, Volume 178, Issue 2, pp 273–281 | Cite as

Parental effects on the performance of cultivated × wild species hybrids in potato

  • Shelley Jansky


Valuable genetic diversity in diploid wild Solanum species can be accessed through crosses to haploids (2n = 2×) of the tetraploid cultivated potato, Solanum tuberosum. Haploid-wild species hybrids segregate for the ability to tuberize in the field. In addition, they vary in male fertility, vine size, stolon length, and tuber size. In this study, three haploids were crossed with nine diploid wild Solanum species and 27 hybrid families were evaluated in the field for two years. The proportion of male fertile hybrid clones varied depending on the wild species parent. A large effect of the female parent was detected for vine size, stolon length, tuber size, percent tuberization, and percent plants selected for agronomic quality. An exceptional haploid (US-W4) was identified for the production of agronomically desirable haploid-wild species hybrids. In hybrids derived from US-W4, differences among wild species parents were observed for agronomic quality. Superior hybrids were produced by S. berthaultii and S. microdontum. Reciprocal crosses were evaluated for a subset of families. When the wild species was used as the female parent, male fertility was restored, but tuberization and tuber size were reduced. Careful selection of both haploid and wild species parents can result in a large proportion of fertile, agronomically desirable hybrid offspring.


Potato Solanum Wild species Germplasm enhancement Haploid 



The author thanks Andy Hamernik for assistance with evaluations of the HS populations. Wild species germplasm was provided by the NRSP-6 potato gene bank.


  1. Berger S, Sinha AK, Roitsch T (2007) Plant physiology meets phytopathology: plant primary metabolism and plant pathogen interactions. J Exp Bot 58:4019–4026CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Bradshaw J, Bryan G, Ramsay G (2006) Genetic resources (including wild and cultivated Solanum species) and progress in their utilisation in potato breeding. Potato Res 49:49–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Darmo E, Peloquin SJ (1990) Performance and stability of nine 4× clones from 4×–2× crosses and four commercial cultivars. Potato Res 33:357–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. De Jong H (1981) Inheritance of russeting in cultivated diploid potatoes. Potato Res 24:309–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ewing EE, Struik PC (1992) Tuber formation in potato: induction, initiation, and growth. Hortic Rev 14:89–198Google Scholar
  6. Grun P, Aubertin M, Radlow A (1962) Multiple differentiation of plasmons of diploid species of Solanum. Genetics 47:1321–1333PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Hammes PS, Nel PC (1975) Control mechanisms in the tuberization process. Potato Res 18:262–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hanneman RE Jr (1989) The potato germplasm resource. Am Potato J 66:655–667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hawkes JG (1990) The potato: evolution, biodiversity, and genetic resources. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  10. Hermundstad SA, Peloquin SJ (1985a) Male fertility and 2n pollen production in haploid-wild species hybrids. Am Potato J 62:479–487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hermundstad SA, Peloquin SJ (1985b) Germplasm enhancement with potato haploids. J Hered 76:463–467Google Scholar
  12. Hermundstad S, Peloquin SJ (1986) Tuber yield and tuber traits of haploid-wild species F1 hybrids. Potato Res 29:289–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hilali A, Lauer FI, Veilleux RE (1987) Reciprocal differences between hybrids of Solanum tuberosum groups Tuberosum (haploid) and Phureja. Euphytica 36:631–639CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hilali A, Lauer FI, Veilleux RE (1988) Effect of environment and direction of hybridization on genetic variability in two diploid potato populations. Potato Res 31:247–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Iwanaga M, Ortiz R, Cipar MS, Peloquin SJ (1991) A restorer gene for genetic-cytoplasmic male sterility in cultivated potatoes. Am Potato J 68:19–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jansky S (2000) Breeding for disease resistance in potato. Plant Breed Rev 19:69–155Google Scholar
  17. Jansky SH, Peloquin SJ (2006) Advantages of wild diploid Solanum species over cultivated diploid relatives in potato breeding programs. Genet Resour Crop Evol 53:669–674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jansky SH, Yerk GL, Peloquin SJ (1990) The use of potato haploids to put 2× wild species germplasm into a usable form. Plant Breed 104:290–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jansky SH, Davis GL, Peloquin SJ (2004) A genetic model for tuberization in potato haploid-wild species hybrids grown under long-day conditions. Am J Potato Res 81:335–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jansky SH, Simon R, Spooner DM (2006) A test of taxonomic predictivity: resistance to white mold in wild relatives of cultivated potato. Crop Sci 46:2561–2570CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jansky SH, Simon R, Spooner DM (2008) A test of taxonomic predictivity: resistance to early blight in wild relatives of cultivated potato. Phytopathology 98:680–687CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Jansky S, Simon R, Spooner DM (2009) A test of taxonomic predictivity: resistance to the Colorado potato beetle in wild relatives of cultivated potato. J Econ Entomol 102:422–431CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Kameraz AY, Zhitlova NA, Ivanova VN (1978) Use of diploid species of the potato S. chacoense Bitt. in interspecific hybridization. Bull Appl Bot Genet Breed 62:139–156Google Scholar
  24. Kotch GP, Ortiz R, Peloquin SJ (1992) Genetic analysis by use of potato haploid populations. Genome 35:103–108Google Scholar
  25. Leue EF, Peloquin SJ (1980) Selection for 2n gametes and tuberization in Solanum chacoense. Am Potato J 57:189–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Oltmans SM, Novy RG (2002) Identification of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) haploid × wild species hybrids with the capacity to cold chip. Am J Potato Res 79:263–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ortega F, Carraso A (2005) Germplasm enhancement with wild tuber-bearing species: introgression of PVY resistance and high dry matter content from Solanum berthaultii, S. gourlayi, S. tarijense, and S. vernei. Potato Res 48:97–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pavek JJ, Corsini DL (1981) Inheritance of russet skin in diploid potatoes. Am Potato J 58:515–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sanford JC, Hanneman RE Jr (1979) Reciprocal differences in the photoperiod reaction of hybrid populations in Solanum tuberosum. Am Potato J 56:531–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Santini M, Camadro EL, Marcellán ON, Erazzú LE (2000) Agronomic characterization of diploid hybrid families derived from crosses between haploids of the common potato and three wild Argentinean tuber-bearing species. Am J Potato Res 77:211–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Singh SP, Teran H, Schwartz HF, Otto K, Lema M (2009) Introgressing white mold resistance from Phaseolus species of the secondary gene pool into common bean. Crop Sci 49:1629–1637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Spooner DM (2009) DNA barcoding will frequently fail in complicated groups: an example in wild potatoes. Am J Bot 96:1177–1189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Tucci M, Carputo D, Bile G, Frusciante L (1996) Male fertility and freezing tolerance of hybrids involving Solanum tuberosum haploids and diploid Solanum species. Potato Res 39:345–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wang L-P, Jackson PA, Lu X, Fan Y-H, Foreman JW, Chen X-K, Deng H-H, Fu C, Ma L, Aitken KS (2008) Evaluation of sugarcane × Saccharum spontaneum progeny for biomass composition and yield components. Crop Sci 48:951–961CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Watanabe KN, Orrillo M, Vega S, Iwagana M, Ortiz R, Freyre R, Yerk G, Peloquin SJ, Ishiki K (1995) Selection of diploid potato clones from diploid (haploid × wild species) F1 hybrid families for short day conditions. Breed Sci 45:341–347Google Scholar
  36. Yerk GL (1989) Haploids, wild species, and 2n gametes in the 4× × 2× breeding scheme in potato. University of Wisconsin, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  37. Yerk GL, Peloquin SJ (1988) 2n pollen in eleven 2×, 2EBN wild species and their haploid × wild species hybrids. Potato Res 31:581–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Yerk GL, Peloquin SJ (1989) Evaluation of tuber traits of 10, 2×(2EBN) wild species through hybrid × wild species hybrids. Am Potato J 66:731–739CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Zeng L, Meredith WR Jr (2009) Associations among lint yield, yield components, and fiber properties in an introgressed population of cotton. Crop Sci 49:1647–1654CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. (outside the USA) 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.USDA-ARS and Department of HorticultureUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonMadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations