Advances in Wheat Genetics: From Genome to Field 2015
DOI: 10.1007/978-4-431-55675-6_8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

New Aneuploids of Common Wheat

Abstract: Chromosomal structural changes can be induced by the addition of specifi c alien chromosomes called 'gametocidal (Gc) chromosomes'. In the monosomic addition of the Gc chromosome to common wheat, chromosomal breaks occur in gametes receiving no Gc chromosome, and the broken ends heal and stabilize in the subsequent generations. Thus, by the so-called Gc system, defi ciencies and translocations can be induced in common wheat and also in alien chromosome addition and substitution lines of common wheat. Defi cien… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
1
1
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 17 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Polyploid nature of wheat offers it with a unique feature of genome buffering, due to which wheat can tolerate addition, substitution or deletion of different sets of chromosomes and still be fertile (Sears, 1954;Endo, 2015). A number of aneuploid stocks have been developed in bread wheat by wheat cytogeneticists using this feature that have served as a very important genetic resource for the wheat community (Sears, 1954;Sears, 1966;Endo and Gill, 1996; for review see Gupta & Vasistha, 2018).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Polyploid nature of wheat offers it with a unique feature of genome buffering, due to which wheat can tolerate addition, substitution or deletion of different sets of chromosomes and still be fertile (Sears, 1954;Endo, 2015). A number of aneuploid stocks have been developed in bread wheat by wheat cytogeneticists using this feature that have served as a very important genetic resource for the wheat community (Sears, 1954;Sears, 1966;Endo and Gill, 1996; for review see Gupta & Vasistha, 2018).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%