| 氮胁迫和非胁迫条件下玉米不同时期叶绿素含量的QTL分析 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 刘宗华,谢惠玲,王春丽,田国伟,卫晓轶,胡彦民,崔党群.氮胁迫和非胁迫条件下玉米不同时期叶绿素含量的QTL分析[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2008,14(5):845-851. |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 刘宗华 谢惠玲 王春丽 田国伟 卫晓轶 胡彦民 崔党群 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 1.河南农业大学农学院,河南郑州450002 |
| |
| 基金项目： | 国家高技术研究发展计划(863计划)，河南省重大专项，国家农业结构调整技术研究专项基金 |
| |
| 摘 要： | 以优良玉米杂交种农大108的203个F2:3家系为材料，构建了包含189个SSR标记的遗传连锁图谱，利用复合区间作图法，在施氮（+N）和不施氮（-N）情况下，对玉米不同发育时期的叶绿素含量进行了QTL分析。结果表明:在-N和+N条件下，亲本许178的5个时期叶绿素（SPAD）均值分别为54.12和55.76，比黄C分别高1.80和2.40；而F2:3家系的SPAD均值分别达55.6和58.32，高于双亲的中亲值；同时，在+N情况下，叶绿素含量变异范围相对较小，说明氮胁迫对玉米叶绿素含量的变化具有一定影响。-N和+N情况下，在玉米喇叭口期、散粉期、灌浆初期、灌浆中期和灌浆后期分别检测到2、2、1、3、1个和2、2、2、7、1个叶绿素含量的非条件QTL，可分别解释对应时期叶绿素含量表型总变异的22.75%、22.93%、19.77%、49.87%、12.79%和16.95%、23.49%、19.38%、84.56%、13.38%。在-N和+N情况下，喇叭口期―散粉期、灌浆中期―灌浆后期和喇叭口期―散粉期、散粉期―灌浆初期各检测到1个条件QTL，可分别解释绿素含量表型变异的12.90%、25.51%和5.98%、26.67%。4）叶绿素含量的QTL表达存在时空性，其中qchl4和qchl5b在整个生育时期均能检测到，是玉米生长发育所必需的两个QTL。
|
| 关 键 词： | 玉米 氮胁迫 叶绿素含量 QTL分析 |
| 收稿时间： | 2007-1-14 |
QTL analysis of chlorophyll content of maize under N-stress and no N-stress at different development stages |
| |
| LIU Zong-hua,XIE Hui-ling,WANG Chun-li,TIAN Guo-wei,WEI Xiao-yi,HU Yan-min,CUI Dang-qun.QTL analysis of chlorophyll content of maize under N-stress and no N-stress at different development stages[J].Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science,2008,14(5):845-851. |
| |
| Authors: | LIU Zong-hua XIE Hui-ling WANG Chun-li TIAN Guo-wei WEI Xiao-yi HU Yan-min CUI Dang-qun |
| |
| Institution: | 1.College of Agronomy,Henan Agricultural University,Zhengzhou 45000 2,China |
| |
| Abstract: | In this study, the unconditional and conditional QTL (Quantitative trait locus) analysis for chlorophyll contents (CC) at different development stages of maize were detected under N input (+N) and N stress (-N), using the composite interval mapping method with a 203 F2: 3 population derived from an elite maize hybrid cultivar: Nongda108 (Huang C ×Xu178), and a molecular linkage maps including 189 SSR markers. The results showed that the mean CC at the five development stages (bell stage, BS; florescence stage, FS; early grain filling stage, EGFS; mid-grain filling stage, MGFS; and later grain filling stage, LGFS) for parent Xu178 under -N and +N conditions were 54.12 and 55.76, and there were 1.80 and 2.40 higher than another parent Huang C, respectively. The average CC for the F2: 3 populations were 55.6 and 58.32, higher than the mean of their parents, and the variance range of CC in +N was smaller than that of -N. These results implied that the variance ranges for CC were affected by -N stress in some degree. Under -N and +N conditions, 2, 2, 1, 3, 1 and/or 2, 2, 2, 7, 1 unconditional QTL for CC were detected at the five development stages respectively, and the accumulative contribution of the detected QTL could explain 22.75%, 22.93%, 19.77%, 49.87%, 12.79% and/or 16.95%, 23.49％, 19.38%, 84.56 %, 13.38% phenotypic variances of CC, respectively. There was one conditional QTL identified for periods from BS to FS, from MGFS to LGFS and/ or from BS to FS, and from FS to EGFS under -N and +N conditions, these could explain 12.90%, 25.51% and/or 15.98%, 26.67% phenotypic variances of CC for each period, respectively. There were different spatio-temporal patterns for QTL expression of CC, especially for qchl4 and qchl5b, which are the two major QTLs in maize development. |
| |
| Keywords: | maize nitrogen stress chlorophyll content QTL analysis |
| 本文献已被 维普 万方数据 等数据库收录！ |
| 点击此处可从《植物营养与肥料学报》浏览原始摘要信息 |
| 点击此处可从《植物营养与肥料学报》下载免费的PDF全文 |
|
