Marker-assisted introgression of resistance to fusarium wilt race 2 in Pusa 256, an elite cultivar of desi chickpea
- 420 Downloads
Fusarium wilt caused by F. oxysporum f. sp. ciceris causes extensive damage to chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) in many parts of the world. In the central part of India, pathogen race 2 (Foc 2) causes severe yield losses. We initiated molecular marker-assisted backcrossing (MABC) using desi cultivar, Vijay, as a donor to introgress resistance to this race (Foc2) in Pusa 256, another elite desi cultivar of chickpea. To confirm introgression of resistance for this race, foreground selection was undertaken using two SSR markers (TA 37 and TA110), with background selection to observe the recovery of recurrent parent genome using 45 SSRs accommodated in 8 multiplexes. F1 plants were confirmed with molecular markers and backcrossed with Pusa 256, followed by cycles of foreground and background selection at each stage to generate 161 plants in BC3F2 during the period 2009–2013. Similarly, 46 BC3F1 plants were also generated in another set during the same period. On the basis of foreground selection, 46 plants were found homozygotes in BC3F2. Among them, 17 plants recorded >91% background recovery with the highest recovery percentage of 96%. In BC3F1 also, 14 hybrid plants recorded a background recovery of >85% with the highest background recovery percentage of >94%. The identified plants were selfed to obtain 1341 BC3F3 and 2198 BC3F2 seeds which were screened phenotypically for resistance to fusarium wilt (race 2) besides doing marker analysis. Finally, 17 BC3F4 and 11 BC3F3 lines were obtained which led to identification of 5 highly resistant lines of Pusa 256 with Foc 2 gene introgressed in them. Development of these lines will help in horizontal as well as vertical expansion of chickpea in central part of India.
KeywordsBackcrossing Chickpea BGS FGS MABC Molecular breeding SSR markers
The authors would like to thank Manish K. Pandey, Siva K. Chamarthi (ICRISAT), Subhojit Datta (ICAR-IIPR) and partners in ACIP programme from JNKVV, Jabalpur, ARS, Kalaburgi and MPKV, Rahuri for useful discussions during the course of this study. The authors are also highly thankful to Col Douglas, Senior Research Scientist, Agri-Science, Queensland, Australia for reading the manuscript for language corrections.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
The present study was supported under the Accelerated Crop Improvement Programme (ACIP) of Department of Biotechnology (DBT), Government of India vide Grant No. BT/PR11693/AGR/02/641/2008, 22 October 2009. All laboratory and field facilities were provided by ICAR-IIPR Kanpur.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
- Alzate-Marin AL, Menarim H, Arruda MCC, Chagas JM, Barros EG, Moreira MA (1999) Backcross assisted by RAPD markers for introgression of Co-4 and Co-6 anthracnose resistant genes in common bean cultivars. Ann Rep Bean Improv Coop 42:15–16Google Scholar
- Arelli PR, Young LD (2009) Jtn-5109 soybean germplasm resistant to nematode population infecting cv. Hartwig. Agron Soc Am Abstr 133:268-18Google Scholar
- Cunnington J, Lindbeck K, Jones RH (2007) National diagnostic protocol for the detection of fusarium wilt of chickpea (Fusarium Oxysporum f. sp. ciceris). Plant Health Australia, CamberraGoogle Scholar
- Faleiro FG, Ragagnin VA, Carvalho GA, Paula TJ Jr, Moreira MA, Barros EG (2001) Development of common bean lines resistant to rust and anthracnose by molecular marker-assisted backcrossing. Annu Rep Bean Improv Coop 44:1130–1133Google Scholar
- Halila MH, Strange RN (1996) Identification of the causal agent of wilt of chickpea in Tunisia as Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. ciceri race 0. Phytopathol Mediterr 35:67–74Google Scholar
- Haware MP, Nene YL (1980) Influence of wilt and different growth stages on yield loss in chickpea. Trop Grain Legume Bull 19:38–40Google Scholar
- Jalali BL, Chand H (1992) Chickpea wilt. Plant Dis Int Importance 1:429–444Google Scholar
- Miklas PN (2002) Marker assisted selection for disease resistance in common beans. Ann Rep Bean Improv Coop 45:1–3Google Scholar
- Quadir SA, Datta S, Singh NP, Kumar S (2007) Development of highly polymorphic SSR marker for chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) and their use in parental polymorphism. Indian J Genet 67(4):329–333Google Scholar
- Solanki RK, Singh S, Kumar J (2010) Molecular marker-assisted testing of hybridity of F1 plants in lentil. J Food Leg 23:21–24Google Scholar
- Stavely JR (2000) Pyramiding rust and viral resistance genes using traditional and marker techniques in common bean. Ann Rep Bean Improv Coop 43:1–3Google Scholar
- Varshney RK, Thudi M, May GD, Jakson SA (2010) Legume genomics and breeding. Plant Breed Rev 33:257–304Google Scholar
- Varshney RK, Mohan SM, Gaur PM, Gangarao NVPR, Pandey MK, Bohra A, Sawargaonkar SL, Chitikineni A, Kimurto PK, Janila P, Saxena KB, Fikre A, Sharma M, Rathore A, Pratap A, Tripathi S, Datta S, Chaturvedi SK, Mallikarjuna N, Anuradha G, Babbar A, Choudhray AK, Mhase MB, Bhardwaj CH, Mannur DM, Harer PN, Guo B, Liang X, Nadrajan N, Gowda CLL (2013) Achievements and prospects of genomics-assisted breeding in three legume crops of the semi-arid tropics. Biotechnol Adv 31(8):1120–1134CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Varshney RK, Mohan SM, Gaur PM, Chamarthi SK, Singh VK, Srinivasan S, Swapna N, Sharma M, Pande S, Singh S, Kaur L (2014) Marker-assisted backcrossing to introgress resistance to fusarium wilt race 1 and Ascochyta blight in C 214, an elite cultivar of chickpea. The plant genome 7:1–11Google Scholar
- Warrington CV, Zhu S, Parrot WA, All JN, Boerma HR (2008) Seed yield of near isogenic soybean lines introgressed with quantitative trait loci conditioning resistance to corn earworm (Lepidopter: Noctuidae) and soybean looper (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) from PI 229358. J Econ Entomol 101:1471–1477CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar