| Literature DB >> 29334899 |
Su Jang1, Yunjoo Lee1, Gileung Lee1, Jeonghwan Seo1, Dongryung Lee1, Yoye Yu1, Joong Hyoun Chin2, Hee-Jong Koh3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Balancing panicle-related traits such as panicle length and the numbers of primary and secondary branches per panicle, is key to improving the number of spikelets per panicle in rice. Identifying genetic information contributes to a broader understanding of the roles of gene and provides candidate alleles for use as DNA markers. Discovering relations between panicle-related traits and sequence variants allows opportunity for molecular application in rice breeding to improve the number of spikelets per panicle.Entities:
Keywords: Candidate gene association analysis; Haplotype; Panicle-related traits; Rice; Single nucleotide polymorphisms; The number of spikelets per panicle
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29334899 PMCID: PMC5769279 DOI: 10.1186/s12863-017-0591-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Genet ISSN: 1471-2156 Impact factor: 2.797
Summary of DNA variation in nine genes involved in panicle development
| Gene (bp) | Group | No. of nucleotide substitutions | No. of INDELs |
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | 1 | 0 | 0.76 | 2 | 0.491 | – | |
|
| 1 | 0 | 0.66 | 2 | 0.425 | – | |
|
| 1 | 0 | 0.14 | 2 | 0.091 | – | |
|
| 1 | 0 | 0.62 | 2 | 0.400 | – | |
| Total | 12 | 3 | 2.02 | 3 | 0.533 | −0.146 | |
|
| 12 | 3 | 3.6 | 3 | 0.667 | 1.135 | |
|
| 0 | 0 | – | – | – | – | |
|
| 2 | 1 | 0.62 | 2 | 0.400 | −0.973 | |
| Total | 13 | 0 | 4.83 | 3 | 0.536 | 2.755** | |
|
| 13 | 0 | 4.33 | 3 | 0.602 | 1.329 | |
|
| 0 | 0 | – | – | – | – | |
|
| 11 | 0 | 3.76 | 2 | 0.400 | −1.200 | |
| Total | 19 | 1 | 2.78 | 9 | 0.723 | −1.251 | |
|
| 9 | 0 | 2.38 | 7 | 0.854 | 0.647 | |
|
| 11 | 1 | 1.49 | 3 | 0.267 | −1.320 | |
|
| 6 | 0 | 2.03 | 3 | 0.700 | −0.668 | |
| Total | 14 | 0 | 2.05 | 6 | 0.764 | 2.820** | |
|
| 6 | 0 | 0.99 | 4 | 0.731 | 2.321* | |
|
| 12 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 0.552 | 2.812** | |
|
| 10 | 0 | 1.34 | 2 | 0.400 | −1.193 | |
| Total | 16 | 6 | 6.16 | 9 | 0.812 | 1.605 | |
|
| 15 | 6 | 4.07 | 7 | 0.866 | −0.560 | |
|
| 11 | 1 | 1.54 | 3 | 0.495 | −1.920* | |
|
| 11 | 3 | 7.13 | 3 | 0.800 | 1.527 | |
| Total | 8 | 4 | 1.44 | 8 | 0.790 | 0.948 | |
|
| 5 | 2 | 0.98 | 6 | 0.801 | 0.526 | |
|
| 6 | 3 | 1.26 | 4 | 0.557 | 0.895 | |
|
| 3 | 2 | 1.06 | 2 | 0.600 | 1.573 | |
| Total | 12 | 9 | 4.04 | 9 | 0.771 | 3.105** | |
|
| 10 | 8 | 3.07 | 6 | 0.760 | 1.503 | |
|
| 11 | 4 | 4.11 | 4 | 0.686 | 3.050*** | |
|
| 12 | 4 | 4.08 | 3 | 0.700 | −1.031 | |
| Total | 20 | 3 | 2.11 | 7 | 0.679 | −0.436 | |
|
| 7 | 0 | 1.33 | 4 | 0.696 | 0.756 | |
|
| 17 | 3 | 2.44 | 5 | 0.538 | −0.105 | |
|
| 3 | 0 | 0.65 | 2 | 0.400 | −1.049 |
S, Number of variable sites; π, Nucleotide diversity; h, Number of haplotypes; Hd, Haplotype diversity; D, Tajima’s D
*, **, and ***, significant at p < 0.05, p < 0.01, and p < 0.001, respectively
Fig. 1Haplotype analysis of coding sequences. (a) APO1 (b) APO2 (c) DEP1 (d) FON1. Multiple sequence alignment was performed based on the Nipponbare rice reference sequence. Light blue boxes denote positions of non-synonymous polymorphisms. Nip, Nipponbare; Type, encoded protein type; ins, insertion; del, deletion
Fig. 2Haplotype networks. (a) APO1 (b) APO2 (c) DEP1 (d) FON1 (e) GHD8 (f) GN1a (g) HD1 (h) SP1. Circle size denotes relative haplotype frequency in all cultivars. Colors represent three rice types: indica, orange; japonica, red; tong-il, blue. Dashes and diagonal dashes with numbers between circles denote mutational steps, including gaps in the alignment
Fig. 3Linkage disequilibrium patterns (MAF <0.05) and polymorphic sites associated with panicle-related traits in two field tests. (a) APO1 (b) APO2 (c) DEP1 (d) FON1 (e) HD1 (f) SP1. PL, panicle length; PB, the number of primary branches per panicle; and SB, the number of secondary branches per panicle. Asterisks indicate significant associations between sequence variants and phenotypic variations (p < 0.05)
Sequence variants associated with three panicle-related traits in two field tests
| 2013 | 2014 | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Site | PL | PB | SB | PL | PB | SB | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| APO1 | ||||||||||||
| 11 sites in LDa | – | – | – | – | 0.001 | 0.180 | – | – | – | – | 0.014 | 0.109 |
| 948 | 0.003 | 0.191 | 0.032 | 0.123 | ||||||||
| APO2 | ||||||||||||
| 102, 888b | – | – | – | – | 0.007 | 0.123 | – | – | – | – | 0.012 | 0.112 |
| DEP1 | ||||||||||||
| 41 | 0.003 | 0.053 | – | – | – | – | 0.035 | 0.038 | – | – | – | – |
| 314c | 0.011 | 0.039 | – | – | – | – | 0.005 | 0.064 | – | – | – | – |
| 683, 970c | 0.006 | 0.060 | – | – | – | – | 0.004 | 0.089 | – | – | – | – |
| FON1 | ||||||||||||
| 1062 | 0.045 | 0.036 | – | – | – | – | 0.024 | 0.056 | – | – | – | – |
| HD1 | ||||||||||||
| 10 sites in LDd | – | – | 0.001 | 0.089 | – | – | – | – | 0.011 | 0.070 | – | – |
| 646 | – | – | 0.006 | 0.064 | – | – | – | – | 0.012 | 0.067 | – | – |
| 652 | – | – | 0.015 | 0.052 | – | – | – | – | 0.010 | 0.071 | – | – |
| 660 | – | – | 0.005 | 0.088 | – | – | – | – | 0.012 | 0.093 | – | – |
| 1216 | – | – | 0.005 | 0.068 | 0.001 | 0.185 | – | – | 0.023 | 0.057 | 0.039 | 0.078 |
| SP1 | ||||||||||||
| 922, 983e | – | – | – | – | 0.001 | 0.170 | – | – | – | – | 0.008 | 0.126 |
a, 11 sites in complete LD: 40, 57, 537, 546, 627, 765, 795, 850, 951, 1005, 1188; d, 10 sites in complete LD: 248, 249, 440, 466, 469, 487, 512, 661, 1062, 1324
a, b, c, d, and e were in complete LD
Estimates of the allelic effect for phenotypic variation
| Position (Position (bp) | Allele | 2013 | 2014 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PL | PB | SB | PL | PB | SB | ||
| APO1 | |||||||
| 40a | A | – | – | 14.4 | – | – | 9.9 |
| G | – | – | 0.0 | – | – | 0.0 | |
| 948 | C | – | – | 8.9 | – | – | 15.5 |
| DEL | – | – | 14.6 | – | – | 9.8 | |
| A | – | – | 0.0 | – | – | 0.0 | |
| APO2 | |||||||
| 102b | G | – | – | 13.2 | – | – | 11.1 |
| A | – | – | 0.0 | – | – | 0.0 | |
| DEP1 | |||||||
| 41 | A | 5.7 | – | – | 4.3 | – | – |
| G | 0.0 | – | – | 0.0 | – | – | |
| 314c | A | −7.4 | – | – | −8.5 | – | – |
| G | 0.0 | – | – | 0.0 | – | – | |
| 683c | T | 4.2 | – | – | 4.1 | – | – |
| A | 11.5 | – | – | 12.5 | – | – | |
| DEL | 0.0 | – | – | 0.0 | – | – | |
| FON1 | |||||||
| 1062 | C | −1.3 | – | – | −1.2 | – | – |
| G | 0.0 | – | – | 0.0 | – | – | |
| HD1 | |||||||
| 247d | G | – | 2.1 | – | – | 1.9 | – |
| A | – | 0.0 | – | – | 0.0 | – | |
| 646 | G | – | 1.9 | – | – | 2.0 | – |
| DEL | – | 0.0 | – | 0.0 | – | ||
| 652 | G | – | 1.9 | – | – | 2.3 | – |
| DEL | – | 0.0 | – | – | 0.0 | – | |
| 660 | C | – | 1.2 | – | – | 1.7 | – |
| G | – | 2.7 | – | 2.9 | – | ||
| DEL | 0.0 | – | – | 0.0 | – | ||
| 1216 | A | – | −1.8 | −11.9 | – | −1.7 | −6.8 |
| DEL | 0.0 | 0.0 | – | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
| SP1 | |||||||
| 922e | G | – | – | −10.5 | – | – | −8.0 |
| A | – | – | 0.0 | – | – | 0.0 | |
a, 11 sites in complete LD: 40, 57, 537, 546, 627, 765, 795, 850, 951, 1005, 1188; b, complete LD with 888; c, complete LD with 970; d, 10 sites in complete LD: 248, 249, 440, 466, 469, 487, 512, 661, 1062, 1324; e, complete LD with 983
Fig. 4Unweighted Pair Group Method with Arithmetic Mean (UPGMA) cluster analysis. a Allele combinations associated with panicle-related traits were divided into four clusters. Colors indicate favorable alleles for panicle-related traits: yellow, PL; sky blue, PB; yellow-green, SB. b Comparisons of average SPP values between clusters for 2 years (mean ± SEM)