Xiaolei Zhang1, Ming Lu2, Aiai Xia3, Tao Xu4, Zhenhai Cui5, Ruiying Zhang6, Wenguo Liu7, Yan He8. 1. Quality and Safety Institute of Agricultural Products, Heilongjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Harbin, 150086, China. 2. Maize Research Institute, Jilin Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Gongzhuling, 136100, China. 3. Sanya institute of China Agricultural University, Sanya, 572025, China. 4. Tieling Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Tieling, 112000, China. 5. College of Biological Science and Technology, Liaoning Province Research Center of Plant Genetic Engineering Technology, Shenyang Key Laboratory of Maize Genomic Selection Breeding, Shenyang Agricultural University, Shenyang, 110866, China. zhcui@syau.edu.cn. 6. Quality and Safety Institute of Agricultural Products, Heilongjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Harbin, 150086, China. zhruiying@163.com. 7. Maize Research Institute, Jilin Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Gongzhuling, 136100, China. liuwenguo168@163.com. 8. Sanya institute of China Agricultural University, Sanya, 572025, China. yh352@cau.edu.cn.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The maize husk consists of numerous leafy layers and plays vital roles in protecting the ear from pathogen infection and dehydration. Teosinte, the wild ancestor of maize, has about three layers of small husk outer covering the ear. Although several quantitative trait loci (QTL) underlying husk morphology variation have been reported, the genetic basis of husk traits between teosinte and maize remains unclear. RESULTS: A linkage population including 191 BC2F8 inbred lines generated from the maize line Mo17 and the teosinte line X26-4 was used to identify QTL associated with three husk traits: i.e., husk length (HL), husk width (HW) and the number of husk layers (HN). The best linear unbiased predictor (BLUP) depicted wide phenotypic variation and high heritability of all three traits. The HL exhibited greater correlation with HW than HN. A total of 4 QTLs were identified including 1, 1, 2, which are associated with HL, HW and HN, respectively. The proportion of phenotypic variation explained by these QTLs was 9.6, 8.9 and 8.1% for HL, HN and HW, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The QTLs identified in this study will pave a path to explore candidate genes regulating husk growth and development, and benefit the molecular breeding program based on molecular marker-assisted selection to cultivate maize varieties with an ideal husk morphology.
BACKGROUND: The maizehusk consists of numerous leafy layers and plays vital roles in protecting the ear from pathogen infection and dehydration. Teosinte, the wild ancestor of maize, has about three layers of small husk outer covering the ear. Although several quantitative trait loci (QTL) underlying husk morphology variation have been reported, the genetic basis of husk traits between teosinte and maize remains unclear. RESULTS: A linkage population including 191 BC2F8 inbred lines generated from the maize line Mo17 and the teosinte line X26-4 was used to identify QTL associated with three husk traits: i.e., husk length (HL), husk width (HW) and the number of husk layers (HN). The best linear unbiased predictor (BLUP) depicted wide phenotypic variation and high heritability of all three traits. The HL exhibited greater correlation with HW than HN. A total of 4 QTLs were identified including 1, 1, 2, which are associated with HL, HW and HN, respectively. The proportion of phenotypic variation explained by these QTLs was 9.6, 8.9 and 8.1% for HL, HN and HW, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The QTLs identified in this study will pave a path to explore candidate genes regulating husk growth and development, and benefit the molecular breeding program based on molecular marker-assisted selection to cultivate maize varieties with an ideal husk morphology.
Authors: Yoshihiro Matsuoka; Yves Vigouroux; Major M Goodman; Jesus Sanchez G; Edward Buckler; John Doebley Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2002-04-30 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Joost van Heerwaarden; John Doebley; William H Briggs; Jeffrey C Glaubitz; Major M Goodman; Jose de Jesus Sanchez Gonzalez; Jeffrey Ross-Ibarra Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2010-12-28 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Ana Cao; Rogelio Santiago; Antonio J Ramos; Xosé C Souto; Olga Aguín; Rosa Ana Malvar; Ana Butrón Journal: Int J Food Microbiol Date: 2014-02-19 Impact factor: 5.277
Authors: Dolores R Piperno; Anthony J Ranere; Irene Holst; Jose Iriarte; Ruth Dickau Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2009-03-23 Impact factor: 11.205