Gene Effects for Tolerance to Weather Fleck in Tobacco

Povilaitis, Bronius

doi:10.1139/g67-032

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Dominance gene effects appear to be more important in Canadian flue-cured tobacco as reported by Povilaitis (1967) than in Maryland tobacco. Data from these studies indicate that general conclusions on the inheritance of weather fleck resistance is difficult Mulchi and Aycock (1982) reported that cultivar differences for weather fleck resistance based on visual ratings.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 81%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Genetics of weather fleck in Nicotiana tabacum

Aycock¹

1983

Can. J. Genet. Cytol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A 2-year study was conducted to investigate additive, dominance, and epistatic gene effects for weather fleck in Maryland tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.). P1, P2, F1, F2, P1F1, and P2F1 population means from each of seven crosses were used to estimate gene effects. In general, additive gene effects were more important in the inheritance of weather fleck than dominance or epistatic effects; however, in three of the seven crosses dominance and (or) epistatic gene effects were important. Adequate additive gene effects were present in five of the seven crosses to allow considerable progress towards selection of more weather fleck resistant lines. In two families, because of significant epistatic gene effects, the development of weather fleck resistant lines could be accomplished by producing doubled haploids from desirable F1 plants or by using a reciprocal recurrent selection program.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 81%

“…Povilaitis (1967) in Canada found dominance to be important in five out of six crosses. Sung et al ( 197 1 ) in Taiwan reported that additive gene effects were most important in the inheritance of weather fleck resistance, but dominance effects and additive x additive epistatic effects were important also.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Genetics of weather fleck in Nicotiana tabacum

Aycock¹

1983

Can. J. Genet. Cytol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Petr and Frey (1966) used a similar formula to compute potence ratio as a measure of dominance. Heterosis in tobacco, defined as the deviation of F, from midparent, was reported in a number of studies (Mann and Weybrew, 1958;Matzinger et nl., 1960;Aycock et nl., 1963;Chaplin, 1966;Marani and Sachs, 1966;Ailatzinger and Wernsman, 1967;Povilaitis, 1964Povilaitis, , 1967. In most cases the average amounts of heterosis were small.…”

Section: Results Ancl Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Photoperiodic Response and Its Effects on Certain Quantitative Characters in Tobacco

Povilaitis¹

1968

Can. J. Genet. Cytol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

T h e effects of the mamnlotli gcnc causing a short-day pliotopcriodic response in a mutant lvcrc srudied in 1962 and 1966 in six gcnctic populations (PI, P,, F,, F,, B,, B,) derived from thc cross bet\\.ecn h4ammoth Dclcrest, a short-day mutation of thc fluc-cured tol)acco variety Dclcrest, and Praecos, a day-neutral pipc robacco. T h e data slio~vcd thc cxpected nlonofactorial segregation of day-neutral against short-da!. plants, the latter being rccessivc. Considerable amount of positivc hctcrosis I\.as obserrcd for lcaf width. I n thc inhcritaiicc of da).s-to-flo~\:er, in addition t o thc pair of alleles determining tlic short-day response, onc to nvo gene groups are indicated, operating probably i n an addirirc fashion. T n f o and rhrcc gcnc groups are indicated for lcaf ~v i d t h and leaf length, respectively. Paramctcrs describing additive gcne cffecrs nrcrc important for all thc charactcr tcstcd but nonc of rhc paranleters for dominance and digcnic epistatic cffccts wcrc significant. Eridcntly thc scgrcgating il~ajor gcnc for tlic mammoth cl~aracrer did not cxccssivcly influcncc thc rclationship of gcnc cflccts in thc icmaining gcnotypc as dctcrmined by thc gcnerarion-nican analysis. IntroductionIn tobacco, Nicotial~n tabacu771, a spontaneous mutation occurs from time to time which produces plants that do not flowcr ilndcr norillal growing conditions in thc ficld but gro\il tall and producc an esccssivel\. large nuillber of leavcs. This mutation has been callcd gigantism or mammoth charactcr (Allard, 1919). Allard and Carncr (1940) determined that genetical changes in the gcrnm plasm of such mutants arc responsible for the non-induction of flowcring when plants are csposed to long-day photoperiods and that thesc plants may be induccd to flou cr bv short-day photoperiods, such as in the fall. The dependencv of plants on thc iel~gth of daj. for the induction of flowering is generally calicd photopcriodism. Plants that depcnd on the short days for flower induction arc called short-da!~ plants, tliosc that dcpend on long days long-day plants, and those which flower indepcndentl\r of the length of day indcterminatc or daj -neutral. Normal N. tabac~1771 .tvues are day-neutral. -1T h c short-day p~loto~driodic responsc in tol)acco, as contrastcd to day-neutral response, is conditioned bj. a singlc gcnc diffcrencc, homozygous reccssivc being the mammoth typc (Allard, 1919;Smith, 1950). Lang (1912) considered rhc possibilitv that the difference betwccn short-dav and day-neutral types of ,\,l;rjTland tbl~acco majr be controlled by nlorc thin one faitor, and 0 l t a and i\ilu&ol;a (1957) repoited a three-gcnc hiffcrencc between short-day and dav-neutral t i -~e s of tobacco..

show abstract

“…Genetic modification of plants for tolerance to air pollutants has been reviewed (Reinert et al, 1982). Studies of gene control over susceptibility and resistance in crops to O 3 have been conducted for tobacco (Aycock, 1972;Haung et al, 1975;Povilaitus, 1967), soybean (Glycine max L.) (Damicone and Manning, 1987), onion (Allium cepa L.) (Engle and Gableman, 1966), sweet corn (Zea mays L. var. rugosa Bonaf.)…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Genetic Control of O3 Sensitivity in a Cross Between Two Cultivars of Snap Bean

Reinert¹,

Eason²

2000

jashs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Identification of genetic control of ozone (O3) sensitivity is desirable for selection of plant cultivars which are indicators of O3 stress. A cross was made between two cultivars of snap bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), `Oregon 91' (P1) and `Wade Bush' (P2), an O3-sensitive and O3-insensitive cultivar, respectively. Ten genetic populations (generations), `Oregon 91' (P1), `Wade Bush' (P2), F1, F2, backcrosses to both parents, and all reciprocal crosses, were field planted in each of two summers and evaluated for injury to O3. Ozone responses for the reciprocal crosses were not significantly different for any generation, so injury ratings from the reciprocal crosses were combined for each generation to provide six populations (P1, P2, F1, F2, BC1, and BC2) for analysis. When components of genetic variation were estimated from the six generations, additive genetic variance was the most important component in the total genetic variance available, although dominance variance was also a significant component. There was an inconsistency in the magnitude and the direction of the factors contributing to the dominance effects and also a large environmental component making up the phenotypic variance. Estimates of broad-sense heritability and narrow-sense heritability were 60% and 44%, respectively. Results suggest that O3-sensitive and O3-insensitive selections could be screened and evaluated in an ambient O3 environment. Several generations will be necessary, however, to develop `Bush Blue Lake' type selections that vary only in sensitivity to O3.

show abstract

Gene Effects for Tolerance to Weather Fleck in Tobacco

Cited by 10 publications

References 11 publications

Genetics of weather fleck in Nicotiana tabacum

Genetics of weather fleck in Nicotiana tabacum

Photoperiodic Response and Its Effects on Certain Quantitative Characters in Tobacco

Genetic Control of O3 Sensitivity in a Cross Between Two Cultivars of Snap Bean

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About