| Literature DB >> 35318389 |
Dongyu Liang1, Minghu Zhang1, Xin Liu1, Hui Li1, Zhenjiao Jia1, Dinghao Wang1, Ting Peng1, Ming Hao1, Dengcai Liu2,1, Bo Jiang1, Lin Huang2,1, Shunzong Ning1, Zhongwei Yuan1, Xuejiao Chen1, Lianquan Zhang3,4.
Abstract
Stem solidness is an important agronomic trait for increasing the ability of wheat to resist lodging. In this study, four new synthetic hexaploid wheat with solid stems were developed from natural chromosome doubling of F1 hybrids between a solid-stemmed durum wheat (Triticum turgidum ssp. durum, 2n = 4x = 28, AABB) and four Aegilops tauschii (2n = 2x = 14, DD) accessions. The solid expression of the second internode at the base of the stem was stable for two synthetic hexalpoid wheat Syn-SAU-117 and Syn-SAU-119 grown in both the greenhouse and field. The lodging resistance of four synthetic solid-stem wheats is stronger than that of CS, and Syn-SAU-116 has the strongest lodging resistance, followed by Syn-SAU-119. The paraffin sections of the second internode showed that four synthetic wheat lines had large outer diameters, well-developed mechanical tissues, large number of vascular bundles, and similar anatomical characteristics with solid-stemmed durum wheat. The chromosomal composition of four synthetic hexaploid wheat was identified by FISH (fluorescence in situ hybridization) using Oligo-pSc119.2-1 and Oligo-pTa535-1. At adult stage, all four synthetic hexaploid wheat showed high resistance to mixed physiological races of stripe rust pathogen (CYR31, CYR32, CYR33, CYR34). These synthetic hexaploid wheat lines provide new materials for the improvement of common wheat.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35318389 PMCID: PMC8941074 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-08866-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.996
Figure 1Root tip chromosomes of the F1 hybrid of Ma (Triticum turgidum ssp. durum) and Aegilops tauschii Cosson. (a): Ma/AS78 F1; (b): Ma/AS92 F1; (c): Ma/AS95 F1; (d): Ma/AS96 F1.
Self seed setting rate of hybrid F1 between Ma and different Ae. tauschii accessions.
| Hybrid combination | No. selfed florets | No. self-setting seeds | Seed setting (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ma/AS78 F1 | 700 | 117 | 16.71 |
| Ma/AS92 F1 | 910 | 150 | 16.48 |
| Ma/AS95 F1 | 722 | 147 | 20.36 |
| Ma/AS96 F1 | 1230 | 317 | 25.77 |
Figure 2Morphology of synthetic hexaploid wheat and its parents. (a): Ma (left), Syn-SAU-119 (middle) and AS96 (right); (b), (c): Ma (top), Syn-SAU-119 (middle) and AS96 (bottom).
Agronomic trait comparison of synthetic hexalpoid wheat and their parents.
| Plant materials | Plant height (cm) | Spike length (cm) | Seed setting (%) | Solidness (field/greenhouse) | Adult ITsa |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ma | 82.3 | 10.46 | 54.6 | 5.0/5.0 | 1 |
| Syn-SAU-116 | 90.2## | 14.4**## | 81.87**## | 5.0/4.2 | 3 |
| AS78 | 50 | 8.06 | 70.69 | 1.3/-b | 7 |
| Syn-SAU-117 | 92*## | 13.6**## | 47.37# | 4.1/3.2 | 2 |
| AS92 | 61.7 | 9.39 | 78.13 | 1.2/-b | 8 |
| Syn-SAU-118 | 88.25## | 14.5**## | 76.77* | 4.5/5.0 | 2 |
| AS95 | 50.4 | 8.54 | 68.32 | 1.0/-b | 7 |
| Syn-SAU-119 | 91.5*## | 14.28**## | 70.51 | 5.0/5.0 | 2 |
| AS96 | 48.4 | 8.01 | 73.16 | 2.0/-b | 7 |
athe infection type to stripe rust; bno data.
*Significantly different from T. durum Ma at the 0.05 level, **at the 0.01 level; # significantly different from Ae. tauschii at the 0.05 level, ##at the 0.01 level.
Figure 3Stripe rust resistance of synthetic wheat at the adult stage. (a): SY95-71; (b): Ma; (c): Syn-SAU-116; (d): Syn-SAU-117; (e): Syn-SAU-118; (f): Syn-SAU-119.
Figure 4Stalk solidity of synthetic hexaploid wheat grown in the greenhouse. (a): Ma; (b): CS; (c): Syn-SAU-116; (d): Syn-SAU-117; (e): Syn-SAU-118 and (f): Syn-SAU-119. Numbers 1–5 indicate the first to fifth stem internodes (from the base to the top), respectively.
Figure 5Stalk solidity of synthetic hexaploid wheat grown in the field. (a): Ma; (b): CS; (c): Syn-SAU-116; (d): Syn-SAU-117; (e): Syn-SAU-118 and (f): Syn-SAU-119. Numbers 1–5 indicate the first to fifth stem internodes (from the base to the top), respectively.
Investigation of lodging resistance of synthetic hexalpoid wheat in the field.
| Plant materials | Breaking resistance (N) | Bending moment (cm g) | Lodging index |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chinese Spring | 9.068 | 785.8865 | 8666.4003 |
| Ma | 16.51 | 890.7525 | 5395.2302 |
| Syn-SAU-116 | 7.136*## | 165.6736**## | 2321.659**## |
| Syn-SAU-117 | 9.939# | 672.5422 | 6766.4266**## |
| Syn-SAU-118 | 11.523 | 700.785 | 6081.619** |
| Syn-SAU-119 | 9.379# | 474.5922*# | 5060.2655** |
*Significantly different from CS at the 0.05 level, **at the 0.01 level; # significantly different from T. durum Ma at the 0.05 level, ##at the 0.01 level.
Correlation coefficients between lodging index and mechanical traits in synthetic hexalpoid wheat in the field.
| Mechanical traits | Bending moment | Lodging index |
|---|---|---|
| Breaking resistance | 0.460* | − 0.129 |
| Bending moment | 0.798** |
* And ** indicate significant at the P < 0.05 and P < 0.01 levels, respectively.
Figure 6Anatomical structure of the second internode of synthetic hexaploid wheat and its parents in the field. (a): Ma; (b): Syn-SAU-116; (c): AS78; (d): Syn-SAU-117; (e): AS92; (f): Syn-SAU-118; (g): AS95; (h): Syn-SAU-119; (i): AS96.
Comparisons of stem character of synthetic hexalpoid wheat and their parents in the field.
| Plant materials | Outer diameter of culm (μm) | Width of pith cavity (μm) | Ratio of wall thickness to outer diameter of culm (%) | Percentage of mechanical tissues (%) | No. vascular bundles in transverse section |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ma | 4669.54 | 0 | 50 | 25.99 | 64 |
| Syn-SAU-116 | 4209.18**## | 0## | 50## | 28.27**## | 59**## |
| AS78 | 1471.58 | 580.93 | 30.26 | 14.25 | 27 |
| Syn-SAU-117 | 3563.52**## | 709.27**## | 40.05** | 21.48** | 62.33**## |
| AS92 | 1509.86 | 287.95 | 40.46 | 21.39 | 40 |
| Syn-SAU-118 | 3380.75**## | 324.76**## | 45.2**## | 26.38## | 52**## |
| AS95 | 1692.28 | 721.06 | 28.7 | 13.52 | 30 |
| Syn-SAU-119 | 3557.54**## | 0## | 50## | 34.29** | 62.5**## |
| AS96 | 1726.55 | 523.32 | 34.85 | 31.67 | 38 |
*Significantly different from T. durum Ma at the 0.05 level, **at the 0.01 level; # significantly different from Ae. tauschii at the 0.05 level, ##at the 0.01 level.
Correlation coefficients between lodging index and traits in synthetic hexalpoid wheat in the field.
| Traits | Width of pith | Ratio of wall thickness to outer diameter of culm | Percentage of mechanical tissues | Number of vascular bundles in transverse section | Lodging index |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Outer diameter of culm | − 0.28 | 0.306 | − 0.119 | 0.402 | − 0.539* |
| Width of pith cavity | − 0.998** | − 0.699** | 0.129 | 0.677** | |
| Ratio of wall thickness to outer diameter of culm | 0.694** | − 0.09 | − 0.686** | ||
| Percentage of mechanical tissues | − 0.018 | − 0.326 | |||
| No. vascular bundles in transverse section | 0.078 |
*And ** indicate significant at the P < 0.05 and P < 0.01 levels, respectively.
Chromosome observation of synthetic hexalpoid wheat.
| Code | No. of plants observed | Chromosome pairing configuration of synthetic hexaploid wheat | |
|---|---|---|---|
| n = 41 | n = 42 | ||
| Syn-SAU-116 | 6 | 6 | 5.92 I + 10.56 rod II + 7.48 ring II |
| Syn-SAU-117 | 5 | 11 | 5.38 I + 12.67 rod II + 5.64 ring II |
| Syn-SAU-118 | 2 | 9 | 4.32 I + 10.06 rod II + 8.78 ring II |
| Syn-SAU-119 | 2 | 6 | 6.08 I + 8.61 rod II + 9.35 ring II |
Figure 7FISH identification of Syn-SAU-116 and its parent. (a): FISH karyotypes of the A, B, and D genomes in Syn-SAU-116 and its parents; (b): Ma; (c): Syn-SAU-116; (d): AS78.
Figure 8Chromosome pairings of pollen mother cells at meiotic metaphase I in synthetic hexaploid wheat. (a): Syn-SAU-116 (6I + 18II); (b): Syn-SAU-117 (4I + 19II); (c): Syn-SAU-118 (2I + 20II); (d): Syn-SAU-119 (21II). Arrows indicate univalents.