| Literature DB >> 28797222 |
Kerstin Neumann1, Yusheng Zhao2, Jianting Chu2, Jens Keilwagen3, Jochen C Reif2, Benjamin Kilian2,4, Andreas Graner2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Genetic mapping of phenotypic traits generally focuses on a single time point, but biomass accumulates continuously during plant development. Resolution of the temporal dynamics that affect biomass recently became feasible using non-destructive imaging.Entities:
Keywords: Barley; Development; Genetic architecture; Genome-wide association mapping; Growth; High-throughput phenotyping; Non-invasive; Photoperiod; Vegetative biomass
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28797222 PMCID: PMC5554006 DOI: 10.1186/s12870-017-1085-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Plant Biol ISSN: 1471-2229 Impact factor: 4.215
Fig. 1Overview of BLUEs, variance components, and broad sense heritability of estimated traits for 100 barley lines. a Bar diagram of the overall BLUEs for all analyzed traits: digital biomass (DB) from 10 to 58 days after sowing (DAS) in 106 Voxel, fresh weight (FW) in g estimated at DAS 59, inflection point (IP) in DAS, tiller number (TN) at DAS 27, 45 and 58 and tipping time (TP). Error bars represent the 95% confidence interval. b Proportion of variance components in % for each time point of DB (DB10 to DB58), FW, IP, TN (TN 27, 45 and 58) and TP, where VG refers to genotypic variance, VGE to genotype x environment interaction and VR the variance of the rest (unexplained variance). c Bar diagram presenting broad sense heritability values for DB (DB10 to DB58), FW, IP, TN (TN 27, 45 and 58) and TP. Hatched bars represent days with missing data
Fig. 2Heatmap for Kendall rank correlation coefficients between BLUEs of digital biomass from days after sowing (DAS) 10 to 58. Colors range from purple (for correlation ~ 0.1) to light-yellow (for correlation ~0.9). Numbers in the contour line indicate the level of correlation
Fig. 3Time course of QTL-dynamics for digital biomass (DB) in days after sowing (DAS). The figure represents seven SNPs that exceeded the FDR threshold of 0.1 for at least 1 day. Note that missing DAS data points were excluded in this graph. a Significance value –log(p) over time - each colored line represents one QTL. b Proportion of genetic variance explained by QTL separately (lower, colored lines) or in combination (upper grey line)
Overview of genetic loci identified by GWAS
| Chr | Position (cM) | Trait | Published candidate loci in target region | QTL in other studies using iSelect or BOPA arrays |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1H | 70.5 | IP | ||
| 2H | 27.7 | TP |
| Alqudah et al. (2014): stage duration; Pasam et al. (2012 and (Maurer et al. 2015, 2016): heading; height, TKW, starch, protein; Ingvordsen et al. (2015): grain yield (23.0 cM), Sannemann et al. (2015) heading |
| 2H | 57.4–58.1 | TN58 |
| Alqudah et al. (2014): stage duration; Alqudah et al. (2016): TN; Long et al. (2013) and Tondelli et al. (2013): height; Maurer et al. (2015): flowering; Maurer et al. (2016): shooting, shoot elongation phase, heading, ripening, maturity, height; Pasam et al. (2012): heading, height |
| 2H | 74.4 | TN 58 | Alqudah et al. (2014): stage duration | |
| 2H | 124.9 | TN 45 + 58 |
| Maurer et al. (2016): shooting, hedensading, ripening (127–130 cM); Pasam et al. (2012): height |
| 2H | 135.8 | TN58 | Alqudah et al. (2014): stage duration; Maurer et al. (2016): maturity, height (139 cM); Pasam et al. (2012): height; Tondelli et al. (2013): height | |
| 3H | 98.7 | DB 42–58, FW |
| Ingvordsen et al. (2015): grain yield (100.3 cM); Maurer et al. (2016): shooting, shoot elongation phase, heading, ripening, maturity, height, TKW; Long et al. (2013): root weight; Wehner et al. (2015): biomass yield |
| 3H | 105.9 | DB 12 | Alqudah et al. (2016): TN; Maurer et al. (2015): flowering (107.8–109.2 cM); Maurer et al. (2016): shooting, shoot elongation phase, heading, ripening, maturity, height, TKW; Sannemann et al. (2015): heading; Wehner et al. (2015): biomass yield | |
| 4H | 43.6 | DB 10 | Ingvordsen et al. (2015): straw biomass | |
| 4H | 91 | DB 33–47 | ||
| 5H | 30.6 | TN58 | ||
| 5H | 42.0–45.7 | TN 45 + 58 |
| Alqudah et al. (2014): stage duration; Alqudah et al. (2016): height; Maurer et al. (2016): shoot elongation phase; Pasam et al. (2012): height; Wehner et al. (2015): biomass yield |
| 6H | 24.5 | DB 50–58, FW, TN 45 | Alqudah et al. (2016): TN | |
| 6H | 30.1–30.2 | TN 45 + 58 | ||
| 6H | 55 | TN45 |
| Alqudah et al. (2016): TN, height; Maurer et al. (2016): shooting, heading, ripening, height; Pasam et al. (2012): height, TKW; Tondelli et al. (2013): lodging |
| 7H | 14.0 | DB 10–12 | Alqudah et al. (2014): stage duration, Alqudah et al. (2016): TN; Maurer et al. (2016): shooting; Long et al. (2013): TN | |
| 7H | 34.0 | IP |
| Alqudah et al. (2014): stage duration; Maurer et al. (2015), Pasam et al. (2012), Rollins et al. (2013) and Sannemann et al. (2015): heading/flowering; Maurer et al. (2016): shooting, shoot elongation phase, heading, ripening, maturity, height, TKW |
| 7H | 67.8–68.1 | TN 45 + 58 |
| Alqudah et al. (2014): stage duration; Alqudah et al. (2016): TN, height; Maurer et al. (2016): shooting, shoot elongation phase, heading, maturity, height, TKW; Pasam et al. (2012): heading, height; Sannemann et al. (2015): heading; Wehner et al. (2015): biomass yield (70.2 cM) |
| 7H | 120.4 | TN 45 + 58 |
| Alqudah et al. (2014): stage duration; Alqudah et al. (2016): height; Ingvordsen et al. (2015): yield variance; Maurer et al. (2016): shooting, heading, ripening, maturity; TKW Tondelli et al. (2013): height |
| 7H | 134.2 | TN58 | Wehner et al. (2015): biomass yield (133.9 cM) | |
| 7H | 140.9 | DB 33–58, FW |
| George et al. (2014): shoot dry weight |
SNPs are described by their genetic position and associated traits. Candidate genes for flowering traits are based on positions from Alqudah et al. (2014) and comparison to growth and heading/flowering related traits from other mapping studies in barley that used the same barley collection and/or SNPs from iSelect or barley oligo pool array (BOPA)
IP inflection point, TP tipping time, DB digital biomass, FW fresh weight, TN tiller number (at a specific number of DAS)
Fig. 4Standardized digital biomass of all barley accessions highlighting favorable and non-favorable QTL allele combinations over time. Biomass was standardized each day according to the population average. Values below zero indicate genotypes with biomass values lower than the average for the population; values above zero represent genotypes with biomass values higher than the average for the population. Genotypes that carry the positive marker alleles for each QTL set are highlighted in green, those carrying the non-favorable alleles are shown in red. The remaining allelic combinations for all other genotypes are shown in grey (a) QTL for early biomass (3 QTL) (b) QTL for late biomass (4 QTL) and (c) QTL for early and late biomass (7 QTL) (d) QTL for early and late biomass and for the inflection point (9 QTL)