Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T07:01:45.006Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The incorporation of alien disease resistance in wheat by genetic interference with the regulation of meiotic chromosome synapsis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

Ralph Riley ,
Victor Chapman  and
Roy Johnson
Ralph Riley
Affiliation:
Plant Breeding Institute, Cambridge, England
Victor Chapman
Affiliation:
Plant Breeding Institute, Cambridge, England
Roy Johnson
Affiliation:
Plant Breeding Institute, Cambridge, England
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. Triticum aestivum ssp. vulgare variety Chinese Spring (2n = 6x = 42) is susceptible to yellow rust caused by Puccinia striiformis while the wild annual grass Aegilops comosa (2n = 14) is resistant to all the physiologic races for which it has been tested.

2. By a backcrossing programme initiated from Chinese Spring × Ae. comosa hybrids, using Chinese Spring as the recurrent parent, a line was isolated with a single chromosome of Ae. comosa, determining rust resistance, added to the full complement of Chinese Spring.

3. The alien chromosome substituted with good genetic compensation only for the chromosomes of homoeologous group 2 of Chinese Spring. This demonstrated that the chromosome determining rust resistance is in homoeologous group 2. It was designated 2M since Ae. comosa has the M genome.

4. In order to induce recombination between 2M and its wheat homoeologues, hybrids were made using Ae. speltoides which has the capacity to suppress the activity of chromosome 5B that normally prevents homoeologous synapsis. A backcrossing programme, using Chinese Spring as the recurrent parent, was reinitiated from the 29-chromosome hybrids carrying chromosome 2M and the haploid complements of Chinese Spring and Ae. speltoides.

5. Selection was practised for rust resistance and ultimately a resistant plant with 42 chromosomes, that formed 21 bivalents at meiosis, was isolated. This plant was heterozygous for a dominant rust resistance allele (Yr8) derived from Ae. comosa. Homozygotes were isolated in its progeny and in this way the rust resistant breeder's variety, Compair, was established.

6. Compair differs from Chinese Spring in its yellow rust resistance which was shown to be determined by a chromosome corresponding to 2D of Chinese Spring. This chromosome of Compair has the short arm, the centromere and a proximal segment of the long arm of chromosome 2M and a distal segment of the right arm of chromosome 2D. The modified chromosome, which is designated 2M/D, arose by homoeologous recombination in the Ae. speltoides hybrid or in the immediately succeeding backcross generations. Chromosome 2M/D carries the Yr8 gene in the proximal segment of the long arm derived from chromosome 2M.

7. In hybrids between Compair and standard wheat varieties, chromosome 2M/D pairs regularly with chromosome 2D so that regular segregation of Yr8 can be expected and Compair treated like any other parental variety in wheat hybridization programmes.

8. This work illustrates the way that homoeologous recombination can be induced and exploited both in cytogenetic analysis in wheat and in practical breeding work. The nature of the meiotic synapsis of chromosome 2M/D with its partial homologues raises questions concerning the means by which chromosome 5B influences the specificity of meiotic synapsis.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , October 1968 , pp. 199 - 219
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1968

References

REFERENCES

Feldman, M. (1966). The effect of chromosomes, 5B, 5D and 5A on chromosome pairing in Triticum aestivum. Proc. natn. Acad. Sci., U.S.A. 55, 1447–1453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, R. (1966). The substitution of a chromosome from Agropyron elongatum for chromosomes of hexaploid wheat. Can. J. Genet. Cytol. 8, 279–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, R. & Kimber, G. (1967). Homoeologous pairing of a chromosome from Agropyron elongatum with those of Triticum aestivum and Aegilops speltoides. Genet. Res., Camb. 10, 63–71.Google Scholar
Kimber, G. (1966). Estimate of the number of genes involved in the genetic suppression of the cytological diploidization of wheat. Nature, Lond. 212, 317.Google Scholar
Macer, R. C. F. (1966). The formal and monosomic genetic analysis of stripe rust (Puccinia striiformis) resistance. Proc. 2nd Int. Wheat Genet. Symp. (Mackey, J., ed.) Hereditas Suppl. 2, 127–142.Google Scholar
Morrison, J. W. (1953). Chromosome behaviour in wheat monosomics. Heredity, Lond. 7, 203–217.Google Scholar
Riley, R. (1960). The diploidisation of wheat. Heredity, Lond. 15, 407–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riley, R. (1965). Cytogenetics and the evolution of wheat. In Essays on Crop Plant Evolution (Hutchinson, J. B., ed.), pp. 103–122. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Riley, R. (1966). The genetic regulation of meiotic behaviour in wheat and its relatives. Proc. 2nd Int. Wheat Genet. Symp. (Mackey, J., ed.). Hereditas Suppl. 2, 395–406.Google Scholar
Riley, R. & Chapman, V. (1958). Genetic control of the cytologically diploid behaviour of hexaploid wheat. Nature, Lond. 182, 713–715.Google Scholar
Riley, R. & Chapman, V. (1964). Cytological determination of the homoeology of chromosomes of Triticum aestivum. Nature, Lond. 203, 156–158.Google Scholar
Riley, R. & Chapman, V. (1966). Estimate of the homoeology of wheat chromosomes by measurements of differential affinity at meiosis. In Chromosome Manipulations and Plant Genetics (Riley, R. and Lewis, K. R. eds.), a supplement to Heredity, Lond. 20, 46–58. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riley, R., Chapman, V. & Johnson, R. (1968). Introduction of yellow rust resistance of Aegilops comosa into wheat by genetically induced homoeologous recombination. Nature, Lond. 217, 383–384.Google Scholar
Riley, R., Chapman, V. & Macer, R. C. F. (1966). The homoeology of an Aegilops chromosome causing stripe rust resistance. Can. J. Genet. Cytol. 8, 616–630.Google Scholar
Riley, R. & Kempanna, C. (1963). The homoeologous nature of the non-homologous meiotic pairing in Triticum aestivum deficient for chromosome V (5B). Heredity, Lond. 18, 287–306.Google Scholar
Riley, R. & Kimber, G. (1966). The transfer of alien genetic variation to wheat. Rep. Pl. Breed. Inst. 1964–65, 6–36.Google Scholar
Riley, R. & Law, C. N. (1965). Genetic variation in chromosome pairing. Adv. Genet. 13, 57–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sears, E. R. (1953). Nullisomic analysis in common wheat. Am. Nat. 87, 245–252.Google Scholar
Sears, E. R. (1954). The aneuploids of common wheat. Bull. Mo. agric. Exp. Sta. 572.Google Scholar
Sears, E. R. (1956). The transfer of leaf rust resistance from Aegilops umbellulata to wheat. Brookhaven Symp. Biol. 9, 1–22.Google Scholar
Sears, E. R. (1966). Nullisomic-tetrasomic combinations in hexaploid wheat. In Chromosome Manipulations and Plant Genetics. (Riley, R. and Lewis, K. R., eds.), a supplement to Heredity, Lond. 20, 29–45. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar