| Literature DB >> 35741783 |
Hsuan Chen1, Ryan N Contreras2.
Abstract
Hibiscus syriacus, azalea, is an important woody ornamental shrub planted throughout many temperate and subtropical regions of the world. However, flower size is smaller in this species than some of its relatives. To increase flower size, interspecific hybridization has been used, and such hybrid cultivars are usually characterized by larger flowers, increased vigor, diverse leaf shapes, and reduced fertility. Our earlier studies have shown that these hybrid cultivars could backcross with H. syriacus when used as male parents. To understand the breeding potential of these hybrid cultivars, two popular tetraploid hybrid cultivars, 'Lohengrin' and 'Resi', were used as pollen parents to backcross several tetraploid H. syriacus cultivars. As a result, 28.76% and 64.4% of 'Lohengrin' and 'Resi' progenies exhibited larger flowers than both of their parents. Interestingly, 14 of 18 progenies of 'Resi' were putative hexaploids, whereas 19 tested 'Lohengrin' progenies were tetraploid. Because putative hexaploid progenies were only observed among progenies of 'Resi', this hybrid cultivar appears to produce unreduced gametes. In addition, among the 14 putative hexaploids derived from 'Resi', 11 had larger flowers than both of their parents and their tetraploid siblings (p < 0.05). The 45S rDNA and 5S rDNA locus segregation among those BC1F1 progenies was tested by fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH), and the wide range of 45S rDNA signal numbers among siblings indicated that these aneuploids resulted from unequal segregation or chromosome rearrangement. Chromosome counting confirmed aneuploidy among BC1F1 progenies. Ploidy diversity and aneuploidy have been known to contribute to various elements of morphological diversity, such as larger flower size and reduced fertility, which are important in ornamental plant breeding. The present study demonstrated the breeding potential of interspecific Hibiscus cultivars for increasing ploidy level and flower size.Entities:
Keywords: aneuploidy; infertility; interspecific hybridization; ornamental plant breeding; ploidy manipulation; polyploidy; unreduced gamete
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35741783 PMCID: PMC9222940 DOI: 10.3390/genes13061022
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genes (Basel) ISSN: 2073-4425 Impact factor: 4.141
Genome size and ploidy level of H. syriacus cultivar standard, interspecifichybrid cultivars, ‘Lohengrin’ and ‘Resi’, and BC1F1 hybrids 1.
| Cultivar or Accession | Female Parent | Male Parent | Predicted Ploidy Level | Relative 2C Genome Size, Mean ± SE (pg) | Petal Area 2 (cm2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | 4.63 ± 0.05 | - | |||
| ‘Resi’ | 4 | 4.63 ± 0.08 | 35.5 | ||
| ‘Lohengrin’ | 4 | 4.58 ± 0.03 | 28.0 | ||
| H2015-019-08 | ‘Resi’ | 6 | 7.05 ± 0.01 | 53.0 * | |
| H2015-019-09 | ‘Resi’ | 6 | 6.96 ± 0.05 | 54.9 * | |
| H2015-024-01 | ‘Resi’ | 6 | 6.98 ± 0.02 | 40.0 * | |
| H2015-024-05 | ‘Resi’ | 6 | 7.02 ± 0.05 | 34.1 | |
| H2015-024-07 | ‘Resi’ | 6 | 6.97 ± 0.03 | 45.7 * | |
| H2015-024-08 | ‘Resi’ | 6 | 6.99 ± 0.03 | 16.2 | |
| H2015-016-01 | ‘Resi’ | 6 | 7.05 ± 0.03 | 51.5 * | |
| H2015-016-11 | ‘Resi’ | 6 | 7.21 ± 0.09 | 42.6 * | |
| H2015-016-02 | ‘Resi’ | 6 | 7.07 ± 0.03 | 50.2 * | |
| H2015-016-03 | ‘Resi’ | 6 | 7.16 ± 0.08 | 35.2 | |
| H2015-016-05 | ‘Resi’ | 6 | 7.04 ± 0.08 | 46.5 * | |
| H2015-016-08 | ‘Resi’ | 6 | 7.03 ± 0.00 | 37.3 * | |
| H2015-017-05 | ‘Resi’ | 6 | 6.94 ± 0.07 | 42.6 * | |
| H2015-109-01 | ‘Resi’ | 6 | 7.09 ± 0.08 | 52.6 * | |
| H2015-108-02 | ‘Resi’ | 4 | 4.76 ± 0.07 | 36.6 * | |
| H2015-122-01 | ‘Resi’ | 4 | 4.82 ± 0.03 | 45.3 * | |
| H2015-122-02 | ‘Resi’ | 4 | 4.83 ± 0.07 | 32.3 | |
| H2015-122-03 | ‘Resi’ | 4 | 4.87 ± 0.05 | 26.4 | |
| H2015-029-02 | ‘Lohengrin’ | 4 | 4.72 ± 0.03 | 25.9 | |
| H2015-031-04 | ‘Lohengrin’ | 4 | 4.72 ± 0.00 | 15.3 | |
| H2015-043-06 | ‘Lohengrin’ | 4 | 4.75 ± 0.02 | 19.7 | |
| H2015-043-07 | ‘Lohengrin’ | 4 | 4.83 ± 0.08 | 22.9 | |
| H2015-044-17 | ‘Lohengrin’ | 4 | 4.73 ± 0.07 | 18.7 | |
| H2015-046-09 | ‘Lohengrin’ | 4 | 4.76 ± 0.05 | 17.2 | |
| H2015-047-05 | ‘Lohengrin’ | 4 | 4.95 ± 0.13 | 25.4 | |
| H2015-052-02 | ‘Lohengrin’ | 4 | 4.83 ± 0.05 | 13.7 | |
| H2015-052-05 | ‘Lohengrin’ | 4 | 4.72 ± 0.02 | 4.8 | |
| H2015-052-12 | ‘Lohengrin’ | 4 | 4.81 ± 0.06 | 29.4 | |
| H2015-052-X2 | ‘Lohengrin’ | 4 | 4.79 ± 0.03 | 11.8 | |
| H2015-060-23 | ‘Lohengrin’ | 4 | 4.78 ± 0.03 | 40.1 | |
| H2015-061-03 | ‘Lohengrin’ | 4 | 4.75 ± 0.01 | 31.9 | |
| H2015-062-08 | ‘Lohengrin’ | 4 | 4.83 ± 0.04 | 27.8 | |
| H2015-064-10 | ‘Lohengrin’ | 4 | 4.76 ± 0.03 | 20.5 | |
| H2015-068-01 | ‘Lohengrin’ | 4 | 4.63 ± 0.09 | 24.6 | |
| H2015-072-10 | ‘Lohengrin’ | 4 | 4.75 ± 0.04 | 35.6 | |
| H2015-076-08 | ‘Lohengrin’ | 4 | 4.75 ± 0.04 | 23.7 | |
| H2015-081-01 | ‘Lohengrin’ | 4 | 4.83 ± 0.02 | 27.6 |
1 A total of 18 progenies of ‘Resi’ and of 19 progenies of ‘Lohengrin’ were randomly chosen from a population that has been selected by general plant growth vigor. 2 Petal area measurement was based on two random chosen flowers [4]. * Individuals having a larger petal area than both of its parents.
Figure 1Leaf morphology of the Hibiscus hybrids and H. syriacus. (A,B) Hybrid cultivar pollen parents (A) ‘Lohengrin’ and (B) ‘Resi’. (C–F) Hexaploid BC1F1 hybrids (C) H2015-104-05, (D) H2015-024-08, (E) H2015-017-05, and (F) H2015-024-07. (G–J) Tetraploid BC1F1 hybrids (G) H2015-052-X2, (H) H2015-052-02, (I) H2015-064-10, and (J) H2015-062-08. (K) Hexaploid H. syriacus cultivar ‘Flogi’. (L–P) Tetraploid H. syriacus (L) ‘Blushing Bride’, (M) ‘Lavender Chiffon’, (N) ‘Blue Chiffon’, (O) ‘White Chiffon’, and (P) ‘Red Heart’. Scale bar = 3 cm.
Figure 2Pollen grain size (µm) distributions: (A) H. syriacus ‘Red Heart’, (B) Hibiscus ‘Lohengrin’, and (C) Hibiscus ‘Resi’. The black histogram indicates the counts of stainable pollen grains tested by 2% acetocarmine stain, while the gray histogram indicates empty pollen grains.
FISH analysis results of rDNA loci for a H. syriacus cultivar standard, interspecific hybrid cultivars, ‘Lohengrin’ and ‘Resi’, and BC1F1 hybrids.
| Cultivar Name or Accession | Female Parent | Male Parent | Predicted Ploidy Level | 45S rDNA | 5S rDNA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | 4 | 4 | 2 | |
| ‘Lohengrin’ | - | - | 4 | 5 | 2 |
| ‘Resi’ | - | - | 4 | 5 | 2 |
| H2015-029-02 | ‘Lohengrin’ | 4 | 4 | 2 | |
| H2015-064-10 | ‘Lohengrin’ | 4 | 5 | 2 | |
| H2015-061-03 | ‘Lohengrin’ | 4 | 5 | 2 | |
| H2015-052-X2 | ‘Lohengrin’ | 4 | 6 | 2 | |
| H2015-016-08 | ‘Resi’ | 6 | 5 | 3 | |
| H2015-016-03 | ‘Resi’ | 6 | 6 | 3 | |
| H2015-017-02 | ‘Resi’ | 6 | 6 | 3 | |
| H2015-017-05 | ‘Resi’ | 6 | 6 | 3 | |
| H2015-017-08 | ‘Resi’ | 6 | 6 | 3 | |
| H2015-019-09 | ‘Resi’ | 6 | 6 | 3 | |
| H2015-024-07 | ‘Resi’ | 6 | 6 | 3 | |
| H2015-109-01 | ‘Resi’ | 6 | 6 | 3 | |
| H2015-016-01 | ‘Resi’ | 6 | 7 | 3 | |
| H2015-024-01 | ‘Resi’ | 6 | 7 | 3 | |
| H2015-104-05 | ‘Resi’ | 6 | 8 | 3 |
Figure 3Petal area (cm2) distribution of BC1F1 seedlings (H. syriacus × (H. syriacus × H. paramutabilis)) of (A) ‘Lohengrin’ and (B) ‘Resi’. The dashed lines indicate the petal areas of ‘Lohengrin’ and ‘Resi’ in (A,B), respectively. Petal areas of each known ploidy ‘Resi’ progeny are labeled in the (B) figure. Flower area sizes and ploidies of plants listed in Table 1 are independently represented. The filled circles represent putative hexaploids, while open diamonds represent putative tetraploids. Each icon independently represents one individual listed in Table 1. Filled circles represent putative hexaploids, while open diamonds represent putative tetraploids. According to Wilcoxon’s signed-rank test upon removing the outliner H2015-024-08 (the leftmost one), the average petal area size of putative hexaploids was significantly larger than that of tetraploids (p = 0.024).
Figure 4Chromosome squash of a BC1F1 interspecific hybrid Hibiscus (H. syriacus (2n = 4x = 80) × (H. syriacus (2n = 4x = 80) × H. paramutabilis (2n = 4x = 82)), H2015-016-03 (2n = 6x + 8 = 128), with 128 metaphase chromosomes. Chromosomes were counterstained with DAPI. Scale bar = 50 μm.
Figure 5Results of FISH analysis of rDNA signals in mitotic cells of tetraploid (4x) BC1F1 seedlings (H. syriacus × H. ‘Lohengrin’ (H. syriacus × H. paramutabilis)). The cells were dual-probed with biotin-labeled 45S rDNA (green) and dig-labeled 5S rDNA (red) from wheat (T. aestivum) [33]. Chromosomes were counterstained with DAPI (blue). (A) H2015-029-02 with four 45S rDNA and two 5S rDNA signals. (B) H2015-061-03 with five 45S rDNA and two 5S rDNA signals. (C) H2015-050-X2 with six 45S rDNA and two 5S rDNA signals. (D) ‘Lohengrin’ with five 45S rDNA and two 5S rDNA signals. Scale bar in (A–D) = 50 μm.
Figure 6Results of FISH to analysis of rDNA signals in mitotic cells of hexaploid (6x) BC1F1 seedlings (H. syriacus × (H. syriacus × H. paramutabilis)). The cells were dual-probed with biotin-labeled 45S rDNA (green) and dig-labeled 5S rDNA (red) from wheat (T. aestivum). Chromosomes were counterstained with DAPI (blue). (A) H2015-016-08 with five 45S rDNA and three 5S rDNA signals. (B) H2015-109-01 with six 45S rDNA and three 5S rDNA signals. (C) H2015-016-01 with seven 45S rDNA and three 5S rDNA signals. (D) H2015-104-5 with eight 45S rDNA and three 5S rDNA signals. Scale bar in (A–D) = 50 μm.