欢迎访问作物学报,今天是

作物学报 ›› 2008, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (04): 605-611.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2008.00605

• 作物遗传育种·种质资源·分子遗传学 • 上一篇    下一篇

大豆抗倒伏性的评价指标及其QTL分析

黄中文1,2;赵团结1;喻德跃1;陈受宜3;盖钧镒1,*   

  1. 1 南京农业大学大豆研究所 / 国家大豆改良中心 / 作物遗传与种质创新国家重点实验室, 江苏南京210095; 2 河南科技学院农学系, 河南新乡453003; 3 中国科学院遗传与发育生物学研究所, 北京100101
  • 收稿日期:2007-08-06 修回日期:1900-01-01 出版日期:2008-04-12 网络出版日期:2008-04-12
  • 通讯作者: 盖钧镒

Lodging Resistance Indices and Related QTLs in Soybean

HUANG Zhong-Wen12,ZHAO Tuan-Jie1,YU De-Yue1,CHEN Shou-Yi3,GAI Jun-Yi1*   

  1. 1 Soybean Research Institute, Nanjing Agricultural University / National Center for Soybean Improvement / National Key Laboratory for Crop Genetics and Germplasm Enhancement, Nanjing 210095, Jiangsu; 2 Department of Agronomy, Henan Institute of Science and Technology, Xinxiang 453003, Henan; 3 Institute of Genetics and Developmental Biology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
  • Received:2007-08-06 Revised:1900-01-01 Published:2008-04-12 Published online:2008-04-12
  • Contact: GAI Jun-Yi

摘要: 倒伏性的鉴定通常采用倒伏程度分级法, 但其表现依赖于田间实时环境, 分级较粗放。育种实践需要一种不依赖于实时环境的倒伏潜势评价方法。本研究利用表型差异大的32个大豆品种和1个重组自交系(RIL)群体NJRIKY, 研究了鲜重力矩(株高×鲜重, PF)、干重力矩(株高×干重, PD)、单位抗折力鲜重力矩(株高×鲜重/抗折力, PFS)和单位抗折力干重力矩(株高×干重/抗折力, PDS)等4种倒伏性评价指标与倒伏程度的关系, 从中遴选出PF与倒伏程度的相关系数高、物理意义明确、测度简便、环境稳定性高, 与倒伏程度共同QTL多, 综合表现最优, 反映了倒伏势。在A2、C2、D2和G连锁群上, 共检测到7个倒伏程度相关的QTL, 分别解释表型变异的6%~12%, 2年未检测到相同的QTL; 在B1、C2和O连锁群共检测到7个倒伏势有关的QTL, 分别解释表型变异的5%~12%, 其中qPFC2-2, 2年均能稳定表达, 贡献值较大; 倒伏程度和倒伏势共有的QTL区间有GMKF059a~satt319和satt286~A63_1T两个; 抗倒伏性等位基因来自亲本科丰1号。

关键词: 大豆, 倒伏指标, 相关, QTL分析

Abstract: The used lodging resistance index is lodging score, with 0 as most resistant and 4 as most sensitive. In breeding for lodging resistance, an index more precise than lodging score and independent from the cultivation conditions is expected. In the present study, four kinds of lodging resistance indices, i.e. fresh matter moment (plant height × above ground fresh weight, PF), dry matter moment (plant height × above ground dry weight, PD), fresh weight moment per unit of stem broken strength (PFS), and dry weight moment per unit of stem broken strength (PDS), were designed in two experiments, one with 32 diverse cultivars and one with the RIL population NJRIKY including 184 recombinant inbred lines of the cross (Kefeng 1 × Nannong 1138-2) in 2005 and 2006. Among the four indices, fresh weight moment (PF) designated as lodging potential performed with higher correlation with lodging score, more relevant physical meaning, easier operation of measurement, better stability in various environments and more common QTLs with lodging score than those of the other indices, therefore PF was the best candidate of lodging resistance index to replace lodging score. On the basis of the results, QTL analysis was performed for lodging score and lodging potential. Seven QTLs for lodging score on linkage groups A2, C2, D2, and G explaining 6%–12% of phenotypic variation, but no common one between the two years, were detected. There were seven QTLs for lodging potential on linkage groups B1, C2, and O, explaining 5%-12% phenotypic variation, with the same QTL qPFC2-2 in two years. Between lodging score and lodging po-tential, two QTLs were with same flanking markers, i.e. GMKF059a–satt319 and satt286–A63_1T, and the lodging resistance alleles were mainly contributed from Kefeng 1. Between the two loci, qPFC2-2 was of larger contribution, so its flanking markers can be used in marker-assisted selection for lodging resistance in soybean.

Key words: Soybean, Lodging indix, Correlation, QTL analysis

[1] 陈玲玲, 李战, 刘亭萱, 谷勇哲, 宋健, 王俊, 邱丽娟. 基于783份大豆种质资源的叶柄夹角全基因组关联分析[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(6): 1333-1345.
[2] 杨欢, 周颖, 陈平, 杜青, 郑本川, 蒲甜, 温晶, 杨文钰, 雍太文. 玉米-豆科作物带状间套作对养分吸收利用及产量优势的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(6): 1476-1487.
[3] 王炫栋, 杨孙玉悦, 高润杰, 余俊杰, 郑丹沛, 倪峰, 蒋冬花. 拮抗大豆斑疹病菌放线菌菌株的筛选和促生作用及防效研究[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(6): 1546-1557.
[4] 于春淼, 张勇, 王好让, 杨兴勇, 董全中, 薛红, 张明明, 李微微, 王磊, 胡凯凤, 谷勇哲, 邱丽娟. 栽培大豆×半野生大豆高密度遗传图谱构建及株高QTL定位[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(5): 1091-1102.
[5] 李阿立, 冯雅楠, 李萍, 张东升, 宗毓铮, 林文, 郝兴宇. 大豆叶片响应CO2浓度升高、干旱及其交互作用的转录组分析[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(5): 1103-1118.
[6] 朱峥, 王田幸子, 陈悦, 刘玉晴, 燕高伟, 徐珊, 马金姣, 窦世娟, 李莉云, 刘国振. 水稻转录因子WRKY68在Xa21介导的抗白叶枯病反应中发挥正调控作用[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(5): 1129-1140.
[7] 彭西红, 陈平, 杜青, 杨雪丽, 任俊波, 郑本川, 罗凯, 谢琛, 雷鹿, 雍太文, 杨文钰. 减量施氮对带状套作大豆土壤通气环境及结瘤固氮的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(5): 1199-1209.
[8] 王好让, 张勇, 于春淼, 董全中, 李微微, 胡凯凤, 张明明, 薛红, 杨梦平, 宋继玲, 王磊, 杨兴勇, 邱丽娟. 大豆突变体ygl2黄绿叶基因的精细定位[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(4): 791-800.
[9] 李瑞东, 尹阳阳, 宋雯雯, 武婷婷, 孙石, 韩天富, 徐彩龙, 吴存祥, 胡水秀. 增密对不同分枝类型大豆品种同化物积累和产量的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(4): 942-951.
[10] 杜浩, 程玉汉, 李泰, 侯智红, 黎永力, 南海洋, 董利东, 刘宝辉, 程群. 利用Ln位点进行分子设计提高大豆单荚粒数[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(3): 565-571.
[11] 周悦, 赵志华, 张宏宁, 孔佑宾. 大豆紫色酸性磷酸酶基因GmPAP14启动子克隆与功能分析[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(3): 590-596.
[12] 王娟, 张彦威, 焦铸锦, 刘盼盼, 常玮. 利用PyBSASeq算法挖掘大豆百粒重相关位点与候选基因[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(3): 635-643.
[13] 董衍坤, 黄定全, 高震, 陈栩. 大豆PIN-Like (PILS)基因家族的鉴定、表达分析及在根瘤共生固氮过程中的功能[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(2): 353-366.
[14] 张国伟, 李凯, 李思嘉, 王晓婧, 杨长琴, 刘瑞显. 减库对大豆叶片碳代谢的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(2): 529-537.
[15] 赵雪, 周顺利. 玉米抗茎倒伏能力相关性状与评价研究进展[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(1): 15-26.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!