| Literature DB >> 30873183 |
Rebecca Caroline Ulbricht Ferreira1, Letícia Aparecida de Castro Lara2, Lucimara Chiari3, Sanzio Carvalho Lima Barrios3, Cacilda Borges do Valle3, José Raul Valério3, Fabrícia Zimermann Vilela Torres3, Antonio Augusto Franco Garcia2, Anete Pereira de Souza1,4.
Abstract
Urochloa decumbens (Stapf) R. D. Webster is one of the most important African forage grasses in Brazilian beef production. Currently available genetic-genomic resources for this species are restricted mainly due to polyploidy and apomixis. Therefore, crucial genomic-molecular studies such as the construction of genetic maps and the mapping of quantitative trait loci (QTLs) are very challenging and consequently affect the advancement of molecular breeding. The objectives of this work were to (i) construct an integrated U. decumbens genetic map for a full-sibling progeny using GBS-based markers with allele dosage information, (ii) detect QTLs for spittlebug (Notozulia entreriana) resistance, and (iii) seek putative candidate genes involved in defense against biotic stresses. We used the Setaria viridis genome a reference to align GBS reads and selected 4,240 high-quality SNP markers with allele dosage information. Of these markers, 1,000 were distributed throughout nine homologous groups with a cumulative map length of 1,335.09 cM and an average marker density of 1.33 cM. We detected QTLs for resistance to spittlebug, an important pasture insect pest, that explained between 4.66 and 6.24% of the phenotypic variation. These QTLs are in regions containing putative candidate genes related to defense against biotic stresses. Because this is the first genetic map with SNP autotetraploid dosage data and QTL detection in U. decumbens, it will be useful for future evolutionary studies, genome assembly, and other QTL analyses in Urochloa spp. Moreover, the results might facilitate the isolation of spittlebug-related candidate genes and help clarify the mechanism of spittlebug resistance. These approaches will improve selection efficiency and accuracy in U. decumbens molecular breeding and shorten the breeding cycle.Entities:
Keywords: Brachiaria; SNP; allele dosage; linkage map; polyploidy; quantitative traits; signalgrass
Year: 2019 PMID: 30873183 PMCID: PMC6401981 DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2019.00092
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Plant Sci ISSN: 1664-462X Impact factor: 5.753
FIGURE 1Allele dosage in the parents and progeny, and the frequency histograms. (A) Marker S.5_20487325. Red squares represent the Aaaa parent and offspring, and blue circles represent the aaaa parent and offspring. (B) Marker D.2_28922605. Red squares represent the AAaa parent and offspring, blue circles represent the aaaa parent and the Aaaa offspring, and green triangles represent the aaaa offspring. (C) Marker XSS.1_23891474. Red squares represent AAAa parent and offspring, blue circles represent the Aaaa parent and the AAaa offspring, and green triangles represent the Aaaa offspring.
FIGURE 2Linkage map for U. decumbens: homologous groups from 1 to 4. The genotype configuration of each marker is indicated by the marker name prefix and color. Simplex markers are represented in black; duplex markers are represented in green; double-simplex markers are represented in purple; X-double-simplex markers are represented in light blue; duplex-simplex markers are represented in dark blue and double-duplex markers are represented in orange. QTLs are identified in HG1 and HG2.
FIGURE 3Linkage map for U. decumbens: homologous groups from 5 to 9. The genotype configuration of each marker is indicated by the marker name prefix and color. Simplex markers are represented in black; duplex markers are represented in green; double-simplex markers are represented in purple; X-double-simplex markers are represented in light blue; duplex-simplex markers are represented in dark blue and double-duplex markers are represented in orange. A QTL is identified in HG6.
The number of GBS-based markers after significance testing, the number of mapped markers within each homology group (HG), and the length, marker density and largest distance between adjacent markers in each HG (cM) in the genetic map.
| HG | No. GBS-based markers∗ | No. mapped markers | Length of HG (cM) | Marker density (cM) | Largest distance between adjacent markers (cM) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 132 | 100 | 136.74 | 1.37 | 9.1 |
| 2 | 181 | 121 | 164.95 | 1.36 | 10.5 |
| 3 | 219 | 138 | 151.56 | 1.10 | 10.7 |
| 4 | 169 | 101 | 139.70 | 1.38 | 10.7 |
| 5 | 183 | 123 | 129.70 | 1.05 | 8.4 |
| 6 | 100 | 63 | 161.72 | 2.57 | 10.4 |
| 7 | 154 | 99 | 140.08 | 1.41 | 9.1 |
| 8 | 82 | 68 | 144.07 | 2.12 | 12.4 |
| 9 | 295 | 187 | 166.57 | 0.89 | 5.2 |
| Total | 1,515 | 1,000 | 1,335.09 | – | – |
FIGURE 4Distribution of the distance between adjacent markers on the U. decumbens consensus genetic map.
Distribution of SNPs into genotypic classes.
| Type | Parent 1 | Parent 2 | P1 dosage | P2 dosage | SNP initial number | Mapped SNP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Null (N) | AAAA | BBBB | 4 | 0 | 8 | 0 |
| Simplex (S) | AAAA | AAAB | 4 | 3 | 1,332 | 591 |
| Simplex (S) | ABBB | BBBB | 1 | 0 | ||
| Triplex (T) | AAAA | ABBB | 4 | 1 | 126 | 0 |
| Triplex (T) | AAAB | BBBB | 3 | 0 | ||
| Duplex (D) | AAAA | AABB | 4 | 2 | 720 | 172 |
| Duplex (D) | AABB | BBBB | 2 | 0 | ||
| Double-simplex (SS) | AAAB | AAAB | 3 | 3 | 1,013 | 78 |
| Double-simplex (SS) | ABBB | ABBB | 1 | 1 | ||
| X-double-simplex (XSS) | AAAB | ABBB | 3 | 1 | 65 | 8 |
| Simplex-duplex (SD) | AAAB | AABB | 3 | 2 | 11 | 0 |
| Duplex-simplex (DS) | AABB | ABBB | 2 | 1 | 773 | 116 |
| Double-duplex (DD) | AABB | AABB | 2 | 2 | 192 | 35 |
| Total | 4,240 | 1,000 |
Values of AIC and SIC for Ga matrix, considering different VCOV structures.
| Ga Matrix | Df | AIC | SIC | logREML | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ID | 4 | 18868.02 | 18891.51 | -9430.010 | |
| DIAG | 5 | 18866.02 | 18895.41 | -9428.021 | |
| CS | 5 | 18848.03 | -9419.014 | Selected | |
| CS-Het | 6 | 18880.37 | -9416.565 | ||
| FA1 | 7 | 18847.13 | 18888.24 | -9416.565 | |
| US | 6 | 18880.37 | -9416.565 |
Summary of the predicted genotypic values for progeny and checks, genetic () and residual () variance and heritability () for spittlebug resistance.
| Progeny predicted means | ( | ( | ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Minimum | Mean | Maximum | |||
| 56.16 | 70.81 | 85.07 | 68.86 | 382.32 | 0.3730 |
| Basilisk | 83.18 | Highly susceptible | |||
| Marandu | 38.79 | Resistant | |||
| Ipyporã | 17.72 | Highly resistant | |||
| MulatoII | 55.96 | Intermediary | |||
Quantitative trait loci information for the spittlebug resistance trait analyzed in the U. decumbens progeny.
| Trait | HG | QTL position (cM) | LOD | Variance explained (%) | SIC | Configuration |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nymphal survive | 1 | 95 | 4.68 | 4.80 | 85.33 | Duplex (D) |
| Nymphal survive | 2 | 60 | 4.39 | 4.66 | 93.03 | Duplex (D) |
| Nymphal survive | 6 | 23 | 5.49 | 6.24 | 99.07 | Simplex (S) |