Advertisement

Euphytica

, Volume 207, Issue 2, pp 225–243 | Cite as

Breeding value of selected dessert strawberry (Fragaria × ananassa Duch.) cultivars for ripening time, fruit yield and quality

  • Agnieszka Masny
  • Kris Pruski
  • Edward Żurawicz
  • Wiesław Mądry
Article

Abstract

A half-diallel mating design (Griffing’s method IV) among 13 dessert strawberry parental genotypes (‘Figaro’, ‘Salsa’, ‘Palomar’, ‘Granda’, ‘Camarosa’, ‘Elianny’, ‘Aromas’, ‘Diamante’, ‘Portola’, ‘Charlotte’, ‘San Andreas’, ‘Monterey’ and ‘Albion’) was constructed to study the breeding value in terms of general and specific combining ability (GCA and SCA) effecting several important horticultural traits. The crossbreeding was conducted during the winter of 2010/2011 in a greenhouse (temperature of 20 °C and supplemental lighting of 16 h). The 6 week-old progenies of 78 sibling families were planted to the field experiment in July 2011. A randomized complete block design, with four replicates, each composed of 15 seedlings was used. Fruit ripening time, marketable fruit yield and fruit quality (weight, attractiveness and firmness, soluble solids, and ascorbic acid content) were recorded in 2012 and 2013. Data analysis was performed based on the fixed Griffing’s model. The analyzed traits were determined by both additive and non-additive genetic effects. Inheritance of the traits such as fruit firmness, mean fruit weight, and soluble solids content, was predominantly determined by additive effects. The strongest positive phenotypic and genetic correlations were observed between fruit weight and fruit attractiveness, whereas the negative ones—between fruit ripening time and fruit weight. The highest breeding value based on GCA was estimated for cultivars: ‘Palomar’—for fruit weight and attractiveness, and the soluble solids content, ‘Figaro’—for fruit weight and soluble solids content, ‘Camarosa’—for marketable fruit yield and fruit weight, ‘Elianny’—for fruit weight and attractiveness, and ‘Charlotte’—for marketable fruit yield and ascorbic acid content. The lowest breeding value exhibited cultivars ‘Albion’ and ‘San Andreas’. The following hybrid families have shown the highest positive SCA effects for two or more traits with no negative effects: ‘Aromas’ × ‘Salsa’, ‘Monterey’ × ‘Figaro’, ‘Palomar’ × ‘Camarosa’, ‘Portola’ × ‘San Andreas’ and ‘Portola’ × ‘Charlotte’.

Keywords

Half-diallel mating design Fixed Griffing’s model GCA SCA Genetic additive and non-additive effects Phenotypic and genetic correlations 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Dr. Jerzy Nowak, Department of Plant Science, Virginia Tech, Blackburg VA, USA for comprehensive revision of the manuscript. We are grateful to Dr. Jeff Hoyle, Department of Environmental Sciences, Dalhousie University, Halifax/Truro, Canada for English language revisions of the manuscript. This study was funded by the Polish Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (“Basic research for the biological progress” – grant 106 “Genetic and biometric analysis of the strawberry parental forms for obtaining genotypes with high fruit quality and productive value of plants”).

References

  1. Aalders LE, Craig DL (1974) Analysis of fruit yield and related factors in a diallel of seven inbred strawberry clones. Can J Genet Cytol 16:381–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baker RJ (1978) Issues in diallel analysis. Crop Sci 18:533–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barritt BH (1975) Heritability estimates and parent selection in strawberry. HortScience 10:329Google Scholar
  4. Barritt BH (1976) Evaluation of strawberry parent clones for easy calyx removal. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 101:590–591Google Scholar
  5. Bestfleisch M, Möhring J, Hanke MV, Peil A, Flachowsky H (2014) A diallel crossing approach aimed on selection for ripening time and yield in breeding of new strawberry (Fragaria × ananassa Duch.) cultivars. Plant Breed 133:115–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Commission Regulation (2002) No. 843/2002 laying down the marketing standard for strawberries and amending Regulation (EEC) No. 899/87. In: Official Journal of the European Communities L 134, 22 May 2002, pp. 24–28Google Scholar
  7. Dossett M, Lee J, Finn CE (2008) Genetics and breeding inheritance of phenological, vegetative and fruit chemistry traits in black raspberry. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 133:408–417Google Scholar
  8. Faedi W, Rosati P, D’Ercole N (1988) The strawberry breeding program for North Italy. Acta Hortic 265:53–68Google Scholar
  9. Faedi W, Baruzzi G, Lucchi P, Sbrighi P (2009) Monografia di cultivar di Fragola.In: VII Convegno Nazionale “La Fragola: Presente e Futuro”, Marsala, Italy, 25–30 Mar. 2009. Regione Siciliana Assessorato Agricoltura e Foreste, RomaGoogle Scholar
  10. Falconer DS (1960) Introduction to quantitative genetics. Edinburgh, Great BritainGoogle Scholar
  11. FAOSTAT (2012) http://www.faostat.fao.org/site/567/default.aspx#ancor. Accessed 05 Feb 2014
  12. Finn CE (1999) Strawberry. In: Okie WR (ed) Register of new fruit and nut varieties—list 39. HortScience 34:197–201Google Scholar
  13. Forney CF, Kalt W, Jordan MA (2000) The composition of strawberry aroma is influenced by cultivar, maturity and storage. HortScience 35:1022–1026Google Scholar
  14. Fort SB, Shaw DV (2000) Genetic analysis of strawberry root system traits in fumigated and nonfumigated soils. I. Inheritance patterns of strawberry root system characteristics. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 125:318–323Google Scholar
  15. Garretsen F, Keuls M (1978) A general method for the analysis of genetic variation in complete and incomplete diallels and North Carolina II (NC II) designs. Part II. Procedures and general formulas for the fixed model. Euphytica 27:49–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gawroński J (2011) Evaluation of the genetic control, heritability and correlations of some quantitative characters in strawberry (Fragaria × ananassa Duch.). Acta Sci Pol Hortorum Cultus 10:71–76Google Scholar
  17. Gecer MK, Eyduran E, Yilmaz H (2013) The effect of different applications on fruit yield characteristics of strawberries cultivated under an ecological condition. J Animal Plant Sci 23:1431–1435Google Scholar
  18. Geleta LF, Labuschagne MT (2006) Combining ability and heritability for vitamin C and total soluble solids in pepper (Capsicum annuum L.). J Sci Food Agric 86:1317–1320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Giménez G, Ballington JR (2002) Inheritance of resistance to Colletotrichum acutatum Simmonds on runners of garden strawberry and its backcrosses. HortScience 37:686–690Google Scholar
  20. Griffing B (1956a) A generalised treatments of diallel crosses in quantitative inheritance. Heredity 10:31–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Griffing B (1956b) Concept of general and specific combining ability in relation to diallel crossing systems. Aust J Biol Sci 9:463–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hansche PE, Bringhurst RS, Voth V (1968) Estimates of genetic and environmental parameters in the strawberry. Proc Am Soc Hortic Sci 92:338–345Google Scholar
  23. Hasing T, Osorio LF, Whitaker VM (2012) Estimation of genetic parameters and gains for color traits of strawberry. Euphytica 186:303–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Himelrick DG, Powell AA, Dozier Jr. WA (1996) Commercial strawberry production. http://www.agrisk.umn.edu/library/Display.aspx?RecID=1702. Accessed 29 Jan 2015
  25. Hortyński JA (1987) Dziedziczenie niektórych cech ilościowych truskawki (Fragaria ananassa Duch). Metody i problemy oszacowań. Wydawnictwo Akademii Rolniczej, LublinGoogle Scholar
  26. Hortyński JA (1989) Correlations in strawberry breeding programs. Acta Hortic 265:169–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lundergan CA, Moore JN (1975) Inheritance of ascorbic acid content and color intensity in fruits of strawberry (Fragaria × ananassa Duch.). J Am Soc Hortic Sci 100:633–635Google Scholar
  28. MacLachlan JB (1978) Data on the inheritance of resistance to powdery mildew in the cultivated strawberry. Sci Hortic 8:43–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Masny A, Żurawicz E (2009) Yielding of new dessert strawberry cultivars and their susceptibility to fungal diseases in Poland. J Fruit Ornam Plant Res 17:191–202Google Scholar
  30. Masny A, Żurawicz E (2010) Productive value of new foreign strawberry cultivars evaluated in 2007–2010. J Fruit Ornam Plant Res 18:273–282Google Scholar
  31. Masny A, Żurawicz E (2013) Uprawa truskawek z uwzględnieniem zasad integrowanej ochrony. Plantpress, KrakówGoogle Scholar
  32. Masny A, Mądry W, Żurawicz E (2008) Combining ability for important horticultural traits in medium- and late-maturing strawberry cultivars. J Fruit Ornam Plant Res 16:133–152Google Scholar
  33. Masny A, Sieczko L, Żurawicz E, Mądry W (2010a) Zmienność i współzależność cech ilościowych u rodzin mieszańcowych truskawki powtarzającej owocowanie. Część I. Związki między cechami. Zeszyty Problemowe Postępów Nauk Rolniczych 555:551–559Google Scholar
  34. Masny A, Sieczko L, Żurawicz E, Mądry W (2010b) Zmienność i współzależność cech ilościowych u rodzin mieszańcowych truskawki powtarzającej owocowanie. Część II. Jedno- i wielowymiarowa analiza zmienności i grupowania. Zeszyty Problemowe Postępów Nauk Rolniczych 555:561–577Google Scholar
  35. Masny A, Mądry W, Żurawicz E (2014) Combining ability of selected dessert strawberry cultivars with different fruit ripening periods. Acta Sci Pol Hortorum Cultus 13:67–78Google Scholar
  36. Möhring J, Piepho HP (2009) Comparison of weighting in two-stage analyses of series of experiments. Crop Sci 49:1977–1988CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mori T (2000) Heritability and selection effectiveness for fruit firmness in strawberry. J Jpn Soc Hortic Sci 69:90–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pluta S, Żurawicz E, Studnicki M, Mądry W (2014) Combining ability analysis for selected plant traits in gooseberry. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 139:1–11Google Scholar
  39. Roudeillac P, Trajkovski K (2004) Breeding for fruit quality and nutrition in strawberries. Acta Hortic 649:55–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. SAS Institute (2000) SAS language and procedure: usage. Version 8, 1st edn. SAS Institution, CaryGoogle Scholar
  41. Shim JS, Cheon KS, Oh JY, Hwang HJ, Yoon HS, Shon GM, Kim ZH (2007) Genetic analysis of soluble solid contents in strawberry (Fragaria × ananassa Duch.) by a half-diallel cross. Korean J Hortic Sci Technol 25:334–346Google Scholar
  42. Spangelo LPS, Hsu CS, Fejer SO, Bedard PR, Rouselle GL (1971) Heritability and genetic variance components for 20 fruit and plant characters in the cultivated strawberry. Can J Genet Cytol 13:443–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Vieira RA, Scapim CA, Moterle LM, Tessmann DJ, Conrado TV, Amaral AT Jr (2009) Diallel analysis of leaf disease resistance in inbred Brazilian popcorn cultivars. Genet Mol Res 8:1427–1436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Yao Q, Mehlenbacher SA (2000) Heritability, variance components and correlation of morphological and phenological traits in hazelnut. Plant Breed 119:369–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Zhang Y, Kang MS, Lamkey KR (2005) DIALLEL-SAS05: a comprehensive program for Griffing’s and Gardner-Eberhart analyses. Agron J 97:1097–1106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Zubov AA, Stankevich KV (1982) Combining ability of a group of strawberry varieties for quality characters of the fruits. Sov Genet 18:732–739 (in Russian) Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Agnieszka Masny
    • 1
  • Kris Pruski
    • 2
  • Edward Żurawicz
    • 1
  • Wiesław Mądry
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Breeding of Horticultural CropsResearch Institute of HorticultureSkierniewicePoland
  2. 2.Department of Plant and Animal SciencesDalhousie UniversityTruroCanada
  3. 3.Department of Experimental Design and BioinformaticsWarsaw University of Life SciencesWarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations