Overcoming hybridization barriers between pea and some of its wild relatives

Ochatt, Sergio; Benabdelmouna, Abdellah; Marget, Pascal; Aubert, Grégoire; Moussy, F.; Pontécaille, Catherine; Jacas, L.

doi:10.1023/b:euph.0000040476.57938.81

Cited by 43 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…elatius (variously named P. humile or P. syriacum in papers) have often found to be resistant to various biotic stresses (reviewed in Smýkal et al, 2013). Attempts to cross Pisum with Lathyrus sativus did not result in fertile, viable plants (Ochatt et al, 2004), although the phylogenetically closest L. ochrus, L. clymenum, and L. neurolobus (Schaefer et al, 2012) have not been tested. The development of backcross recombinant inbred lines containing chromosome segments of the wild pea P. fulvum or P. sativum subsp.…”

Section: Wild Relatives As a Source Of Novelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other tested species formed pods but did not produce fully developed, viable seeds. It may be concluded that breeding strategies involving alien genetic transfer for the improvement of grasspea are possible through the readily crossable species L. cicera and L. amphicarpos, but biotechnology tools will be needed to assist in gene transfers among other species (Ochatt et al, 2004).…”

Section: Wild Relatives As a Source Of Novelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Legume Crops Phylogeny and Genetic Diversity for Science and Breeding

Smýkal

Coyne

Ambrose

et al. 2014

Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences

269

189

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Wild Relatives As a Source Of Novelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Wild Relatives As a Source Of Novelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Legume Crops Phylogeny and Genetic Diversity for Science and Breeding

Smýkal

Coyne

Ambrose

et al. 2014

Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences

269

189

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…P. fulvum and P. sativum have a more restricted interfertility, although crosses can be successful (Clement et al 2002) and for practical purposes P. abyssinicum has been used in a bridging cross (e.g., Forster et al 1999). There are sporadic reports of infertility in wide crosses (e.g., Ochatt et al 2004), but such reports should be considered against the background of demonstrable success in these wide crosses. For these reasons Pisum is perhaps best considered as a species complex with multiple subspecies that interbreed to a different degree.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Gene-Based Sequence Diversity Analysis of Field Pea (Pisum)

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sequence diversity of 39 dispersed gene loci was analyzed in 48 diverse individuals representative of the genus Pisum. The different genes show large variation in diversity parameters, suggesting widely differing levels of selection and a high overall diversity level for the species. The data set yields a genetic diversity tree whose deep branches, involving wild samples, are preserved in a tree derived from a polymorphic retrotransposon insertions in an identical sample set. Thus, gene regions and intergenic ''junk DNA'' share a consistent picture for the genomic diversity of Pisum, despite low linkage disequilibrium in wild and landrace germplasm, which might be expected to allow independent evolution of these very different DNA classes. Additional lines of evidence indicate that recombination has shuffled gene haplotypes efficiently within Pisum, despite its high level of inbreeding and widespread geographic distribution. Trees derived from individual gene loci show marked differences from each other, and genetic distance values between sample pairs show high standard deviations. Sequence mosaic analysis of aligned sequences identifies nine loci showing evidence for intragenic recombination. Lastly, phylogenetic network analysis confirms the non-treelike structure of Pisum diversity and indicates the major germplasm classes involved. Overall, these data emphasize the artificiality of simple tree structures for representing genomic sequence variation within Pisum and emphasize the need for fine structure haplotype analysis to accurately define the genetic structure of the species.T HE genetic diversity of a species is the sum of its total DNA sequence variation, resulting from millions of years of cumulative mutation, recombination, and selection. Understanding the pattern of the diversity within cultivated plant species and their wild relatives is both interesting and practically important from the viewpoint of conservation and use. Therefore, the ways by which genetic diversity in populations are estimated and represented are important. A popular approach for measuring the genetic diversity of accessions of a species is to analyze samples from gene banks (germplasm collections) by one or more of the many available molecular marker methods. The effectiveness of this strategy depends upon the suitability of the marker method for analyzing the diversity of the sample collection under investigation. Different marker methods can give different views of diversity, depending upon the evolutionary parameters of the underlying DNA sequence variation. Rapidly evolving DNAs, such as simple sequence repeats (SSRs), give high resolution views of relatedness; single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP)-based variation is more suited to deeper relationships, reflecting the slow mutation rate for this type of sequence variation; and transposon insertion-based marker methods should lie between these two, reflecting their intermediate mutation rate, although few studies have been carried out to test this. Furthermore, the g...

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, using P. fulvum as a male parent, we successfully obtained hybrid progenies between resistant P. fulvum accessions and cultivated pea, and currently this species is included in our breeding programs for resistance to broomrape and ascochyta blight. Similarly, other researchers have succeeded in crossing these two species using P. fulvum as pollen parent (Muehlbauer et al 1994, Worth 1998, Ochatt et al 2004.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, crosses between P. sativum and P. fulvum cannot be easily made. The cross-incompatibility has been attributed to chromosome structural differences (Ben-Ze'ev and Zohary 1973, Errico et al 1991) and pollen-stigma incompatibility (Ochatt et al 2004). Nevertheless, using P. fulvum as a male parent, we successfully obtained hybrid progenies between resistant P. fulvum accessions and cultivated pea, and currently this species is included in our breeding programs for resistance to broomrape and ascochyta blight.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%