Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution

, Volume 66, Issue 2, pp 311–319 | Cite as

Spontaneous hybridisation within Aegilops collection and biobanking of crop wild relatives (CWR)

  • V. HolubecEmail author
  • L. Leišová-Svobodová
  • M. Matějovič
Short Communications


Collections of crop wild relatives (CWR) are an important part of crop genetic resources. They represent a backup of in situ conservation and provide material for use in research and breeding. They are usually maintained together with crops. Many CWRs are cross pollinators and they need special attention including isolation. Isolation decreases seed set in self-incompatible and highly outcrossing accessions. The annual Triticeae collection in the Czech Genebank was maintained in small row sown plots surrounded by several wheat rows and less related species formed larger blocks. The appeared hybrids were analysed morphologically, genetically and seed set calculated. On the molecular level, 40 microsatellite loci were used to test the samples. Data was evaluated using gene and genotype diversity indices and Bayesian approach to check the presence of genetic introgressions within tested samples. Hybrids with wheat were found mainly within accessions of Ae. triuncialis L. (19), Ae. crassa Boiss. (11), Ae. geniculata Roth (10), Ae. neglecta (Req.) ex Bertol. (9) and Ae. cylindrica Host (7). No spontaneous hybrids were noticed within other annual Triticeae genera.


Triticeae Aegilops Germplasm collection Spontaneous hybridisation Genetic analysis 



The research was supported by National programme No. 51834/2017-MZE-17253/6.2.14, project MZE_RO0417, Czech Republic and by 7FP Project No. 613609 (Healthy Minor Cereals).


  1. Andersson MS, Carmen de Vicente M (2010) Gene flow between crops and their wild relatives. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, p 585Google Scholar
  2. Beteselassie N, Fininsa C, Badebo A (2007) Sources of resistance to stem rust (Puccinia graminis f. sp. tritici) in Ethiopian tetraploid wheat accessions. Genet Res Crop Evol 54:337–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brown AHD, Zohary D, Neve E (1978) Outerossing rates and heterozygosity in natural populations of Hordeum spontaneum. Koch in Israel. Heredity 41:49–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dempewolf H, Baute G, Anderson J, Kilian B, Smith Ch, Guarino L (2017) Past and future use of wild relatives in crop breeding. Crop Sci 57:1070–1082CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dorofeev VF (1969) Spontaneous hybridization in wheat populations of Transcaucasia. Euphytica 18:406–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Falush D, Stephens M, Pritchard JK (2003) Inference of population structure. Extensions in linked loci and correlated allele frequencies. Genetics 164:1567–1587Google Scholar
  7. Faris JD, Xu SS, Cai X, Friesen TL, Jin Y (2008) Molecular and cytogenetic characterization of a durum wheat-Aegilops speltoides chromosome translocation conferring resistance to stem rust. Chromosome Res 16:1097–1105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. GRIN Czech documentation system (2018). Accessed 30 May 2018
  9. Guedes-Pinto H, Lima-Brito J, Ribeiro-Carvalho C, Gustafson JP, Qualset CO (2001) Genetic control of crossability of triticale with rye. Plant Breed 120:27–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hajjar R, Hodgkin T (2007) The use of wild relatives in crop improvement: a survey of developments over the last 20 years. Euphytica 156:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hammer K (1981) Zur Taxonomie und Nomenklatur der Gattung Aegilops L. Feddes Repert 91(4):225–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Harlan JR (1992) Crop and man. American Society of Agronomy, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  13. Hubish M, Falush D, Stephens M, Pritchard J (2009) Inferring weak population structure with the assistance of sample group information. Mol Ecol Resour 9:1322–1332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jauhar PP, Chibbar RN (1999) Chromosome-mediated and direct gene transfers in wheat. Genome 42:570–583CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jin Y, Szabo LJ, Rouse MN, Fetch F, Pretorius ZA (2009) Detection of virulence to resistance gene Sr36 within the TTKS race lineage of Puccinia graminis f. sp tritici. Plant Dis 93:367–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kavanagh VB, Hils MJ, Goyal A, Randhawa HS, Topinka AK, Eudes F, Hall LM (2013) Molecular markers as a complementary tool in risk assessments: quantifying interspecific gene flow from triticale to spring wheat and durum wheat. Transgenic Res 22(4):767–778CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Maxted N, Scholten M, Codd R, Ford-Lloyd B (2007) Creation and use of a national inventory of crop wild relatives. Biol Conserv 140:142–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Oettler G (2005) The fortune of a botanical curiosity – Triticale: past, present and future. J Agric Sci 143:329–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Perrier X, Jacquemoud-Collet JP (2006) DARwin software. Accessed 30 May 2018
  20. Pinto AV, Mathieu A, Marsin S, Veaute X, Ielpi L, Labigne A, Radicella P (2005) Suppression of homologous and homeologous recombination by the bacterial MutS2 protein. Mol Cell 17:113–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnely P (2000) Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155:945–959Google Scholar
  22. Rőder SM, Korzun V, Wendehake K, Plaschke J, Tixier MH, Leroy P, Ganal MW (1998) A microsatellite map of wheat. Genetics 149:2007–2023Google Scholar
  23. Roussel V, Leišová L, Exbrayat F, Stehno Z, Balfourier F (2005) SSR allelic diversity changes in 480 European bread wheat varieties released from 1840 to 2000. Theor Appl Genet 111:162–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Saghai-Maroof MA, Soliman KM, Jorgensen RA, Allard RW (1984) Ribosomal DNA spacer-length polymorphisms in barley: Mendelian inheritance, chromosomal location, and population dynamics. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 81:8014–8018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tanno K, Takeda K (2004) On the origin of six-rowed barley with brittle rachis, agriocrithon [Hordeum vulgare ssp. vulgare f. agriocrithon (Aberg) Bowd.], based on a DNA marker closely linked to the vrs1 (six-row gene) locus. Theor Appl Genet 110:145–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tzotzos G, Head GP, Hull R (2009) Genetically modified plants, assessing safety and managing risk. Elsevier Inc., Amsterdam, p 256Google Scholar
  27. Van Ginkel M, Ogbonnaya F (2007) Novel genetic diversity from synthetic wheats in breeding cultivars for changing production conditions. Field Crop Res 104:86–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Waines JG, Hegde SG (2003) Intraspecific gene flow in bread wheat as affected by reproductive biology and pollination ecology of wheat flowers. Crop Sci 43:451–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Weissmann S, Feldman M, Gressel J (2008) Hypothesis: transgene establishment in wild relatives of wheat can be prevented by utilizing the Ph1 gene as a senso stricto chaperon to prevent homoeologous recombination. Plant Science 175:410–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Zhang W, Olson EL, Saintenac C, Rouse M, Abate Z, Jin Y, Akhunov E, Pumphrey MO, Dubcovsky J (2010) Genetic maps of stem rust resistance gene Sr35 in diploid and hexaploid wheat. Crop Sci 50:2464–2474CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Crop Research InstitutePragueCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations