欢迎访问作物学报,今天是

作物学报 ›› 2006, Vol. 32 ›› Issue (10): 1453-1457.

• 研究论文 • 上一篇    下一篇

玉米抗丝黑穗病的基因效应

高树仁1,2;李新海1;王振华3;李明顺1;张世煌1,*   

  1. 1中国农业科学院作物科学研究所/国家农作物基因资源与基因改良重大科学工程/农业部作物遗传育种重点开放实验室,北京 100081; 2黑龙江八一农垦大学,黑龙江大庆 163319;3东北农业大学,黑龙江哈尔滨 150030
  • 收稿日期:2006-01-21 修回日期:1900-01-01 出版日期:2006-10-12 网络出版日期:2006-10-12
  • 通讯作者: 张世煌

Gene Effects of Resistance to Head Smut in Maize

GAO Shu-Ren1 2,LI Xin-Hai1,WANG Zhen-Hua3,LI Ming-Shun1,ZHANG Shi-Huang1 *   

  1. 1Institute of Crop Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences/ The National Key Facility for Crop Gene Resources and Genetic Improvement /Key Laboratory of Crop Genetics and Breeding, Ministry of Agriculture, Beijing 100081; 2Heilongjiang August First Land Reclamation University, Daqing 163319, Heilongjiang; 3Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, Heilongjiang, China
  • Received:2006-01-21 Revised:1900-01-01 Published:2006-10-12 Published online:2006-10-12
  • Contact: ZHANG Shi-Huang

摘要: 利用2个抗玉米丝黑穗病自交系(齐319和Mo17)与2个感病系(E28和黄早四),组配4个抗感杂交组合。2004年,对4个组合的亲本、F1、F2、BCR(F1与抗病亲本回交1代)和BCS(F1与感病亲本回交1代)6个世代群体分别在北京和黑龙江进行丝黑穗病的人工接种鉴定,采用世代平均值分析玉米抗丝黑穗病的遗传特点。研究表明,各杂交组合的抗病性均含有显著的加性效应,其中3个组合有显著的显性效应。不同杂交组合的抗病遗传模式表现不同,用感病亲本E28组配的2个组合(齐319×E28)和(Mo17×E28)的抗病性基本符合加性-显性遗传模型;而用另一个感病亲本黄早四组配的组合(齐319×黄早四)和(Mo17×黄早四)的抗病性存在明显的上位性效应。这说明玉米对丝黑穗病的抗性呈现较复杂的遗传模式。因此,在抗玉米丝黑穗病育种中既要重视对自交系抗病水平的鉴定,也要加强杂种F1的合理组配及抗病性评估。

关键词: 玉米, 丝黑穗病, 遗传分析, 模型检验

Abstract:

Head smut of maize is a kind of worldwide disease. Development of resistant varieties is an effective choice to control the disease, which depends on the knowledge of the resistance resources and genetic mechanism. In order to select and breed resistant varieties, some resistant resources of head smut have been selected. The resistance to head smut of maize is quantitative character controlled by numerous genes, and additive effect of resistant gene plays the leading role, while the dominant effect and the epitasis effect are much weaken. In this study, two resistant inbred lines (Qi 319 and Mo17) and two susceptible lines (Huangzao 4 and E28) were used to produce four cross populations. The parental lines, F1, F2, BCR (F1 backcrossed to the resistant parents) and BCS (F1 backcrossed to the susceptible parents) were evaluated by artificial inoculation in Beijing and Heilongjiang province in 2004. The randomized complete block design in the filed was used with 2 repetitions. The parental lines and F1 were grown in 1-row lots, BCR and BCS backcross generations in 4-row pots, F2 in 8-row plots, and the rows were 5 m long each and spaced 0.7 m apart with 17 holes per row and 2 seedlings per hole. In soft ripe stage, the total number of the seedlings and the number of the diseased seedlings and the diseased seedling rate of various generations by taking the plot as a unit was calculated. The gene effects of resistance to head smut in maize was evaluated through generation means for the four cross combinations. The additive-dominant genetic model used was Y=m+αa+βd; the additive-dominance-epistasis genetic model used was Y=m+αa+βd+α2aa+αβad+β2dd. The variances among means of generations in the four cross combinations were analyzed to find the models for a, d, aa, ad and dd gene effects using least squares regression analysis. Point estimated of m, a, d, aa, ad and dd were obtained by solving the system of equations. For the former model, the genetic effects were evaluated by the least squares regression analysis, and the latter that was analyzed by the same method, but the effects with no-significant should be omitted firstly, after that the χ2 test was involved to judge the significance of the models. The results showed that the additive effects were significant in 4 cross combinations, and dominant effects were significant in 3 cross combinations. The inheritance of resistance in Qi 319×E28 and Mo17×E28 fitted additive-dominant model, whereas the inheritance of Qi 319×Huangzao4 and Mo17×Huangzaov4 was in accordance with additive-dominant-epistasis model. The results indicated that the mode of resistance to head smut varied under different genetic background of maize. Therefore, not only the level of resistance to head smut is important, but also that of parental combination and F1 should be emphasized.

Key words: Maize (Zea mays L.), Head smut, Genetic analysis, Model test

中图分类号: 

  • S513
[1] 刘恩波, 陈静, 李红星, 于宁宁, 任佰朝, 赵斌, 刘鹏, 张吉旺. 遮阴改变源-库平衡和调节碳水化合物代谢进而抑制夏玉米幼穗发育[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(6): 1891-1901.
[2] 梁进宇, 尹嘉德, 王红丽, 张国平, 侯慧芝, 董博, 马明生. 基于无人机高光谱和机器学习的旱地饲用玉米叶片氮含量估测[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(6): 1788-1801.
[3] 孙淑凤, 许振南, 黄嘉鑫, 翁建峰, 李新海. 玉米MAPK家族全基因组鉴定及其对拟轮枝镰孢菌感染的响应[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1291-1308.
[4] 张宁宁, 滕雨菲, 任娜娜, 魏兴卓, 闫书豪, 樊可心, 王永宏, 陈文康, 张兴华, 朱万超, 徐淑兔, 薛吉全. 201份玉米自交系抗旱表型评价及可塑性分析[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1309-1325.
[5] 杨欣雨, 崔文涛, 迪力尼格尔·阿力木, 汪凯翔, 吴鹏昊, 任姣姣. 玉米穗上叶片数全基因组关联分析和全基因组选择[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1573-1590.
[6] 韩亚鑫, 何冠华, 张小琼, 张登峰, 李永祥, 刘旭洋, 王天宇, 黎裕, 邹华文, 李春辉. 基于RNA-Seq和BSA-Seq联合分析挖掘玉米侧根密度基因资源[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1341-1352.
[7] 张鸿蓉, 王菲儿, 李盼, 仇海龙, 朱静, 赵连豪, 南运有, 何蔚, 樊志龙, 胡发龙, 柴强, 殷文. 减量20%灌水与25%有机肥替代化肥提高青贮玉米产量的光合特性[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1487-1500.
[8] 杨扬, 常诗惠, 田红丽, 易红梅, 王璐, 任洁, 范亚明, 刘亚维, 王凤格, 赵久然. 不同生态区国审玉米品种的遗传多样性分析[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1352-1364.
[9] 蔡宏玮, 于爱忠, 姜科强, 王鹏飞, 王玉珑, 霍建喆, 庞小能, 尹波, 尚永盼. 干旱灌区有机肥替代部分化肥促进甜玉米产量提升的关键机制[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(4): 1166-1180.
[10] 田红丽, 杨扬, 范亚明, 易红梅, 郭丹丹, 王凤格, 赵久然. 适于玉米品种鉴定的一套三等位变异SNP新型标记组合[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(4): 993-1005.
[11] 杨亚莉, 徐明睿, 马越飞, 海艺蕊, 刘凯栋, 刘万茂, 孙颖. 玉米根尖及整根响应缺铁的转录组比较研究[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(4): 1006-1021.
[12] 张超, 郭欢, 李忠玲, 岳淑宁, 赵娜. 基于BSA-seq技术定位玉米籽粒花青素关联基因[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(3): 780-789.
[13] 郭向阳, 涂亮, 王栋, 刘鹏飞, 王安贵, 易强, 任洪, 李刚, 祝云芳, 吴迅, 蒋喻林, 田丰, 陈泽辉. 热带Suwan种质在我国玉米种质改良中的创新与利用[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(3): 655-664.
[14] 孟成, 王哲. 玉米ZmPFK基因家族全基因组鉴定及响应胁迫表达分析[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(3): 764-779.
[15] 李新浩, 邢梦柯, 周梓惠, 李思烨, 任昊, 王洪章, 赖华江. 外源褪黑素通过协调光反应与暗反应增强玉米苗期的耐热性[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(3): 839-856.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!