Search

Key message: Knowledge of genetic variation, genetics, physiology/molecular basis and breeding (including biotechnological approaches) for biofortification and bioavailability for Zn, Fe and Se will help in developing nutritionally improved wheat. Biofortification of wheat cultivars for micronutrients is a priority research area for wheat geneticists and breeders. It is known that during breeding of wheat cultivars for productivity and quality, a loss of grain micronutrient contents occurred, leading to decline in nutritional quality of wheat grain. Keeping this in view, major efforts have been made during the last two decades for achieving biofortification and bioavailability of wheat grain for micronutrients including Zn, Fe and Se. The studies conducted so far included evaluation of gene pools for contents of not only grain micronutrients as above, but also for phytic acid (PA) or phytate and phytase, so that, while breeding for the micronutrients, bioavailability is also improved. For this purpose, QTL interval mapping and GWAS were carried out to identify QTLs/genes and associated markers that were subsequently used for marker-assisted selection (MAS) during breeding for biofortification. Studies have also been conducted to understand the physiology and molecular basis of biofortification, which also allowed identification of genes for uptake, transport and storage of micronutrients. Transgenics using transgenes have also been produced. The breeding efforts led to the development of at least a dozen cultivars with improved contents of grain micronutrients, although land area occupied by these biofortified cultivars is still marginal. In this review, the available information on different aspects of biofortification and bioavailability of micronutrients including Zn, Fe and Se in wheat has been reviewed for the benefit of those, who plan to start work or already conducting research in this area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key message: A review of the available literature on genetics of yield and its component traits, tolerance to abiotic stresses and biofortification should prove useful for future research in wheat in the genomics era. The work reviewed in this article mainly covers the available information on genetics of some important quantitative traits including yield and its components, tolerance to abiotic stresses (heat, drought, salinity and pre-harvest sprouting = PHS) and biofortification (Fe/Zn and phytate contents with HarvestPlus Program) in wheat. Major emphasis is laid on the recent literature on QTL interval mapping and genome-wide association studies, giving lists of known QTL and marker-trait associations. Candidate genes for different traits and the cloned and characterized genes for yield traits along with the molecular mechanism are also described. For each trait, an account of the present status of marker-assisted selection has also been included. The details of available results have largely been presented in the form of tables; some of these tables are included as supplementary files. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key message: This study demonstrates for the first time that resistance to different root lesion nematodes ( P. neglectus and P. penetrans ) is controlled by a common QTL. A major resistance QTL ( Rlnnp6H ) has been mapped to chromosome 6H using two independent barley populations. Abstract: Root lesion nematodes ( Pratylenchus spp.) are important pests in cereal production worldwide. We selected two doubled haploid populations of barley (Igri × Franka and Uschi × HHOR 3073) and infected them with Pratylenchus penetrans and Pratylenchus neglectus. Nematode multiplication rates were measured 7 or 10 weeks after infection. In both populations, continuous phenotypic variations for nematode multiplication rates were detected indicating a quantitative inheritance of resistance. In the Igri × Franka population, four P. penetrans resistance QTLs were mapped with 857 molecular markers on four linkage groups (2H, 5H, 6H and 7H). In the Uschi × HHOR 3073 population, eleven resistance QTLs ( P. penetrans and P. neglectus) were mapped with 646 molecular markers on linkage groups 1H, 3H, 4H, 5H, 6H and 7H. A major resistance QTL named Rlnnp6H (LOD score 6.42-11.19) with a large phenotypic effect (27.5-36.6 %) for both pests was mapped in both populations to chromosome 6H. Another resistance QTL for both pests was mapped on linkage group 5H (Igri × Franka population). These data provide first evidence for common resistance mechanisms against different root lesion nematode species. The molecular markers are a powerful tool for the selection of resistant barley lines among segregating populations because resistance tests are time consuming and laborious. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The root-lesion nematode Pratylenchus neglectus can cause severe losses in barley cultivation. Multiplication rates had been found to vary greatly between different barley accessions. Two winter barley cultivars, Igri and Franka, had been found to differ in their ability to resist this parasite. An existing Igri × Franka doubled haploid population was chosen to genetically map resistance genes after artificial inoculation with P. neglectus in the greenhouse and climate chamber. A continuous phenotypic variation was found indicating a quantitative inheritance of P. neglectus resistance. An existing map was enriched by 527 newly developed Diversity Array Technology markers (DArTs). The new genetic linkage map was comprised of 857 molecular markers that cover 1,157 cM on seven linkage groups. Using phenotypic data collected from four different experiments in 3 years, five quantitative trait loci were mapped by composite interval mapping on four (3H, 5H, 6H and 7H) linkage groups. A quantitative trait locus with a large phenotypic effect of 16% and likelihood of odds (LOD) score of 6.35 was mapped on linkage group 3H. The remaining four QTLs were classified as minor or moderate with LOD scores ranging from 2.71 to 3.55 and R values ranging from 8 to 10%. The DNA markers linked to the resistance QTLs should be quite useful for marker-assisted selection in barley breeding because phenotypic selection is limited due to time constraints and labor costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]