, 213:91 | Cite as

Identification of QTLs associated with metribuzin tolerance in field pea (Pisum sativum L.)

  • M. Javid
  • D. Noy
  • S. Sudheesh
  • J. W. Forster
  • S. Kaur


Competition with weeds is a major constraint to production of field pea in Australia, exacerbated by limited herbicide control options. Metribuzin is considered to be a safe herbicide, but may be phytotoxic to both weeds and target crop. A preliminary glasshouse-based assay was used to identify the optimal concentration required for discrimination between tolerant and sensitive field pea genotypes as 10 ppm metribuzin. This dosage was subsequently used to screen the Kaspa × PBA Oura recombinant inbred line genetic mapping population of 185 individuals for tolerance to metribuzin in three individual controlled environment assays. After two weeks of metribuzin treatment, plants were assessed on the basis of both a numerical score for symptoms such as chlorosis and necrosis, and plant damage as a percentage of necrosis. The two phenotypic parameters showed a high level of correlation (r = 0.85–0.97). The locations and magnitudes of effect of quantitative trait loci (QTLs) were determined for metribuzin tolerance (based on both symptom score and plant damage) as well as several related morphological traits. Analysis of all characters detected a single genomic region located on linkage group (LG) Ps IV (LOD scores 3.5–5.7), accounting for proportions of phenotypic variance for plant symptom score and percentage of plant necrosis varying from 12 to 21%. Genetic markers based on genic sequences that closely flank the metribuzin tolerance QTL are suitable for implementation in field pea breeding programs. In addition, comparative genomics between field pea and Medicago truncatula identified a cytochrome P450 monooxygenase gene in the vicinity of the QTL, potentially involved in non-target-site metabolism-based herbicide tolerance.


Herbicide Necrosis Genetic map Candidate gene Plant breeding 



The research described in this study was jointly funded by the Victorian Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources (DEDJTR) and the Grains Research and Development Corporation (GRDC), Australia through project DAV00126 (Molecular markers for pulse breeding programs).

Supplementary material

10681_2017_1878_MOESM1_ESM.docx (33 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 33 kb)
10681_2017_1878_MOESM2_ESM.docx (33 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 32 kb)
10681_2017_1878_MOESM3_ESM.docx (32 kb)
Supplementary material 3 (DOCX 32 kb)


  1. ABARES (2014) Agricultural commodity statistics. Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences, DecemberGoogle Scholar
  2. Al-Khatib K, Libbey C, Kadir S, Boydston R (1997) Differential varietal response of green pea (Pisum sativum) to metribuzin. Weed Technol 11:775–781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barrentine WL, Edwards C, Hartwig E (1976) Screening soybeans for tolerance to metribuzin. Agron J 68(2):351–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brand J, McMurray L (2006) Interpreting variable data from herbicide tolerance trials on pulse cultivars for on-farm applicability. In: Proceedings of 16th agronomy conferenceGoogle Scholar
  5. Brand J, Mick L, McMurray L, Materne M (2012) Novel herbicide tolerance in lentils. In: Proceedings of 16th agronomy conference, NSWGoogle Scholar
  6. Choi H-K, Kim D, Uhm T, Limpens E, Lim H, Mun J-H, Kalo P, Penmetsa RV, Seres A, Kulikova O (2004) A sequence-based genetic map of Medicago truncatula and comparison of marker colinearity with M. sativa. Genetics 166(3):1463–1502CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Dodge AD (1983) The mode of action of herbicides. In: Hutson DH, Roberts TR (eds) Progress in pesticide biochemistry and toxicology, vol 3. Wiley, New York, pp 163–197Google Scholar
  8. Edwards CJ, Barrentine WL, Kilen TC (1976) Inheritance of sensitivity to metribuzin in soybeans. Crop Sci 16:119–120Google Scholar
  9. Howard SW, Libbey CR, Hall ER (1989) Green pea herbicide evaluation. In: Pullman W (ed) Weed science report. Washington State University, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  10. Kaur S, Pembleton LW, Cogan NOI, Savin KW, Leonforte T, Paull J, Materne M, Forster JW (2012) Transcriptome sequencing of field pea and faba bean for discovery and validation of SSR genetic markers. BMC Genomics 13:104Google Scholar
  11. Kilen TC, He G (1992) Identification and inheritance of metribuzin tolerance in wild soybean. Crop Sci 32:684–685Google Scholar
  12. Kumari S, Sharma N, Joshi R, Gulati A, Sharma P (2015) Dissipation studies of metribuzin in alfisol soils and its terminal residues in potato tubers. Inte J Agric Environ Biotechnol 8(2):449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Leonforte A (2013) A study of salinity tolerance in field pea. The University of Melbourne, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  14. Mao D, Paull J, Preston C, Dyson C, Yang SY, McMurray L (2015) Improving herbicide tolerance in pulses to support the diversification of Australian crop rotations, 570–573. In: Acuña T, Moeller C, Parsons D, Harrison M “Building productive, diverse and sustainable landscapes”. Proceedings of the 17th australian agronomy conference 2015, 21–24 September 2015, Hobart, Tasmania, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  15. McConnell M, Mamidi S, Lee R, Chikara S, Rossi M, Papa R, McClean P (2010) Syntenic relationships among legumes revealed using a gene-based genetic linkage map of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Theor Appl Genet 121:1103–1116Google Scholar
  16. Mets L, Thiel A (1989) Biochemistry and genetic control of the photosystem II herbicide target site. Target sites of herbicide action. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 1–24Google Scholar
  17. Phan HT, Ellwood SR, Ford R, Thomas S, Oliver R (2006) Differences in syntenic complexity between Medicago truncatula with Lens culinaris and Lupinus albus. Funct Plant Biol 33(8):775–782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Phatak S, Stephenson G (1973) Influence of light and temperature on metribuzin phytotoxicity to tomato. Can J Plant Sci 53(4):843–847CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rubiales D, Mikic A (2015) Introduction: legumes in sustainable agriculture. Crit Rev Plant Sci 34(1–3):2–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Semagn K, Bjørnstad Å, Ndjiondjop MN (2006) Principles, requirements and prospects of genetic mapping in plants. African J Biotech 5:2569–2587Google Scholar
  21. Si P, Buirchell B, Sweetingham MW (2009) Improved metribuzin tolerance in narrowleafed lupin (Lupinus angustifolius L.) by induced mutation and field selection. Field Crops Res 113:282–286Google Scholar
  22. Si P, Pan G, Sweetingham M (2011) Semi-dominant genes confer additive tolerance to metribuzin in narrow-leafed lupin (Lupinus angustifolius L.) mutants. Euphytica 177(3):411–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Siddique KH, Johansen C, Turner NC, Jeuffroy M-H, Hashem A, Sakar D, Gan Y, Alghamdi SS (2012) Innovations in agronomy for food legumes. A review. Agron Sustain Dev 32(1):45–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Simoneaux BJ, Gould TJ (2008) Plant uptake and metabolism of triazine herbicides. Triazine Herbic 50:73–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sudheesh S, Lombardi M, Leonforte A, Cogan NO, Materne M, Forster JW, Kaur S (2015a) Consensus genetic map construction for field pea (Pisum sativum L.), trait dissection of biotic and abiotic stress tolerance and development of a diagnostic marker for the er1 powdery mildew resistance gene. Plant Mol Biol Rep 33(5):1391–1403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sudheesh S, Rodda M, Kennedy P, Verma P, Leonforte A, Cogan NO, Materne M, Forster JW, Kaur S (2015b) Construction of an integrated linkage map and trait dissection for bacterial blight resistance in field pea (Pisum sativum L.). Mol Breed 35(9):1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tiwari BK, Singh N (2012) Pulse chemistry and technology. Royal Society of Chemistry, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  28. Trebst A, Wietoska H (1974) Mode of action and structure-acitivity-relationships of the aminotriazinone herbicide metribuzin. Inhibition of photosynthetic electron transport in chloroplasts by metribuzin (author’s transl). Zeitschrift fur Naturforschung 30(4):499–504Google Scholar
  29. Villarroya M, Escorial MC, Garcia-Baudin JM, Chueca MC (2000) Inheritance of tolerance to metribuzin in durum wheat. Weed Res 40(3):293–300. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-3180.2000.00188.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wang S, Basten C, Zeng Z (2012) Windows QTL cartographer 2.5. Department of Statistics, North Carolina State University, RaleighGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Javid
    • 1
  • D. Noy
    • 1
  • S. Sudheesh
    • 2
  • J. W. Forster
    • 2
    • 3
  • S. Kaur
    • 2
  1. 1.Agriculture VictoriaGrains Innovation ParkHorshamAustralia
  2. 2.Agriculture Victoria, AgriBio, Centre for AgriBioscienceLa Trobe UniversityBundooraAustralia
  3. 3.School of Applied Systems BiologyLa Trobe UniversityBundooraAustralia

Personalised recommendations