Euphytica

, Volume 163, Issue 1, pp 57–65

Reconstructing Fragaria × ananassa utilizing wild F. virginiana and F. chiloensis: inheritance of winter injury, photoperiod sensitivity, fruit size, female fertility and disease resistance in hybrid progenies

  • James J. Luby
  • James F. Hancock
  • Adam Dale
  • Sedat Serçe
Article

Abstract

The genetics of disease resistance, winter hardiness, spring bloom date, fruit set, ovule set, fruit size, and photoperiod sensitivity was investigated in crosses between sets of elite selections of Fvirginiana and F. chiloensis in Minnesota and Ontario. In Minnesota, family means varied considerably for all traits except ovule set. For all other traits, general combining ability was significant for at least one species, while specific combining ability was significant for only spring bloom date. In Ontario, general combining ability was significant for all traits in at least one species except flower number. Just as they were in previous crosses with F.  × ananassa cultivars, the F. virginiana parents High Falls 22 and Montreal River 10 were notable for producing offspring with large fruit and high fertility. Fragaria chiloensis parents exhibited strong combining ability effects for short day-induced flowering and suppressed the expression of day-neutral flowering in these progeny compared to progeny of these F. virginiana in previous crosses with F. × ananassa. These results indicate that substantial breeding progress can be made by reconstructing F. × ananassa if care is taken to select elite, complementary genotypes of F. virginiana and F. chiloensis.

Keywords

Strawberry Germplasm resources Cyclic flowering Day-neutral Short-day 

References

  1. Ahmadi H, Bringhurst RS, Voth V (1990) Modes of inheritance of photoperiodism in Fragaria. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 115:146–152Google Scholar
  2. Barritt BH, Bringhurst RS, Voth V (1982) Inheritance of early flowering in relation to breeding of day-neutral strawberries. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 107:733–736Google Scholar
  3. Bedard PR, Hsu CS, Spangelo LPS, Fejer SO, Rouselle GL (1971) Genetic, phenotypic, and environmental correlations among 28 fruit and plant characters in the cultivated strawberry. Can J Genet Cytol 13:470–479Google Scholar
  4. Comstock KRE, Robinson HF (1948) The components of genetic variance in populations of biparental progenies and their use in estimating the average degree of dominance. Biometrics 4:254–266PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dale A, Daubeny HA, Luffman M, Sullivan JA (1993) Development of Fragaria germplasm in Canada. Acta Hortic 348:75–80Google Scholar
  6. Darrow GM (1966) The strawberry history, breeding and physiology. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Gilbert N (1967) Additive combining abilities fitted to plant breeding data. Biometrics 23:45–49PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hancock JF (1999) Strawberries. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UKGoogle Scholar
  9. Hancock JF, Maas JL, Shanks CH, Breen PJ, Luby JJ (1990) Strawberries In: Moore JN, Ballington JR (eds) Genetic resources in temperate fruit and nut crop. International Society Horticultural Science Wageningen, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  10. Hancock JF, Dale A, Luby JJ (1993) Should we reconstitute Fragaria  × ananassa? Acta Hortic 348:85–93Google Scholar
  11. Hancock JF, Callow PW, Dale A, Luby JJ, Finn CE, Hokanson SC, Hummer KE (2001a) From the Andes to the Rockies: native strawberry collection and utilization. HortScience 36:221–225Google Scholar
  12. Hancock JF, Callow PW, Serçe S, Schilder AMC (2001b) Relative performance of strawberry cultivars and native hybrids on fumigated and nonfumigated soil in Michigan. HortScience 36:136–138Google Scholar
  13. Hancock JF, Finn CE, Hokanson SC, Luby JJ, Goulart BL, Demchak K, Callow PW, Serce S, Schilder AMC, Hummer KE (2001c) A multistate comparison of native octoploid strawberries from North and South America. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 126:579-586Google Scholar
  14. Hancock JF, Luby JJ, Dale A, Callow PW, Serçe S, El-Shiek A (2002) Utilizing wild Fragaria virginiana in strawberry cultivar development: inheritance of photoperiod sensitivity, fruit size, gender, female fertility and disease resistance. Euphytica 126:174–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hancock JF, Callow PW, Serçe S, Son PQ (2003) Variation in the horticultural characteristics of native Fragaria virginiana and F. chiloensis from North and South America. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 128:201–208Google Scholar
  16. Hancock JF, Serçe S, Portman CM, Callow PW, Luby JJ (2004) Taxonomic variation among North and South American subspecies of Fragaria virginiana Miller and F. chiloensis (L) Miller. Can J Bot 82:1632–1644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hancock JF, Drake CA, Callow PW, Serçe S (2005) Genetic improvement of the Chilean native strawberry, Fragaria chiloensis. HortScience 40:1644–1645Google Scholar
  18. Hokanson KE, Harrison RE, Luby JJ, Hancock JF (1993) Morphological variation in Fragaria virginiana from the Rocky Mountains. Acta Hortic 348:94–101Google Scholar
  19. Lacey CND (1973) Phenotypic correlations between vegetative characters and yield components in strawberry. Euphytica 22:546–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Libby WJ, Cockerham CC (1980) Random non-contiguous plots in interlocking field layouts. Silvae Genet 29:183–190Google Scholar
  21. Luby JJ, Stahler MM (1993) Collection and evaluation of Fragaria virginiana in North America. Acta Hortic 345:49–54Google Scholar
  22. Luby JJ, Hancock JF, Cameron S (1991) Expansion of the strawberry germplasm base in North America In: Dale A, Luby JJ (eds) The strawberry into the 21st century. Timber Press, Portland, pp 66–75Google Scholar
  23. Luby JJ, Hancock JF, Ballington JR (1992) Collection of native strawberry (Fragaria ssp.) germplasm in the Pacific Northwest and Northern Rocky Mountains of the USA. HortScience 27:12–17Google Scholar
  24. Sakin M, Hancock JF, Luby JJ (1997) Identifying new sources of genes that determine cyclic flowering in Rocky Mountain populations of Fragaria virginiana ssp glauca Staudt. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 122:205–210Google Scholar
  25. SAS Institute Inc. (1990) SAS users guide; SAS/STAT, version 6. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, N.C.Google Scholar
  26. Serçe S, Hancock JF (2002) Screening of strawberry germplasm for resistance to the two-spotted spider mite. HortScience 37:593–594Google Scholar
  27. Serçe S, Hancock JF (2003) Assessment of day-neutral scoring methods in strawberry families grown in greenhouse and field environments. Turk J Agric For 27:191–198Google Scholar
  28. Serçe S, Hancock JF (2005a) The temperature and photoperiod regulation of flowering in Fragaria chiloensis, F. virginiana, and F. × ananassa genotypes. Sci Hortic 103(2):167–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Serçe S, Hancock JF (2005b) Inheritance of day-neutrality in octoploid species of Fragaria. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 130(4):580–584Google Scholar
  30. Serçe S, Callow PW, Ho JJ, Hancock JF (2002) High temperature effects on CO2 assimilation rate in genotypes of Fragaria  × ananassa, F.  chiloensis and F. virginiana. J Am Pomol Soc 56:57–62Google Scholar
  31. Shaw DV (2003) Heterogeneity of segregation ratios from selfed progenies demonstrate polygenic inheritance for day-neutrality in strawberry (Fragaria  × ananassa Duch). J Am Soc Hortic Sci 128:504–507Google Scholar
  32. Shaw DV, Famula TR (2005) Complex segregation analysis of day-neutrality in domestic strawberry (Fragaria  × ananassa Duch.). Euphytica 145:331–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sjulin TM, Dale A (1987) Genetic diversity of North American strawberry cultivars. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 112:375–385Google Scholar
  34. Staudt G (1999) Systematics and geographic distribution of the American strawberry species: taxonomic studies in the genus Fragaria (Rosaceae: Potentilleae). University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  35. Weebadde CK, Wang D, Finn CE, Lewers KS, Luby JJ, Bushakra J, Sjulin TM, Hancock JF (2007) Using a linkage mapping approach to identify QTL for day-neutrality in the octoploid strawberry (Fragaria  × ananassa Duch ex Rozier). Plant Breed (accepted)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • James J. Luby
    • 1
  • James F. Hancock
    • 2
  • Adam Dale
    • 3
  • Sedat Serçe
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Horticultural ScienceUniversity of MinnesotaSt. PaulUSA
  2. 2.Department of HorticultureMichigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA
  3. 3.Department of Plant AgricultureUniversity of GuelphSimcoeCanada
  4. 4.Department of HorticultureMustafa Kemal UniversityAntakya, HatayTurkey

Personalised recommendations