Theoretical and Applied Genetics

, Volume 111, Issue 7, pp 1238–1250

Comprehensive genetic analyses reveal differential expression of spot blotch resistance in four populations of barley

Original Paper


Spot blotch, caused by Cochliobolus sativus, is an important disease of barley in the Upper Midwest region of the United States. The resistance of six-rowed malting cultivars like Morex has remained effective for over 40 years and is considered durable. Previous research on Steptoe/Morex (S/M), a 6×6-rowed doubled haploid (DH) population, showed that seedling resistance is controlled by a single gene (Rcs5) on chromosome 1(7H) and adult plant resistance by two quantitative trait loci (QTL): one of the major effect on chromosome 5(1H) explaining 62% of the phenotypic variance and a second of minor effect on chromosome 1(7H) explaining 9% of the phenotypic variance. To corroborate these results in a 2×6-rowed DH population, composite interval mapping (CIM) was performed on Harrington/Morex (H/M). As in the S/M population, a single major gene (presumably Rcs5) on chromosome 1(7H) conferred resistance at the seedling stage. However, at the adult plant stage, the results were markedly different as no chromosome 5(1H) effect whatsoever was detected. Instead, a QTL at or near Rcs5 on chromosome 1(7H) explained nearly all of the phenotypic variance (75%) for disease severity. To determine whether this result might be due to the genetic background of the two-rowed susceptible parent Harrington, we analyzed another DH population that included the same resistance donor (Morex) and another six-rowed susceptible cultivar Dicktoo (D/M). Three QTL conferred seedling resistance in the D/M population: one near Rcs5 on chromosome 1(7H) explaining 30%, a second near the centromere of chromosome 1(7H) explaining 9%, and a third on the short arm of chromosome 3(3H) explaining 19% of the phenotypic variation. As in the H/M population, no chromosome 5(1H) QTL was detected for adult plant resistance in the D/M population. Instead, three QTL on other chromosomes explained most of the variation: one on the short arm of chromosome 3(3H) explaining 36%, a second on the long arm of chromosome 3(3H) explaining 11%, and a third at or near Rcs5 on chromosome 1(7H) explaining 20% of the phenotypic variation. These data demonstrate the complexity of expression of spot blotch resistance in different populations and have important implications in breeding for durable resistance.


  1. Arny DC (1951) Inheritance of resistance to spot blotch in barley seedlings. Phytopathology 41:691–698Google Scholar
  2. Basten JC, Weir BS, Zeng Z-B (2001) QTL Cartographer: a reference manual and tutorial for QTL mapping. North Carolina State University, RaleighGoogle Scholar
  3. Beavis WD (1994) The power and deceit of QTL experiments: Lessons from comparative QTL studies. In: Proceedings of the corn sorghum industry research conference, vol 49, pp 250–266Google Scholar
  4. Beavis WD, Grant D, Albertsen M, Fincher R (1991) Quantitative trait loci for plant height in four maize populations and their associations with qualitative genetic loci. Theor Appl Genet 83:141–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bernardo R (2002) Breeding for quantitative traits in plants. Stemma Press, Woodbury, pp 303–307Google Scholar
  6. Bilgic H, Steffenson B, Hayes P (in press) Molecular mapping of loci conferring resistance to different pathotypes of the spot blotch pathogen in barley. PhytopathologyGoogle Scholar
  7. Clark RV (1979) Yield losses in barley cultivars caused by spot blotch. Can J Plant Pathol 1:113–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Doerge RW, Churchill GA (1996) Permutation test for multiple loci affecting a quantitative character. Genetics 142:285–294PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Fetch TG Jr, Steffenson BJ (1999) Rating scales for assessing infection responses of barley infected with Cochliobolus sativus. Plant Dis 83:213–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Franckowiak JD (1997) Revised linkage maps for morphological markers in barley, Hordeum vulgare. Barley Genet Newsl 26:9–21Google Scholar
  11. Gonzalez Ceniceros F (1990) Assigning genes conferring resistance to spot and net blotch in barley to a specific chromosome. PhD Dissertation, North Dakota State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  12. Griffee F (1925) Correlated inheritance of botanical characters in barley, and manner of reaction to Helminthosporium sativum. J Agric Res 30:915–935Google Scholar
  13. Hayes PM, Chen THH, Blake TK (1992) Marker-assisted genetic analysis of cold tolerance in winter barley. In: Li PH, Christersson L (eds) Advances in Plant Cold Hardiness. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  14. Hayes PM, Blake TK, Chen THH, Tragoonrung S, Chen F, Pan A, Liu B (1993a) Quantitative trait loci on barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) chromosome 7 associated with components of winter hardiness. Genome 36:66–71PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Hayes PM, Liu BH, Knapp SJ, Chen F, Jones B, Blake T, Franckowiak J, Rasmusson D, Sorrels M, Ullrich SE, Wesenberg D, Kleinhofs A (1993b) Quantitative trait locus effects and environmental interaction in a sample of North American barley germplasm. Theor Appl Genet 87:392–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hayes PM, Chen FQ, Corey A, Pan A, Chen THH, Baird E, Powell W, Thomas W, Waugh R, Bedo Z, Karsai I, Blake T, Oberthur L (1997) The Dicktoo × Morex population: a model for dissecting components of winter hardiness in barley. In: Li PH, Chen TH (eds) Plant cold hardiness. Plenum, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. James WC (1971) A manual of disease assessment keys for plant diseases. Can Dep Agric Publ 1458Google Scholar
  18. Kasha KJ, Kleinhofs A, The North American Barley Genome Mapping Project (1994) Mapping of the barley cross Harrington/TR306. Barley Genet Newsl 23:65–69Google Scholar
  19. Kasha KJ, Kleinhofs A, Kilian A, Saghai-Maroof M, Scoles GJ, Hayes PM, Chen FQ, Xia X, Li X-Z, Biyashev RM, Hoffman D, Dahleen L, Blake TK, Rossnagel BG, Steffenson BJ, Thomas PL, Falk DE, Laroche A, Kim W, Molnar SJ, Sorrels ME (1995) The North American barley map on the cross HT and its comparison to the map on cross SM. In: Tsunewaki K (ed) The plant genome and plastome: their structure and evolution. Kodansha Scientific Ltd., Tokyo, pp 73–88Google Scholar
  20. Kleinhofs A, Kilian A, Saghai-Maroof MA, Biyashev RM, Hayes P, Chen FQ, Lapitan N, Fenwick A, Blake TK, Kanazin V, Ananiev E, Dahleen L, Kudrna D, Bollinger J, Knapp SJ, Liu B, Sorrells M, Heun M, Franckowiak JD, Hoffman D, Skadsen R, Steffenson BJ (1993) A molecular, isozyme and morphological map of the barley (Hordeum vulgare) genome. Theor Appl Genet 86:705–712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lander ES, Green P, Abrahamson J, Barlow A, Daly MJ, Lincoln SE, Newburg L (1987) MAPMAKER: an interactive computer package for constructing primary genetic linkage maps of experimental and natural populations. Genomics 1:174–181CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Langridge P, Karakousis A, Collins N, Kretchmer J, Manning S (1995) A consensus linkage map of barley. Mol Breed 1:389–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Marquez-Cedillo LA, Hayes PM, Jones BL, Kleinhofs A, Legge WG, Rossnagel BG, Sato K, Ullrich E, Wesenberg DM, The North American Barley Genome Mapping Project (2000) QTL analysis of malting quality in barley based on the doubled-haploid progeny of two North American varieties representing different germplasm groups. Theor Appl Genet 101:173–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mather DE, Tinker NA, La Berge DE, Edney M, Jones BL, Rossnagel BG, Legge WG, Briggs KG, Irvine RB, Falk DE, Kasha KJ (1997) Regions of the genome that affect grain and malt quality in a North American two-row barley cross. Crop Sci 37:544–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Melchinger AE, Utz HF, Schon CC (1998) Quantitative trait locus (QTL) mapping using different testers and independent population samples in maize reveals low power of QTL detection and large bias in estimates of QTL effects. Genetics 149:383–403PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Pan A, Hayes PM, Chen F, Chen THH, Blake T, Wright S, Karsai I, Bedo Z (1994) Genetic analysis of the components of winterhardiness in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.). Theor Appl Genet 89:900–910CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Qi X, Stam P, Lindhout P (1996) Comparison and integration of four barley genetic maps. Genome 39:379–394CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Søgaard B, von Wettstein-Knowles P (1987) Barley: genes and chromosomes. Carlsberg Res Commun 52:123–196Google Scholar
  29. Steffenson BJ (2000) Durable resistance to spot blotch and stem rust in barley. In: Logue S (ed) Proceeding 8th international barley genetics symposium, (Barley Genetics VIII, Vol I) Glen Osmond, pp 39–44Google Scholar
  30. Steffenson BJ, Hayes PM, Kleinhofs A (1996) Genetics of seedling and adult plant resistance to net blotch (Pyrenophora teres f. teres) and spot blotch (Cochliobolus sativus) in barley. Theor Appl Genet 92:552–558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Tinker NA, Mather DE (1995) MQTL: software for simplified composite interval mapping of QTL in multiple environments. J Agric Genomics 1: (
  32. Tinker NA, Mather DE, Rossnagel BG, Kasha KJ, Kleinhofs A, Hayes PM, Falk DE, Ferguson T, Shugar LP, Legge WG, Irvine RB, Choo TM, Briggs KG, Ullrich SE, Franckowiack JD, Blake TK, Graf RJ, Dofing SM, Saghai-Maroof MA, Scoles GJ, Hoffman D, Dahleen LS, Killian A, Chen F, Biyashev M, Kudrna DA, Steffenson BJ (1996) Regions of the genome that affect agronomic performance in two-row barley. Crop Sci 36:1053–1062CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Valjavec-Gratian M, Steffenson BJ (1997) Pathotypes of Cochliobolus on barley. Plant Dis 81:1275–1278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wiebe GA, Reid DA (1961) Description, history, and distribution of varieties. In: Classification of barley varieties grown in United States and Canada in 1958. Tech Bull 1224, USDA Agric Res Ser, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  35. Wilcoxson RD, Rasmusson DC, Miles MR (1990) Development of barley resistant to spot blotch and genetics of resistance. Plant Dis 74:207–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zadoks JC, Chang TT, Koznak CF (1974) A decimal code for the growth stages of cereals. Weed Res 14:415–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Zeng Z-B (1994) Precision mapping of quantitative trait loci. Genetics 136:1457–1468PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Plant PathologyUniversity of MinnesotaSt. PaulUSA
  2. 2.Department of Crop and Soil SciencesOregon State UniversityCorvallisUSA

Personalised recommendations