Effect of Different Drought Resistance Genes on Thousand Grains Weight of Wheat

doi:10.7668/hbnxb.20193893

Abstract

Abstract:

To clarify the effect of different drought resistance genes on wheat grain weight, 352 main varieties (or lines) in Huang and Huai Valley wheat region were used as experimental materials. Two experimental treatments were designed, normal irrigation and drought condition. Grain weight data were investigated for three consecutive years from 2019 to 2021. KASP markers of three drought resistance genes (1-fehw3, TaDreb-B1 and Cwi-4A) were used to genotype the experimental materials, and the effects of different drought resistance genes on wheat grain weight were studied. The results showed that the KASP markers of the three genes could be used for genotyping of the experimental materials, and the effects of KASP marker of 1-fehw3 and Cwi-4A genes were better than that of TaDreb-B1 gene. The distribution frequency of the dominant alleles of 1-fehw3,TaDreb-B1 and Cwi-4A genes was 36.9%, 41.1% and 35.1%, respectively. When genotyping by single gene marker, the thousand grain weight between drought resistant and susceptible genotypes did not reach a significant level in different years and conditions. When tested using two gene markers, 1-fehw3+TaDreb-B1 showed significant differences in thousand grains weight between drought resistant and susceptible genotypes under normal irrigation in 2019 and drought in 2020; 1-fehw3+Cwi-4A reached a significant level in the 2019 and 2020 drought environments; TaDreb-B1+Cwi-4A achieved a significant level in 2020 drought environment. When tested using three genes (1-fehw3, TaDreb-B1 and Cwi-4A) markers, the thousand grains weight of drought resistant genotypes was significantly higher than that of drought susceptible genotypes in all five environments except for irrigation conditions in 2020. The results indicated that because drought resistance was a complex trait controlled by multiple genes, the contribution of a single drought resistance gene to wheat drought resistance was relatively small. However, using molecular marker assisted selection for multi gene pyramiding breeding could significantly improve wheat drought resistance.

Key words: Wheat, Drought resistant genes, Thousand grains weight

YANG Kai, CHENG Xiaohu, ZHAO Jie, HUANG Jinan, YU Cuihong, ZHANG Li, HU Mengyun, SUN Lijing, LI Hui, WNAG Qingtao, ZHANG Yingjun. Effect of Different Drought Resistance Genes on Thousand Grains Weight of Wheat[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2023, 38(3): 69-76. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20193893.

/ / Recommend / Download Citations

URL: http://www.hbnxb.net/EN/10.7668/hbnxb.20193893

http://www.hbnxb.net/EN/Y2023/V38/I3/69

Figures/Tables 9

References 35

[1]	Boyer J S. Plant productivity and environment[J]. Science, 1982, 218(4571):443-448. doi:10.1126/science.218.4571.443. doi: 10.1126/science.218.4571.443 pmid: 17808529
[2]	Valliyodan B, Nguyen H T. Understanding regulatory networks and engineering for enhanced drought tolerance in plants[J]. Current Opinion in Plant Biology, 2006, 9(2):189-195.doi:10.1016/j.pbi.2006.01.019. doi: 10.1016/j.pbi.2006.01.019 pmid: 16483835
[3]	Baldoni E, Genga A, Cominelli E. Plant MYB transcription factors:Their role in drought response mechanisms[J]. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 2015, 16(7):15811-15851.doi:10.3390/ijms160715811. doi: 10.3390/ijms160715811 pmid: 26184177
[4]	Castilhos G, Lazzarotto F, Spagnolo-Fonini L, Bodanese-Zanettini M H, Margis-Pinheiro M. Possible roles of basic helix-loop-helix transcription factors in adaptation to drought[J]. Plant Science, 2014, 223:1-7.doi:10.1016/j.plantsci.2014.02.010. doi: 10.1016/j.plantsci.2014.02.010 pmid: 24767109
[5]	Chen L G, Song Y, Li S J, Zhang L P, Zou C S, Yu D Q. The role of WRKY transcription factors in plant abiotic stresses[J]. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, 2012, 1819(2):120-128.doi:10.1016/j.bbagrm.2011.09.002. doi: 10.1016/j.bbagrm.2011.09.002 pmid: 21964328
[6]	Mizoi J, Shinozaki K, Yamaguchi-Shinozaki K. AP2/ERF family transcription factors in plant abiotic stress responses[J]. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, 2012, 1819(2):86-96.doi:10.1016/j.bbagrm.2011.08.004. doi: 10.1016/j.bbagrm.2011.08.004 pmid: 21867785
[7]	Nakashima K, Takasaki H, Mizoi J, Shinozaki K, Yamaguchi-Shinozaki K. NAC transcription factors in plant abiotic stress responses[J]. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, 2012, 1819(2):97-103.doi:10.1016/j.bbagrm.2011.10.005. doi: 10.1016/j.bbagrm.2011.10.005 pmid: 22037288
[8]	Nakashima K, Yamaguchi-Shinozaki K, Shinozaki K. The transcriptional regulatory network in the drought response and its crosstalk in abiotic stress responses including drought,cold,and heat[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2014, 5:170.doi:10.3389/fpls.2014.00170. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2014.00170 pmid: 24904597
[9]	Wu Y R, Deng Z Y, Lai J B, Zhang Y Y, Yang C P, Yin B J, Zhao Q Z, Zhang L, Li Y, Yang C W, Xie Q. Dual function of Arabidopsis ATAF1 in abiotic and biotic stress responses[J]. Cell Research, 2009, 19(11):1279-1290.doi:10.1038/cr.2009.108. doi: 10.1038/cr.2009.108
[10]	Sakuma Y, Maruyama K, Qin F, Osakabe Y, Shinozaki K, Yamaguchi-Shinozaki K. Dual function of an Arabidopsis transcription factor DREB2A in water-stress-responsive and heat-stress-responsive gene expression[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2006, 103(49):18822-18827.doi:10.1073/pnas.0605639103. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0605639103 pmid: 17030801
[11]	Zhang Z Y, Liu X, Wang X D, Zhou M P, Zhou X Y, Ye X G, Wei X N. An R2R3 MYB transcription factor in wheat,TaPIMP1,mediates host resistance to Bipolaris sorokiniana and drought stresses through regulation of defense-and stress-related genes[J]. The New Phytologist, 2012, 196(4):1155-1170.doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.2012.04353.x. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2012.04353.x URL
[12]	Raineri J, Wang S H, Peleg Z, Blumwald E, Chan R L. The rice transcription factor OsWRKY47 is a positive regulator of the response to water deficit stress[J]. Plant Molecular Biology, 2015, 88(4/5):401-413.doi:10.1007/s11103-015-0329-7. doi: 10.1007/s11103-015-0329-7 URL
[13]	Lawson T, Blatt M R. Stomatal size,speed,and responsiveness impact on photosynthesis and water use efficiency[J]. Plant Physiology, 2014, 164(4):1556-1570.doi:10.1104/pp.114.237107. doi: 10.1104/pp.114.237107 pmid: 24578506
[14]	Farquhar G D, Ehleringer J R, Hubick K T. Carbon isotope discrimination and photosynthesis[J]. Annual Review of Plant Physiology and Plant Molecular Biology, 1989, 40:503-537.doi:10.1146/annurev.pp.40.060189.002443. doi: 10.1146/annurev.pp.40.060189.002443 URL
[15]	Franks P J, Adams M A, Amthor J S, Barbour M M, Berry J A, Ellsworth D S, Farquhar G D, Ghannoum O, Lloyd J, McDowell N, Norby R J, Tissue D T, von Caemmerer S.Sensitivity of plants to changing atmospheric CO₂ concentration:From the geological past to the next century[J]. The New Phytologist, 2013, 197(4):1077-1094.doi:10.1111/nph.12104. doi: 10.1111/nph.12104 URL
[16]	Des Marais D L, Auchincloss L C, Sukamtoh E, McKay J K, Logan T, Richards J H, Juenger T E. Variation in MPK12 affects water use efficiency in Arabidopsis and reveals a pleiotropic link between guard cell size and ABA response[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2014, 111(7):2836-2841.doi:10.1073/pnas.1321429111. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1321429111 pmid: 24550314
[17]	Chaerle L, Saibo N, Van Der Straeten D.Tuning the pores:Towards engineering plants for improved water use efficiency[J]. Trends in Biotechnology, 2005, 23(6):308-315.doi:10.1016/j.tibtech.2005.04.005. doi: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2005.04.005 pmid: 15922083
[18]	Geiger D, Scherzer S, Mumm P, Stange A, Marten I, Bauer H, Ache P, Matschi S, Liese A, Al-Rasheid K A S, Romeis T, Hedrich R. Activity of guard cell anion channel SLAC1 is controlled by drought-stress signaling kinase-phosphatase pair[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2009, 106(50):21425-21430.doi:10.1073/pnas.0912021106. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0912021106 pmid: 19955405
[19]	Mustilli A C, Merlot S, Vavasseur A, Fenzi F, Giraudat J. Arabidopsis OST1 protein kinase mediates the regulation of stomatal aperture by abscisic acid and acts upstream of reactive oxygen species production[J]. The Plant Cell, 2002, 14(12):3089-3099.doi:10.1105/tpc.007906. doi: 10.1105/tpc.007906 URL
[20]	Yang Z Y, Liu J H, Tischer S V, Christmann A, Windisch W, Schnyder H, Grill E. Leveraging abscisic acid receptors for efficient water use in Arabidopsis[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2016, 113(24):6791-6796.doi:10.1073/pnas.1601954113. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1601954113
[21]	Cutler S R, Rodriguez P L, Finkelstein R R, Abrams S R. Abscisic acid:emergence of a core signaling network[J]. Annual Review of Plant Biology, 2010, 61:651-679.doi:10.1146/annurev-arplant-042809-112122. doi: 10.1146/annurev-arplant-042809-112122 pmid: 20192755
[22]	Zhao Y, Chan Z L, Gao J H, Xing L, Cao M J, Yu C M, Hu Y L, You J, Shi H T, Zhu Y F, Gong Y H, Mu Z X, Wang H Q, Deng X, Wang P C, Bressan R A, Zhu J K. ABA receptor PYL9 promotes drought resistance and leaf senescence[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2016, 113(7):1949-1954.doi:10.1073/pnas.1522840113. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1522840113 pmid: 26831097
[23]	Pizzio G A, Rodriguez L, Antoni R, Gonzalez-Guzman M, Yunta C, Merilo E, Kollist H, Albert A, Rodriguez P L. The PYL4 A194T mutant uncovers a key role of PYR1-LIKE4/PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE 2CA interaction for abscisic acid signaling and plant drought resistance[J]. Plant Physiology, 2013, 163(1):441-455.doi:10.1104/pp.113.224162. doi: 10.1104/pp.113.224162 pmid: 23864556
[24]	Santiago J, Rodrigues A, Saez A, Rubio S, Antoni R, Dupeux F, Park S Y, Márquez J A, Cutler S R, Rodriguez P L. Modulation of drought resistance by the abscisic acid receptor PYL5 through inhibition of clade A PP2Cs[J]. The Plant Journal, 2009, 60(4):575-588.doi:10.1111/j.1365-313X.2009.03981.x. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2009.03981.x pmid: 19624469
[25]	Rubio S, Rodrigues A, Saez A, Dizon M B, Galle A, Kim T H, Santiago J, Flexas J, Schroeder J I, Rodriguez P L. Triple loss of function of protein phosphatases type 2C leads to partial constitutive response to endogenous abscisic acid[J]. Plant Physiology, 2009, 150(3):1345-1355.doi:10.1104/pp.109.137174. doi: 10.1104/pp.109.137174 pmid: 19458118
[26]	Zhang J J, Xu Y J, Chen W, Dell B, Vergauwen R, Biddulph B, Khan N, Luo H, Appels R, Van den Ende W.A wheat 1-FEH w3 variant underlies enzyme activity for stem WSC remobilization to grain under drought[J]. The New Phytologist, 2015, 205(1):293-305.doi:10.1111/nph.13030. doi: 10.1111/nph.13030 URL
[27]	Wei B, Jing R L, Wang C S, Chen J B, Mao X G, Chang X P, Jia J Z. Dreb1 genes in wheat(Triticum aestivum L.):development of functional markers and gene mapping based on SNPs[J]. Molecular Breeding, 2009, 23(1):13-22.doi:10.1007/s11032-008-9209-z. doi: 10.1007/s11032-008-9209-z URL
[28]	Jiang Y M, Jiang Q Y, Hao C Y, Hou J, Wang L F, Zhang H N, Zhang S N, Chen X H, Zhang X H. A yield-associated gene TaCWI,in wheat:Its function,selection and evolution in global breeding revealed by haplotype analysis[J]. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 2015, 128(1):131-143.doi:10.1007/s00122-014-2417-5. doi: 10.1007/s00122-014-2417-5 URL
[29]	Rasheed A, Wen W E, Gao F M, Zhai S N, Jin H, Liu J D, Guo Q, Zhang Y J, Dreisigacker S, Xia X C, He Z H. Development and validation of KASP assays for genes underpinning key economic traits in bread wheat[J]. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 2016, 129(10):1843-1860. doi:10.1007/s00122-016-2743-x. doi: 10.1007/s00122-016-2743-x pmid: 27306516
[30]	袁谦, 张锋, 张中州, 甄士聪, 望俊森, 赵永涛, 鲁进恒, 范志业. 国审小麦品种漯麦18重要功能基因的KASP标记检测[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2021, 49(24): 56-59. doi:10.15889/j.issn.1002-1302.2021.24.009. doi: 10.15889/j.issn.1002-1302.2021.24.009
	Yuan Q, Zhang F, Zhang Z Z, Zhen S C, Wang J S, Zhao Y T, Lu J H, Fan Z Y. KASP marker detection of important functional genes of national wheat variety Luomai 18[J]. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2021, 49(24): 56-59.
[31]	高振贤, 赵彦坤, 班进福, 张国丛, 曹巧, 傅晓艺, 底琮瀚, 史占良. 河北省小麦重要农艺性状的KASP标记检测[J]. 分子植物育种, 2021, 19(2):518-528.doi:10.13271/j.mpb.019.000518. doi: 10.13271/j.mpb.019.000518
	Gao Z X, Zhao Y K, Ban J F, Zhang G C, Cao Q, Fu X Y, Di Z H, Shi Z L. Detection of important agronomic traits of wheat by KASP markers in Hebei Province[J]. Molecular Plant Breeding, 2021, 19(2):518-528.
[32]	王志伟, 乔祥梅, 王志龙, 杨金华, 程加省, 程耿, 于亚雄. 云南小麦品种(系)抗逆性相关基因的KASP标记检测[J]. 西南农业学报, 2020, 33(8):1601-1607.
	Wang Z W, Qiao X M, Wang Z L, Yang J H, Cheng J S, Cheng G, Yu Y X. Identification of genes associated with stress resistance in Yunnan wheat cultivars(lines)by KASP assays[J]. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2020, 33(8):1601-1607.doi:10.16213/j.cnki.scjas.2020.8.001. doi: 10.16213/j.cnki.scjas.2020.8.001
[33]	张海萍, 常成, 游光霞, 张秀英, 闫长生, 肖世和, 司红起, 卢杰, 马传喜. 中国小麦微核心种质及地方品种籽粒休眠特性的分子标记鉴定[J]. 作物学报, 2010, 36(10):1649-1656. doi:10.3724/SP.J.1006.2010.01649. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2010.01649
	Zhang H P, Chang C, You G X, Zhang X Y, Yan C S, Xiao S H, Si H Q, Lu J, Ma C X. Identification of molecular markers associated with seed dormancy in mini core collections of Chinese wheat and landraces[J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2010, 36(10):1649-1656. doi: 10.1016/S1875-2780(09)60077-8 URL
[34]	王瑞, 刘红彦, 李洪连, 王俊美, 伊艳杰. 小麦抗白粉病基因Pm6的PCR标记鉴定[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2007, 27(3):421-424. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1009-1041.2007.03.012. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-1041.2007.03.012
	Wang R, Liu H Y, Li H L, Wang J M, Yi Y J. Identification of PCR markers linked to wheat powdery mildew resistance gene Pm6[J]. Journal of Triticeae Crops, 2007, 27(3):421-424.
[35]	王俊美. 小麦抗白粉病基因Pm4、Pm6的PCR鉴定[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2005.
	Wang J M. PCR identification of wheat powdery mildew resistance genes Pm4 and Pm6[D]. Yangling: Northwest Agriculture and Forestry University, 2005.

基因名称 Gene name	抗旱基因型 (上游引物1) Resistant type (up-stream primer 1)	不抗旱基因型 (上游引物2) Susceptible type (up-stream primer 2)	通用引物 (下游引物) General primer (down-stream primer)
1-fehw3	GAAGGTGACCAAGTTCATGCTCTC CCCCCTTCCTTCTGTCC	GAAGGTCGGAGTCAACGGATTCTC CCCCCTTCCTTCTGTCT	AGGAAGACGGCCCGAGCT TT
TaDreb-B1	GAAGGTGACCAAGTTCATGCTCCT GCGCACTTTCTTCTTCCTGT	GAAGGTCGGAGTCAACGGATTCT GCGCACTTTCTTCTTCCTGG	TTTCACCTTGTGATATGGAT TGCCTTGAT
Cwi-4A	GAAGGTGACCAAGTTCATGCTTTTATT TAAAATTTGATGAACTTTTCATAAAC	GAAGGTCGGAGTCAACGGATTTTTAT TTAAAATTTGATGAACTTTTCACAAAT	CATCGAATTGAAGAAAAGT TCACGC

基因名称 Gene name	抗旱基因型 (上游引物1) Resistant type (up-stream primer 1)	不抗旱基因型 (上游引物2) Susceptible type (up-stream primer 2)	通用引物 (下游引物) General primer (down-stream primer)
1-fehw3	GAAGGTGACCAAGTTCATGCTCTC CCCCCTTCCTTCTGTCC	GAAGGTCGGAGTCAACGGATTCTC CCCCCTTCCTTCTGTCT	AGGAAGACGGCCCGAGCT TT
TaDreb-B1	GAAGGTGACCAAGTTCATGCTCCT GCGCACTTTCTTCTTCCTGT	GAAGGTCGGAGTCAACGGATTCT GCGCACTTTCTTCTTCCTGG	TTTCACCTTGTGATATGGAT TGCCTTGAT
Cwi-4A	GAAGGTGACCAAGTTCATGCTTTTATT TAAAATTTGATGAACTTTTCATAAAC	GAAGGTCGGAGTCAACGGATTTTTAT TTAAAATTTGATGAACTTTTCACAAAT	CATCGAATTGAAGAAAAGT TCACGC

环境 Environments	抗旱基因型 Resistant type		不抗旱基因型 Susceptible type		P值 P value
环境 Environments	样本量 Sample number	平均值/g Average	样本量 Sample number	平均值/g Average	P值 P value
2021正常2021 Normal	130	51.27	222	51.05	0.344
2020正常2020 Normal	115	49.36	199	49.32	0.471
2019正常2019 Normal	112	44.48	200	44.40	0.434
2021干旱2021 Drought	128	46.01	222	46.16	0.374
2020干旱2020 Drought	128	48.68	217	48.70	0.482
2019干旱2019 Drought	114	44.62	201	44.91	0.340

环境 Environments	抗旱基因型 Resistant type		不抗旱基因型 Susceptible type		P值 P value
环境 Environments	样本量 Sample number	平均值/g Average	样本量 Sample number	平均值/g Average	P值 P value
2021正常2021 Normal	130	51.27	222	51.05	0.344
2020正常2020 Normal	115	49.36	199	49.32	0.471
2019正常2019 Normal	112	44.48	200	44.40	0.434
2021干旱2021 Drought	128	46.01	222	46.16	0.374
2020干旱2020 Drought	128	48.68	217	48.70	0.482
2019干旱2019 Drought	114	44.62	201	44.91	0.340

环境 Environments	抗旱基因型 Resistant type		不抗旱基因型 Susceptible type		P值 P value
环境 Environments	样本量 Sample number	平均值/g Average	样本量 Sample number	平均值/g Average	P值 P value
2021正常2021 Normal	140	51.34	201	50.98	0.253
2020正常2020 Normal	123	49.66	183	49.14	0.147
2019正常2019 Normal	122	44.80	180	44.18	0.103
2021干旱2021 Drought	138	46.31	202	46.04	0.283
2020干旱2020 Drought	137	48.86	197	48.48	0.201
2019干旱2019 Drought	121	44.75	184	44.63	0.401

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export