Advertisement

Molecular Breeding

, Volume 33, Issue 1, pp 243–248 | Cite as

Rapid marker-assisted development of advanced recombinant lines from barley starch mutants

  • Phil Howell
  • Fiona Leigh
  • Ruth Bates
  • Nick Gosman
  • Kay Trafford
  • Wayne Powell
  • Alison M. Smith
  • Andy Greenland
Short Communication

Abstract

The comparative phenotypic analysis of mutants is often hampered by their diverse and poorly characterised genetic backgrounds. To overcome this problem, a suite of recombinant spring barley lines was developed for four starch biosynthesis genes in a common elite background. Rapid breeding progress was made by combining foreground and background selection with the screening of bulked families. A toolkit of perfect co-dominant PCR assays was developed for the four target genes, based on the causative single nucleotide polymorphisms underlying their starch phenotypes. These were used for foreground selection during backcrossing and selfing, and may be applied to bulks of up to ten plants. Screening bulks meant that large numbers of individuals with known family structure were rapidly assessed and that breeding effort was accurately targeted. These markers were also used for quality control during field multiplication and should be readily transferable to any crosses involving these four mutations. Background selection amongst BC1 progeny known to be heterozygous for the target starch alleles identified individuals which were relatively enriched for the recurrent parent across the rest of the genome. These were further advanced and true-breeding recombinants were selected which carry the target starch mutations in a largely recurrent parent background. The resulting set of BC2F5 pre-breeding lines should enable meaningful analysis of the starch phenotypes and facilitate their transfer into commercial breeding programmes.

Keywords

Marker-assisted selection Barley Starch Mutant SNP Bulk genotyping Pre-breeding 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This project was funded by the UK Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (grant BB/E007031/1) and has been carried out in compliance with UK law. The authors would also like to thank Brendan Fahy, John Innes Centre, for making the initial F1 crosses.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

11032_2013_9930_MOESM1_ESM.xlsx (36 kb)
Online Resource 1 Full set of BC2F5 pre-breeding material generated, with family structure (XLSX 36 kb)

References

  1. Biyashev RM, Netsvetaev VP, Sozinov AA (1986) Genetic control of some morphological markers for qualitative and biochemical characters and location of three genetic factors on chromosomes 1 and 5 of barley, Hordeum vulgare L. Soviet Genet 22:226–232Google Scholar
  2. Burton RA, Jenner H, Carrangis L, Fahy B, Fincher GB, Hylton C, Laurie DA, Parker M, Waite D, van Wegen S, Verhoeven T, Denyer K (2002) Starch granule initiation and growth are altered in barley mutants that lack isoamylase activity. Plant J 31:97–112PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cook FR (2011) Control of the size and composition of the embryo in cereals. PhD dissertation, University of East AngliaGoogle Scholar
  4. Diab AA (2006) Construction of barley consensus map showing chromosomal regions associated with economically important traits. Afr J Biotech 5:235–248Google Scholar
  5. Doll H (1983) Barley seed proteins and possibilities for their improvement. In: Gottschalk W, Muller HP (eds) Seed proteins: biochemistry, genetics, nutritive value. Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, pp 207–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dubreuil P, Charcosset A (1998) Genetic diversity within and among maize populations: a comparison between isozyme and nuclear RFLP loci. Theor Appl Genet 96:577–587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fincher GB (1989) Molecular and cellular biology associated with endosperm mobilization in germinating cereal grains. Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Bio 40:305–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ishikawa N, Ishihara J, Itoh M (1995) Artificial induction and characterization of amylose-free mutants of barley. Barley Genet Newsl 24:49–53Google Scholar
  9. Karakousis A, Gustafson JP, Chalmers KJ, Barr AR, Langridge P (2003) A consensus map of barley integrating SSR, RFLP and AFLP markers. Aust J Agric Res 54:1173–1185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Lorieux M (2012) MapDisto: fast and efficient computation of genetic linkage maps. Mol Breed 30:1231–1235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Mackay IJ, Caligari PDS (2000) Efficiencies of F2 and backcross generations for bulked segregant analysis using dominant markers. Crop Sci 40:626–630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Mayer KF, Waugh R, Langridge P et al (2012) A physical, genetic and functional sequence assembly of the barley genome. Nature 491:711–716PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Morell MK, Kosar-Hashemi B, Cmiel M, Samuel MS, Chandler P, Rahman S, Buléon A, Batey IA, Li Z (2003) Barley sex6 mutants lack starch synthase IIa activity and contain a starch with novel properties. Plant J 34:173–185PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Patron NJ, Smith AM, Fahy BF, Hylton CM, Naldrett MJ, Rossnagel BG, Denyer K (2002) The altered pattern of amylase accumulation in the endosperm of low-amylose barley cultivars is attributable to a single mutant allele of granule-bound starch synthase I with a deletion in the 5′ non-coding region. Plant Physiol 130:190–198PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Patron NJ, Greber B, Fahy BF, Laurie DA, Parker ML, Denyer K (2004) The lys5 mutations of barley reveal the nature and importance of plastidial ADP-Glc transporters for starch synthesis in cereal endosperm. Plant Physiol 135:2088–2097PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Wenzl P, Li H, Carling J et al (2006) A high-density consensus map of barley linking DArT markers to SSR, RFLP and STS loci and agricultural traits. BMC Genomics 7:206PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Phil Howell
    • 1
  • Fiona Leigh
    • 1
  • Ruth Bates
    • 1
  • Nick Gosman
    • 1
  • Kay Trafford
    • 1
    • 2
  • Wayne Powell
    • 3
  • Alison M. Smith
    • 2
  • Andy Greenland
    • 1
  1. 1.John Bingham LaboratoryNational Institute for Agricultural BotanyCambridgeUK
  2. 2.John Innes CentreNorwich Research ParkNorwichUK
  3. 3.Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural SciencesAberystwyth UniversityCeredigionUK

Personalised recommendations