Detecting Glyphosate Tolerant QTL in Wheat Based on Genome-wide Association Analysis

doi:10.7668/hbnxb.20194672

Abstract

Abstract:

Glyphosate is currently the most widely used broad-spectrum herbicide.Cultivating glyphosate tolerant crops will help improve the effectiveness of chemical control on weed in farmlands,reduce the use of pesticide,and simplify preventive and control measures.To fully detect the glyphosate tolerance(GT)loci in wheat,484 germplasm resources from the Huang-huai wheat region were used to identify glyphosate toxicity.Based on the wheat 15K SNP array data,genome-wide association analysis(GWAS)was used to explore QTL related to glyphosate tolerance in wheat.The main results were as follows:the trend of changes in glyphosate tolerance of wheat varieties cultivated in different eras was slow,and the glyphosate tolerance had not significantly improved;three glyphosate tolerant wheat germplasms(including Henong 130,Jimai 782 and Taishan 23)were selected based on the phenotypic identification results of pesticide damage;seven QTL associated with the level of wheat pesticide damage were detected by GWAS,including 19 significant SNPs,distributed on wheat chromosomes 1A(0.00—30.48 Mb),1B(6.57—30.57 Mb),1D(0.00—22.98 Mb),4A(656.09—680.09 Mb),5A(508.19—532.19 Mb),6A(54.56—85.09 Mb),and 6D(12.02—36.02 Mb);the two QTL qGlyT-1A and qGlyT-6A located on wheat chromosomes 1A and 6A were the main effector sites for glyphosate tolerance in wheat,containing a total of 16 genes that may be related to glyphosate tolerance in wheat.

Key words: Wheat, Huang-huai wheat region, Glyphosate tolerance, Genome-wide association analysis

ZHAO Jie, MU Liming, HU Mengyun, SUN Lijing, LI Qianying, WANG Peinan, LI Hui, LIU Xiaomin, ZHANG Yingjun. Detecting Glyphosate Tolerant QTL in Wheat Based on Genome-wide Association Analysis[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2024, 39(3): 1-7. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20194672.

/ / Recommend / Download Citations

URL: http://www.hbnxb.net/EN/10.7668/hbnxb.20194672

http://www.hbnxb.net/EN/Y2024/V39/I3/1

Figures/Tables 7

References 32

[1]	张洋洋, 高原, 欧阳萧晗, 董立尧, 李俊. 啶磺草胺、唑啉草酯和异丙隆混配配比筛选及防除小麦田一年生杂草的田间效果[J]. 南京农业大学学报, 2020, 43(2):253-259.doi:10.7685/jnau.201905039.
	Zhang Y Y, Gao Y, Ouyang X H, Dong L Y, Li J. Screening of the optimal proportion for the mixture of pyroxsulam,pinoxaden,isoproturon and its field efficiency against annual weeds in wheat fields[J]. Journal of Nanjing Agricultural University, 2020, 43(2):253-259.
[2]	张红磊, 李军玲, 张融雪, 郭彦丽, 苏京平, 孙玥, 佟卉, 刘燕清, 王胜军, 刘学军. ALS以及ALS抑制剂类除草剂的研究进展[J]. 植物学研究, 2021, 10(6):781-791.doi:10.12677/BR.2021.106097.
	Zhang H L, Li X L, Zhang R X, Guo Y L, Su J P, Sun Y, Tong H, Liu Y Q, Wang S J, Liu X J. Research progress of ALS and ALS inhibitors herbicides[J]. Botanical Research, 2021, 10(6):781-791.
[3]	张雅涵, 朱丽霞, 胡静, 朱亚静, 张雪婧, 曹叶中. 草甘膦在我国生物育种产业化应用中的机遇与挑战[J]. 生物技术通报, 2022, 38(11):1-9.doi:10.13560/j.cnki.biotech.bull.1985.2022-0924.
	Zhang Y H, Zhu L X, Hu J, Zhu Y J, Zhang X J, Cao Y Z. Opportunities and challenges of glyphosate in the application of biotechnology breeding in China[J]. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2022, 38(11):1-9.
[4]	Moehs C P, Austill W J, Facciotti D, Holm A, Loeffler D, Lu Z J, Mullenberg J C, Slade A J, Steine M N, van Boxtel J, McGuire C. Development of non-transgenic glyphosate tolerant wheat by TILLING[J]. PLoS One, 2021, 16(9):e0245802.doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0245802.
[5]	Heap I. Global perspective of herbicide-resistant weeds[J]. Pest Management Science, 2014, 70(9):1306-1315.doi:10.1002/ps.3696. pmid: 24302673
[6]	曹瑛, 冯渊博, 郭鹏飞. 非选择性除草剂在禾本科杂草重发麦田的应用研究[J]. 陕西农业科学, 2020, 66(3):36-38.doi:10.3969/j.issn.0488-5368.2020.03.010.
	Cao Y, Feng Y B, Guo P F. Study on the application of non-selective herbicides in wheat fields with recurrent Gramineous weeds[J]. Shaanxi Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2020, 66(3):36-38.
[7]	Alibhai M F, Stallings W C. Closing down on glyphosate inhibition-with a new structure for drug discovery[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2001, 98(6):2944-2946.doi:10.1073/pnas.061025898. pmid: 11248008
[8]	Maeda H, Dudareva N. The shikimate pathway and aromatic amino acid biosynthesis in plants[J]. Annual Review of Plant Biology, 2012, 63:73-105.doi:10.1146/annurev-arplant-042811-105439. pmid: 22554242
[9]	Schönbrunn E, Eschenburg S, Shuttleworth W A, Schloss J V, Amrhein N, Evans J N, Kabsch W. Interaction of the herbicide glyphosate with its target enzyme 5-enolpyruvylshikimate 3-phosphate synthase in atomic detail[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2001, 98(4):1376-1380.doi:10.1073/pnas.98.4.1376. pmid: 11171958
[10]	Fuchs B, Saikkonen K, Helander M. Glyphosate-modulated biosynthesis driving plant defense and species interactions[J]. Trends in Plant Science, 2021, 26(4):312-323.doi:10.1016/j.tplants.2020.11.004. pmid: 33277187
[11]	Ridley W P, Sidhu R S, Pyla P D, Nemeth M A, Breeze M L, Astwood J D. Comparison of the nutritional profile of glyphosate-tolerant corn event NK603 with that of conventional corn(Zea mays L.)[J]. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 2002, 50(25):7235-7243.doi:10.1021/jf0205662.
[12]	Cui Y, Huang S Q, Liu Z D, Yi S Y, Zhou F, Chen H, Lin Y J. Development of novel glyphosate-tolerant Japonica rice lines:a step toward commercial release[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2016, 7:1218.doi:10.3389/fpls.2016.01218.
[13]	Peng C, Mei Y T, Ding L, Wang X F, Chen X Y, Wang J M, Xu J F. Using combined methods of genetic mapping and nanopore-based sequencing technology to analyze the insertion positions of G10evo-EPSPS and Cry1Ab/Cry2Aj transgenes in maize[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2021, 12:690951.doi:10.3389/fpls.2021.690951.
[14]	Tan S, Evans R, Singh B. Herbicidal inhibitors of amino acid biosynthesis and herbicide-tolerant crops[J]. Amino Acids, 2006, 30(2):195-204.doi:10.1007/s00726-005-0254-1. pmid: 16547651
[15]	Li S Y, Li P C, Li X Y, Wen N, Wang Y X, Lu W, Lin M, Lang Z H. In maize,co-expression of GAT and GR79-EPSPS provides high glyphosate resistance,along with low glyphosate residues[J]. aBIOTECH, 2023, 4(4):277-290.doi:10.1007/s42994-023-00114-8.
[16]	Sammons R D, Gaines T A. Glyphosate resistance:state of knowledge[J]. Pest Management Science, 2014, 70(9):1367-1377.doi:10.1002/ps.3743.
[17]	Siehl D L, Castle L A, Gorton R, Keenan R J. The molecular basis of glyphosate resistance by an optimized microbial acetyltransferase[J]. The Journal of Biological Chemistry, 2007, 282(15):11446-11455.doi:10.1074/jbc.M610267200.
[18]	Siehl D L, Castle L A, Gorton R, Chen Y H, Bertain S, Cho H J, Keenan R, Liu D L, Lassner M W. Evolution of a microbial acetyltransferase for modification of glyphosate:a novel tolerance strategy[J]. Pest Management Science, 2005, 61(3):235-240.doi:10.1002/ps.1014.
[19]	Liu Y J, Cao G Y, Chen R R, Zhang S X, Ren Y, Lu W, Wang J H, Wang G Y. Transgenic tobacco simultaneously overexpressing glyphosate N-acetyltransferase and 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase are more resistant to glyphosate than those containing one gene[J]. Transgenic Research, 2015, 24(4):753-763.doi:10.1007/s11248-015-9874-8. pmid: 25822532
[20]	Meng Y Y, Zhang W W, Wang Z M, Yuan F, Guo S D, Lin H, Niu L F. Co-expression of GR79 EPSPS and GAT generates high glyphosate-resistant alfalfa with low glyphosate residues[J]. aBIOTECH, 2023, 4(4):352-358.doi:10.1007/s42994-023-00119-3.
[21]	Zhao J, Sun L J, Gao H M, Hu M Y, Mu L M, Cheng X H, Wang J B, Zhao Y, Li Q Y, Wang P N, Li H, Zhang Y J. Genome-wide association study of yield-related traits in common wheat(Triticum aestivum L.)under normal and drought treatment conditions[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2023, 13:1098560.doi:10.3389/fpls.2022.1098560.
[22]	Purcell S, Neale B, Todd-Brown K, Thomas L, Ferreira M A R, Bender D, Maller J, Sklar P, de Bakker P I W, Daly M J, Sham P C. PLINK:a tool set for whole-genome association and population-based linkage analyses[J]. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 2007, 81(3):559-575.doi:10.1086/519795.
[23]	Bradbury P J, Zhang Z W, Kroon D E, Casstevens T M, Ramdoss Y, Buckler E S. TASSEL:software for association mapping of complex traits in diverse samples[J]. Bioinformatics, 2007, 23(19):2633-2635.doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btm308. pmid: 17586829
[24]	Wang J B, Tang Y, Zhang Z W. Performing genome-wide association studies with multiple models using GAPIT[J]. Methods in Molecular Biology, 2022, 2481:199-217.doi:10.1007/978-1-0716-2237-7_13. pmid: 35641767
[25]	王秀红, 史向远, 白建荣, 孙毅, 刘惠民. 抗草甘膦基因的玉米转化及后代遗传分析[J]. 华北农学报, 2011, 26(1):117-121. doi:10.7668/hbnxb.2011.01.024.
	Wang X H, Shi X Y, Bai J R, Sun Y, Liu H M. Transformation and genetic analysis of maize with the glyphosate-resistant gene[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2011, 26(1):117-121.
[26]	李敬娜, 刘亚, 李翔, 袁潜华, 赵久然. 抗草甘膦基因表达载体的构建及对玉米的遗传转化[J]. 华北农学报, 2010, 25(4):44-48. doi:10.7668/hbnxb.2010.04.009.
	Li J N, Liu Y, Li X, Yuan Q H, Zhao J R. Construction of expression vector with glyphasate-resistant gene and its genetic transform in maize[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2010, 25(4):44-48.
[27]	Achary V M M, Sheri V, Manna M, Panditi V, Borphukan B, Ram B, Agarwal A, Fartyal D, Teotia D, Masakapalli S K, Agrawal P K, Reddy M K. Overexpression of improved EPSPS gene results in field level glyphosate tolerance and higher grain yield in rice[J]. Plant Biotechnology Journal, 2020, 18(12):2504-2519.doi:10.1111/pbi.13428.
[28]	Liang C Z, Sun B, Meng Z G, Meng Z H, Wang Y, Sun G Q, Zhu T, Lu W, Zhang W, Malik W, Lin M, Zhang R, Guo S D. Co-expression of GR79 EPSPS and GAT yields herbicide-resistant cotton with low glyphosate residues[J]. Plant Biotechnology Journal, 2017, 15(12):1622-1629.doi:10.1111/pbi.12744. pmid: 28418615
[29]	Green J M. Current state of herbicides in herbicide-resistant crops[J]. Pest Management Science, 2014, 70(9):1351-1357.doi:10.1002/ps.3727. pmid: 24446395
[30]	张玉池, 王晓蕾, 徐文蓉, 刘琪, 相世刚, 戴伟民, 强胜, 宋小玲. 国内外抗除草剂基因专利的分析[J]. 杂草学报, 2017, 35(2):1-22.doi:10.19588/j.issn.1003-935X.2017.02.001.
	Zhang Y C, Wang X L, Xu W R, Liu Q, Xiang S G, Dai W M, Qiang S, Song X L. Analysis on the patents of herbicide resistance gene at home and abroad[J]. Journal of Weed Science, 2017, 35(2):1-22.
[31]	胡利锋, 刘小安, 孙兰, 邵仁志, 柏连阳. 除草剂安全剂作用机理研究进展[J]. 农药学学报, 2017, 19(2):152-161.doi:10.16801/j.issn.1008-7303.2017.0020.
	Hu L F, Liu X A, Sun L, Shao R Z, Bai L Y. Progresses in the action mechanism of herbicide safeners[J]. Chinese Journal of Pesticide Science, 2017, 19(2):152-161.
[32]	杨晓霞, 张雪梅, 张伟, 龚久平, 李典晏, 杨俊英, 李必全, 柴勇, 刘剑飞. 蚯蚓细胞色素P450亚酶及代谢组学对土壤亚致死剂量草甘膦除草剂的响应[J]. 环境科学学报, 2021, 41(3):1091-1100.doi:10.13671/j.hjkxxb.2020.0461.
	Yang X X, Zhang X M, Zhang W, Gong J P, Li D Y, Yang J Y, Li B Q, Chai Y, Liu J F. Responses of cytochrome P450 subenzymes and metabolomics in earthworms exposed to sublethal of glyphosate-based herbicide in soil[J]. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae, 2021, 41(3):1091-1100.

药害等级 Pesticide damage level	小麦草甘膦药害表型 Glyphosate tolerant phenotype in wheat
1级	只有小麦叶尖发黄,处理比对照植株株高稍矮
2级	小麦1/3以下叶片发黄,处理植株高度高于对照株高1/2
3级	小麦1/2叶片发黄,处理株高度高于对照的一半株高
4级	小麦2/3叶片发黄,处理株高明显矮于对照株高
5级	小麦大部分叶片发黄,叶片开始枯萎
6级	小麦植株枯萎、死亡

药害等级 Pesticide damage level	小麦草甘膦药害表型 Glyphosate tolerant phenotype in wheat
1级	只有小麦叶尖发黄,处理比对照植株株高稍矮
2级	小麦1/3以下叶片发黄,处理植株高度高于对照株高1/2
3级	小麦1/2叶片发黄,处理株高度高于对照的一半株高
4级	小麦2/3叶片发黄,处理株高明显矮于对照株高
5级	小麦大部分叶片发黄,叶片开始枯萎
6级	小麦植株枯萎、死亡

数量性状基因座QTL	显著性SNP位点 Significant SNP	染色体 Chromosome	物理位置/Mb Position	显著性值 P value	可解释表型变异/%R²
qGlyT-1A	AX-108779844	1A	9.98	3.30E-04	2.64
	AX-110523831	1A	15.18	5.90E-05	3.32
	AX-108966198	1A	16.03	7.49E-04	2.33
	AX-111125144	1A	18.48	1.88E-04	2.86
qGlyT-1B	AX-95089648	1B	18.57	9.20E-04	2.25
qGlyT-1D	AX-94809631	1D	18.57	9.93E-04	2.22
qGlyT-4A	AX-109519189	4A	668.09	5.75E-04	2.43
qGlyT-5A	AX-110418750	5A	520.19	4.42E-04	2.53
qGlyT-6A	AX-109933415	6A	66.56	7.94E-04	2.30
	AX-109520642	6A	67.34	3.31E-04	2.64
	AX-111490517	6A	67.46	6.07E-04	2.41
	AX-110445351	6A	68.42	7.85E-04	2.31
	AX-108988699	6A	68.62	6.63E-04	2.37
	AX-109563646	6A	70.56	9.97E-04	2.22
	AX-108987721	6A	70.57	7.24E-04	2.34
	AX-109469598	6A	71.05	5.86E-04	2.42
	AX-109478914	6A	72.30	3.76E-04	2.59
	AX-108852271	6A	73.09	8.83E-04	2.26
qGlyT-6D	AX-110382511	6D	24.02	7.27E-04	2.34

数量性状基因座QTL	显著性SNP位点 Significant SNP	染色体 Chromosome	物理位置/Mb Position	显著性值 P value	可解释表型变异/%R²
qGlyT-1A	AX-108779844	1A	9.98	3.30E-04	2.64
	AX-110523831	1A	15.18	5.90E-05	3.32
	AX-108966198	1A	16.03	7.49E-04	2.33
	AX-111125144	1A	18.48	1.88E-04	2.86
qGlyT-1B	AX-95089648	1B	18.57	9.20E-04	2.25
qGlyT-1D	AX-94809631	1D	18.57	9.93E-04	2.22
qGlyT-4A	AX-109519189	4A	668.09	5.75E-04	2.43
qGlyT-5A	AX-110418750	5A	520.19	4.42E-04	2.53
qGlyT-6A	AX-109933415	6A	66.56	7.94E-04	2.30
	AX-109520642	6A	67.34	3.31E-04	2.64
	AX-111490517	6A	67.46	6.07E-04	2.41
	AX-110445351	6A	68.42	7.85E-04	2.31
	AX-108988699	6A	68.62	6.63E-04	2.37
	AX-109563646	6A	70.56	9.97E-04	2.22
	AX-108987721	6A	70.57	7.24E-04	2.34
	AX-109469598	6A	71.05	5.86E-04	2.42
	AX-109478914	6A	72.30	3.76E-04	2.59
	AX-108852271	6A	73.09	8.83E-04	2.26
qGlyT-6D	AX-110382511	6D	24.02	7.27E-04	2.34

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export