2011
DOI: 10.1007/s13562-011-0080-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Fine mapping of grain length QTLs on chromosomes 1 and 7 in Basmati rice (Oryza sativa L.)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
27
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 42 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
27
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the region of 22.3–22.8 Mb on chromosome 7, a QTL cluster ( qGL7, qGLWR7 , and qGW7.3 ) was detected in the region of a fine mapped QTL ( qGRL7.1 ) affecting GL, GW, and GLWR (Singh et al, 2012). Our haplotype analysis suggested five candidates for this QTL, including Os07g0563700 (IKI3 family protein), Os07g0563800 (a GTPase-activating protein), Os07g0564000 (Conserved hypothetical protein), Os07g0564100 (a UDP-glucuronosyl / UDP-glucosyltransferase family protein) and Os07g0564150 (a hypothetical gene).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In the region of 22.3–22.8 Mb on chromosome 7, a QTL cluster ( qGL7, qGLWR7 , and qGW7.3 ) was detected in the region of a fine mapped QTL ( qGRL7.1 ) affecting GL, GW, and GLWR (Singh et al, 2012). Our haplotype analysis suggested five candidates for this QTL, including Os07g0563700 (IKI3 family protein), Os07g0563800 (a GTPase-activating protein), Os07g0564000 (Conserved hypothetical protein), Os07g0564100 (a UDP-glucuronosyl / UDP-glucosyltransferase family protein) and Os07g0564150 (a hypothetical gene).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To date, many genes governing grain shape have been identified and cloned, such as GW2 (Song et al, 2007), GIF1 (Wang et al, 2008), qSW5 (Shomura et al, 2008), GS3 (Mao et al, 2010), GS5 (Li et al, 2011), qGL3 (Zhang et al, 2012), GW8 (Wang S. et al, 2012), GS6 (Sun et al, 2013), GS2 (Hu et al, 2015), GL7 / GW7 (Wang S. et al, 2015; Wang Y. et al, 2015), OsMAPK6 (Liu S. et al, 2015), and GLW7 (Si et al, 2016). Besides these genes, many QTL affecting grain size have been identified through linkage mapping and association studies (Zhao et al, 2011; Singh et al, 2012; Zhang W. et al, 2013; Yang et al, 2014; Liu D. et al, 2015; Qiu et al, 2015; Edzesi et al, 2016; Feng et al, 2016), and some of them have been fine mapped such as GW1-1 and qGRL1.1 (Singh et al, 2012), GW3 and GW6 (Guo et al, 2009), qGL-7 (Bai et al, 2010), qGRL7.1 (Singh et al, 2012). For grain chalkiness, only one gene, Chalk5 is cloned (Li et al, 2014).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…GS3 functions as a negative regulator for grain size which is a major QTL for GL and TGW and a minor QTL for GW and GT [16]. The qGL7.2 (S07_22844850) and qTGW7.2 (S07_22684516) were located in the region harboring the previously fine mapped QTL affecting GL, GW and GLWR, qGRL7.1 (22127.4Kb-24526.7Kb) [6]. The qGLWR7.1 (S07_25383179) was located in the region of Srs1 (25381698-25389547) affecting grain size [23].…”
Section: Gwas Is Effectivementioning
confidence: 98%
“…Many genes/QTL for rice grain appearance quality and milling quality traits have been reported in the last decades. The GW1-1 and GW1-2 [5], qGRL1.1 [6], GS2 [7], GW3 and GW6 [8], qGL-4b [9], qPGWC-7 [10] qGL-7 [11], qGRL7.1 [6], gw8.1 [12], gw9.1 [13], tgw11 [14] have been fine mapped. The GW2 [15], GS3 [16], qGL-3 [17], qSW5 [18], GS5 [19], Chalk5 [20], TGW6 [21], GW6a [22], SRS1 [23], GL7/GW7 [24,25], GW8 [26] and CycT1;3 [27] have been cloned.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most recent literature has focused on new SNP technologies, but by far the most common systems in use by public sector breeding programs are traditional SSRs. These are widely employed in biparental mapping studies such as QTL mapping and fine-mapping (Bradbury et al 2005, Weng et al 2008, Singh et al 2012, Ghimire et al 2012, Swamy et al 2013, Yadaw et al 2013, Yang et al 2016, but have also been used in cross-population meta-analyses (Swamy et al 2013) and allelic diversity assessments (Mohammadi-Nejad et al 2008, Singh et al 2015. Given their high throughput nature SNPs and GBS are the platforms of choice for strategies requiring high sample volumes and/or marker densities, such as genomic selection and genome-wide association studies (e.g.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%