Literature DB >> 28261603

Genetic Diversity and Association Analysis for Solvent Retention Capacity in the Accessions Derived from Soft Wheat Ningmai 9.

Peng Jiang1, Ping-Ping Zhang1, Xu Zhang1, Hong-Xiang Ma1.   

Abstract

Solvent retention capacity (SRC) test is an effective method for quality evaluation of soft wheat. Ningmai 9 is a founder in soft wheat breeding. The SRC and genotype of Ningmai 9 and its 117 derivatives were tested. Association mapping was employed to identify the quantitative trait loci (QTL) associated with SRCs. Ningmai 9 had the allele frequency of 75.60% and 67.81% to its first- and second-generation derivatives, respectively, indicating higher contribution than theoretical expectation. Neighbor-joining cluster based on the genotyping data showed that Ningmai 9 and most of its first-generation derivatives were clustered together, whereas its second-generation derivatives were found in another group. The variation coefficients of SRCs in the derivatives ranged from 5.35% to 8.63%. A total of 29 markers on 13 chromosomes of the genome were associated with the SRCs. There were 6 markers associated with more than one SRC or detected in two years. The results suggested that QTL controlling SRCs in Ningmai 9 might be different from other varieties. Markers Xgwm44, Xbarc126, Xwmc790, and Xgwm232 associated with SRCs in Ningmai 9 might be used for quality improvement in soft wheat breeding.

Entities:  

Year:  2017        PMID: 28261603      PMCID: PMC5316455          DOI: 10.1155/2017/2413150

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Genomics        ISSN: 2314-436X            Impact factor:   2.326


1. Introduction

Soft wheat flour of low protein content is usually associated with the cookie quality [1], which produces good quality cookies with a large spread factor, such as low thickness, tender texture with smaller particle size, and low water absorption. Soft wheat yields less flour with a smaller average particle size and less damaged starch [2]. In comparing with hard wheat, solvent retention capacity (SRC) is used more often for evaluating the quality of soft wheat in cookie making [3]. SRC is the weight of solvent held by flour after centrifugation and draining. SRC tests were developed by Slade and Levine (1994) to estimate grain and end-use quality in soft wheat [4]. They are all based on a mixture of flour plus one of four different solutions: water, 5% sodium carbonate (NaCO3), 5% lactic acid, and 50% sucrose to predict water-holding capacity, damaged starch, gluten strength, and water soluble pentosan (arabinoxylan), respectively [3]. SRC was mainly determined by genotype [5-7]; however, most of the previous studies concerned the evaluation of SRC in different genotypes with various treatments, whereas the genetic mechanism of SRC received little attention. Understanding genetic mechanisms and the identification of quantitative trait loci (QTL) associated with the components regulating end-use traits are the basis for quality improvement in wheat. Several mapping studies have been conducted to locate QTL associated with baking quality in wheat. However, most of them were conducted using hard wheat population. In soft wheat, Smith et al. (2011) reported large effect QTL for quality on chromosomes 1B and 2B [8]. Cabrera et al. (2015) identified 26 regions as potential QTL in a diversity panel and 74 QTL in all 5 biparental mapping populations [9]. Association mapping is a method to test the association between molecular markers and QTL based on linkage disequilibrium [10]. In recent years, it has been widely used for QTL detection in main crops, such as maize, wheat, and rice [11-13]. Generally, natural populations with wide genetic basis were used for association mapping [14, 15]. In soft wheat, Cabrera et al. (2015) identified 26 regions as potential QTL in a diversity panel from the soft wheat breeding program in USA by using an association mapping approach [9]. Zhang et al. (2015) discovered several favorable allelic variations for SRCs by association mapping with a natural population including 176 varieties (lines) from China [16]. Association mapping on founder parents and its derivatives can find some important QTL and favorable allelic variations in founder parent, which can be further used for marker assisted selection to produce more favorable varieties [17]. Ningmai 9 is a soft wheat cultivar with desirable quality and has been widely used in wheat production and as parent in the Yangtze River to Huai River valley area in China. A total of 20 cultivars derived from Ningmai 9 have been released in the past 10 years. Ningmai 9 has high general combining ability in SRCs [18]; however, the QTL and chromosome regions associated with SRCs in Ningmai 9 were unclear. In this study, the genotypes of Ningmai 9 and its derivatives were screened with SSR molecular markers covering whole-genome; meanwhile the phenotypes of SRCs were analyzed in two consecutive growth seasons. The genetic structure, genetic similarity, and association mapping were analyzed to reveal the relationship between Ningmai 9 and its derivatives and to identify molecular markers associated with SRCs.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Plant Materials and Phenotyping

Ningmai 9 and its 117 derivatives including 39 lines of first generation and 78 lines of second generation were used in this study (Table 1). The materials were planted in 2014 and 2015 at the experimental farm of Jiangsu Academy of Agricultural Sciences in Nanjing, China. Each line was planted in a plot comprising 3 rows with two replications. Each row was sowed with 50 seeds with the length of 1.3 m and a row-to-row distance of 0.25 m. After harvest and milling, the flour was tested for SRCs according to AACC 56-11 [19, 20]. The SRC of water, sodium carbonate, lactic acid, and sucrose were described as WSRC, SCSRC, LaSRC, and SuSRC, respectively.
Table 1

List of Ningmai 9 and its derivatives.

GenerationNumberVariety/lines
ParentL1Ningmai 9

1st generationL2Ningmai 13
L3Ningmai 14
L4Ningmai 16
L5Shengxuan 6
L6Yangmai 18
L7Yangfumai 4
L83E/158
L9Nannong 0686
L10Ningmai 18
L11Ning 0556
L12Ning 07123
L13Ning 07119
L14Ning 0853
L15Ning 0866
L16Ning 0894
L17Ning 08105
L18Ning 0561
L19Ning 0564
L20Ning 0565
L21Ning 0417
L22Ning 0418
L23Ning 0422
L24Ning 0311
L25Ning 0316
L26Ning 0319
L27Ning 0320
L28Ning 0327
L29Ning 0331
L35Ning 9-11
L36Ning 9-36
L37Ning 9 Large 41
L38Ning 9 Large 44
L39Ning 9 Large 76
L40Ning 9 Large 78
L41Ning 9 Large 80
L6071666
L616E/123
L6209-654
L6409-444

 L30Ning 0798
 L31Ning 07117
 L32F307
 L33F308
 L34Ning 0797
 L42Ning 0862
 L43Ning 0869
 L44Ning 0872
 L45Ning 0880
 L46Ning 0882
 L47Ning 0884
 L48Ning 0887
 L49Ning 0893
 L50Ning 0895
 L51Ning 0897
 L52Ning 0898
 L53Ning 0899
 L54Ning 08102
 L55Ning 08104
 L56Ning 08108
 L57Ning 08110
 L58Ning 08115
 L59Ning 08116
 L6309-569
 L65Zhenmai 166
 L66Ning 0867
 L67Ning 0881
 L68Ning 0883
 L69Ning 0886
 L70Ning 0896
 L71Ning 08109
 L72Ning 08111
2nd generationL73Ning 08112
L74Ning 08113
 L7508F331
 L7608F333
 L7708F337
 L7808F353
 L7908F362
 L8008F386
 L8108F387
 L8208F396
 L8308F397
 L8408F399
 L8508F406
 L8608F407
 L8708F408
 L8808F409
 L8908F410
 L9008F411
 L9108F417
 L9208F418
 L9308F423
 L9408F424
 L9508F426
 L9608F432
 L9708F433
 L9808F434
 L9908F435
 L10008F436
 L10108F437
 L10208F442
 L10308F443
 L10408F444
 L10508F445
 L10608F446
 L10708F448
 L10808F449
 L10908F450
 L11008F451
 L11108F453
 L11208F454
 L11308F457
 L11408F458
 L11508F468
 L11608F459
 L11708F516
 L11808F517

2.2. Genotype Analysis

DNA was extracted from fresh leaves using a CTAB procedure according to Saghai-Maroof et al. (1984) [21]. One hundred and eighty-five polymorphic simple sequence repeat (SSR) primer pairs were used to screen Ningmai 9 and its 117 derived lines in the study. These markers were randomly distributed across the wheat genome, and each chromosome included 5–14 markers with an average of 8.8 markers. Map positions of markers were based on the linkage map reported by Somers et al. (2004) [22]. Each 10 μL PCR contained 1 μL 10 × PCR buffer, 0.6 μL 15 mM MgCl2, 0.8 μL 2 mMdNTP, 1 μL 0.02 μM of each primer, 0.1 μLTaq DNA polymerase, 1 μL 0.02 μM template DNA, and 3.5 μL deionized water. The cycling system consisted of an initial denaturation step of 94°C/5 min, followed by 36 cycles of 94°C/45 s, 50~60°C/45 s, 72°C/60 s, and a final extension of 72°C/10 min. Amplification bands were electrophoretically separated through nondenaturating 6% polyacrylamide gels and visualized by silver staining.

2.3. Data Processing and Analysis

Excel 2007 was used for data preparation; ANOVA was performed using SPSS 17.0. Neighbor-joining cluster was performed with Mega 6.0 [23]. Both the Q matrix and K matrix were determined using STRUCTURE v2.3.4 [24]. Five independent simulations were processed for each k, ranging from 1 to 8, with a 10,000 burn-in length and 100,000 iterations. The association analysis was calculated using the mixed linear model (MLM) method incorporated into the TASSEL 3.0 software [25]. The significant marker-trait associations were declared for P ≤ 0.01.

3. Results

3.1. Genetic Contribution of Ningmai 9 to Its Derivatives

A total of 490 alleles were detected with 1–7 and an average of 2.6 alleles per locus. The ratio of allele frequency between Ningmai 9 and its derivatives on the chromosomes ranged from 55.71% to 88.29% with an average of 75.60% for first generation and from 56.33% to 83.50% with an average of 67.81% for second generation (Table 2), which indicated that Ningmai 9 had a higher contribution to its derivatives than theoretically expected. Both first and second generation had highest allele frequency on chromosome 4A. The first generation possesses the higher allele frequency compared to the second on all chromosomes except for chromosome 6D.
Table 2

The allele frequency between Ningmai 9 and its derivatives on chromosomes.

ChromosomeAllele frequency (%)
1st generation2nd generation
1A71.2857.33
2A80.9866.65
3A71.2364.16
4A88.2983.50
5A77.0975.34
6A77.6177.08
7A74.4760.23
Mean77.2869.18

1B68.6161.01
2B73.0870.61
3B79.4072.37
4B76.7164.02
5B79.3967.69
6B69.9762.60
7B80.1473.98
Mean75.3367.47

1D75.3066.54
2D78.9772.75
3D64.8656.33
4D87.9573.46
5D72.4964.24
6D55.7159.79
7D84.0974.27
Mean74.1966.77

Genome wide allele frequency with Ningmai 9 (%)  
 1st generation75.60
 2nd generation67.81

3.2. Population Structure Analysis and Cluster Analysis

In order to eliminate the spurious association caused by population structure of the materials, the number of populations was calculated according to the method by Evanno et al. (2005) [26]. Two populations in the materials were previously reported in our research [27]. Neighbor-joining cluster based on the genotyping data also showed that there were 2 groups in the materials (Figure 1). Ningmai 9 and most of its first-generation derivatives were clustered together, whereas its second-generation derivatives were found in another group. Yangfumai 4 was distantly clustered with those two groups since it was a mutant induced from hybrid seed treated with 60Co radiation.
Figure 1

Neighbor-joining cluster of Ningmai 9 and its derivatives. Note: the genetic distance of L7 is so large that it is marked by dashed line.

3.3. Phenotype Analysis

There were significant variations among the derivatives of Ningmai 9 for all SRCs. The value of each SRC of the derivatives was higher, on average, than that of Ningmai 9, and the variations were high with coefficients of variation (CV) ranging from 5.35% in SuSRC (2014) to 8.63% in WSRC (2015) (Table 3).
Table 3

Phenotype variation for 4 SRCs of Ningmai 9 and its derivatives.

IndexYearNingmai 9MeanStdevMinMaxCV (%)
WSRC201459.4964.035.3649.4379.408.37
201559.6063.725.5049.9877.258.63
SCSRC201478.9686.736.8671.1198.917.91
201579.8585.666.9770.38100.158.13
LaSRC2014108.52116.889.2493.98141.717.91
2015109.05117.239.5796.21146.578.16
SuSRC2014108.85116.055.9799.15131.095.15
2015109.51117.066.45104.39132.755.51
ANOVA revealed significant effects of genotype for all SRCs (Table 4). Year effect was also significant for SCSRC. ANOVA showed that the effect of genotype by year was not significant for each SRC. There was no significant difference among generations for SRCs except for SCSRC, though the values of all the SRCs in second generation were larger than that in first generation and in Ningmai 9 except for the value of LaSRC.
Table 4

ANOVA and multiple comparisons among generations for the SRCs of Ningmai 9 and its derivatives.

Index F valueMultiple comparison test (S-N-K method)
GenotypeYearGenotype × yearNingmai 91st generation2nd generation
WSRC5.24∗∗0.520.2859.55a61.15a65.29a
SCSRC8.04∗∗6.02∗0.7779.41a81.14ab88.81b
LaSRC4.75∗∗0.210.54108.79a117.72a116.83a
SuSRC3.43∗∗3.000.51109.18a115.66a117.10a

∗∗ and ∗ show significant difference at 0.01 and 0.5 level, respectively; different small letters in the same row show significant difference at 0.05 level.

There was significant positive correlation between the two years for all SRCs (Table 5). The correlation between different SRCs was identical in the two years; SuSRC was significantly positively correlated with WSRC, SCSRC, and LaSRC, and there was also significant correlation between WSRC and SCSRC.
Table 5

Correlation analysis for the SRCs over two years in Ningmai 9 and its derivatives.

 WSRCSCSRCLaSRCSuSRC
WSRC0.897∗∗0.663∗∗−0.0120.343∗∗
SCSRC0.640∗∗0.825∗∗−0.0070.525∗∗
LaSRC0.0370.0850.809∗∗0.403∗∗
SuSRC0.311∗∗0.582∗∗0.398∗∗0.740∗∗

∗∗ shows significant difference at 0.01 level. The correlation analysis for the same trait between 2014 and 2015 is marked on the diagonal; the correlation analysis among different traits in 2014 is marked below the diagonal, whereas the correlation analysis among different traits in 2015 is marked above.

3.4. Association Analysis

A total of 29 markers on 13 wheat chromosomes were associated with the SRCs (Table 6). Five markers associated with WSRC were identified on chromosomes 4A, 4D, 7B, and 7D, 21 markers on chromosomes 1B, 1D, 2A, 2B, 2D, 3B, 4A, 6A, 6B, 7A, 7B, and 7D were associated with SCSRC, two markers on chromosome 3B were associated with LaSRC, and four markers on chromosomes 1D, 2D, and 3B were associated with SuSRC. The QTL related to such markers could explain 5.12%~12.05% of the phenotypic variation. Xgwm44 was associated with WSRC and SCSRC, and Xwmc754 and Xwmc326 were associated with both LaSRC and SuSRC. Xbarc126, Xwmc517, Xgwm484, Xwmc754, Xwmc326, and Xgwm232 were detected in both years, and wmc754 and wmc326 associated with LaSRC presented different alleles in two years. Most of the alleles of the marker associated with more than one SRC or detected in two years had negative effects on their corresponding SRCs, which were a benefit for soft wheat quality.
Table 6

Association analysis for SRCs.

TraitsMarkerChromosome20142015
P R 2 (%)Effect (allele) P R 2 (%)Effect (allele)
WSRC Xwmc468 4AL4.74 × 10−36.61− (134)   
Xwmc89 4DS8.10 × 10−35.94− (140)   
Xwmc517 7BL   9.68 × 10−35.71+ (183)
Xgwm44 7DS8.11 × 10−35.78− (196)1.37 × 10−38.84− (196)
Xbarc126 7DS6.48 × 10−36.13− (170)4.34 × 10−410.80− (170)

SCSRC Xgwm153 1BL   5.65 × 10−36.02− (188)
Xcfd72 1DL   4.55 × 10−36.22+ (310)
Xgwm232 1DL7.64 × 10−48.57+ (144)   
Xwmc658 2AL6.82 × 10−35.44+ (250)   
Xgwm257 2BS   9.54 × 10−35.16− (186)
Xgwm539 2DL6.32 × 10−35.56+ (160)   
Xgwm102 2DS3.04 × 10−36.57+ (142)   
Xgwm484 2DS1.94 × 10−410.81− (179)2.90 × 10−36.96− (179)
Xwmc231 3B1.09 × 10−38.17+ (240)   
Xwmc777 3B4.13 × 10−49.48− (100)   
Xwmc653 3B   6.05 × 10−35.83− (160)
Xwmc219 4AL6.68 × 10−35.47+ (160)   
Xgwm169 6AL   9.54 × 10−35.68− (190)
Xwmc397 6BL9.68 × 10−512.05—   
Xwmc790 7A1.68 × 10−37.42− (108)   
Xwmc809 7A   6.04 × 10−35.81− (180)
Xwmc311 7BL9.64 × 10−35.12+ (120)   
Xwmc634 7DL4.16 × 10−410.17+ (210)   
Xgwm437 7DL   6.04 × 10−35.81− (110)
Xgwm44 7DS   6.61 × 10−35.88− (183)
Xcfd14 7DS   1.80 × 10−37.62− (100)

LaSRC Xwmc754 3B2.09 × 10−38.77− (160)7.89 × 10−36.39+ (152)
Xwmc326 3B7.20 × 10−37.15+ (186)8.29 × 10−37.00+ (186)

SuSRC Xgwm232 1DL5.17 × 10−410.44− (144)4.27 × 10−37.20− (144)
Xgwm349 2DL5.97 × 10−36.47+ (310)   
Xwmc754 3B5.96 × 10−36.68− (160)   
Xwmc326 3B   4.38 × 10−37.35+ (186)

The number in brackets following “+” or “−” represents the allele of markers, and “+” and “−” indicate a positive or negative effect by the allele of markers.

4. Discussion

Ningmai 9 is a soft wheat variety with stable soft wheat quality, high yield, wide adaptation, and resistance to multiple diseases including Fusarium head blight, soil born mosaic virus, and sharp eye spots released in 1997. Since 2006, 20 wheat cultivars derived from Ningmai 9 have been released to wheat production of the Yangtze River to the Huai River regions in China. As a founder parent, Ningmai 9 has a high general combining ability in sterile spikelet number (negative effect), grain weight per spike, protein content (negative effect), SRC (negative effect), and Fusarium head blight resistance, which means that it is easy to produce desirable traits in progenies [18]. At genomic level, founder parents have more favorable allelic variations than other varieties, and the genetic composition of new varieties is more similar to founder parent rather than the average value of parents. In this study, the genetic contribution of Ningmai 9 to its first and second generation was 75.60% and 67.81%, respectively, which were both significantly higher than theoretical expectation of 50% and 25%. The result was consistent with previous reports on other founder parents, such as Triumph/Yanda 1817 [28], Orofen [29], Bima 4 [30], and Zhou 8425B [31]. Solvent retention capacity (SRC) has been considered as an important breeding tool for predicting flour functionality of different wheat for different end uses ever since it has been developed [4, 32, 33]. SRC addresses the relative contributions to water absorption of each flour component using four different solvents: water, lactic acid, sodium carbonate, and sucrose. While WSRC has been associated with the overall water-holding capacity of all flour constituents, LaSRC is associated more specifically with the glutenin network formation and gluten elasticity or strength of flour. SCSRC is closely related to the amount of damaged starch of the flour, while SuSRC relates more specifically to the concentration of arabinoxylan and gliadin [19]. In this study, SRCs of Ningmai 9 and its derivatives were measured in two consecutive years, and all the SRCs of Ningmai 9 were lower than those of the derivatives on average, as wheat breeders did not take soft wheat as the only goal in wheat breeding. Therefore, genetic improvement for soft wheat quality would be strengthened in the future. Identification of molecular marker associated with desired traits is a basis for marker assisted selection in wheat breeding. Association mapping is an effective method for identifying related markers. In this study, a total of 29 markers on 13 chromosomes were associated with the SRCs. Five markers associated with WSRC were identified on chromosomes 4A, 4D, 7B, and 7D. Cabrera et al. [9] and Carter et al. [34] discovered QTL related to WSRC on chromosomes 4A and 4D, respectively, and the QTL on 4A was close to Xwmc468 detected in this study. Twenty-one markers on chromosomes 1B, 1D, 2A, 2B, 2D, 3B, 4A, 6A, 6B, 7A, 7B, and 7D were associated with SCSRC in the study. Wmc751 on 3B reported by Carter et al. [34] was located at the interval between Xwmc777 and Xwmc653, and Xgwm44 on 7D was also reported by Zhang et al. [16]. Smith et al. (2011) found that a QTL on 2B associated with SCSRC was close to Xgwm257 by using 171 families from the cross Foster/Pioneer “25R26” [8]. Some markers on chromosomes 1A, 1B, 3A, 3B, 6A, and 7A related to SCSRC were also reported [8, 9, 16], but a little far from the ones we detected, as the markers on multiple chromosomes including chromosomes 1D, 2D, and 3B associated with LaSRC and SuSRC. There was high correlation between two years for all SRCs, but only a few markers were repeatedly detected, which might be due to a limited number of markers used in this study. The association mapping in Ningmai 9 and its derivatives showed that SRCs were determined by lots of minor QTL effects but also the environment, which suggest that the genetic mechanism of SRCs was complex in Ningmai 9 and QTL controlling SRCs might differ from other varieties. The favorable allelic variations of Xgwm44, Xbarc126, Xwmc790, and Xgwm232 associated with SRCs in Ningmai 9 may be used for quality improvement in soft wheat breeding.
  11 in total

Review 1.  Structure of linkage disequilibrium in plants.

Authors:  Sherry A Flint-Garcia; Jeffry M Thornsberry; Edward S Buckler
Journal:  Annu Rev Plant Biol       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 26.379

2.  Detecting the number of clusters of individuals using the software STRUCTURE: a simulation study.

Authors:  G Evanno; S Regnaut; J Goudet
Journal:  Mol Ecol       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 6.185

3.  TASSEL: software for association mapping of complex traits in diverse samples.

Authors:  Peter J Bradbury; Zhiwu Zhang; Dallas E Kroon; Terry M Casstevens; Yogesh Ramdoss; Edward S Buckler
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2007-06-22       Impact factor: 6.937

4.  MEGA6: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis version 6.0.

Authors:  Koichiro Tamura; Glen Stecher; Daniel Peterson; Alan Filipski; Sudhir Kumar
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2013-10-16       Impact factor: 16.240

5.  Identification of milling and baking quality QTL in multiple soft wheat mapping populations.

Authors:  Antonio Cabrera; Mary Guttieri; Nathan Smith; Edward Souza; Anne Sturbaum; Duc Hua; Carl Griffey; Marla Barnett; Paul Murphy; Herb Ohm; Jim Uphaus; Mark Sorrells; Elliot Heffner; Gina Brown-Guedira; David Van Sanford; Clay Sneller
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2015-07-19       Impact factor: 5.699

6.  Validation of Dwarf8 polymorphisms associated with flowering time in elite European inbred lines of maize (Zea mays L.).

Authors:  Jeppe R Andersen; Tobias Schrag; Albrecht E Melchinger; Imad Zein; Thomas Lübberstedt
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2005-06-03       Impact factor: 5.699

7.  Association mapping for quality traits in soft winter wheat.

Authors:  Jochen C Reif; Manje Gowda; Hans P Maurer; C F H Longin; Viktor Korzun; Erhard Ebmeyer; Reiner Bothe; Christof Pietsch; Tobias Würschum
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2010-12-14       Impact factor: 5.699

8.  A high-density microsatellite consensus map for bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.).

Authors:  Daryl J Somers; Peter Isaac; Keith Edwards
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2004-07-29       Impact factor: 5.699

9.  Inferring weak population structure with the assistance of sample group information.

Authors:  Melissa J Hubisz; Daniel Falush; Matthew Stephens; Jonathan K Pritchard
Journal:  Mol Ecol Resour       Date:  2009-04-01       Impact factor: 7.090

10.  Association mapping of kernel size and milling quality in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivars.

Authors:  Flavio Breseghello; Mark E Sorrells
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2005-08-03       Impact factor: 4.562

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.