Behaviour of Sinapis alba chromosomes in a Brassica napus background revealed by genomic in-situ hybridization
- 212 Downloads
Genomic in-situ hybridization (GISH) was applied to study the behaviour of addition chromosomes in first and second backcross (BC) progenies of hybrids between Brassica napus ssp. napus L. (AACC, 2n = 38) and Sinapis alba L. (SS, 2n = 24) produced by electrofusion. With GISH using genomic DNA of S. alba was used as probe it was possible to clearly distinguish both of the parental genomes and effectively monitor the fate of S. alba chromosomes in the BC1 and BC2 progenies. GISH analysis confirmed the sesquidiploid genome composition (AACCS) of the BC1 progenies, which contained 38 chromosomes from B. napus and 12 chromosomes from S. alba. Genome painting in the pollen mother cells (PMCs) of the BC1 plants revealed intergenomic association between B. napus and S. alba chromosomes, whereby a maximum of 4 trivalents between AC and S chromosomes were identified at metaphase I. In the BC2 progenies, aneuploids with different numbers of additional chromosomes from S. alba, ranging from 1 to 7, were confirmed. Three putative monosomic alien addition lines were characterized, and the results are discussed with respect to the potential for intergenomic chromosome recombination.
Key wordsBrassica napus L. genomic in-situ hybridization (GISH) hybrid progeny Sinapis alba L.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Anamthawat-Jonsson K, Schwarzacher T, Leitch AR, Bennett MD, Heslop-Harrison JS (1990) Discrimination between closely related Triticeae species using genomic DNA as a probe. Theor Appl Genet 79: 721–728.Google Scholar
- Bodnaryk RP, Lamb RJ (1991) Mechanisms of resistance to the flea beetle, Phyllotreta cruciferae (Goeze), in yellow mustard seedlings, Sinapis alba L. Can J Plant Sci 71: 13–20.Google Scholar
- Brown J, McCaffrey JP, Brown DA, Harmon DA, Harmon BL, Davis JB (2004) Yield reduction in Brassica napus, B. rapa, B. juncea, and Sinapis alba caused by flea beetle (Phyllotreta cruciferae (Goeze) (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae)) infestation in northern Idaho. J Econ Entomol 97: 1642–1647.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Chevre AM, Eber F, Margale E et al. (1994) Comparison of somatic and sexual Brassica napus–Sinapis alba hybrids and their progeny by cytogenetic studies and molecular characterization. Genome 37: 367–374.Google Scholar
- Gaikward K, Kirti PB, Sharma A, Prakash S, Chopra VL (1996) Cytogenetical and molecular investigations on somatic hybrids of Sinapis alba and Brassica juncea and their backcross progeny. Plant Breed 115: 480–483.Google Scholar
- Jacobsen E, De Jong JH, Kamstra SA, Van den Berg PM, Ramanna MS (1995) Genomic in situ hybridization (GISH) and RFLP analysis for the identification of alien chromosomes in the backcross progeny of potato (+) tomato fusion hybrids. Heredity 74: 250–257.Google Scholar
- Kamstra SA, Ramanna MS, De Jeu MJ, Kuipers GJ, Jacobsen E (1999) Homoeologous chromosome pairing in the distant hybrid Alstroemeria aurea × A. inodora and the genome composition of its backcross derivatives determined by fluorescent in situ hybridization with species-specific probes. Heredity 82: 69–78.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lelivelt CLC, Leunissen EHM, Frederiks HJ, Helsper JPFG, Krens FA (1993) Transfer of resistance to the beet cyst nematode (Heterodera schachtii Schm.) from Sinapis alba L. (white mustard) to the Brassica napus L. gene pool by sexual and somatic hybridization. Theor Appl Genet 85: 688–696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Li M, Qian W, Meng J, Li Z (2004) Construction of novel Brassica napus genotypes through chromosomal substitution and elimination using interploid species hybridization. Chromosom Res 12: 417–426.Google Scholar
- Lim KB, Chung JD, Kronenburg BCE, Ramanna MS, Jong JH, Tuyl JM (2000) Introgression of Lilium rubellum Baker chromosomes into L. longiflorum Thunb.: a genome painting study of the F1 hybrid, BC1 and BC2 progenies. Chromosom Res 8: 119–125.Google Scholar
- Mathias R (1991) Improved embryo rescue technique for intergeneric hybridization between Sinapis species and Brassica napus. Crucif Newsl 14/15: 90–92.Google Scholar
- Rakow G, Potts D, Raney P, Katepa-Mupondwa F (2000) Designing oilseed crops for the Canadian dry prairie. In: 3rd Int Crop Sci Congr. Book of Abstracts, p 221, session 4C, poster no. 34. Hamburg, Germany.Google Scholar
- Ripley VL, Arnison PG (1990) Hybridization of Sinapis alba L. and Brassica napus L. via embryo rescue. Plant Breed 104: 26–33.Google Scholar
- Schwarzacher T, Leitch AR, Bennet MD, Heslop-Harrison JS (1989) In situ hybridization of parental genomes in a wide hybrid. Ann Bot 64: 315–324.Google Scholar
- Skarzhinskaya M, Landgren M, Glimelius K (1998) Production of intertribal somatic hybrids between Brassica napus L. and Lesquerella fendleri (Gray) Wats. Theor Appl Genet 93: 1242–1250.Google Scholar
- Stevenson M, Armstrong SJ, Ford-Lloyd BV, Jones GH (1998) Comparative analysis of crossover exchanges and chiasmata in Allium cepa × fistulosum after genomic in situ hybridization (GISH). Chromosom Res 6: 567–574.Google Scholar
- Takahashi C, Leitch IJ, Ryan A, Bennett MD, Brandham PE (1997) The use of genomic in situ hybridization (GISH) to show transmission of recombinant chromosomes by partially fertile bigeneric hybrid, Gasteria lutzii × Aloe arstata (Aloaceae), to its progeny. Chromosoma 105: 342–348.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Voss A, Snowdon RJ, Lühs W, Friedt W (2000) Intergeneric transfer of nematode resistance from Raphanus sativus into the Brassica napus genome. Acta Hortic 539: 129–134.Google Scholar
- Wang YP, Sonntag K, Rudloff E, Chen J (2005b) Intergeneric somatic hybridization between Brassica napus and Sinapis alba. J Integrative Plant Biol 47: 84–91.Google Scholar
- Wang YP, Sonntag K, Rudloff E, Wehling P, Snowdon RJ (2006) GISH analysis of disomic Brassica napus–Crambe abyssinica chromosome addition lines produced by microspore culture from monosomic addition lines. Plant Cell Rep (in press). 10.1007/s00299-005-0031-3.