Leaf Blight Disease of Wheat and Barley: Past, Present and Future

Navathe, Sudhir; Yashavanthakumar, K. J.; Pandey, Ajit Kumar; Patil, Ravindra; Baviskar, Vijendra S.; Chand, Ramesh

doi:10.1007/978-981-16-4134-3_3

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 119 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The pathogen ( B. sorokiniana ) has also been studied for occurrence of races/pathotypes and identification of genes involved in pathogenesis. In several studies, isolates have been collected from specific geographical regions and differentials suggested for classification of these isolates into groups, sometimes erroneously described as pathotypes ( Aggarwal et al., 2009 ; Chauhan et al., 2017 ; also see reviews by Gupta et al., 2018a and Navathe et al., 2022 ). So far, no physiological races or pathotypes have been identified and described, although a virulence gene has been identified ( VHv1 in barley and VTa1 in wheat; Zhong et al., 2002 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genetics of spot blotch resistance in bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) using five models for GWAS

Singh

Gaurav²,

Vasistha³

et al. 2023

Front. Plant Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Genetic architecture of resistance to spot blotch in wheat was examined using a Genome-Wide Association Study (GWAS) involving an association panel comprising 303 diverse genotypes. The association panel was evaluated at two different locations in India including Banaras Hindu University (BHU), Varanasi (Uttar Pradesh), and Borlaug Institute for South Asia (BISA), Pusa, Samastipur (Bihar) for two consecutive years (2017-2018 and 2018-2019), thus making four environments (E1, BHU 2017-18; E2, BHU 2018-19; E3, PUSA, 2017-18; E4, PUSA, 2018-19). The panel was genotyped for 12,196 SNPs based on DArT-seq (outsourced to DArT Ltd by CIMMYT); these SNPs included 5,400 SNPs, which could not be assigned to individual chromosomes and were therefore, described as unassigned by the vendor. Phenotypic data was recorded on the following three disease-related traits: (i) Area Under Disease Progress Curve (AUDPC), (ii) Incubation Period (IP), and (iii) Lesion Number (LN). GWAS was conducted using each of five different models, which included two single-locus models (CMLM and SUPER) and three multi-locus models (MLMM, FarmCPU, and BLINK). This exercise gave 306 MTAs, but only 89 MTAs (33 for AUDPC, 30 for IP and 26 for LN) including a solitary MTA detected using all the five models and 88 identified using four of the five models (barring SUPER) were considered to be important. These were used for further analysis, which included identification of candidate genes (CGs) and their annotation. A majority of these MTAs were novel. Only 70 of the 89 MTAs were assigned to individual chromosomes; the remaining 19 MTAs belonged to unassigned SNPs, for which chromosomes were not known. Seven MTAs were selected on the basis of minimum P value, number of models, number of environments and location on chromosomes with respect to QTLs reported earlier. These 7 MTAs, which included five main effect MTAs and two for epistatic interactions, were considered to be important for marker-assisted selection (MAS). The present study thus improved our understanding of the genetics of resistance against spot blotch in wheat and provided seven MTAs, which may be used for MAS after due validation.

show abstract