| Literature DB >> 26283631 |
Cléa Houel1,2, Ratthaphon Chatbanyong3,4, Agnès Doligez5, Markus Rienth6,7,8,9, Serena Foria10, Nathalie Luchaire11,12, Catherine Roux13, Angélique Adivèze14, Gilbert Lopez15, Marc Farnos16, Anne Pellegrino17, Patrice This18, Charles Romieu19, Laurent Torregrosa20.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The increasing temperature associated with climate change impacts grapevine phenology and development with critical effects on grape yield and composition. Plant breeding has the potential to deliver new cultivars with stable yield and quality under warmer climate conditions, but this requires the identification of stable genetic determinants. This study tested the potentialities of the microvine to boost genetics in grapevine. A mapping population of 129 microvines derived from Picovine x Ugni Blanc flb, was genotyped with the Illumina® 18 K SNP (Single Nucleotide Polymorphism) chip. Forty-three vegetative and reproductive traits were phenotyped outdoors over four cropping cycles, and a subset of 22 traits over two cropping cycles in growth rooms with two contrasted temperatures, in order to map stable QTLs (Quantitative Trait Loci).Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26283631 PMCID: PMC4539925 DOI: 10.1186/s12870-015-0588-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Plant Biol ISSN: 1471-2229 Impact factor: 4.215
Trait abbreviations and descriptions (units, years and growing conditions)
| Environments | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Greenhouse | Outdoors | Temperature experiments | |||||||||||
| 2011 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2013 | 2014 | |||||||
| Trait | Abreviation | Method | Hot | Cool | Hot | Cool | |||||||
| Vegetative | Budburst time (cumulated GDD after the 15th of March) | BB | calculated | X | X | X | |||||||
| Phyllochron (GDD/leaf) | PHY | calculated | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | ||||
| Leaf area (cm2/leaf) | LA | calculated | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | |||
| Leaf mass per area (mg/cm2) | LMA | measured | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | ||||
| Internode length (mm) | IL | calculated | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | |||
| Reproductive | Number of pre-formed inflorescences in winter buds per plant | NBI | measured | X | X | X | X | ||||||
| Green lag phase | Position of first pre-formed inflorescence | PBI | measured | X | X | X | |||||||
| Period from inflorescence appearance to 50 % flowering (days) | PIF | calculated | X | X | |||||||||
| Period from 50 % flowering to 50 % | PFV | calculated | X | X | |||||||||
| Berry weight (g) | BWG | measured | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | ||||
| Citrate (mEq/kg.FW) | CiG | measured | X | X | X | X | |||||||
| Malate (mEq/kg.FW) | MaG | measured | X | X | X | X | X | ||||||
| Tartrate (mEq/kg.FW) | TaG | measured | X | X | X | X | X | ||||||
| Total acids (mEq/kg.FW) | ToAG | calculated | X | X | X | X | X | ||||||
| Malate/tartrate ratio | MTG | calculated | X | X | X | X | X | ||||||
| Malate/total acids ratio | MOG | calculated | X | X | X | X | |||||||
| Tartrate/total acids ratio | TOG | calculated | X | X | X | X | |||||||
| Citrate/total acids ratio | COG | calculated | X | X | X | X | |||||||
| Glucose (mM/kg.FW) | GuG | measured | X | X | X | X | |||||||
| Fructose (mM/kg.FW) | FuG | calculated | X | X | X | X | |||||||
| Total sugars (mM/kg.FW) | ToSG | calculated | X | X | X | X | |||||||
| Glucose/fructose ratio | GFG | calculated | X | X | X | X | |||||||
| Potassium (mM/kg.FW) | KG | measured | X | X | X | X | X | X | |||||
| Total acids?+?total sugars?+?potassium (mM/Kg.FW) | ASKG | calculated | X | X | X | X | |||||||
| Maturity stage | Berry weight (g) | BWM | measured | X | X | X | |||||||
| Number of berries per cluster | NB | measured | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | |||
| Number of clusters per ten phytomers | NC | measured | X | X | X | X | |||||||
| Number of seeds per berry | NS | measured | X | X | X | X | |||||||
| Seed weight (mg) | SW | measured | X | X | |||||||||
| Citrate (mEq/kg.FW) | CiM | measured | X | X | |||||||||
| Malate (mEq/kg.FW) | MaM | measured | X | X | |||||||||
| Tartrate (mEq/kg.FW) | TaM | measured | X | X | |||||||||
| Total acids (mEq/kg.FW) | ToAM | calculated | X | X | |||||||||
| Malate/tartrate ratio | MTM | calculated | X | X | |||||||||
| Malate/total acids ratio | MOM | calculated | X | X | |||||||||
| Tartrate/total acids ratio | TOM | calculated | X | X | |||||||||
| Citrate/total acids ratio | COM | calculated | X | X | |||||||||
| Glucose (mM/kg.FW) | GuM | measured | X | X | |||||||||
| Fructose (mM/kg.FW) | FuM | measured | X | X | |||||||||
| Total sugars (mM/kg.FW) | ToSM | measured | X | X | |||||||||
| Glucose/fructose ratio | GFM | calculated | X | X | |||||||||
| Potassium (mM/kg.FW) | KM | measured | X | X | |||||||||
| Total acids?+?total sugars?+?potassium (mM/Kg.FW) | ASKM | calculated | X | X | |||||||||
GDD: growing degree-day
Minimum, median, maximum and broad-sense heritability values for each trait
| Vegetative traits | ||||||||
| BB | PHY | LA | LMA | IL | ||||
|
|
| 0.16 | 0.18 | 0.05 | 0.27 | |||
| Minimun | 9 | 16 | 17 | 2 | 5 | |||
| Median | 30 | 27 | 118 | 4 | 21 | |||
| Maximum | 153 | 118 | 308 | 12 | 39 | |||
| Inflorescence traits | ||||||||
| NBI | PBI | PIF | PFV | |||||
|
| 0.02 | 0.27 | 0.30 |
| ||||
| Minimun | 0.1 | 3 | 18 | 48 | ||||
| Median | 1.5 | 6 | 21 | 56 | ||||
| Maximum | 4.0 | 8 | 25 | 73 | ||||
| Berry traits | ||||||||
| NC | NB | BWG | BWM | NS | SW | |||
|
|
| 0.28 |
|
|
|
| ||
| Minimun | 0.1 | 3 | 0.2 | 0.5 | 0.9 | 27 | ||
| Median | 2.9 | 19 | 1.0 | 1.3 | 2.6 | 46 | ||
| Maximum | 4.6 | 86 | 2.2 | 3.2 | 4.0 | 69 | ||
| Berry acid content traits | ||||||||
| At green lag phase | MaG | TaG | CiG | MOG | TOG | COG | MTG | ToAG |
|
| 0.20 | 0.32 | 0.32 |
|
|
| 0.39 | 0.17 |
| Minimun | 113 | 80 | 1 | 0.36 | 0.20 | 0.001 | 0.5 | 241 |
| Median | 334 | 166 | 7 | 0.62 | 0.36 | 0.015 | 2.1 | 509 |
| Maximum | 627 | 260 | 20 | 0.80 | 0.62 | 0.035 | 2.5 | 784 |
| At maturity | MaM | TaM | CiM | MOM | TOM | COM | MTM | ToAM |
|
| 0.19 | 0.13 | 0.33 | 0.31 |
|
| 0.34 | 0.05 |
| Minimun | 23 | 47 | 1 | 0.10 | 0.2 | 0.010 | 0.2 | 93 |
| Median | 82 | 116 | 5 | 0.40 | 0.6 | 0.027 | 0.7 | 197 |
| Maximum | 204 | 210 | 13 | 0.70 | 1.0 | 0.059 | 1.7 | 365 |
| Berry sugar and potassium content traits | ||||||||
| At green lag phase | GuG | FuG | GFG | ToSG | KG | ASKG | ||
|
| 0.28 | 0.13 | 0.24 | 0.22 | 0.09 | 0.01 | ||
| Minimun | 1 | 1 | 0.1 | 1 | 16 | 105 | ||
| Median | 18 | 15 | 1.2 | 41 | 53 | 361 | ||
| Maximum | 71 | 132 | 3.9 | 177 | 130 | 564 | ||
| At maturity | GuM | FuM | GFM | ToSM | KM | ASKM | ||
|
| 0.23 | 0.16 | 0.01 | 0.19 | 0.23 | 0.17 | ||
| Minimun | 125 | 178 | 0.7 | 303 | 53 | 458 | ||
| Median | 420 | 461 | 0.9 | 879 | 87 | 1073 | ||
| Maximum | 647 | 516 | 1.1 | 1365 | 128 | 1612 | ||
Bold setting indicates H 2 ≥ 0.4
Fig. 1Biplots of vegetative or berry composition related traits in a microvine population. a. Leaf area vs internode length. b. Total sugars vs malate concentration at green lag phase
Statistically significant repeated QTLs, identified under at least two different growing conditions
| Trait | Year | Growing conditiona | Genetic map | Linkage group | QTL peak position (cM) | Interval position (cM) | LOD | % of variance | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| LA | 2013 | hot | Picovine | 19 | 30.9 | 26.2 | 30.9 | 2.9 | 10 |
| LA | 2014 | hot | Picovine | 19 | 30.9 |
|
| 3.5 | 12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| BWM | 2011 | outdoors | Ugni blanc flb | 7 | 48.0 |
| 53 | 9.9 | 42 |
| BWM | 2013 | outdoors | Ugni blanc flb | 7 | 51.0 | 47 |
| 7.6 | 17 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| NB | 2013 | hot | Ugni blanc flb | 14 | 53.7 |
| 59.4 | 3.2 | 18 |
| NB | 2013 | outdoors | Ugni blanc flb | 14 | 59.3 | 55.6 |
| 4.3 | 13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ToAG | 2012 | outdoors | Picovine | 5 | 11.3 | 0 | 17.8 | 3.4 | 6 |
| ToAG | 2013 | outdoors | Picovine | 5 | 0 |
|
| 3.1 | 12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Italic setting indicates the maximum and minimum limits of QTL confidence intervals for a given trait identified under different environments
The stable QTLs, identified in at least half of the environments studied, are displayed in bold
ahot and cool growth conditions correspond to the two conditions in controlled growth rooms during the thermal stress experiment
Fig. 2Localisation on the parental genetic maps of a microvine population, of QTLs repeated in at least two different conditions. Stable QTLs, found in at least half of the explored conditions, are displayed in blue. Bars indicate the maximum and minimum value of LOD-1 confidence intervals from QTLs for the same traits identified under at least two environments. Black boxes represent the range of peak LOD values over the different environments. Distances are in Kosambi cM. BWG: Berry weight at green lag phase; BWM: Berry weight at maturity; LA: Leaf area; MOG: Malate/total acids ratio at green lag phase; MTG: Malate/tartrate ratio at green lag phase; NB: Number of berries per cluster at maturity; NC: Number of clusters per ten phytomers at maturity; NS: Number of seeds per berry at maturity; TaG: Tartrate at green lag phase; ToAG: Total acids at green lag phase; TOG: Tartrate/total acids ratio at green lag phase
Integrated confidence interval limits for repeated QTLs and number of total and most probable positional candidate genes
| Number of candidate genes | Number of relevant candidate genes | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Traits | Chromosome | Start position (bp) | Stop position (bp) | Length (Mb) | CRIBI annotation | REFSEQ annotation | Totalb | Involved in appropriate functions | And expressed in appropriate organs |
| LA | 4 | 20322895 | 23912829 | 3.6 | 220 | 204 | 353 | 79 | 33 |
| LA | 19 | 1859933 | 4965830 | 3.1 | 231 | 185 | 377 | 41 | 25 |
| ToAG | 5 | 16515489 | 27520474 | 11.0 | 447 | 341 | 765 | 27 | 19 |
| BWG | 7 | 4916723 | 15195449 | 10.9a | 400 | 320 | 617 | 122 | 65 |
| BWM | 7 | 6319558 | 14198046 | 7.9 | 261 | 227 | 400 | 102 | 62 |
| MOG | 7 | 5465273 | 16113558 | 10.6 | 383 | 300 | 654 | 40 | 16 |
| MTG | 7 | 5303765 | 16113558 | 10.8 | 399 | 316 | 686 | 40 | 16 |
| NB | 7 | 6177689 | 20219664 | 14.0 | 723 | 549 | 1201 | 86 | 52 |
| NB | 14 | 19704668 | 23504652 | 3.8 | 172 | 164 | 302 | 38 | 32 |
| NC | 7 | 8922964 | 15861847 | 6.9 | 200 | 126 | 306 | 23 | 11 |
| NS | 7 | 6461425 | 14101459 | 7.6 | 250 | 216 | 436 | 36 | 28 |
| TaG | 4 | 8840288 | 16951127 | 8.1 | 192 | 163 | 336 | 19 | 10 |
| TaG | 7 | 5096194 | 14716952 | 9.6 | 352 | 294 | 613 | 44 | 19 |
| TOG | 7 | 5303765 | 15673945 | 10.4 | 368 | 295 | 634 | 40 | 16 |
a10.3 Mb from chromosome 7 and 0.6 Mb from Unknown chromosome according to the genetic map
bSome genes are common between the two annotations
Fig. 3The microvine mapping population derived from the cross between Picovine and Ugni Blanc flb. (A) Microvine plant with continuous reproductive development along the proleptic axis. (B) The population grown outdoors in pots