QTL consistency and meta-analysis for grain yield components in three generations in maize
- 765 Downloads
Grain yield is the most important and complex trait in maize. In this study, a total of 258 F9 recombinant inbred lines (RIL), derived from a cross between dent corn inbred Dan232 and popcorn inbred N04, were evaluated for eight grain yield components under four environments. Quantitative trait loci (QTL) and their epistatic interactions were detected for all traits under each environment and in combined analysis. Meta-analysis was used to integrate genetic maps and detected QTL across three generations (RIL, F2:3 and BC2F2) derived from the same cross. In total, 103 QTL, 42 pairs of epistatic interactions and 16 meta-QTL (mQTL) were detected. Twelve out of 13 QTL with contributions (R 2) over 15% were consistently detected in 3–4 environments (or in combined analysis) and integrated in mQTL. Only q100GW-7-1 was detected in all four environments and in combined analysis. 100qGW-1-1 had the largest R 2 (19.3–24.6%) in three environments and in combined analysis. In contrast, 35 QTL for 6 grain yield components were detected in the BC2F2 and F2:3 generations, no common QTL across three generations were located in the same marker intervals. Only 100 grain weight (100GW) QTL on chromosome 5 were located in adjacent marker intervals. Four common QTL were detected across the RIL and F2:3 generations, and two between the RIL and BC2F2 generations. Each of five important mQTL (mQTL7-1, mQTL10-2, mQTL4-1, mQTL5-1 and mQTL1-3) included 7–12 QTL associated with 2–6 traits. In conclusion, we found evidence of strong influence of genetic structure and environment on QTL detection, high consistency of major QTL across environments and generations, and remarkable QTL co-location for grain yield components. Fine mapping for five major QTL (q100GW-1-1, q100GW-7-1, qGWP-4-1, qERN-4-1 and qKR-4-1) and construction of single chromosome segment lines for genetic regions of five mQTL merit further studies and could be put into use in marker-assisted breeding.
KeywordsQuantitative Trait Locus Recombinant Inbred Line Yield Component Recombinant Inbred Line Population Major Quantitative Trait Locus
This work was funded by the Henan Industrial Development Project in High Technology, the Henan Science and Technology Research Program (92102110062).
- Kao CH, Zeng ZB, Robert DT (1999) Multiple interval mapping for quantitative trait loci. Genetics 521:203–1216Google Scholar
- Lan JH, Li XH, Gao SR, Zhang BS, Zhang SH (2005) QTL analysis of yield components in maize under different environments. Acta Agro Sin 31(10):1253–1259Google Scholar
- Li ZK, Yu SB, Lafitte HR, Huang N, Courtois B, Hittalmani S, Vijayakumar CHM, Liu GF, Wang GC, Shashidhar HE, Zhuang JY, Zheng KL, Singh VP, Sidhu JS, Srivantaneeyakul S, Khush GS (2003) QTL × environment interactions in rice. I. Heading date and plant height. Theor Appl Genet 108:141–153CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Li YL, Niu SZ, Dong YB, Cui DQ, Wang YZ, Liu YY, Wei MM (2007) Identification of trait-improving quantitative trait loci for grain yield components from a dent corn inbred line in an advanced backcross BC2F2 population and comparison with its F2:3 population in popcorn. Theor Appl Genet 115:129–140CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Li YL, Dong YB, Niu SZ, Cui DQ, Wang YZ, Liu YY, Wei MG, Li XH (2008) Identification of agronomically favorable quantitative trait loci alleles from a dent corn inbred Dan232 using advanced backcross QTL analysis and comparison with the F2:3 population in popcorn. Mol Breed 21:1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Wang S, Basten CJ, Zeng ZB (2006) Windows QTL cartographer 2.5. Department of statistics, North Carolina State University, Ra-leigh, NC. http://statgen.ncsu.edu/qtlcart/WQTLCart.htm
- Zhang ZW (2009) Construction of normal corn × popcorn RIL population and analysis of QTL for main traits. MS D Thesis. Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou, Henan, ChinaGoogle Scholar
- Ziegler KE, Ashman B (1994) Popcorn. In: Hallauer AR (ed) Specialty corns. CRC Press, New York, pp 189–223Google Scholar