa-3BS, and QLr.ifa-5BL, and five for resistance to stripe rust QYr.ifa-2AL, QYr.ifa-2BL, QYr.ifa-3AS, QYr.ifa-3BS, and QYr.ifa-5A. For all QTL apart from two (QYr.ifa-3AS, QLr.ifa-5BL) Capo contributed the resistance improving allele. The leaf rust and stripe rust resistance QTL on 2AL, 2BL and 3BS mapped to the same chromosome positions, indicating either closely linked genes or pleiotropic gene action. These three multiple disease resistance QTL (QLr.ifa-2AL/QYr.ifa-2AL, QLr.ifa.2BL/QYr.ifa-2BL, QLr.ifa-3BS/QYr.ifa.3BS) potentially contribute novel resistance sources for stripe rust and leaf rust. The long-lasting resistance of Capo apparently rests upon a combination of several genes. The described germplasm, QTL and markers are applicable for simultaneous resistance improvement against leaf rust and stripe rust.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25112204 PMCID: PMC4145209 DOI: 10.1007/s00122-014-2357-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Theor Appl Genet ISSN: 0040-5752 Impact factor: 5.699
Fig. 1Phenotypic variation in leaf rust and stripe rust severity of the averaged means across all experiments for population Capo × Arina (CA) and Capo × Furore (CF). Frequency distribution of RILs for YrS (%) and LrS (%). Parental scores Capo (C), Arina (A), Furore (F) are indicated by arrows
Means of parents, mean, minimum and maximum values of populations, least significant differences at α < 0.05 (LSD) of stripe rust and leaf rust severity
| Trait | Site | Country | Year | Parents | Mean | Min | Max | LSD5% | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stripe rust severity (%) | |||||||||
| Population Capo × Furore | Capo | Furore | |||||||
| Overall mean | 0.3 | 38.5 | 9.5 | 0 | 49 | 5.6 | |||
| Reichersberg | AT | 2009 | 0 | 7.6 | 2.8 | 0 | 18 | 2.1 | |
| Reichersberg | AT | 2010 | 0 | 17.7 | 4.7 | 0 | 26 | 2.3 | |
| Tulln | AT | 2010 | 0.1 | 53.0 | 7.1 | 0 | 65 | 7.4 | |
| Tulln | AT | 2011 | 0 | 45.0 | 7.9 | 0 | 70 | 6.2 | |
| Atzenbrugg | AT | 2012 | 0.75 | 70.0 | 20.1 | 0 | 75 | 8.1 | |
| Changins | CH | 2012 | 0.75 | 37.5 | 16.5 | 0 | 55 | 4.9 | |
| Cambridgea | GB | 2012 | 30 | 65.0 | 43.1 | 2.5 | 80 | 9.3 | |
| Ickletona | GB | 2012 | 0 | 50 | 15.7 | 0 | 63 | 7.1 | |
| Population Capo × Arina | Capo | Arina | |||||||
| Overall mean | 0.1 | 24.0 | 16.0 | 0 | 65 | 5.5 | |||
| Tulln | AT | 2011 | 0 | 20.0 | 10.9 | 0 | 85 | 5.2 | |
| Atzenbrugg | AT | 2012 | 0 | 65.0 | 29.3 | 0 | 90 | 6.9 | |
| Reichersberg | AT | 2012 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 2.9 | 0 | 14 | 1.5 | |
| Cappelle | FR | 2012 | 0 | 10.0 | 19.9 | 0 | 75 | 5.2 | |
| Changins | CH | 2012 | 0 | 25.0 | 15.1 | 0 | 73 | 7.1 | |
| Cambridgea | GB | 2012 | 30 | 45.0 | 33.0 | 12.5 | 55 | 11.5 | |
| Ickletona | GB | 2012 | 0 | 0.1 | 3.0 | 0 | 30 | 5.4 | |
| Leaf rust severity (%) | |||||||||
| Population Capo × Furore | Capo | Furore | |||||||
| Overall mean | 25.5 | 41.6 | 34.7 | 6.5 | 53 | 7.5 | |||
| Tulln | AT | 2004 | 7.0 | 33.3 | 22.0 | 1 | 45 | 6.8 | |
| Probstdorf | AT | 2006 | 47.5 | 57.5 | 53.5 | 4 | 80 | 5.5 | |
| Tulln | AT | 2007 | 20.0 | 28.0 | 24.2 | 5 | 50 | 10.0 | |
| Tulln | AT | 2008 | 27.5 | 47.5 | 38.8 | 4 | 60 | 7.2 | |
| Population Capo × Arina | Capo | Arina | |||||||
| Overall mean | 18.9 | 67.7 | 43.2 | 4 | 70 | 8.7 | |||
| Martonvásár | HU | 2008 | 20.0 | 90.0 | 60.1 | 0 | 100 | 11.6 | |
| Fundulea | RO | 2008 | 3.0 | 90.0 | 50.7 | 0 | 100 | - | |
| Schmida | AT | 2008 | 17.3 | 53.8 | 31.8 | 0 | 60 | 11.2 | |
| Probstdorf | AT | 2008 | 47.5 | 58.8 | 51.6 | 30 | 65 | 4.0 | |
| Rust | AT | 2008 | 16.9 | 60.0 | 45.3 | 5 | 70 | 9.4 | |
| Tulln | AT | 2008 | 3.0 | 26.5 | 16.7 | 1 | 40 | 5.4 | |
| Rust | AT | 2009 | 21.3 | 82.5 | 46.7 | 2 | 90 | 11.7 | |
| Tulln | AT | 2009 | 21.9 | 80.0 | 44.7 | 3 | 90 | 10.5 | |
asubset of 31 lines, data not included in overall mean
Locations and estimates of QTL for leaf rust and stripe rust severity measured by the percentage of infected leaf area (LrS, YrS) using multiple QTL mapping in population Capo × Arina
| QTLd | Markers | Stripe rust severity | Leaf rust severity | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Site | Tulln | Atzen-brugg | Reichers-berg | Cap-pelle | Changins | Mean over all exps | Fun-dulea | Marton-vásár | Probst-dorf | Schmida | Rust | Tulln | Rust | Tulln | Mean over all exps | |||
| Country | AT | AT | AT | FR | CH | RO | HU | AT | AT | AT | AT | AT | AT | |||||
| Year | 2011 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2012 | 2006 | 2008 | 2008 | 2008 | 2008 | 2008 | 2009 | 2009 | |||||
|
| 1BS |
| LOD | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 8.9 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Closest |
| PVa | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 11.4 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
| 1BL |
| Addb | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 8.9 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
|
| Proximal |
| LODc | 10.6 | 16.6 | 6.1 | 5.1 | 4.1 | 11.9 | 3.6 | 11.4 | 7.6 | 9.0 | 5.2 | 8.9 | 10.9 | 13.4 | 13.6 |
| Closest |
| PVa | 14.1 | 26.8 | 10.1 | 7.7 | 7.2 | 16.3 | 5.5 | 15.2 | 15.8 | 17.8 | 10.2 | 20.1 | 22.7 | 25.7 | 22.8 | |
| Distal |
| Addb | 5.2 | 13.6 | 1.0 | 6.6 | 4.3 | 6.0 | 5.5 | 10.2 | 2.5 | 6.4 | 5.1 | 5.4 | 12.0 | 12.9 | 7.4 | |
|
| Proximal |
| LODc | – | – | – | – | – | – | 5.6 | 13.9 | 3.7 | 4.1 | 8.1 | 4.3 | 6.1 | 4.3 | 8.8 |
| Closest |
| PVa | – | – | – | – | – | – | 8.3 | 19.2 | 7.2 | 7.6 | 16.4 | 9.1 | 11.7 | 7.2 | 13.8 | |
| Distal |
| Addb | – | – | – | – | – | – | 6.7 | 11.6 | 1.6 | 4.0 | 6.0 | 3.4 | 8.2 | 6.5 | 5.7 | |
|
| Proximal |
| LODc | 12.8 | 10.1 | 11.0 | 8.3 | 5.6 | 12.2 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Closest |
| PVa | 17.5 | 14.8 | 19.6 | 13.1 | 10.1 | 16.8 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
| Distal |
| Addb | 6.5 | 10.7 | 1.4 | 7.5 | 4.0 | 6.1 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
|
| Proximal |
| LODc | – | – | – | – | – | – | 15.7 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Closest |
| PVa | – | – | – | – | – | – | 28.5 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
| Distal |
| Addb | – | – | – | – | – | – | 11.8 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
|
| Proximal |
| LODc | 6.3 | – | 3.4 | 4.5 | – | 4.5 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Closest |
| PVa | 7.8 | – | 5.4 | 6.7 | – | 5.6 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
| Distal |
| Addb | −5.2 | −0.8 | - 6.9 | – | −4.0 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | ||
| Proximal |
| LODc | 8.8 | 5.1 |
| 8.8 | 7.9 | 9.2 | 3.4 | 4.4 | – |
| 3.0 | – | – |
| 4.6 |
| Closest |
| PVa | 11.3 | 7.0 |
| 13.9 | 14.7 | 12.1 | 5.2 | 5.2 | – |
| 5.7 | – | – |
| 6.8 | |
| Distal |
| Addb | 4.1 | 6.1 |
| 6.7 | 5.5 | 4.5 | 4.9 | 5.8 | – |
| 3.6 | – | – |
| 4.0 | |
|
| Proximal |
| LODc | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 3.7 | – | 3.8 | – | – | 3.1 | 3.6 | 5.0 |
| Closest |
| PVa | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 4.5 | – | 7.0 | – | – | 5.7 | 6.0 | 7.4 | |
| Distal |
| Addb | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | −5.4 | – | −3.9 | – | – | −5.8 | −6.4 | −4.4 | |
| LOD of the full model | LOD | 31.8 | 27.6 | 21.2 | 24.2 | 17.8 | 31.3 | 22.9 | 32.2 | 9.4 | 15.8 | 15.1 | 11.2 | 16.1 | 19.9 | 24.7 | ||
| Total variance explained (%) | PVa | 57.5 | 52.4 | 43.5 | 47.9 | 38.2 | 56.9 | 48.2 | 58.4 | 22.4 | 34.7 | 34.0 | 26.0 | 36.1 | 41.8 | 48.6 | ||
| Heritability/repeatability |
| 0.95g | 0.94g | 0.83g | 0.90g | 0.78g | 0.93f | –h | 0.86g | 0.68g | 0.60g | 0.67g | 0.79g | 0.89g | 0.87g | 0.89f | ||
aSignificance codes P: 0 < ‘standard’ < 0.001 < ‘italic’ < 0.01; non-significant data are not presented
bPercentage of phenotypic variance explained by the QTL
cPositive additive effects denote LrS/YrS-reducing effect of the Capo allele; QTL effect was estimated as the difference in the mean between the two homozygous QTL genotypes of the untransformed data
dQTL name described by rust disease and chromosome or chromosome arm
fBroad-sense heritability
gRepeatability
hNot estimated
Locations and estimates of QTL for leaf rust and stripe rust severity measured by the percentage of infected leaf area (LrS, YrS) using multiple QTL mapping in population Capo × Furore
| dQTLand QTL:QTL interaction | Markers | Stripe rust severity | Leaf rust severity | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Site | Reichers-berg | Reichers-berg | Tulln | Tulln | Atzen-brugg | Changins | Mean over all exps | Tulln | Probst-dorf | Tulln | Tulln | Mean over all exps | |||
| Country | AT | AT | AT | AT | AT | CH | AT | AT | AT | AT | |||||
| Year | 2009 | 2010 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2012 | 2004 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | |||||
|
| Proximal |
| LODa | 31.1 | 37.0 | 24.7 | 29.0 | 27.1 | 35.0 | 45.4 | 5.4 | 5.7 | – | 5.8 | 6.8 |
| Closest |
| PV %b | 47.7 | 58.0 | 37.0 | 40.2 | 39.4 | 43.8 | 54.5 | 8.8 | 8.7 | – | 11.0 | 10.5 | |
| Distal |
| Addc | 2.3 | 4.4 | 6.9e | 7.6e | 14.9 | 10.3 | 7.7 | 3.3 | 3.9 | – | 4.2 | 3.2 | |
|
| Proximal |
| LODa | 13.8 | 10.2 | 24.6 | 27.2 | 6.3 | 29.7 | 27.8 | 17.6 | 21.2 | 4.2 | 11.8 | 20.2 |
| Closest |
| PV %b | 16.6 | 10.9 | 36.8 | 36.8 | 6.8 | 34.5 | 25.8 | 34.2 | 40.1 | 10.3 | 24.3 | 37.6 | |
| Distal |
| Addc | 1.1 | 1.6 | 7.9e | 8.3e | 4.4 | 7.5 | 4.6 | 6.4 | 8.2 | 3.2 | 6.1 | 5.9 | |
|
| Proximal | barc117 | LODa | 2.7 | – | – | 5.3 | 16.1 |
| 10.3 | – | – | – | – | – |
| Closest |
| PV %b | 2.8 | – | – | 5.3 | 20.0 |
| 7.4 | – | – | – | – | – | |
| Distal |
| Addc | 0.8 | – | – | 3.3 | 10.4 |
| 3.1 | – | – | – | – | – | |
|
| wPt-6643:wPt-10192 | LODa | – | – | 9.8 | 9.3 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
| PV %b | – | – | 11.9 | 9.8 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | |||
| LOD of the full model | LOD | 36.8 | 39.4 | 34.1 | 39.5 | 36.6 | 46.8 | 54.5 | 20.4 | 23.3 | 4.2 | 14.9 | 23.0 | ||
| Total variance explained (%) | PV %b | 61.4 | 63.9 | 58.6 | 64.0 | 61.2 | 70.2 | 75.6 | 41.2 | 45.3 | 10.3 | 32.0 | 45.3 | ||
| Heritability/repeatability |
| 0.77g | 0.87g | 0.80g | 0.89g | 0.89g | 0.87g | 0.93f | 0.72g | 0.88g | 0.34g | 0.77g | 0.84f | ||
aSignificance codes P: 0 < ‘standard’ < 0.001 < ‘italic’ < 0.01; non-significant data are not presented
bPercentage of phenotypic variance explained by the QTL
cPositive additive effects denote LrS/YrS-reducing effect of the Capo allele; QTL effect was estimated as the difference in the mean between the two homozygous QTL genotypes of the untransformed data
dQTL name described by rust disease and chromosome or chromosome arm
eEstimated single QTL effect and QTL by QTL interaction effect not unambiguously distinguishable
fBroad-sense heritability
gRepeatability
Fig. 2Maps of linkage groups harbouring QTL identified in multiple experiments. QTL for stipe rust severity (YrS) and leaf rust severity (LrS) are determined by the MQM model. LOD profiles obtained from the averaged mean of all experiments are given on the right. Bars of the QTL support interval for the respective experiments are on the left. Bar size indicates a LOD decrease of 1.5 from maximum LOD. The dashed lines represent the LOD 3 value
Fig. 3Boxplot of QTL effects for QTL identified in multiple experiments. Genotypes were classified by allele status of the closest markers to the corresponding QTL. Percentage of infected leaf area of stripe rust (YrS) and leaf rust (LrS) are based on average mean values across experiments. Medians are indicated by solid lines
Fig. 4Two-way interaction plots between QYr.ifa-2BL and QYr.ifa-3BS for each genotypic allele combination of Capo (C) and Furore (F). The phenotypic means are plotted, with error bars at ±1 SE