, 215:81 | Cite as

Genetic improvement of naked-tufted seed mutants in upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)

  • Bralie R. Hendon
  • Efrem Bechere
  • Travis W. Witt
  • Brendan R. Kelly
  • Deepika Mishra
  • Dick L. AuldEmail author


This research evaluated the potential for using sexual crosses for genetic improvement of fiber yield, lint percent, AFIS fiber quality, and fiber initiation of two naked-tufted mutants of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). The naked tufted lines were crossed with ten fuzzy breeding lines to generate 10 F2 populations. The F2 distributions were tested with Chi Square for Goodness of Fit to two monogenic and two digenetic segregation ratios. Five of the six F2 populations made with Atlas-NS-129 segregated as either a single dominant gene (3 Naked-tufted: 1 fuzzy) or as two dominant genes (9 Naked-tufted: 7 fuzzy). Three of the four F2 populations made with SC 9023-ns-57 segregated as either a single recessive gene (3 Fuzzy: 1 naked-tufted) or as duplicate recessive genes (9 Fuzzy: 7 naked-tufted). However, the F2 populations when crossed with the Fuzzy line of Tejas 48 showed a reversal of dominance. The F2 population of Atlas-NS-129 X Tejas 48 fit a 9 Fuzzy: 7 naked tufted ratio expected of two recessive genes. The F2 population of the cross of SC 9023-ns X Tejas 48 fit a 3 Naked-tufted: 1 fuzzy ratio expected of a single dominant gene. Additional studies will be necessary to fully determine the number of gene(s) and the expected phenotypic ratios of individual naked-tufted mutants in crosses with fuzzy seeded breeding lines. Eight of the F2 and F3 populations were also evaluated for lint yield, lint percent and AFIS fiber quality traits. The F2 and F3 populations of the cross of Atlas-NS-129 X Holland 338 produced the highest average lint yields (1089 kg ha−1) as well as excellent fiber quality. These data indicate that it may be possible to develop relatively high yielding naked tufted cultivars by crossing these mutant lines with elite higher yielding breeding lines.


Naked-tufted seed coat Chemical mutagenesis Genetic inheritance Fuzz fibers Lint fibers 



This research was supported by funding by the USDA-International Cotton Research Center; Cotton Incorporated-Core Program; Cotton Incorporated-Texas State Support Committee; Texas Department of Agriculture-Food and Fiber Research Program; the Rockwell Endowed Chair in the Department of Plant and Soil Science, Texas Tech University (TTU); the Office of Research Commercialization (TTU) and the Fiber Biopolymer Research Institute (TTU). Dr. Steve Oswalt, Mr. Jacob Rieff, Mr. Corey Thompson, and numerous undergraduate students provide technical support and long hours of labor to support this research. Mention of trade names or commercial products in this publication is solely for the purpose of providing specific information and does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employee.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The naked-tufted mutant lines identified in this study are protected by U.S. Patent Application No: 9,877,445 (January 30, 2018) (Auld and Bechere 2018). Consequently, distribution of the lines identified in this study will require the permission of the Office of Research Commercialization at Texas Tech University.


  1. Auld DL, Bechere E (2018) Use of naked-tufted mutant in upland cotton to improve fiber quality, increase seed oil content, increase ginning efficiency, and reduce to the costs of delinting. Patent No.: 9,877,445. January, 30, 2018Google Scholar
  2. Bechere E, Auld DL (2013) Registration of a tufted-naked seed for upland cotton Germplasm, 9093n4t. J Plant Regist 8:63–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bechere E, Auld DL, Hequet EF (2009) Development of ‘naked-tufted’ seed coat mutants for potential use in cotton production. Euphytica 167:333–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bechere E, Turley RB, Auld DL, Zeng L (2012) A new fuzzless seed locus in an upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) mutant. AJPS 3:799–804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boykin JC, Bechere E, Meredith WR Jr (2012) Cotton genotype differences in fiber-seed attachment force. J Cotton Sci 16:170–178Google Scholar
  6. Endrizzi JE, Ray DT (1991) Monosomic and monotelodisomic analysis of 34 mutant loci in cotton. J Hered 82:53–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fourmilab (2018) Chi square calculator-probability.
  8. Hebert JJ, Thibodeaux DP (1988) Cottonseed linters. Text Res J 58(12):714–719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hutchinson JB (1935) The genetics of cotton. Part XV. The inheritance of fuzz and lintlessness and associated characteristics in Asiatic cottons. J Genet 31:451–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. International Cotton Advisory Committee (ICAC) (2017) Global cotton production to increase in 2017/18. Press release (12/1/2017)Google Scholar
  11. Lewton FL (1912) The cotton of the Hopi Indians: a new species of Gossypium. Smithson Misc Collect 60:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Paterson AH, Wendel JE (2015) Unraveling the fabric of polyploidy. Nat Biotechnol 33:491–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Percy P, Hendon BR, Bechere E, Auld DL (2015) Chapter 7: qualitative genetics and utilization of mutants. In: Fang DD, Percy RG (eds) Cotton 2nd edn. Agronomy Monograph No. 57, pp 155–186Google Scholar
  14. Smith CW, Cothren JT (1999) Cotton: origin, history, technology, and production. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Turley RB (2009) Genetics of fiber initiation. In: National cotton council. 2009 Beltwide Cotton Conferences. p 633Google Scholar
  16. USDA-NASS (2017) National and state planted acreage report (June 30, 2017). ISSN 1949-1522. pp 40–41Google Scholar
  17. Wendel JF, Grover CE (2015) Taxonomy and evolution of the cotton genus. Gossypium. Chapter 2: qualitative genetics and utilization of mutants. In: Fang DD, Percy RG (eds) Agronomy monograph no. 57, Cotton 2nd edn. pp 25-44Google Scholar
  18. WinSeedleTM (2019) Regents Instruments. Accessed 21 Mar 2019

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Biology DepartmentUniversity of the SouthwestHobbsUSA
  2. 2.Crop Genetics Research UnitUSDA-ARSStonevilleUSA
  3. 3.Grazinglands Research LaboratoryUSDA-ARSEl RenoUSA
  4. 4.Texas A&M AgriLife Science and the Plant and Soil Science DepartmentTexas Tech UniversityLubbockUSA
  5. 5.Arvegenix, Inc.St. LouisUSA
  6. 6.Plant and Soil Science DepartmentTexas Tech UniversityLubbockUSA
  7. 7.Rockwell Endowed Chair (Emeritus)Texas Tech UniversityLubbockUSA

Personalised recommendations