Several environmental factors including drought and disease can reduce leaf area and photosynthesis during grain-filling to decrease grain yield and kernel weight of cereal crops. Water-soluble carbohydrates (WSC) accumulated around anthesis can be mobilised to assist in filling of developing grains when post-anthesis assimilation is low. Cultivar differences support opportunities to select for high WSC but little is known of the extent or nature of genetic control for this trait in wheat. Three wheat mapping populations (Cranbrook/Halberd, Sunco/Tasman, and CD87/Katepwa) were phenotyped for WSC and other agronomic traits across multiple environments. The range for WSC concentration (WSC-C) was large among progeny contributing to moderate-to-high narrow-sense heritabilities within environments (h2 = 0.51–0.77). Modest genotype × environment interaction reduced the correlation of genotype means across environments (rp = 0.37–0.78, P < 0.01) to reduce heritability on a line-mean (h2 = 0.55–0.87) basis. Transgressive segregation was large and genetic control complex, with 7–16 QTLs being identified for WSC-C in each population. Heritability was smaller (h2 = 0.32–0.54) for WSC mass per unit area (WSC-A), reflecting large genotype × environment interaction and residual variance with estimating anthesis biomass. Fewer significant QTLs (4–8) were identified for this trait in each population, while sizes of individual genetic effects varied between populations but were repeatable across environments. Several genomic regions were common across populations including those associated with plant height (e.g. Rht-B1) and/or anthesis date (e.g. Ppd1). Genotypes with high WSC-C were commonly shorter, flowered earlier, and produced significantly (P < 0.01) fewer tillers than those of low WSC-C. This resulted in similar yields, lower final biomass, and fewer grains per m2, but greater dry weight partitioning to grain, kernel weight, and less grain screenings in high compared with low WSC-C genotypes. By contrast, lines high for WSC-A produced more fertile tillers associated with similar or greater anthesis and maturity biomass, grain number, and yield, yet similar kernel weight or size compared with genotypes with low WSC-A. The data support an important role for WSC-A in assuring stable yield and grain size. However, the small effects of many independent WSC QTLs may limit their direct use for marker-aided selection in breeding programs. We suggest using molecular markers to enrich populations for favourable height and anthesis date alleles before the more costly phenotypic selection among partially inbred families for greater WSC-A.
Commercial, genetically-modified (GM) maize was first planted in the United States (USA, 1996) and Canada (1997) but now is grown in 13 countries on a total of over 35 million hectares (>24% of area worldwide). The first GM maize plants produced a Cry protein derived from the soil bacteriumBacillus thuringiensis (Bt), which made them resistant to European corn borer and other lepidopteran maize pests. New GM maize hybrids not only have resistance to lepidopteran pests but some have resistance to coleopteran pests and tolerance to specific herbicides. Growers are attracted to the Btmaize hybrids for their convenience and because of yield protection, reduced need for chemical insecticides, and improved grain quality. Yet, most growers worldwide still rely on traditional integrated pest management (IPM) methods to control maize pests. They must weigh the appeal of buying insect protection "in the bag" against questions regarding economics, environmental safety, and insect resistance management (IRM). Traditional management of maize insects and the opportunities and challenges presented by GM maize are considered as they relate to current and future insect-resistant products. Four countries, two that currently have commercialize Bt maize (USA and Spain) and two that do not (China and Kenya), are highlighted. As with other insect management tactics (e.g., insecticide use or tillage), GM maize should not be considered inherently compatible or incompatible with IPM. Rather, the effect of GM insect-resistance on maize IPM likely depends on how the technology is developed and used. RightsWorks produced by employees of the U.S. Government as part of their official duties are not copyrighted within the U.S. The content of this document is not copyrighted. , 1996) and Canada (1997) but now is grown in 13 countries on a total of over 35 million hectares (>24% of area worldwide). The first GM maize plants produced a Cry protein derived from the soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), which made them resistant to European corn borer and other lepidopteran maize pests. New GM maize hybrids not only have resistance to lepidopteran pests but some have resistance to coleopteran pests and tolerance to specific herbicides. Growers are attracted to the Bt maize hybrids for their convenience and because of yield protection, reduced need for chemical insecticides, and improved grain quality. Yet, most growers worldwide still rely on traditional integrated pest management (IPM) methods to control maize pests. They must weigh the appeal of buying insect protection "in the bag" against questions regarding economics, environmental safety, and insect resistance management (IRM). Traditional management of maize insects and the opportunities and challenges presented by GM maize are considered as they relate to current and future insect-resistant products. Four countries, two that currently have commercialize Bt maize (USA and Spain) and two that do not (China and Kenya), are highlighted. As with other insect management tactic...
Rooting depth, a hard trait to measure in the field, was negatively correlated with canopy temperature, an easy trait to measure by airborne thermography, in large wheat populations under terminal drought
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.