Abstract
The seed protein production of more than a hundredPisum mutants and recombinants was determined. There is a negative correlation between seed production and protein content of the seed meal in the material tested. Geneipc of thePisum genome increases the protein content of the seed flour by about 20%, but the mutant carrying this gene and the recombinants available so far produce only low amounts of protein, due to their poor seed production. The biochemical methods used allow the detection of the genetic diversity as expressed in altered gene products in closely related genotypes. Many mutants and recombinants, derived from the same mother variety, are available in our collection showing not only quantitative and qualitative differences in their seed proteins, but also other characters of agronomic interest such as higher yield or adaptation to distinct climatic conditions. They represent a suitable material for analyzing the regulatory mechanisms controlling the incorporation of proteins into seeds.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Gottschalk W (1977) Fasciated peas — unusual mutants for breeding and research. J Nucl Agric Biol 6:27–33
Gottschalk W, Wolff G (1982) The behaviour of a protein-richPisum mutant (in press)
Müller HP (1978) Gene mapping on chromosomes and some aspects of gene regulation in eukaryotic cells (a report). Nucleus 21:135–142
Müller HP (1979) The genetic control of seed protein polymorphism inPisum. Proc 1st Mediterr Conf Genet Cairo, pp 747–764
Müller HP (1978) Die genetische Steuerung der Zusammensetzung von Samenproteinen. Z Pflanzenkr Pflanzenschutz 85:210–217
Müller HP, Werner S (1978) Seed protein characteristics ofPisum varieties, mutants and recombinants. Proc Symp Seed Proteins Dicotyledonous Plants; Gatersleben 1977. Abh Akad Wiss Abt Math Naturwiss Technik no. 4N:189–209
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gottschalk, W., Müller, H.P. Seed proteins ofPisum mutants and recombinants. Plant Food Hum Nutr 31, 297–306 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01108637
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01108637