| Literature DB >> 27375632 |
Ousmane Boukar1, Christian A Fatokun2, Bao-Lam Huynh3, Philip A Roberts3, Timothy J Close4.
Abstract
Cowpea is one of the most important grain legumes in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). It provides strong support to the livelihood of small-scale farmers through its contributions to their nutritional security, income generation and soil fertility enhancement. Worldwide about 6.5 million metric tons of cowpea are produced annually on about 14.5 million hectares. The low productivity of cowpea is attributable to numerous abiotic and biotic constraints. The abiotic stress factors comprise drought, low soil fertility, and heat while biotic constraints include insects, diseases, parasitic weeds, and nematodes. Cowpea farmers also have limited access to quality seeds of improved varieties for planting. Some progress has been made through conventional breeding at international and national research institutions in the last three decades. Cowpea improvement could also benefit from modern breeding methods based on molecular genetic tools. A number of advances in cowpea genetic linkage maps, and quantitative trait loci associated with some desirable traits such as resistance to Striga, Macrophomina, Fusarium wilt, bacterial blight, root-knot nematodes, aphids, and foliar thrips have been reported. An improved consensus genetic linkage map has been developed and used to identify QTLs of additional traits. In order to take advantage of these developments single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotyping is being streamlined to establish an efficient workflow supported by genotyping support service (GSS)-client interactions. About 1100 SNPs mapped on the cowpea genome were converted by LGC Genomics to KASP assays. Several cowpea breeding programs have been exploiting these resources to implement molecular breeding, especially for MARS and MABC, to accelerate cowpea variety improvement. The combination of conventional breeding and molecular breeding strategies, with workflow managed through the CGIAR breeding management system (BMS), promises an increase in the number of improved varieties available to farmers, thereby boosting cowpea production and productivity in SSA.Entities:
Keywords: Vigna unguiculata; blackeye pea; cowpea; genomics; marker-assisted breeding
Year: 2016 PMID: 27375632 PMCID: PMC4891349 DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2016.00757
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Plant Sci ISSN: 1664-462X Impact factor: 5.753
Some cowpea genomics resources.
| Physical Map of cowpea | 60,000 BACs from IT97K-499-35 were fingerprinted. The final physical map is an assembly of 43,717 BACs with a depth of 11 × genome coverage. | Tool for gene discovery | Close et al., |
| HarvEST:Cowpea | EST database with gene function analysis and primer design. | Online cowpea genomics browser | Muchero et al., |
| Cowpea Genespace/Genomics Knowledge Base (CGKB) | Genetic markers, gene-space, metabolic pathways, mitochondrial, and chloroplast sequences. | Tool for gene discovery; enzyme and metabolic pathway | Chen et al., |
| The Cowpea Genomics Initiative (CGI) | Some advances in cowpea genomics. | Tools for gene discovery and cowpea improvement | Chen et al., |
| Microarray chip | 41,949 EST sequences from drought stressed and non-stressed drought susceptible and tolerant cowpea materials generated, representing 16,954 unigenes. | For expression analysis in cowpea | Contact S. Hearne, CIMMYT, Mexico, |
| The ESTs are all available in Harvest database of cowpea (UCR and GENBANK on NCBI) | |||
| Validated SSR marker kit | Reference kit of 20 SSRs used to define the Cowpea Germplasm Reference Set representing the genetic diversity of the entirety of the IITA cowpea germplasm bank collection. | For diversity analysis and gene discovery | Available from Generation Challenge Program, CIMMYT, Texcoco, Mexico |
| Cowpea consensus genetic linkage map | A consensus map containing 1107 EST- derived SNP markers (856 bins) on 11 linkage groups (680 cM) was constructed from 13 population-specific maps. | For QTL identification, map-based cloning, diversity, association mapping | Lucas et al., |
| Software | ‘SNP Selector’, ‘KBioConverter’, and ‘Backcross Selector’ used for the management of genotyping data. | For molecular breeding | ( |
List of IITA varieties released from 2005 to 2015 in sub-Saharan Africa.
| 2005 | IT93K-452-1, IT90K-277-2 | Nigeria |
| 2008 | IT97K-499-35 | Nigeria |
| 2009 | IT89KD-288, IT89KD-391 | Nigeria |
| IT97K-499-35, IT97K-499-38, IT98K-205-8 | Niger | |
| 2010 | IT97K-499-35, IT93K-876-30 | Mali |
| IT99K-573-1-1 | Niger | |
| 2011 | IT82E-16, IT00K-1263, IT97K-1069-6 | Mozambique |
| IT99K-494-6 | Malawi | |
| IT99K-573-1-1, IT99K-573-2-1 | Nigeria | |
| 2012 | IT99K-7-21-2-2-1, IT99K-573-1-1 | Tanzania |
| 2013 | IT99K-573-2-1, IT98K-205-8 | Burkina Faso |
| IT95K-193-12 | Benin | |
| 2015 | IT00K-1263, IT99K-1122 | Tanzania |
| IT07K-292-10, IT07K-318-33 | Nigeria | |
| TVx 194801 F, IT05K-321-2, IT97K-390-2, IT82E-16, IT82E-18, IT99K-494-4 | Swaziland | |
| IT99K-573-1-1, IT99K-573-2-1 | Sierra Leone |
Mapping of some cowpea traits.
| Cowpea golden mosaic virus | IT97 K-499-35 × Canapu T16 | F2 | AFLP | 3 | Same linkage group | Rodrigues et al., | |
| TVx 3236 × IT82D-849 | F2 | AFLP | 3 | LG1 | Ouédraogo et al., | ||
| Tvu 14676 × IT84S-2246–4 | F2 | AFLP | 6 | LG 1 | Ouédraogo et al., | ||
| IT84S-2246 × Tvu14676; TVx 3236 × IT82D-849 | F2 | SCAR (61R and 61R-M2) | 2 | LG 1 | Ouédraogo et al., | ||
| IT93 K-693-2 × IAR1696 | F2 | AFLP/SCAR | 4/1 | Same linkage map | Boukar et al., | ||
| Cowpea bacterial blight resistance | DanIla × TVu7778 | RIL | SNP | 3 | LG3, LG5, LG9 | 10–22 | Agbicodo et al., |
| Drought-induced senescence | IT93K503–1 × CB46 | RIL | AFLP | 10 | LG1, LG2, LG3, LG5, LG6, LG7, LG9, LG10 | 5–24 | Muchero et al., |
| Maturity | IT93K503–1 × CB46 | RIL | AFLP | 2 | LG7, LG8 | 25–29 | Muchero et al., |
| Foliar thrips | CB46 × IT93 K-503-1 and CB27 × IT82E-18 | RILs | SNP | 3 | LG2, LG4 and LG10 | 9–32 | Lucas et al., |
| Foliar thrips | CB46 × IT93 K-503-1 and CB27 × IT82E-18 | RILs | AFLP | 3 | LG 5 and 7 | 9–32 | Muchero et al., |
| Hastate leaf shape | Sanzi × Vita 7 | RIL | SNP | 1 | LG 15 | 74.7 | Pottorff et al., |
| Seed size | 524B × 219-01 | RIL | SSR | 6 | LG1, LG10 | 9–19 | Andargie et al., |
| Pod fiber layer thickness | 524B × 219-01 | RIL | SSR | 4 | LG1, LG10 | 6–17 | Andargie et al., |
| Pod length | (JP81610 × TVnu457) × JP81610 | BC1F1 | SSR | 9 | LG1, LG2, LG3, LG4, LG5, LG7, LG8, LG9, LG11 | 31 | Kongjaimun et al., |
| Domestication-related traits | (JP81610 × JP89083) × JP81610 | BC1F1 | SSR | 1–11 for most traits | LG3, LG7, LG8, LG11 | 3–57 | Kongjaimun et al., |
| Seed weight | IT2246-4 × TVNuI963 | F2 | RFLP | 2 | LG 2 LG6 | 37–53 | Fatokun et al., |
| Seed weight | 524B × 219-01 | RIL | SSR | 6 | LG1, LG2, LG3, LG10 | 8–19 | Andargie et al., |
| Charcoal rot resistance | IT93 K-503-1 × CB46 | RIL | SNP/AFLP | 9 | LG2, LG3, LG5, LG6, LG11 | 8–40 | Muchero et al., |
| Flower and seed coat color | ZN016 × Zhijiang 28-2 | RIL | SNP and SSR | 1 each | LG8 | – | Xu et al., |
| Time of flower opening | 524 B × 219-01 | RIL | SSR | 5 | LG1 | 9–30 | Andargie et al., |
| Days to flower | 524 B × 219-01 | RIL | SSR | 3 | LG1 | 6–19 | Andargie et al., |
| Days to first flowering | ZN016 × ZJ282 | RIL | SNP | 3 | LG11, LG10, LG3 | 10–32 | Xu et al., |
| Nodes to first flower | ZN016 × ZJ282 | RIL | SNP | 4 | LG11, LG4, LG2, LG6 | 11–22 | Xu et al., |
| Pod number per plant | ZN016 × ZJ282 | RIL | SSR | 3 | LG3, LG2, LG4 | 11–20 | Xu et al., |
| Leaf senescence | ZN016 × ZJ282 | RIL | SNP | 2 | LG11, LG3, LG7 | 11–29 | Xu et al., |
| Floral scent compounds | 524 B × 219-01 | RIL | SSR | 63 | LG1, LG2, LG4 | 60 | Andargie et al., |
| Heat tolerance | CB27 × IT82E-18 | RIL | SNP | 5 | LG2, LG7, LG6, LG10, LG3 | 12–18 | Lucas et al., |
| Seed size | Eight different populations | RILs | SNP | 10 | LG5, LG7, LG2, LG6, LG8, LG10 | 47 | Lucas et al., |
| CB27 × 24-125B-1 | RIL | SNP | 1 | LG6 | 28 | Pottorff et al., | |
| IT93K-503-1 × CB46, | RIL | SNP | 1 | LG8 | 19–47 | Pottorff et al., | |
| CB27 × 24-125B-1 | RIL | SNP | 1 | LG9 | 32–40 | Pottorff et al., | |
| CB27 × IT82E-18 | RIL | SNP | 1 | LG3 | 18–27 | Pottorff et al., | |
| Pod tenderness | (JP81610 × JP89083) × JP81610 | BC1F1 | SSR | 3 | LG 7, LG8, LG11 | 6–50 | Kongjaimun et al., |
| Pod tenderness | JP81610 × JP89083 | F2 | SSR | 2 | LG 7, LG8 | 6–45 | Kongjaimun et al., |
PV % represents ranges of phenotypic variation of the given QTLs. Adapted and updated from (Abhishek et al., .
Figure 1Scheme of molecular breeding in cowpea.