Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-wq484 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T14:05:30.864Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Retrotransposon-related genetic distance among inbred lines of sweet corn (Zea mays var. saccharata) and hybrid performance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 November 2016

Georgi Bonchev ,
Lydia Shtereva  and
Rumiana Vassilevska-Ivanova
Georgi Bonchev*
Affiliation:
Institute of Plant Physiology and Genetics, Acad. G. Bonchev Str, Build. 21, 1113 Sofia, Bulgaria
Lydia Shtereva
Affiliation:
Institute of Plant Physiology and Genetics, Acad. G. Bonchev Str, Build. 21, 1113 Sofia, Bulgaria
Rumiana Vassilevska-Ivanova
Affiliation:
Institute of Plant Physiology and Genetics, Acad. G. Bonchev Str, Build. 21, 1113 Sofia, Bulgaria
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: bonchevg@mail.bg
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Heterosis is a main force underlying the hybrid seed industry in maize. Our experimental approach consists of a correlation study between retrotransposon-related genetic distances between parental inbred lines and hybrid performance. The assumption is that, at least for certain traits, heterosis results from genome rearrangements, largely related to retrotransposon insertions and/or removals. Fifteen maize inbred lines and one F1 hybrid, representative of the genetic diversity among sweet corn and field corn lines were screened for polymorphism by retrotransposon microsatellite amplified polymorphism markers. DNA fingerprints served as row data for estimating genetic diversity of maize inbred lines and its correlation with the heterotic effect in their hybrids. A correlation between phenotypic and molecular distances was evident only at the level of individual inbred lines. Weak correlation between genetic distances and heterosis effect was observed for the average of all inbred lines. Phenotypic distances negatively correlated with heterosis for insertion height, diameter of the ear and number of kernel rows per ear. The relative contribution of each inbred line to heterosis in its derived hybrids was also estimated. Accordingly, we identified inbred lines with increased genetic distances that mostly add to the heterosis effect in their hybrids and that we recommend as prospective to be used in maize breeding programmes.

Keywords

genetic distanceheterosismaizemolecular markerstransposable elements
Type
Research Article
Information
Plant Genetic Resources , Volume 16 , Issue 1 , February 2018 , pp. 50 - 58
Copyright
Copyright © NIAB 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aguiar, CG, Schuster, I, Amaral, AT Jr, Scapim, CA and Vieira, ESN (2008) Heterotic groups in tropical maize germplasm by test crosses and simple sequence repeat markers. Genetics and Molecular Research 7: 1233–1244.Google Scholar
Ajmone-Marsan, P, Castiglioni, P, Fusari, F, Kuiper, M and Motto, M (1998) Genetic diversity and its relationship to hybrid performance in maize as revealed by RFLP and AFLP markers. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 96: 219–227.Google Scholar
Barbosa, AMM, Geraldi, IO, Benchimol, LL, Garcia, AAF, Souza, CL Jr and Souza, AP (2003) Relationship of performance and heterosis of intra- and interpopulation single crosses and genetic distance computed from AFLP and SSR markers. Euphytica 130: 87–99.Google Scholar
Benchimol, LL, Souza, CL Jr, Garcia, AAF, Kono, PMS, Mangolim, CA, Barbosa, AMM, Coelho, ASG and Souza, AP (2000) Genetic diversity in tropical maize inbred lines: heterotic group assignment and hybrid performance determined by RFLP marker. Plant Breeding 119: 491–496.Google Scholar
Bernardo, R (1992) Relationship between single-cross performance and molecular marker heterozygosity. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 83: 628–634.Google Scholar
Bonchev, G and Parisod, C (2013) Transposable elements and microevolutionary changes in natural populations. Molecular Ecology Resources 13: 765–775.Google Scholar
Boppenmaier, J, Melchinger, AE, Brunklaus-Jung, E, Geiger, HH and Herrmann, RG (1992) Genetic diversity for RFLPs in European maize inbreds. I. Relation to performance of Flint × Dent crosses for forage traits. Crop Science 32: 895–902.Google Scholar
Bruel, DC, Carpentieri-Pípolo, V, Gerage, AC, Fonseca, NS Jr, Prete, CEC, Ruas, CF, Ruas, PM, de Souza, SGH and Garbuglio, DD (2006) Genetic distance estimated by RAPD markers and its relationship with hybrid performance in maize. Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira 41: 1491–1498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunner, S, Fengler, K, Morgante, M, Tingey, S and Rafalski, A (2005) Evolution of DNA sequence nonhomologies among maize inbreds. Plant Cell 17: 343–360.Google Scholar
Burstin, J and Charcosset, A (1997) Relationship between phenotypic and marker distances: theoretical and experimental investigations. Heredity 79: 477–483.Google Scholar
Buti, M, Giordani, T, Vukich, M, Pugliesi, C, Natali, L and Cavallini, A (2013) Retrotransposon-related genetic distance and hybrid performance in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.). Euphytica 192: 289–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casa, AM, Brouwer, C, Nagel, A, Wang, L, Zhang, Q, Kresovich, S and Wessler, SR (2000) The MITE family Heartbreaker (Hbr): molecular markers in maize. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 97: 10083–10089.Google Scholar
Casa, AM, Mitchell, SE, Smith, OS, Register, JC III, Wessler, SR and Kresovich, S (2002) Evaluation of Hbr (MITE) markers for assessment of genetic relationships among maize (Zea mays L.) inbred lines. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 104: 104–110.Google Scholar
Charcosset, A, Lefort-Buson, M and Gallais, A (1991) Relationship between heterosis and heterozygosity at marker loci: a theoretical computation. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 81: 571–575.Google Scholar
Cheres, MT, Miller, JF, Crane, JM and Knapp, SJ (2000) Genetic distance as a predictor of heterosis and hybrid performance within and between heterotic groups in sunflower. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 100: 889–894.Google Scholar
Clark, RM, Nussbaum-Wagler, T, Quijada, P and Doebley, J (2006) A distant upstream enhancer at the maize domestication gene tb1 has pleiotropic effects on plant and inflorescence architecture. Nature Genetics 38: 594–597.Google Scholar
Falconer, DS (1981) Introduction to Guantitattve Genetics, 2nd edn. NewYork: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., p. 340.Google Scholar
Fernandes, EH, Schuster, I, Scapim, CA, Vieira, ESN and Coan, MMD (2015) Genetic diversity in elite inbred lines of maize and its association with heterosis. Genetics and Molecular research 14: 6509–6517.Google Scholar
Flint-Garcia, SA, Buckler, ES, Tiffin, P, Ersoz, E and Springer, NM (2009) Heterosis is prevalent for multiple traits in diverse maize germplasm. PLoS ONE 4: e7433.Google Scholar
Fu, HH and Dooner, HK (2002) Intraspecific violation of genetic colinearity and its implications in maize. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 99: 9573–9578.Google Scholar
Godshalk, EB, Lee, M and Lamkey, KR (1990) Relationship of restriction fragment length polymorphisms to single-cross hybrid performance in maize. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 80: 273–280.Google Scholar
Guimarães, SP, Paterniani, MEAGZ, Lüders, RR, Souza, NAP, Laborda, PR and Oliveira, KM (2007) Correlation between the heterosis of maize hybrids and genetic divergence among lines. Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira 42: 811–816.Google Scholar
Jaccard, P (1908) Nouvelles recherches sur la distribution florale. Bulletin de la Société vaudoise des sciences naturelles 44: 223–270.Google Scholar
Kalendar, R, Grob, T, Regina, M, Suoniemi, A and Schulman, AH (1999) IRAP and REMAP: two new retrotransposon-based DNA fingerprinting techniques. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 98: 704–711.Google Scholar
Kalendar, R, Flavell, AJ, Ellis, TH, Sjakste, T, Moisy, C and Schulman, AH (2011) Analysis of plant diversity with retrotransposon-based molecular markers. Heredity 106: 520–530.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kato, A, Lamb, JC and Birchler, JA (2004) Chromosome painting using repetitive DNA sequences as probes for somatic chromosome identification in maize. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 101: 13554–13559.Google Scholar
Kraptchev, B, Vassilevska-Ivanova, R and Velikova, K (2010) Characteristic of a new Bulgarian sweet corn hybrid (Zea mays var. saccharata Sturt.). Genetics and Breeding 39: 17–21.Google Scholar
Kraptchev, B, Vassilevska-Ivanova, R and Shtereva, L (2014) Heterosis and antioxidant compounds of sweet corn breeding lines and their F1 hybrid. Genetika 46: 807–813.Google Scholar
Kuhn, BC, L'opez-Ribera, I, de F'atima Pires da Silva Machado, M and Vicient, CM (2014) Genetic diversity of maize germplasm assessed by retrotransposon-based markers. Electrophoresis 35: 1921–1927.Google Scholar
Lanza, LLB, Souza, CL Jr, Ottoboni, LMM, Vieira, MLC and Souza, AP (1997) Genetic distance of inbred lines and prediction of maize single-cross performance using RAPD markers. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 94: 1023–1030.Google Scholar
Laurie, DA and Bennett, MD (1985) Nuclear DNA content in the genera Zea and Sorghum: intergeneric, interspecific and intraspecific variation. Heredity 55: 307–313.Google Scholar
Lee, M, Sharopova, N, Beavis, WD, Grant, D, Katt, M, Blair, D and Hallauer, A (2002) Expanding the genetic map of maize with the intermated B73 × Mo17 (IBM) population. Plant Molecular Biology 48: 453–461.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Legesse, BW, Myburg, AA, Pixley, KV, Twumasi-afriye, S and Botha, AM (2008) Relationship between hybrid performance and AFLP based genetic distance in highland maize inbred lines. Euphytica 162: 313–323.Google Scholar
Lopes, MS, Saglam, D, Ozdogan, M and Reynolds, M (2014) Traits associated with winter wheat grain yield in Central and West Asia. Journal of Integrative Plant Biology 56: 673–683.Google Scholar
Melchinger, AE, Lee, M, Lamkey, KR and Woodman, WW (1990) Genetic diversity for restriction fragment length polymorphism: relation to estimated genetic effect in maize inbreds. Crop Science 30: 1033–1040.Google Scholar
Olsen, KM and Wendel, JF (2013) Crop plants as models for understanding plant adaptation and diversification. Frontiers in Plant Evolution and Development 4: 290.Google Scholar
Paschold, A, Jia, Y, Marcon, C, Lund, S, Larson, NB, Yeh, CT, Ossowski, S, Lanz, C, Nettleton, D, Schnable, PS and Hochholdinger, F (2012) Complementation contributes to transcriptome complexity in maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids relative to their inbred parents. Genome Research 22: 2445–2454.Google Scholar
Reif, JC, Melchinger, AE, Xiab, XC, Warburtonb, ML, Hoisingtonb, DA, Vasalb, SK, Srinivasan, G, Bohn, M and Frisch, M (2003) Genetic distance based on simple sequence repeats and heterosis in tropical maize populations. Crop Science 43: 1275–1282.Google Scholar
Sokal, RR and Michener, CD (1958) A statistical method for evaluating systematic relationships. The University of Kansas Science Bulletin 38: 1409–1438.Google Scholar
Springer, NM and Stupar, RM (2007) Allelic variation and heterosis in maize: how do two halves make more than a whole? Genome Research 17: 264–275.Google Scholar
Srdić, J, Nikolić, A, Pajić, Z, Drinić, SM and Filipović, M (2011) Genetic similarity of sweet corn inbred lines in correlation with heterosis. Maydica 56: 251–256.Google Scholar
Stupar, RM, Gardiner, JM, Oldre, AG, Haun, WJ, Chandler, VL and Springer, NM (2008) Gene expression analyses in maize inbreds and hybrids with varying levels of heterosis. BMC Plant Biology 8: 1–19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Teklewold, A and Becker, HC (2006) Comparison of phenotypic and molecular distances to predict heterosis and F1 performance in Ethiopian mustard (Brassica carinata A. Braun). Theoretical and Applied Genetics 112: 752–759.Google Scholar
Vassilevska-Ivanova, R and Kraptchev, B (2007) Combining ability analysis in a diallel cross among sweet corn inbred lines (Zea mays L.). Journal of Genetics and Breeding 61: 69–76.Google Scholar
Vassilevska-Ivanova, R, Kraptchev, B, Naidenova, N and Nedev, T (2007) Genotype correlation and path-coefficient analysis of some productivity elements in sweet corn (Zea mays L.). Comptes Rendus De L'Academie Bulgare Des Sciences 60: 1011–1014.Google Scholar
Xu, S, Liu, J and Liu, G (2004) The use of SSRs for predicting the hybrid yield and yield heterosis in 15 key inbred lines of Chinese maize. Hereditas 141: 207–215.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Bonchev supplementary material

Tables S1 and S2

Download Bonchev supplementary material(File)
File 56.8 KB