| Literature DB >> 34769361 |
Jingjuan Zhang1, Maoyun She1, Rongchang Yang1, Yanjie Jiang1, Yebo Qin1, Shengnan Zhai1, Sadegh Balotf1, Yun Zhao1, Masood Anwar1, Zaid Alhabbar1,2, Angéla Juhász1, Jiansheng Chen1, Hang Liu1, Qier Liu1, Ting Zheng1, Fan Yang1, Junkang Rong3, Kefei Chen4, Meiqin Lu5, Shahidul Islam1, Wujun Ma1.
Abstract
In the present study, four large-scale field trials using two doubled haploid wheat populations were conducted in different environments for two years. Grain protein content (GPC) and 21 other yield-related traits were investigated. A total of 227 QTL were mapped on 18 chromosomes, which formed 35 QTL clusters. The potential candidate genes underlying the QTL clusters were suggested. Furthermore, adding to the significant correlations between yield and its related traits, correlation variations were clearly shown within the QTL clusters. The QTL clusters with consistently positive correlations were suggested to be directly utilized in wheat breeding, including 1B.2, 2A.2, 2B (4.9-16.5 Mb), 2B.3, 3B (68.9-214.5 Mb), 4A.2, 4B.2, 4D, 5A.1, 5A.2, 5B.1, and 5D. The QTL clusters with negative alignments between traits may also have potential value for yield or GPC improvement in specific environments, including 1A.1, 2B.1, 1B.3, 5A.3, 5B.2 (612.1-613.6 Mb), 7A.1, 7A.2, 7B.1, and 7B.2. One GPC QTL (5B.2: 671.3-672.9 Mb) contributed by cultivar Spitfire was positively associated with nitrogen use efficiency or grain protein yield and is highly recommended for breeding use. Another GPC QTL without negatively pleiotropic effects on 2A (50.0-56.3 Mb), 2D, 4D, and 6B is suggested for quality wheat breeding.Entities:
Keywords: DH populations; QTL; QTL cluster; consensus map; correlation; grain yield-related traits
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34769361 PMCID: PMC8585063 DOI: 10.3390/ijms222111934
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Figure 1Box plots of yield-related traits of three parental lines in BW and SpB populations. GN: grain number; TGW: thousand grain weight; GPC: grain protein content; PY: protein yield; NUE: nitrogen use efficiency; Biomass: plant biomass per m2; BioTiller: biomass per tiller; GW: grain weight; GWTiller: grain weight per tiller; Spikelet No.: spikelet number per spike; PH: plant height; PedLength: peduncle length; PedRatio: peduncle ratio; Keycard D: keycard diameter; Beth: Bethlehem; Wes: Westonia; Spit: Spitfire. Values with the same letter or without letter are statistically not different at p = 0.05.
Figure 2Violin plots of yield-related traits and grain protein content of BW and SpB populations. TGW: thousand grain weight; NUE: nitrogen use efficiency.
Figure 3Phenotypic correlations between yield-related traits in Williams in BW and SpB populations. The values are correlation coefficients r. The areas and colors of ellipses show the absolute values of the corresponding correlations. Right and left oblique ellipses indicate positive and negative correlations, respectively. The values without ellipses indicate insignificance at the 0.05 level. Biosq: plant biomass per m2; BioTiller: biomass per tiller; GWsq: grain weight per m2; GWplant: grain weight per plant; GWTiller: grain weight per tiller; Spikelet: spikelet number per spike; GNspike: grain number per spike; TGW: thousand grain weight; SdArea: seed area; SdLength: seed length; SdThick: seed thickness; SdWidth: seed width; Keycard: keycard diameter; Height: plant height; StLength: stem length; PedLength: peduncle length; SpLength: spike length; PedRatio: peduncle ratio; GPC: grain protein content; GY: grain yield; PY: protein yield; NUE: nitrogen use efficiency; Anthesis: days to anthesis.
Figure 4The circos graph of the consensus map of BW–SpB, the consensus map of Wang et al. (2014), and the physical map of the wheat genome (IWGSC RefSeq v1.0). (a) The chromosomes and the physical location scale of wheat. (b) Physical map of the SNP markers using in BW–SpB. (c) The collinearity between the consensus map of BW–SpB and the physical map. (d) The consensus map of BW–SpB. (e) The collinearity between BW–SpB and the consensus map of Wang et al. (f) The consensus map of Wang et al. (2014).
Figure 5Potential candidate genes in QTL clusters in 18 wheat chromosomes. ABA: abscisic acid; ABC: ABC transporter ATP-binding protein ARB1; GA: gibberellin acid; GATA: GATA transcription factor; MADS: MADS-box transcription factors; MYB: MYB related transcription factors; NAC: NAC domain proteins; SPS: sucrose phosphate synthase; WRKY: WRKY transcription factors; WUSCHEL: WUSCHEL-like homeobox.
Figure 6Significant QTL formed three QTL clusters on the homologous region on 1B in both populations, BW and SpB. Homologous regions in both populations are highlighted in light blue; markers for QTL highlighted in red; homologous markers highlighted in blue.
Figure 7Significant QTL formed three QTL clusters on the homologous regions on 2B in BW and SpB populations. Homologous regions in both populations are highlighted in light blue; markers for QTL highlighted in red; homologous markers in blue.
Figure 8Significant QTL formed two QTL clusters on 3A—one on the homologous region on 3A—in both populations, BW and SpB. Homologous regions in both populations are highlighted in light blue; the QTL cluster on one population is highlighted in yellow; markers for QTL are highlighted in red; homologous markers are highlighted in blue.
Figure 9Significant QTL formed two QTL clusters on the homologous regions on 5B in both populations, BW and SpB. Homologous regions in both populations are highlighted in light blue; markers for QTL highlighted in red; homologous markers in blue.
Figure 10Significant QTL formed one QTL cluster on the homologous region on 7D in both populations, BW and SpB. Homologous regions in both populations are highlighted in light blue; markers for QTL highlighted in red; homologous markers highlighted in blue.