| Literature DB >> 29151804 |
Shalabh Dixit1, Anshuman Singh1,2, Nitika Sandhu1, Aditi Bhandari1, Prashant Vikram1,3, Arvind Kumar1.
Abstract
TDK1 is a popular rice variety from the Lao PDR. Originally developed for irrigated conditions, this variety suffers a high decline in yield under drought conditions. Studies have identified three quantitative trait loci (QTLs) for grain yield under drought conditions, qDTY3.1 , qDTY6.1 , and qDTY6.2 , that show a high effect in the background of this variety. We report here the pyramiding of these three QTLs with SUB1 that provides 2-3 weeks of tolerance to complete submergence, with the aim to develop drought- and submergence-tolerant near-isogenic lines (NILs) of TDK1. We used a tandem approach that combined marker-assisted backcross breeding with phenotypic selection to develop NILs with high yield under drought stress and non-stress conditions and preferred grain quality. The effect of different QTL combinations on yield and yield-related traits under drought stress and non-stress conditions is also reported. Our results show qDTY3.1 to be the largest and most consistent QTL affecting yield under drought conditions, followed by qDTY6.1 and qDTY6.2 , respectively. QTL class analysis also showed that lines with a combination of qDTY3.1 and qDTY6.1 consistently showed a higher tolerance to drought than those in which one of these QTLs was missing. In countries such as Lao PDR, where large areas under rice cultivation suffer vegetative-stage submergence and reproductive-stage drought, these lines could ensure yield stability. These lines can also serve as valuable genetic material to be used for further breeding of high-yielding, drought- and submergence-tolerant varieties in local breeding programs.Entities:
Keywords: Drought; MABB; QTL; Rice; Submergence; Yield
Year: 2017 PMID: 29151804 PMCID: PMC5670188 DOI: 10.1007/s11032-017-0737-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mol Breed ISSN: 1380-3743 Impact factor: 2.589
Analysis of variance in the drought stress, non-stress, and submergence experiments using mean values of parents and progenies
| Designationab | Grain yield (kg ha−1) | Days to flowering | Plant height (cm) | Submergence experiment | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DS-2015 | WS-2015 | DS-2016 | DS-2015 | WS-2015 | DS-2016 | DS-2015 | WS-2015 | DS-2016 | DS-2015 (score)b | DS-2016 (% survival) | ||||||||||
| S | NS | S | NS | S | NS | S | NS | S | NS | S | NS | S | NS | S | NS | S | NS | |||
| TDK1 | 14 | 6449 | 2 | 3636 | 48 | 6415 | 108 | 98 | 123 | 107 | 88 | 65 | 88 | 119 | 119 | 69 | 103 | 9 | 0 | |
| TDK1-Sub1 | 0 | 6146 | 2 | 4125 | 0 | 6110 | 101 | 122 | 105 | 104 | 87 | 61 | 90 | 116 | 116 | 75 | 100 | 3 | 5 | |
| IR55419–04 | 882 | 5254 | 449 | 4415 | 1032 | 4227 | 72 | 81 | 80 | 83 | 69 | 71 | 68 | 89 | 115 | 115 | 88 | 90 | 9 | 0 |
| Progenies | 346 | 6144 | 125 | 4855 | 210 | 4854 | 95 | 90 | 97 | 88 | 86 | 80 | 64 | 91 | 92 | 121 | 77 | 102 | 6 | 14 |
|
| **** | ** | **** | ** | **** | **** | **** | **** | **** | **** | **** | **** | **** | *** | **** | **** | **** | **** | **** | |
| Standard error of difference | 166 | 937 | 81 | 629 | 206 | 394 | 3 | 9 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 9 | 4 | 8 | 6 | 3 | 6 | 1 | 10 |
DS, Dry season; WS, wet season; 2015, 2016, years of trials; S, stress experiment; NS, non-stress experiment
aSee sections Plant material and QTL introgression and selection for a description of the parents and progenies
bAs a measure of tolerance of submergence, the lines were scored on a scale of 1–9, with 1 indicating a low susceptibility (high tolerance) to submergence and 9 indicating a high susceptibility to submergence
c P is the probability of difference between genotypes, where **, ***, **** indicates significance at the 1, 0.1, and 0.01% P levels, respectively
Phenotypic correlations between traits under drought stress and non-stress conditions in DS-2015
| Traits | DTF-NS | PHN-S | GY-NS | DTF-S | PH-S | GY-S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DTF-NS | 1 | |||||
| PH-NS | − 0.12 | 1 | ||||
| GY-NS | 0.31* | 0.50** | 1 | |||
| DTF-S | 0.84** | − 0.18 | 0.31* | 1 | ||
| PH-S | − 0.14 | 0.36* | 0.07 | − 0.20 | 1 | |
| GY-S | − 0.74** | 0.08 | − 0.31* | − 0.88** | 0.13 | 1 |
*, **Significant at the 5 and 1% levels of significance, respectively
DTF, Days to flowering; PH, plant height at maturity; GY, grain yield
Fig. 1Effect of combinations of qDTY , qDTY , and qDTY , 3 quantitative trait loci (QTLs) identified in the background of rice variety TDK1 with large effects on grain yield under drought conditions, on a days to flowering, b grain yield (GY) and c plant height under drought stress and non-stress conditions. +++ class refers to lines with all 3 QTLs, +−+ class refers to lines with qDTY and qDTY , −++ class refers to lines with qDTY and qDTY , −−+ class refers to lines with qDTY only; TDK1 (−−−) is taken as the baseline for lines without any QTLs. Lines with three QTLs showed the highest yield advantage under drought conditions and earlier flowering and maintained plant height. qDTY led to a yield penalty under non-stress conditions
Fig. 2Vann diagram showing the proportion of lines with tolerance of drought and submergence and with high yield from the set of lines screened in the dry season of 2015. Numbers in the circles refer to lines with one of the three traits while those in the intersecting areas show the lines with two or all three traits. In total, 29 lines showed the presence of a combination of two or three traits
Selected near-isogenic lines and their grain yield, days to 50% flowering, and plant height under drought stress and non-stress conditions in DS-2015 and WS-2015 and under submergence conditions in DS-2015
| Line | DS-2015 | WS-2015 | Submergence | QTL | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GY (kg ha−1) | DTF | PH (cm) | GY (kg ha−1) | DTF | PH (cm) | |||||||||
| NS | S | NS | S | NS | S | NS | S | NS | S | NS | S | B | L | |
| IR102774–11–128-1-4-3 | 6773 | 466 | 86 | 88 | 98 | 73 | 5244 | 182 | 87 | 84 | 129 | 101 | 9 | H++ |
| IR102776–37–52–1-1-3 | 6760 | 534 | 86 | 89 | 105 | 81 | 5050 | 300 | 86 | 82 | 132 | 106 | 9 | −++ |
| IR102775–24–97-1-1-1 | 6448 | 904 | 90 | 87 | 84 | 70 | 4305 | 95 | 87 | 96 | 107 | 78 | 9 | +++ |
| IR102777–5–64-4-1-5 | 6656 | 595 | 87 | 88 | 84 | 60 | 4144 | 238 | 86 | 88 | 108 | 91 | 9 | +H- |
| IR102776–31–66-2-2-2 | 6615 | 1173 | 87 | 87 | 94 | 65 | 5533 | 58 | 88 | 93 | 117 | 80 | 6 | +++ |
| IR102774–15–32–3-1-2 | 7255 | 718 | 87 | 91 | 110 | 66 | 5511 | 40 | 84 | 91 | 132 | 104 | 5 | +++ |
| IR102777–5–83–1-2-2 | 7112 | 519 | 87 | 89 | 101 | 82 | 4897 | 37 | 90 | 104 | 132 | 92 | 4 | −++ |
| IR55419–04 | 5254 | 882 | 81 | 72 | 89 | 68 | 4415 | 449 | 83 | 80 | 115 | 100 | 9 | |
| TDK1 | 6449 | 14 | 98 | 108 | 88 | 65 | 3636 | 2 | 107 | 123 | 119 | 80 | 9 | |
| TDK1-Sub1 | 6146 | 4 | 101 | 90 | 61 | 4125 | 2 | 105 | 122 | 116 | 83 | 3 | ||