| Literature DB >> 36079631 |
Yu Zhang1,2, Jiajia Zhao1, Yaqi Hu1, Yanni Zhang1, Yining Ying1, Feifei Xu1, Jinsong Bao1,2.
Abstract
The improvement of the cooking and eating quality (CEQ) of rice is one of the major objectives of current rice-breeding programs. A few major genes such as Waxy (Wx) and starch synthase IIa (SSIIa) have been successfully applied in molecular breeding. However, their interactive effects on CEQ have not been fully understood. In this study, a recombinant inbred line (RIL) population was constructed by crossing the white-core mutant GM645 with the transparent phenotype of the japonica rice variety Tainung 67 (TN67). GM645 and TN67 contain different alleles of FLOURY ENDOSPERM2 (FLO2), Wx, and SSIIa. The effects of different allele combinations of FLO2, Wx, and SSIIa on the CEQ of rice were investigated. The inbred lines with the mutation allele flo2 had a significantly lower apparent amylose content (AAC), viscosity characteristics except for setback (SB), and gel texture properties compared to those lines with the FLO2 allele. The allelic combination of FLO2 and Wx significantly affected the AAC, breakdown (BD), and gel textural properties, which could explain most of the variations in those rice quality traits that were correlated with AAC. The allelic combination of FLO2 and SSIIa significantly affected the hot paste viscosity (HPV) and pasting temperature (PT). The Wx × SSIIa interaction had a significant effect on the PT. The interaction of FLO2, Wx and SSIIa significantly affected the AAC, cold paste viscosity (CPV), PT, and consistency viscosity (CS). These results highlight the important roles of these quality-related genes in regulating the CEQ of rice and provide new clues for rice-quality improvement by marker-assisted selection.Entities:
Keywords: SSIIa; Wx; floury endosperm; rice quality; starch
Year: 2022 PMID: 36079631 PMCID: PMC9460582 DOI: 10.3390/plants11172249
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
Rice-quality properties of parents and RIL.
| Parameter | Parents | RIL | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GM645 | TN67 | Mean ± SD | CV (%) | Range | Skewness | Kurtosis | |
| AAC (%) | 22.6 A | 16.3 B | 18 ± 6.8 | 37.8 | 6.7–29.1 | 0.2 | −1.5 |
| PV (RUV) | 215.3 B | 269.9 A | 246.5 ± 56.4 | 22.9 | 96.5–351.3 | −0.4 | −0.7 |
| HPV (RUV) | 176.7 A | 171.1 A | 163.7 ± 43.1 | 26.3 | 62.3–281.7 | 0.1 | −0.3 |
| CPV (RUV) | 279.1 A | 262.9 A | 271.7 ± 69.8 | 25.7 | 115.4–412.7 | −0.3 | −0.6 |
| BD (RUV) | 38.6 A | 98.8 A | 82.8 ± 44.0 | 53.1 | 11.3–198.2 | −0.3 | −0.5 |
| SB (RUV) | 63.8 A | −7.0 B | 25.2 ± 62.5 | 247.8 | −121.1 to 135.4 | −0.3 | −0.9 |
| PT (°C) | 72.8 B | 73.6 A | 75.5 ± 4.6 | 6.1 | 66.9–83.9 | 0.0 | −1.2 |
| CS (RUV) | 102.4 A | 91.8 A | 108.0 ± 34.9 | 32.4 | 34.7–182.6 | 0.1 | −0.6 |
| HD (g) | 11.5 A | 7.5 B | 11.6 ± 10.4 | 89.7 | 1.37–52.72 | 1.5 | 1.9 |
| ADH (g·s) | 24.8 A | 10.7 B | 23.2 ± 20.6 | 88.8 | 0.00–103.4 | 1.5 | 1.9 |
| COH | 0.58 B | 0.76 A | 0.61 ± 0.08 | 13.1 | 0.45–0.96 | 0.5 | 1.7 |
Different letters after the values between parents represent significant differences (p < 0.05). SD—standard deviation; CV—coefficient of variation.
Figure 1Distribution of apparent amylose content and RVA spectrum eigenvalues in RIL.
Figure 2Principal component analysis of rice quality properties.
Figure 3Genotyping of FLO2, Wx, and SSIIa alleles in RIL. M—DNA marker; bp—base pair.
Effects of different alleles of FLO2, Wx and SSIIa on rice quality properties.
| Parameter |
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TT (50) | GC (77) | |||||
| AAC (%) | 19.2 ± 7.1 A | 15.6 ± 5.2 B | 24.6 ± 3.1 A | 12.3 ± 2.6B | 18.7 ± 6.7 A | 17.6 ± 6.7 A |
| PV (RUV) | 274.2 ± 40.4 A | 188.4 ± 37.8 B | 239.0 ± 46.7 A | 253.8 ± 62.9 A | 248.8 ± 60.9 A | 245.1 ± 53.2 A |
| HPV (RUV) | 180.6 ± 37.7 A | 128.4 ± 30.4 B | 188.1 ± 37.5 A | 142.6 ± 35.9 B | 175.4 ± 50.5 A | 156.2 ± 35.6 B |
| CPV (RUV) | 93.6 ± 43.8 A | 60.0 ± 34.7 B | 50.9 ± 22.9 B | 110.5 ± 38.9 A | 73.4 ± 40.7 A | 88.9 ± 45.0 A |
| BD (RUV) | 300.2 ± 57.3 A | 212.0 ± 54.2 B | 321.8 ± 46.8 A | 228.3 ± 56.1 B | 284.0 ± 71.2 A | 263.8 ± 67.8 A |
| SB (RUV) | 26.0 ± 64.8 A | 23.6 ± 57.3 A | 82.8 ± 21.1 A | −24.8 ± 39.1 B | 35.2 ± 54.1 A | 18.7 ± 66.6 A |
| PT (°C) | 76.6 ± 4.7 A | 73.3 ± 3.7 B | 74.6 ± 4.1 B | 76.3 ± 4.9 A | 71.0 ± 2.3 B | 78.4 ± 3.2 A |
| CS (RUV) | 119.6 ± 31.2 A | 83.7 ± 29.4 B | 133.7 ± 27.6 A | 85.7 ± 23.5 B | 108.6 ± 30.9 A | 107.6 ± 37.3 A |
| HD (g) | 13.9 ± 11.5 A | 6.8 ± 4.2 B | 19.7 ± 10.3 A | 4.5 ± 1.0 B | 11.1 ± 9.3 A | 11.9 ± 10.9 A |
| ADH (g·s) | 27.9 ± 22.5 A | 13.3 ± 10.3 B | 38.8 ± 20.9 A | 9.7 ± 4.2 B | 22.7 ± 18.5 A | 23.5 ± 21.8 A |
| COH | 0.60 ± 0.08 A | 0.63 ± 0.08 A | 0.55 ± 0.06 B | 0.65 ± 0.06 A | 0.61 ± 0.07 A | 0.60 ± 0.08 A |
The number after the genotype indicates the number of lines with this allele in the RIL population. Different letters after the values between two alleles of the same gene represent significant differences (p < 0.05).
Differences in rice quality traits in eight combinations of FLO2, Wx, and SSIIa.
| Genetic Combination | AAC (%) | PV (RUV) | HPV (RUV) | BD (RUV) | CPV (RUV) | SB (RUV) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25.70 ± 2.07 A | 264.5 ± 28.6 A | 193.3 ± 23.5 AB | 71.2 ± 17.8 D | 345.4 ± 25.1 A | 80.9 ± 22.7 A | |
| 26.23 ± 2.67 A | 257.9 ± 38.0 A | 214.5 ± 38.7 A | 43.4 ± 13.1 EF | 343.5 ± 40.6 A | 85.6 ± 24.4 A | |
| 11.30 ± 1.94 D | 283.3 ± 48.3 A | 147.3 ± 21.7 D | 136.0 ± 35.1 A | 239.0 ± 33.8 C | −44.4 ± 39.7 D | |
| 14.41 ± 2.45 C | 289.7 ± 35.4 A | 174.8 ± 30.7 BC | 114.9 ± 27.6 B | 280.5 ± 38.7 B | −9.2 ± 31.9 BC | |
| 20.89 ± 1.62 B | 184.8 ± 22.2 BC | 154.2 ± 24.0 CD | 30.6 ± 10.5 F | 262.8 ± 24.1 BC | 78.1 ± 11.1 A | |
| 22.20 ± 1.59 B | 176.8 ± 13.0 BC | 148.1 ± 10.4 D | 28.6 ± 11.4 F | 274.1 ± 14.2 B | 97.4 ± 6.0 A | |
| 12.01 ± 2.39 D | 207.5 ± 37.0 B | 115.5 ± 15.9 E | 92.0 ± 27.4 C | 179.4 ± 30.3 D | −28.1 ± 36.0 BC | |
| 10.87 ± 2.08 D | 161.9 ± 46.8 C | 102.2 ± 30.8 E | 59.7 ± 21.8 DE | 163.7 ± 40.1 D | 1.7 ± 25.3 B | |
| Genetic Combination | PT (°C) | CS (RUV) | HD (g) | ADH (g·s) | COH | |
| 79.0 ± 1.4 B | 152.1 ± 19.6 A | 25.14 ± 10.38 A | 48.68 ± 21.91 A | 0.52 ± 0.04 E | ||
| 70.7 ± 1.8 E | 129.0 ± 29.0 B | 21.21 ± 7.78 A | 41.95 ± 16.23 A | 0.55 ± 0.05 DE | ||
| 81.7 ± 1.2 A | 91.7 ± 16.0 D | 4.70 ± 0.91 CD | 10.25 ± 2.58 CD | 0.66 ± 0.04 AB | ||
| 72.8 ± 1.6 D | 105.7 ± 13.6 CD | 4.72 ± 0.76 CD | 11.59 ± 3.60 CD | 0.67 ± 0.04 A | ||
| 73.8 ± 1.2 D | 108.7 ± 14.3 C | 9.64 ± 3.45 BC | 19.96 ± 9.77 BC | 0.61 ± 0.07 BC | ||
| 68.7 ± 0.9 F | 126.0 ± 15.5 B | 12.70 ± 5.46 B | 25.87 ± 10.99 B | 0.58 ± 0.05CD | ||
| 76.5 ± 2.0 C | 63.9 ± 18.0 E | 4.48 ± 1.34 CD | 8.49 ± 5.66 D | 0.64 ± 0.10AB | ||
| 68.2 ± 1.0 F | 61.4 ± 12.3 E | 3.71 ± 0.52 D | 5.65 ± 2.36 D | 0.65 ± 0.06AB |
Different letters after the values in each column indicated significant differences (p < 0.05).
Figure 4Percentages of variance of starch properties in RIL population explained by the FLO2, Wx and SSIIa interactions.
Figure 5Cluster analysis of 11 quality traits in RIL population. The red part represents Class A, including 59 RIL lines involving four allele combinations of FLO2/Wxa/SSIIa(GC), FLO2/Wxa/SSIIa(TT), flo2/Wxa/SSIIa(GC), and flo2/Wxa/SSIIa(TT). The blue part represents Class B, including 68 RIL lines involving four allele combinations of FLO2/Wxb/SSIIa(GC), FLO2/Wxb/SSIIa(TT), FLO2/Wxb/SSIIa(GC), and FLO2/Wxb/SSIIa(TT).