| Literature DB >> 30497385 |
Liwei Liu1, Wei Li1, Chenxu Liu1, Baojian Chen1, Xiaolong Tian1, Chen Chen1, Jinlong Li1, Shaojiang Chen2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In vivo haploid induction (HI) based on Stock6-derived inducer lines has been the most prevalent means of producing haploids. Nevertheless, the biological mechanism of HI is not fully understood, the twin-embryo kernels had been found during haploid induction, which may provide potential evidence for the abnormal double fertilization during HI.Entities:
Keywords: Flow cytometry; Haploid induction rate; In vivo haploid induction; Twin-embryo; Twin-embryo kernel rate
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30497385 PMCID: PMC6267813 DOI: 10.1186/s12870-018-1422-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Plant Biol ISSN: 1471-2229 Impact factor: 4.215
Comparison of two haploid inducer lines, CAUHOI and CAU5, for haploid induction rate and twin-embryo rate
| Male parent | Tested kernels | TEKR (%) | HIR (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | Range | Mean | Range | ||
| CAUHOI | 43,025 | 0.07 a | 0–0.35 | 4.88 b† | 0.9–11.86 |
| CAU5 | 25,153 | 0.16 a | 0–0.33 | 9.62 a | 6.54–15.75 |
| selfed | 19,961 | 0 | NA | 0 | NA |
HIR haploid induction rate, HIR (%) (number of haploids/total number of induced seeds) × 100%, TEKR Rate of twin-embryo kernel rate. TEKR (%) (number of twin-embryo kernels/total number of induced seeds) × 100%
†Values followed by the same lowercase letter are not significantly different at p < 0.05
HIR and TEKR in maize hybrid ND5598 pollinated by 4 haploid inducers
| Female parent | Male parent | Na | HIR (%) | TEKR (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5598 | CAU2 | 7637 | 10.27 | 0.12 |
| CAU5 | 2855 | 9.42 | 0.11 | |
| CAUwx | 8769 | 5.33 | 0.08 | |
| CAUHOI | 8208 | 2.29 | 0.02 |
aThe total number of induced seeds
Numbers of different types of twin-embryo kernels
| Structure | Ploidy | Sizea | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Classification | Type V | Type Y | Type II | Uncertain | Diploid | Haploid | Type A | Type B |
| Number | 113 | 93 | 7 | 24 | 207 | 30 | 178 | 59 |
aType I embryos were the same size between two plantules; type II embryos were of different size
Fig. 1Classification based on the phenotype of twin-embryo kernels. A-D were type V, type Y, type II and uncertain type twin-embryo kernels. a-d were corresponding phenotype after embryo separation
Fig. 2Field performance of twin embryo plants. A Twin plants in seedling stage. B PHD type I, II, and III twin plants in the field. C1-C3 Ear performance of three PHD types. D Variation of plant height difference between twin plants
Fig. 3Ploidy determinations based on chromosome number and flow cytometry. A-B were diploid twin-embryo kernel and haploid twin-embryo kernel, respectively. a-b were chromosome number of corresponding diploid and haploid twin-embryo kernel. C1-C5 were flow cytometry result of diploids (C1), haploids (C2), and three kinds of aneuploids (C3, C4 and C5). Y axis is the number of cells detected, x axis represents for the fluorescent light area (FL2-A)
Fig. 4Genotyping results (SNPs) for plants from twin-embryo kernels. Red for the number of same genotype between two twin plants and green for different genotype between twin plants. Percentage of the same genotype is inside the red bar