2004
DOI: 10.1007/s11032-004-0903-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Molecular marker-assisted selection for enhanced yield in malting barley

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
16
0
2

Year Published

2008
2008
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
0
16
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Although it is considered to be a well-known method for introgression or substitution of a target allele, the large number of generations required to recover the recurrent parent genome and the presence of portions of the donor parent genome linked to the favorable allele transferred (dragged), there are two problems inherent to the backcross (Benchimol et al, 2005). On the one hand, a wellestablished alternative in plant breeding is the procedure of molecular marker-assisted backcross (Tanksley, 1983;Young and Tanksley, 1989;Visscher et al, 1996;Schmierer et al, 2004), which helps in classical procedures, accelerating the recovery of recurrent parent genome and reducing the number of generations required for introgression of the gene of interest . This strategy can also increase genetic gain and economic efficiency in relation to classical procedures (Kuchel et al, 2005).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although it is considered to be a well-known method for introgression or substitution of a target allele, the large number of generations required to recover the recurrent parent genome and the presence of portions of the donor parent genome linked to the favorable allele transferred (dragged), there are two problems inherent to the backcross (Benchimol et al, 2005). On the one hand, a wellestablished alternative in plant breeding is the procedure of molecular marker-assisted backcross (Tanksley, 1983;Young and Tanksley, 1989;Visscher et al, 1996;Schmierer et al, 2004), which helps in classical procedures, accelerating the recovery of recurrent parent genome and reducing the number of generations required for introgression of the gene of interest . This strategy can also increase genetic gain and economic efficiency in relation to classical procedures (Kuchel et al, 2005).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is envisaged that further improvement in yield potential might require integrated approaches involving traditional breeding and MAS to select a crop ideotype for a given environment (Francia et al 2005 ). MAS for yield enhancement in a cultivar has been demonstrated in barley (Schmierer et al 2004 ). Yield-enhancing QTLs from wild species appear promising (Swamy and Sarla 2008 ) but are yet to be exploited for cultivar development.…”
Section: Enhancing Yield Potentialmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Only few examples of successful application of MAS for quantitative traits are found, such as for malting quality (Coventry et al 2003) and yield in barley (Schmierer et al 2004), as well as for yield in maize (Stuber et al 1992). The reason may be that many issues can complicate or even prevent the use of MAS for QTLs such as: (a) If the target trait is inXuenced by many QTLs with relatively small eVect, MAS is ineYcient; the subpopulation possessing all optimal marker alleles, will be small so only a relatively minor selection progress is gained .…”
Section: Marker-assisted Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%