Advertisement

Theoretical and Applied Genetics

, Volume 123, Issue 8, pp 1433–1443 | Cite as

Stable progeny production of the amphidiploid resynthesized Brassica napus cv. Hanakkori, a newly bred vegetable

  • K. Fujii
  • N. Ohmido
Original Paper

Abstract

Resynthesized Brassica napus cv. Hanakkori (AACC, 2n = 38) was produced by cross-hybridization between B. rapa (AA, 2n = 20) and B. oleracea (CC, 2n = 18) as a new vegetative crop. Many studies have provided evidences for the instability and close relationship between A and C genome in the resynthesized B. napus cultivars. In fact, seed produced to obtain progeny in Hanakkori had unstable morphological characters and generated many off-type plants. In this study, we investigated the pollen fertility, chromosome number, structure, and behavior linked to various Hanakkori phenotypes to define factors of unstable phenotypic expression in the progeny. Hanakkori phenotypes were categorized into five types. The results of pollen fertility, chromosome number, and fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis for somatic mitosis cells indicated that the off-type plants had lower pollen fertility, aberrant chromosome number, and structures with small chromosome fragments. Observation of chromosomes at meiosis showed that the meiotic division in off-type plants led to appreciably higher abnormalities than in on-type plants. However, polyvalent chromosomes were observed frequently in both on- and off-type plants in diplotene stage of meiosis. We assume that the unstable morphological characters in resynthesized progeny were the result of abnormal division in meiosis. It results as important that the plants of normal phenotype, chromosome structure and minimized abnormal meiosis are selected to stabilize progeny.

Keywords

Chromosome Number Pollen Fertility rDNA Locus Chromosome Fragment Meiosis Stage 
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

We are very grateful to Dr. Ki-Byung Lim (Brassica Genome Team, National Institute of Agricultural Biotechnology, Rural Development Administration, Korea), for providing the CentBr2 probe. This research was also supported by the regional agriculture research funding in Yamaguchi prefectural Technology Center for Agriculture and Forestry, Japan. This was supported by Female researcher training system: reform and acceleration funding in Science and Technology Promotion Funding.

References

  1. Benabdelmouna A, Guéritaine G, Abirached-Darmency M, Darmency H (2003) Genome discrimination in progeny of interspecific hybrids between Brassica napus and Raphanus raphanistrum. Genome 46:469–472PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cifuentes M, Eber F, Lucas M, Lode M, Chèvre A, Jenczewski E (2010) Repeated polyploidy drove different levels of crossover suppression between homoeologous chromosomes in Brassica napus allohaploids. Plant Cell 22:2265–2276PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dubcovsky J, Dvořák J (1995) Ribosomal RNA multigene loci: nomads of the Triticeae genomes. Genetics 140:1367–1377PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Fukui K, Iijima K (1991) Somatic chromosome map of rice by imaging methods. Theor Appl Genet 81:589–596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fukui K, Nakayama S, Ohmido N, Yoshaki H, Yamabe M (1998) Quantitative karyotyping of three diploid Brassica species by imaging methods and localization of 45S rDNA loci on the identified chromosomes. Theor Appl Genet 96:325–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gaeta RT, Pires JC (2010) Homoeologous recombination in allopolyploids: the polyploidy ratchet. New Phytol 186:18–28PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gaeta RT, Pires JC, Iniguez-Luy F, Leon E, Osborn TC (2007) Genomic changes in resynthesized Brassica napus and their effect on gene expression and phenotype. Plant Cell 19:3403–3417PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hasterok R, Wolny E, Hosiawa M, Kowalczyk M, Kulak-ksiazczyk S, Ksiazczyk T, Heneen WK, Maluszynska J (2006) Comparative analysis of rDNA distribution in chromosomes of various species of Brassicaceae. Ann Bot 97:205–216PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Howell EC, Kearsey MJ, Jones GH, King GJ, Armstrong SJ (2008) A and C genome distinction and chromosome identification in Brassica napus by sequential fluorescence in situ hybridization and genomic in situ hybridization. Genetics 180:1849–1857PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jenczewski E, Eber F, Grimaud A, Huet S, Lucas MO, Monod H, Chèver AM (2003) PrBn, a major gene controlling homoeologous pairing in oilseed rape (Brassica napus) haploids. Genetics 164:645–653PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Kulak S, Hasterok R, Maluszynska J (2002) Karyotyping of Brassica amphidiploids using 5S and 25S rDNA as chromosome markers. Hereditas 136:144–150PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lim KB, Hans DJ, Yang TJ, Park JY, Kwon SJ, Kim JS, Lim MH, Kim JA, Jin M, Jin YM, Kim SH, Lim YP, Bang JW, Kim HI, Park BS (2005) Characterization of rDNAs and tandem repeats in the heterochromatin of Brassica rapa. Mol Cell 19:436–444Google Scholar
  13. Lim KB, Yang TJ, Hwang YJ, Kim JS, Park JY, Kwon SJ, Kim JA, Choi BS, Lim MH, Jin M, Kim HI, Jong HD, Bancroft I, Lim YP, Park BS (2007) Characterization of the centromere and peri-centromere retrotransposons in Brassica rapa and their distribution in related Brassica species. Plant J 49:173–183PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lu C, Kato M (2001) Fertilization fitness and relation to chromosome number in interspecific progeny between Brassica napus and B. rapa: a comparative study using natural and resynthesized B. napus. Breed Sci 51:73–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Maluszynska J, Hasterok R (2005) Identification of individual chromosomes and parental genomes in Brassica juncea using GISH and FISH. Cytogenet Genome Res 109:310–314PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Maluszynska J, Heslop-Harrison JS (1993) Physical mapping of rDNA loci in Brassica species. Genome 36:774–781PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Nishi S, Kawata J, Toda M (1959) On the breeding of interspecific hybrids between two genomes, C and A of Brassica through the application of embryo culture techniques. Jpn J Breed 8:215–222Google Scholar
  18. Ohmido N, Fukui K (1997) Visual verification of close disposition between a rice A genome-specific DNA sequence (TrsA) and the telomere sequences. Plant Mol Biol 35:963–968PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Snowdon RJ (2007) Cytogenetics and genome analysis in Brassica crops. Chromosome Res 15:85–95PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Snowdon RJ, Köhler W, Friedt W, Köhler A (1997) Genomic in situ hybridization in Brassica amphidiploids and interspecific hybrids. Theor Appl Genet 95:1320–1324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Snowdon RJ, Friedrich T, Friedt W, Köhler W (2002) Identifying the chromosomes of the A- and C-genome diploid Brassica species B. rapa (syn. campestris) and B. oleracea in their amphidiploid B. napus. Theor Appl Genet 104:533–538PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Szadknowski E, Eber F, Huteau V, Lodé M, Huneau C, Belcram H, Coriton O, Manzanares-Dauleux MJ, Delourme R, King GJ, Chalhoub B, Jenczewski E, Chèvre A-M (2010) The first meiosis of resynthesized Brassica napus, a genome blender. New Phytol 186:102–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Taguchi T, Sakamoto K, Terada M (1993) Variations in somatic hybrid plants between cabbage and Chinese cabbage. Plant Biotechnol 10:138–143Google Scholar
  24. Udall JA, Quijada PA, Osborn TC (2005) Detection of chromosomal rearrangements derived from homoeologous recombination in four mapping populations of Brassica napus L. Genetics 169:967–979PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wang YP, Zhao XX, Sonntag K, Wehling P, Snowdon RJ (2005) Behaviour of Sinapis alba chromosomes in a Brassica napus background revealed by genomic in situ hybridization. Chromosome Res 13:819–826PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wu JY, Yang GS (2008) Meiotic abnormality in dominant genic male sterile Brassica napus. Mol Biol 42:572–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Xiong Z, Pires JC (2011) Karyotype and identification of all homoeologous chromosomes of allopolyploid Brassica napus and its diploid progenitors. Genetics 187:37–49PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Xiong Z, Gaeta RT, Pires JC (2011) Homoeologous shuffling and chromosome compensation maintain genome balance in resynthesized allopolyploid Brassica napus. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108:7908–7913PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Zhang B, Hondo K, Kakihara F, Kato M (2001) Production of amphidiploids between A and C genomic species in Brassica. Jpn Soc Breed 3:31–41Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Yamaguchi Prefectural Technology Center for Agriculture and ForestryYamaguchiJapan
  2. 2.Graduate School of Human Development and EnvironmentKobe UniversityKobeJapan

Personalised recommendations