F1 Hybrid Breeding Using Genome Information
Most radish cultivars on the Japanese and Korean markets today are F1 hybrids. In the other countries, F1 cultivars are also increasing. The radish root is a product of field conditions and genotype responses to environment and season. A marketable product depends on a sustained balance of vegetative characters throughout the growth. Breeding for the root size and shape, the disease resistance, and physiological disorder tolerance must maintain the optimum balance of these characters under each cropping environment and consider their heterosis. In vegetable F1 hybrid breeding, characters relevant to seed production are evaluated and selected during the reproductive stage, after the selection of vegetative characters. Therefore, the identification of selection markers for seed production characters can greatly improve selection efficiency. Even if a cross has improved vegetative characters, it is not grown if its parents cannot stably produce large amounts of high-purity F1 seeds with a high germination rate. This chapter describes the current state of F1 hybrid breeding and future needs.
- Akamatsu T (2005) Utilization and problem of male sterility in vegetable crops of Cruciferae. Breed Res 7(Suppl 1, 2):42–43Google Scholar
- Ashizawa M, Hida K, Yoshikawa H (1979) Studies on the breeding Fusarium resistance in radish. I. Screening of radish varieties for Fusarium resistance. Bull Veg Ornam Crops Res Sta 6:39Google Scholar
- Hagiya K (1958) Studies on the occurrence of ‘pithy tissue’ in root crops (5). On the occurrence of the ‘pithy tissue’ in F1 and F2 generations of varietal crosses in radish, and in contemplation of breeding the resistant lines to its occurrence. J Jpn Soc Hortic Sci 27:68Google Scholar
- USDA (2009) http://gain.fas.usda.gov/Recent%20GAIN%20Publications/Cabbage%20Market%20Trends_Seoul_Korea%20-%20Republic%20of_11-5-2010. Accessed 28 Dec 2015
- Wellmann FL (1939) A technique for studying host resistance and pathogenicity in tomato Fusarium wilt. Phytopathology 29:945–956Google Scholar