WA-CMS-based iso-cytoplasmic restorers derived from commercial rice hybrids reveal distinct population structure and genetic divergence towards restorer diversification.
Combining ability
Hybrid rice
Iso-cytoplasmic restorers
Population structure
SSR markers
Journal
3 Biotech
ISSN: 2190-572X
Titre abrégé: 3 Biotech
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101565857
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2019
Aug 2019
Historique:
received:
24
01
2019
accepted:
01
07
2019
entrez:
30
7
2019
pubmed:
30
7
2019
medline:
30
7
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
One hundred diverse iso-cytoplasmic restorer (ICR) lines carrying WA cytoplasm indicated significant but moderate variability for agro-morphological traits as well as for the microsatellite-based allele patterns. There were two major groups of ICRs based on agro-morphological clustering. Simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers identified allelic variants with an average of 2.48 alleles per locus and the gene diversity (GD) ranged from 0.02 to 0.62 at different loci. ICR lines showed a genetic structure involving two sub-populations, POP1 and POP2. Both the subpopulations had the presence of admixture lines. Nearest ancestry-based grouping of ICRs by neighbour-joining (NJ) method showed near similar grouping as that of sub-population division. The POP2 was the largest group but with fewer admixed lines. POP1 was more distinct than POP2. Since the hybrid parents of the ICRs had limited diversity on maternal lineage, paternal lineage was concluded as the major contributor to the observed divergence and population differentiation. ICRs developed from certain hybrids were more genetically distinct than other hybrids. Even with the moderate variability, ICRs could be considered as a potential source of fertility restoration in hybrid development because of their distinct population structure and the full complement of restorer genes they contained. ICR lines with high per se performance can be utilized in hybrid rice development by estimating their combining ability.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31355108
doi: 10.1007/s13205-019-1824-3
pii: 1824
pmc: PMC6646621
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
299Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict of interestThe authors declare no conflict of interest.
Références
Genetics. 2000 Jun;155(2):945-59
pubmed: 10835412
Theor Appl Genet. 2004 Nov;109(8):1586-96
pubmed: 15375619
Bioinformatics. 2005 May 1;21(9):2128-9
pubmed: 15705655
Mol Ecol. 2005 Jul;14(8):2611-20
pubmed: 15969739
Evol Bioinform Online. 2007 Feb 23;1:47-50
pubmed: 19325852
C R Biol. 2010 Jan;333(1):61-7
pubmed: 20176338
Theor Appl Genet. 2010 Aug;121(3):475-87
pubmed: 20364375
Trends Ecol Evol. 1996 Oct;11(10):413-8
pubmed: 21237900
PLoS One. 2011;6(12):e27565
pubmed: 22164211
Plant Biotechnol J. 2012 Aug;10(6):623-34
pubmed: 22222031
J Agric Food Chem. 2013 Sep 4;61(35):8277-86
pubmed: 23551250
J Genet. 2013 Dec;92(3):545-57
pubmed: 24371175
Heredity (Edinb). 2015 Oct;115(4):293-301
pubmed: 25690179
New Phytol. 2015 Sep;207(4):968-84
pubmed: 25944305
BMC Genet. 2016 Jul 13;17(1):107
pubmed: 27412613
BMC Genet. 2016 Sep 05;17(1):127
pubmed: 27597653
Rice (N Y). 2016 Dec;9(1):58
pubmed: 27766601
Rice (N Y). 2017 Dec;10(1):22
pubmed: 28527137
Evolution. 1984 Nov;38(6):1358-1370
pubmed: 28563791
Physiol Mol Biol Plants. 2017 Oct;23(4):891-909
pubmed: 29158637
Mol Biol Evol. 2018 Jun 1;35(6):1547-1549
pubmed: 29722887
Nucleic Acids Res. 1980 Oct 10;8(19):4321-5
pubmed: 7433111
Genetics. 1998 Oct;150(2):899-909
pubmed: 9755218