Screening for Spikelet Fertility and Validation of Heat Tolerance in a Large Rice Mutant Population

doi:10.1016/j.rsci.2018.08.008

摘要/Abstract

. [J]. Rice Science, 2019, 26(4): 229-238.

图/表 12

参考文献 45

[1]	Ahloowalia B S, Maluszynski M, Nichterlein K.2004. Global impact of mutation-derived varieties.Euphytica, 135(2): 187-204.
[2]	Baker J T, Allen Jr L H, Boote K J.1992. Temperature effects on rice at elevated CO2 concentration.J Exp Bot, 43: 959-964.
[3]	Chakhonkaen S, Pitnjam K, Saisuk W, Ukoskit K, Muangprom A.2012. Genetic structure of Thai rice and rice accessions obtained from the International Rice Research Institute.Rice, 5(1): 19.
[4]	Chumpolsri W, Wijit N, Boontakham P, Nimmanpipug P, Sookwong P, Luangkamin S, Wongpornchai S.2015. Variation of terpenoid flavor odorants in bran of some black and white rice varieties analyzed by GC × GC-MS.J Food Nutr Res, 3(2): 114-120.
[5]	Counce P A, Keisling T C, Mitchell A J.2000. A uniform, objective, and adaptive system for expressing rice development.Crop Sci, 40(2): 436-443.
[6]	Endo M, Tsuchiya T, Hamada K, Kawamura S, Yano K, Ohshima M, Higashitani A, Watanabe M, Kawagishi-Kobayashi M.2009. High temperatures cause male sterility in rice plants with transcriptional alterations during pollen development.Plant Cell Physiol, 50(11): 1911-1922.
[7]	González-Schain N, Dreni L, Lawas L M F, Galbiati M, Colombo L, Heuer S, Jagadish K S V, Kater M M.2015. Genome-wide transcriptome analysis during anthesis reveals new insights into the molecular basis of heat stress responses in tolerant and sensitive rice varieties.Plant Cell Physiol, 57(1): 57-68.
[8]	Huang L Y, Sun Y, Peng S B, Wang F.2016. Genotypic differences ofjaponica rice responding to high temperature in China. Agron J, 108(2): 626-636.
[9]	IPCC. 2014. Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Cambridge, and New York: Cambridge University Press.
[10]	IRRI.2013. Standard Evaluation System for Rice (SES). Manila, the Philippines:International Rice Research Institute. 5: 35-36.
[11]	Ishimaru T, Hirabayashi H, Ida M, Takai T, San-Oh Y A, Yoshinaga S, Ando I, Ogawa T, Kondo M.2010. A genetic resource for early-morning flowering trait of wild riceOryza officinalis to mitigate high temperature-induced spikelet sterility at anthesis. Ann Bot, 106(3): 515-520.
[12]	Jagadish S V K, Craufurd P Q, Wheeler T R.2007. High temperature stress and spikelet fertility in rice (Oryza sativa L.). J Exp Bot, 58(7): 1627-1635.
[13]	Jagadish S V K, Craufurd P Q, Wheeler T R.2008. Phenotyping parents of mapping populations of rice for heat tolerance during anthesis.Crop Sci, 48(3): 1140-1146.
[14]	Jagadish S V K, Muthurajan R, Oane R, Wheeler T R, Heuer S, Bennett J, Craufurd P Q.2010. Physiological and proteomic approaches to address heat tolerance during anthesis in rice (Oryza sativa L.). J Exp Bot, 61(1): 143-156.
[15]	Kobayashi K, Matsui T, Murata Y, Yamamoto M.2011. Percentage of dehisced thecae and length of dehiscence control pollination stability of rice cultivars at high temperatures.Plant Prod Sci, 14(2): 89-95.
[16]	Lee I S, Kim D S, Lee S J, Song H S, Lim Y P, Lee Y I.2003. Selection and characterizations of radiation-induced salinity- tolerant lines in rice.Breeding Sci, 53(4): 313-318.
[17]	Manigbas N L, Lambio L A F, Madrid L B, Cardenas C C.2014. Germplasm innovation of heat tolerance in rice for irrigated lowland conditions in the Philippines.Rice Sci, 21(3): 162-169.
[18]	Maruyama A, Weerakoon W M W, Wakiyama Y, Ohba K.2013. Effects of increasing temperatures on spikelet fertility in different rice cultivars based on temperature gradient chamber experiments.J Agron Crop Sci, 199(6): 416-423.
[19]	Masuduzzaman A S M, Ahmad H U, Haque M, Ahmed M M E.2016. Evaluation of rice lines tolerant to heat during flowering stage.J Rice Res, 4: 170.
[20]	Matsui T, Namuco O S, Ziska L H, Horie T.1997. Effects of high temperature and CO2 concentration on spikelet sterility inindica rice. Field Crops Res, 51(3): 213-219.
[21]	Matsui T, Omasa K, Horie T.2000. High temperature at flowering inhibits swelling of pollen grains, a driving force for thecae dehiscence in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Plant Prod Sci, 3(4): 430-434.
[22]	Matsui T, Omasa K, Horie T.2001. The difference in sterility due to high temperatures during the flowering period amongjaponica-rice varieties. Plant Prod Sci, 4(2): 90-93.
[23]	Matsui T, Omasa K.2002. Rice (Oryza sativa L.) cultivars tolerant to high temperature at flowering: Anther characteristics. Ann Bot, 89(6): 683-687.
[24]	Miyagawa S.2001. Dynamics of rainfed lowland rice varieties in north-east Thailand. In: Saxena K G. Small-Scale Livelihoods and Natural Resource Management in Marginal Areas ofMonsoon Asia. Cornell University.
[25]	Mohapatra T, Robin S, Sarla N, Sheshashayee M, Singh A K, Singh K, Singh N K, Amitha Mithra S V, Sharma R P.2014. EMS induced mutants of upland rice variety Nagina 22: Generation and characterization.Proc Ind Nat Sci Acad, 80(1): 163-172.
[26]	Moung-ngam P.2016. Evaluation of Heat Tolerance in Rice Germplasm. [Master thesis]. Bangkok, Thailand:Kasetsart University.
[27]	Moya T B, Ziska L H, Namuco O S, Olszyk D.1998. Growth dynamics and genotypic variation in tropical, field-grown paddy rice (Oryza sativa L.) in response to increasing carbon dioxide and temperature. Global Change Biol, 4(6): 645-656.
[28]	Nakagawa H, Horie T, Matsui T.2003. Effects of Climate Change on Rice Production and Adaptive Technologies. Manila,the Philippines: International Rice Research Institute: 635-658.
[29]	Napasintuwong O.2012. Survey of recent innovations in aromatic rice. In: The 131st EAAE Seminar ‘Innovation for Agricultural Competitiveness and Sustainability of Rural Areas’. September 18-19, 2012. Prague,Czech Republic.
[30]	Peng S, Huang J, Sheehy J E, Laza R C, Visperas R M, Zhong X, Centeno G S, Khush G S, Cassman K G.2004. Rice yields decline with higher night temperature from global warming.Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 101: 9971-9975.
[31]	Poli Y, Basava R K, Panigrahy M, Vinukonda V P, Dokula N R, Voleti S R, Desiraju S, Neelamraju S.2013. Characterization of a Nagina 22 rice mutant for heat tolerance and mapping of yield traits.Rice, 6(1): 36.
[32]	Prasad P V V, Boote K J, Allen L H, Sheehy J E, Thomas J M G.2006. Species, ecotype and cultivar differences in spikelet fertility and harvest index of rice in response to high temperature stress.Field Crops Res, 95: 398-411.
[33]	Prasanth V V, Basava K R, Babu M S, Venkata Tripura V G N, Rama Devi S J S, Mangrauthia S K, Voleti S R, Sarla N.2016. Field level evaluation of rice introgression lines for heat tolerance and validation of markers linked to spikelet fertility.Physiol Mol Biol Plants, 22(2): 179-192.
[34]	Rang Z W, Jagadish S V K, Zhou Q M, Craufurd P Q, Heuer S.2011. Effect of high temperature and water stress on pollen germination and spikelet fertility in rice.Environ Exp Bot, 70(1): 58-65.
[35]	Ruengphayak S, Ruanjaichon V, Saensuk C, Phromphan S, Tragoonrung S, Kongkachuichai R, Vanavichit A.2015. Forward screening for seedling tolerance to Fe toxicity reveals a polymorphic mutation in ferric chelate reductase in rice.Rice, 8(1): 3.
[36]	Saleem M Y, Mukhtar Z, Cheema A A, Atta B M.2005. Induced mutation andin vitro techniques as a method to induce salt tolerance in Basmati rice(Oryza sativa L.). Int J Environ Sci Technol, 2(2): 141-145.
[37]	Satake T, Yoshida S.1978. High temperature-induced sterility inindica rices at flowering. Jpn J Crop Sci, 47(1): 6-17.
[38]	Shah F, Huang J L, Cui K H, Nie L M, Shah T, Chen C, Wang K.2011. Impact of high-temperature stress on rice plant and its traits related to tolerance.J Agric Sci, 149(5): 545-556.
[39]	Shi W J, Ishimaru T, Gannaban R B, Oane W, Jagadish S V K.2015. Popular rice (L.) cultivars show contrasting responses to heat stress at gametogenesis and anthesis.Crop Sci, 55(2): 589-596.
[40]	Sukkeoa S, Rerkasemb B, Jamjoda S.2017. Heat tolerance in Thai rice varieties.Sci Asia, 43(2): 61-69.
[41]	Tenorio F A, Ye C, Redoña E, Sierra S, Laza M, Argayoso M A2013. Screening rice genetic resources for heat tolerance.SABRAO J Breeding Genet, 45(3): 371-381.
[42]	Wassmann R, Jagadish S V K, Sumfleth K, Pathak H, Howell G, Ismail A, Serraj R, Redona E, Singh R K, Heuer S.2009. Regional vulnerability of climate change impacts on Asian rice production and scope for adaptation.Adv Agron, 102: 91-133.
[43]	Wu Y J, Chen Y, Wang J, Zhu C X, Xu B L.2006. RAPD analysis of jasmine rice-specific genomic structure.Genome, 49(6): 716-719.
[44]	Ye C R, Argayoso M A, Redona E D, Sierra S N, Laza M A, Dilla C J, Mo Y J, Thomson M J, Chin J, Delaviña C B, Diaz G Q, Hernandez J E.2012. Mapping QTL for heat tolerance at flowering stage in rice using SNP markers.Plant Breeding, 131(1): 33-41.
[45]	Ziska L H, Manalo P A, Ordonez R A.1996. Intraspecific variation in the response of rice (Oryza sativa L.) to increased CO2 and temperature: Growth and yield response of 17 cultivars. J Exp Bot, 47(9): 1353-1359.

Experiment	Duration	Greenhouse
		Day time (6 h)				Night time
		T (^oC)	RH (%)	LI [µmol/(L·m²·s)]		T (^oC)	RH (%)
Preliminary screening	April-December 2012	41.70 ± 1.90	56.52 ± 4.42	1 001.17	29.07 ± 2.28		82.18 ± 4.90
Repeat screening	April-May 2013	42.13 ± 1.15	61.51 ± 4.47	929.26	29.41 ± 1.10		86.34 ± 4.85
Validation screening	July-August 2013	41.44 ± 1.62	59.10 ± 3.44	997.34	28.35 ± 1.20		84.57 ± 5.86
Experiment	Duration	In field
		Day time (6 h)				Night time
		T (^oC)	RH (%)	LI [µmol/(L·m²·s)]		T (^oC)	RH (%)
Preliminary screening	April-December 2012	35.42 ± 2.90	47.61 ± 7.76	1 667.13	28.68 ± 2.31		80.42 ± 6.49
Repeat screening	April-May 2013	35.24 ± 1.16	56.38 ± 5.81	1 468.89	27.97 ± 0.86		85.37 ± 7.01
Validation screening	July-August 2013	33.25 ± 1.26	55.37 ± 6.13	1 538.70	27.08 ± 0.95		83.45 ± 8.57

Experiment	Duration	Greenhouse
		Day time (6 h)				Night time
		T (^oC)	RH (%)	LI [µmol/(L·m²·s)]		T (^oC)	RH (%)
Preliminary screening	April-December 2012	41.70 ± 1.90	56.52 ± 4.42	1 001.17	29.07 ± 2.28		82.18 ± 4.90
Repeat screening	April-May 2013	42.13 ± 1.15	61.51 ± 4.47	929.26	29.41 ± 1.10		86.34 ± 4.85
Validation screening	July-August 2013	41.44 ± 1.62	59.10 ± 3.44	997.34	28.35 ± 1.20		84.57 ± 5.86
Experiment	Duration	In field
		Day time (6 h)				Night time
		T (^oC)	RH (%)	LI [µmol/(L·m²·s)]		T (^oC)	RH (%)
Preliminary screening	April-December 2012	35.42 ± 2.90	47.61 ± 7.76	1 667.13	28.68 ± 2.31		80.42 ± 6.49
Repeat screening	April-May 2013	35.24 ± 1.16	56.38 ± 5.81	1 468.89	27.97 ± 0.86		85.37 ± 7.01
Validation screening	July-August 2013	33.25 ± 1.26	55.37 ± 6.13	1 538.70	27.08 ± 0.95		83.45 ± 8.57

Score	Spikelet fertility	Description
1	> 80%	Highly tolerant
3	61%-80%	Tolerant
5	41%-60%	Moderately tolerant
7	11%-40%	Susceptible
9	< 11%	Highly susceptible

Score	Spikelet fertility	Description
1	> 80%	Highly tolerant
3	61%-80%	Tolerant
5	41%-60%	Moderately tolerant
7	11%-40%	Susceptible
9	< 11%	Highly susceptible

Cultivar	Origin	Grain type	Special trait
Dawk Pa-yawm	Native rice	Long	Upland rice
Homcholasit	RGDU*	Long	submergence tolerance
Jao Hom Nil	RGDU	Medium	Wild Type
Pathum Thani 1	Rice Department.	Long	Good quality
Pin Kaset 1	RGDU	Long	High yield
Pin Kaset 2	RGDU	Medium	High yield
Pin Kaset 3	RGDU	Long	High yield
PSL2	Rice Department.	Medium	Commercial cultivar
RD15	Rice Department.	Medium	Adaptable to drought
RD33	Rice Department.	Long	Blast resistance
Suphan Buri 1	Rice Department.	Medium	Commercial cultivar
Thanyasirin	RGDU	Medium	Waxy rice
A5029	RGDU	Long	Very long grain
Sinlek	RGDU	Long	Control for high temperature sensitivity
* RGDU; Rice gene discovery unit

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 12

参考文献 45

相关文章 0

编辑推荐

Metrics

Genotype	Spikelet fertility (%)		Panicle length (cm)		Filled grains per panicle		Total florets per panicle
Genotype	Field	Greenhouse	Field	Greenhouse	Field	Greenhouse	Field	Greenhouse
M9962	84.3 aA	82.2 abA	20.4 deA	19.9 eA	105.4 aA	75.1 cdB	119.7 aA	104.4 bcB
M3181	79.5 abcdA	75.1 cdeA	22.3 cdA	20.6 deA	73.1 cdeA	53.6 hiB	92.4 cdefA	83.7 fgA
M7988	75.4 deA	74.3 deA	20.5 deB	23.5 bcA	81.7 bcA	53.1 hiB	109.8 abA	83.5 fgB
M8269	76.1 bcdA	73.7 deA	20.3 deA	19.6 eA	54.3 ghjA	50.9 ijA	84.6 efggA	85.7 defgA
M8281	83.0 abA	72.2 deB	20.6 deA	19.6 eA	64.3 efgA	54.4 ghiA	100.4 bcdA	85.7 defgA
M8372	76.6 bcdA	69.8 eB	20.2 deA	19.8 eA	62.7 fghA	40.7 jB	94.9 bcdefA	77.1 gB
M7766	69.6 eA	16.2 hB	24.7 abA	23.3 bcA	73.1 cdeA	9.2 kB	107.9 abA	101.8 bcA
JHN (wild type)	82.3 abcA	39.3 gB	24.9 abA	21.9 cdeA	85.6 bA	40.7 jB	103.0 bcA	99.2 bcdeA
Sinlek (control)	62.1 fA	10.4 hB	25.9 aA	24.1 abcA	70.1 defA	17.8 kB	109.5 abA	108.6 abA
Genotype (G)	2.50*		0.44*		4.37*		4.68*
Treatment (T)	4.94*		1.67*		7.26*		10.54*
G × T	6.98*		2.37 ns		10.27*		14.91
Different lowercase letters followed the values in the column are significantly different at P < 0.05 by the Tukey’s least significant difference (LSD) test. Different uppercase letters in each row for the same trait indicate significant difference at P < 0.05 by the Tukey’s LSD test.

Genotype	100-grain weight (g)		DF (%)	No. of filled grains per panicle		DF (%)	Panicle weight (g)		DF (%)
Genotype	In field	Greenhouse	DF (%)	In field	Greenhouse	DF (%)	In field	Greenhouse	DF (%)
M9962	2.10 uA	1.93 vB	8	101.0 defgA	103.0 defgA	-	3.45 fghiA	2.82 jklmB	18.3
M3181	2.49 noA	2.31 qrB	7	68.3 jklmnA	50.9 mnoA	25	2.42 klmnopA	1.65 rsB	31.8
M7988	2.27 rstA	2.09 uB	8	77.3 hijklA	79.9 ghijklA	-	2.85 ijklA	2.43 klmnoA	14.7
Thanyasirin	2.57 mnA	2.22 rstB	14	143.2 abA	104.1 defB	27	5.76 aA	3.82 efgB	33.7
M8269	2.44 opA	2.31 qrB	5	74.1 ijklmA	58.2 lmnoA	37	2.75 jklmA	2.34 lmnopqA	14.9
Suphan Buri 1	2.67 jkA	2.43 opB	9	115.0 cdeA	66.2 klmnoB	42	4.80 bcA	2.88 ijklB	40.0
PSL2	3.17 cA	2.30 qrsB	27	92.4 efghiA	60.8 lmoB	33	4.40 cdeA	2.64 jklmnB	40.0
Pathum Thani 1	2.85 ghA	2.46 opB	14	91.0 efghiA	53.1 mnoB	41	3.62 fghA	2.11 nopqrsB	41.7
Jao Hom Nil	2.52 mnoA	2.21 stB	12	85.3 fghijkA	46.6 nopB	45	2.99 hijkA	2.08 nopqrsB	30.4
Pin Kaset 2	2.91 fgA	2.67 jkB	8	134.0 abcA	44.3 opqB	67	5.03 bA	2.54 klmnB	49.5
Pin Kaset 1	3.04 deA	2.86 ghB	6	114.1 cdeA	26.9 pqrB	76	4.50 bcdA	2.06 nopqrsB	54.2
A5029	3.45 aA	2.98 efB	14	87.2 fghikA	20.2 rB	77	4.83 bcA	1.83 pqrsB	62.1
Dawk Payawm	2.77 hiA	2.37 pqB	14	154.3 aA	24.8 pqrB	83	4.90 bcA	2.21 mnopqrB	54.8
Pin Kaset 3	3.12 cdA	2.78 hiB	11	120.0 bcdA	15.4 rB	87	4.71 bcA	1.74 qrsB	63.1
Homcholasit	3.28 bA	2.61 klmB	20	99.0 defghA	22.3 qrB	77	3.70 efgA	1.89 opqrsB	48.9
Sinlek	2.98 efA	2.66 jklB	11	69.6 ijklmnA	17.8 rB	74	3.19 ghijA	1.79 pqrsB	43.9
RD15	2.64 klA	2.48 noB	6	122.0 bcdA	15.2 rB	88	3.90 defA	1.53 sB	60.8
RD33	2.74 ijA	2.18 tuB	20	73.4 ijklmA	7.4 rB	89	2.43 klmnoA	1.59 sB	34.5
Genotype (G)	0.07*			19.9*			2.04*
Treatment (T)	0.02*			5.6*			0.14*
G × T	0.09*			23.9*			0.62*
DF, Percentage decrease from the field. Different lowercase letters followed the values in the column are significantly different at P < 0.05 by the Tukey’s least significant difference (LSD) test. Different uppercase letters in the each row for the same trait indicate significant difference at P < 0.05 by the Tukey’s LSD test.