Future Perspectives in MAS



MAS can be simply defined as selection for a trait based on the genotype of an associated marker rather than the trait itself. In essence, the associated marker is used as an indirect selection criterion. The potential of MAS as a tool for crop improvement has been extensively explored in different plant species. Major applications of MAS include (1) tracing favourable alleles and pyramiding them in desirable genetic backgrounds (foreground MAS), (2) eliminating unwanted genetic backgrounds (background MAS) or undesirable plant material in early breeding generations and identifying the most desirable gene combinations or individuals in segregating populations and (3) breaking the undesirable linkages between favourable and unfavourable alleles (reducing linkage drag). The success of MAS in plant breeding is often assessed on the basis of these three components. In theory, MAS can reduce the cost and increase the precision and efficiency of selection and breeding. However, MAS is not a ‘silver bullet’, and it can be more effective than conventional phenotype-based selection only under certain situations, including when (1) trait-based selection is not feasible (e.g. lack of selection environment or pathogen), (2) such selection is costly or ineffective, (3) trait expression is developmentally regulated or phenotypically not obvious until late in the season, (4) the trait is governed by recessive or incompletely dominant gene(s), (5) trait heritability is low rendering conventional phenotypic selection is ineffective, (6) there are too much G × E interactions, (7) multiple trait selection is desired, (8) conducting gene introduction/pyramiding from different sources and (9) transferring genes/QTLs from wild genetic backgrounds. Furthermore, in a backcross-breeding programme, MAS allows reduction of linkage drag by selecting against the undesirable donor genome and for desirable recurrent parent genome (background selection) while also selecting for desirable donor alleles (foreground selection). Moreover, with MAS, it is possible to conduct multiple rounds of selection in a year, allowing approximately two generations of selection per year, compared to one in phenotypic selection methods.


Faba Bean Single Nucleotide Polymorphism Marker Molecular Breeding Marker Technology Postharvest Physiological Deterioration 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Literature Cited

  1. Delannay X, McLaren G, Ribaut JM (2012) Fostering molecular breeding in developing countries. Mol Breed 29:857–873CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Further Readings

  1. Ali HQ et al (2012) An overview of genomics assisted improvement of drought tolerance in maize (Zea mays L.): QTL approaches. Afr J Biotechnol 11(65):12839–12848Google Scholar
  2. Fauquet CM, Taylor NJ, Tohme J (2012) The global cassava partnership for the 21st century (GCP21). Trop Plant Biol 5:4–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Foolad MR, Panthee DR (2012) Marker-assisted selection in tomato breeding. Crit Rev Plant Sci 31(2):93–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Fridman E, Zamir D (2012) Next-generation education in crop genetics. Curr Opin Plant Biol 2012(15):218–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Isemura T, Kaga A, Tabata S, Somta P, Srinives P et al (2012) Construction of a genetic linkage map and genetic analysis of domestication related traits in Mungbean (Vignaradiata). PLoS One 7(8):e41304. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0041304 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Khan M (2012) Current status of genomic based approaches to enhance drought tolerance in rice (Oryza sativa L.): an over view. Mol Plant Breed 3(1):1–10. doi: 10.5376/mpb.2012.03.00 Google Scholar
  7. Liu Y, He Z, Appels R, Xia X (2012) Functional markers in wheat: current status and future prospects. Theor Appl Genet 125:1–10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Nakaya A, Isobe SN (2012) Will genomic selection be a practical method for plant breeding? Ann Bot 110(6):1303–1316. doi: 10.1093/aob/mcs109 Google Scholar
  9. Panthee DR, Foolad MR (2012) A re-examination of molecular markers for usein marker-assisted breeding in tomato. Euphytica 184:165–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Sharma HC et al (2002) Applications of biotechnology for crop improvement: prospects and constraints. Plant Sci 163:381–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Varshney RK, Graner A, Sorrells ME (2005) Genomics-assisted breeding for crop improvement. Trends Plant Sci 10(12):621–630PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Xu Y et al (2012a) Whole-genome strategies for marker-assisted plant breeding. Mol Breed 29:833–854CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Xu Y, Li Z-K, Thomson MJ (2012b) Molecular breeding in plants: moving into the mainstream. Mol Breed 29:831–832CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer India 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Plant Molecular Biology & BioinformaticsTamil Nadu Agricultural UniversityCoimbatoreIndia

Personalised recommendations