Advertisement

Theoretical and Applied Genetics

, Volume 118, Issue 2, pp 285–294 | Cite as

Photoperiod insensitive Ppd-A1a mutations in tetraploid wheat (Triticum durum Desf.)

  • Edward P. Wilhelm
  • Adrian S. Turner
  • David A. LaurieEmail author
Original Paper

Abstract

Variation in photoperiod response plays an important role in adapting crops to agricultural environments. In hexaploid wheat, mutations conferring photoperiod insensitivity (flowering after a similar time in short or long days) have been mapped on the 2B (Ppd-B1) and 2D (Ppd-D1) chromosomes in colinear positions to the 2H Ppd-H1 gene of barley. No A genome mutation is known. On the D genome, photoperiod insensitivity is likely to be caused by deletion of a regulatory region that causes misexpression of a member of the pseudo-response regulator (PRR) gene family and activation of the photoperiod pathway irrespective of day length. Photoperiod insensitivity in tetraploid (durum) wheat is less characterized. We compared pairs of near-isogenic lines that differ in photoperiod response and showed that photoperiod insensitivity is associated with two independent deletions of the A genome PRR gene that cause altered expression. This is associated with induction of the floral regulator FT. The A genome deletions and the previously described D genome deletion of hexaploid wheat remove a common region, suggesting a shared mechanism for photoperiod insensitivity. The identification of the A genome mutations will allow characterization of durum wheat germplasm and the construction of genotypes with novel combinations of photoperiod insensitive alleles.

Keywords

Hexaploid Wheat Tetraploid Wheat Brachypodium Photoperiod Pathway Early Flowering Phenotype 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by grant-in-aid to the John Innes Centre by the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council of Great Britain and by a grant to E. P. W. from the University of East Anglia, Norwich.

Supplementary material

122_2008_898_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (1.9 mb)
Fig. S1 Alignment of predicted PRR protein sequences from the 2A, 2B and 2D genes of various wheat genotypes and the 2H chromosome of barley. Tetraploid 2A sequences (‘GS-100’, ‘GS-101’, ‘GS-104’ and ‘GS-105’) are described in this paper. Hexaploid sequences are CS_A, CS_B and CS_D from ‘Chinese Spring’ (DQ885753, DQ885757 and DQ885766) and Chey_B from ‘Cheyenne’ (DQ885760). The barley (H) sequence is from ‘Igri’ (AY970701). Two conserved regions, the pseudo-receiver domain and CCT domain, are marked by brackets. Red arrows show variant amino-acids distinguishing the tetraploid wheat genotypes. Blue arrows show variant amino-acids distinguishing the tetraploid and hexaploid wheats. The adjacent coloured numbers refer to polymorphisms listed in Table 1 in the main text (PDF 1982 kb)
122_2008_898_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (231 kb)
Fig. S2 Sequence homology of a promoter region identified by alignment of wheat A, B and D genome sequences with barley (‘Morex’ AY943294), Brachypodium sylvaticum (previously analysed by Turner et al. 2005) and rice (AP005199). 6x and 4x refer to hexaploid and tetraploid sequences, respectively. This conserved region of about 100 bp lies in the centre of the minimum region defined by the three deletions and was the only region in the wheat promoter with significant homology to rice identified using BLAST (http://www.NCBI.org) (PDF 231 kb)
122_2008_898_MOESM3_ESM.doc (78 kb)
Electronic supplementary material (DOC 19 kb)

References

  1. Beales J, Turner A, Griffiths S, Snape JW, Laurie DA (2007) A pseudo-response regulator is misexpressed in the photoperiod insensitive Ppd-D1a mutant of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Theor Appl Genet 115:721–733PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Börner A, Korzun V, Worland AJ (1998) Comparative genetic mapping of loci affecting plant height and development in cereals. Euphytica 100:245–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Börner A, Schumann E, Fürste A, Cöster H, Leithold B, Röder MS, Weber WE (2002) Mapping of quantitative trait loci determining agronomic important characters in hexaploid wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Theor Appl Genet 105:921–936PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Clarke JM, DePauw RM, Thiessen LL (1998) Registration of wheat genetic stocks near-isogenic for photoperiod sensitivity. Crop Sci 38:882Google Scholar
  5. Imaizumi T, Schultz TF, Harmon FG, Ho LA, Kay SA (2005) FKF1 F-box protein mediates cyclic degradation of a repressor of CONSTANS in Arabidopsis. Science 309:293–297PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Kato K, Yokoyama H (1992) Geographical variation in heading characters among wheat landraces, Triticum aestivum L, and its implication for their adaptability. Theor Appl Genet 84:259–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Laurie DA (1997) Comparative genetics of flowering time in cereals. Plant Mol Biol 35:167–177PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Law CN (1987) The genetic control of day-length response in wheat. In: Atherton JE (ed) Manipulation of flowering. Butterworths, London, pp 225–240Google Scholar
  9. Law CN, Worland AJ (1997) Genetic analysis of some flowering time and adaptive traits in wheat. New Phytol 137:19–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Law CN, Sutka J, Worland AJ (1978) A genetic study of day-length response in wheat. Heredity 41:185–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Maccaferri M, Sanguineti MC, Corneti S, Ortega JLA, Ben Salem M, Bort J, DeAmbrogio E, del Moral LFG, Demontis A, El-Ahmed A, Maalouf F, Machlab H, Martos V, Moragues M, Motawaj J, Nachit M, Nserallah N, Ouabbou H, Royo C, Slama A, Tuberosa R (2008) Quantitative trait loci for grain yield and adaptation of durum wheat (Triticum durum Desf.) across a wide range of water availability. Genetics 178:489–511PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Matsushika A, Makino S, Kojima M, Mizuno T (2000) Circadian waves of expression of the APRR1/TOC1 family of pseudo-response regulators in Arabidopsis thaliana: Insight into the plant circadian clock. Plant Cell Physiol 41:1002–1012PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Matsushika A, Murakami M, Ito S, Nakamichi N, Yamashino T, Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of Circadian-associated pseudo-response regulators: I. Comparative studies on a series of transgenic lines misexpressing five distinctive PRR genes in Arabidopsis thaliana. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71:527–534PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mohler V, Lukman R, Ortiz-Islas S, William M, Worland AJ, van Beem J, Wenzel G (2004) Genetic and physical mapping of photoperiod insensitive gene Ppd-B1 in common wheat. Euphytica 138:33–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Motzo R, Giunta F (2007) The effect of breeding on the phenology of Italian durum wheats: from landraces to modern cultivars. Eur J Agron 26:462–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Murakami M, Ashikari M, Miura K, Yamashino T, Mizuno T (2003) The evolutionarily conserved OsPRR quintet: rice pseudo-response regulators implicated in circadian rhythm. Plant Cell Physiol 44:1229–1236PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Nakamichi N, Kita M, Niinuma K, Ito S, Yamashino T, Mizoguchi T, Mizuno T (2007) Arabidopsis clock-associated pseudo-response regulators PRR9, PRR7 and PRR5 coordinately and positively regulate flowering time through the canonical CONSTANS-dependent photoperiodic pathway. Plant Cell Physiol 48:822–832PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ramakers C, Ruijter JM, Deprez RHL, Moorman AFM (2003) Assumption-free analysis of quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) data. Neurosci Lett 339:62–66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sawa M, Nusinow DA, Kay SA, Imaizumi T (2007) FKF1 and GIGANTEA complex formation is required for day-length measurement in Arabidopsis. Science 318:261–265PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Scarth R, Law CN (1984) The control of the day-length response in wheat by the group 2 chromosomes. Z Pflanzenzuchtg 92:140–150Google Scholar
  21. Scarth R, Kirby EJM, Law CN (1985) Effects of the photoperiod genes Ppd1 and Ppd2 on growth and development of the shoot apex in wheat. Ann Bot 55:351–359Google Scholar
  22. Sharp PJ, Kreis M, Shewry PR, Gale MD (1988) Location of B-amylase sequences in wheat and its relatives. Theor Appl Genet 75:286–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Somers DJ, Isaac P, Edwards K (2004) A high-density microsatellite consensus map for bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Theor Appl Genet 109:1105–1114PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Tanio M, Kato K (2007) Development of near-isogenic lines for photoperiod-insensitive genes, Ppd-B1 and Ppd-D1, carried by the Japanese wheat cultivars and their effect on apical development. Breed Sci 57:65–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Turner A, Beales J, Faure S, Dunford RP, Laurie DA (2005) The pseudo-response regulator Ppd-H1 provides adaptation to photoperiod in barley. Science 310:1031–1034PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Valverde F, Mouradov A, Soppe W, Ravenscroft D, Samach A, Coupland G (2004) Photoreceptor regulation of CONSTANS protein in photoperiodic flowering. Science 303:1003–1006PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Worland T, Snape JW (2001) Genetic basis of worldwide wheat varietal improvement. In: Bonjean AP, Angus WJ (eds) The world wheat book: a history of wheat breeding. Lavoisier Publishing, Paris, pp 59–100Google Scholar
  28. Worland AJ, Appendino ML, Sayers EJ (1994) The distribution in European winter wheats of genes that influence ecoclimatic adaptability whilst determining photoperiodic insensitivity and plant height. Euphytica 80:219–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Edward P. Wilhelm
    • 1
  • Adrian S. Turner
    • 1
  • David A. Laurie
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Crop Genetics DepartmentJohn Innes Centre, Norwich Research ParkNorwichUK

Personalised recommendations