Genetic Dissection of Low Phosphorus Tolerance Related Traits Using Selected Introgression Lines in Rice

doi:10.1016/S1672-6308(14)60306-1

Abstract

Abstract:

To dissect the genetic basis of low phosphorus tolerance (LPT), 114 BC₂F₄ introgression lines (ILs) were developed from Shuhui 527 and Minghui 86 (recurrent parents), and Yetuozai (donor parent). The progenies were tested for 11 quantitative traits under three treatments including normal fertilization in normal soil (as control), normal fertilization in barren soil and low phosphorus stress in barren soil in Langfang, Hebei Province, China. Moreover, the ILs were investigated at the seedling stage using nutrient solution culture method in greenhouse in Beijing, China. A total of 49 main-effect quantitative trait loci (QTLs) underlying yield related traits were identified in Langfang, and their contributions to phenotypic variations ranged from 6.7% to 16.5%. Among them, 25 (51.0%) QTLs had favorable alleles from donor parent. A total of 48 main-effect QTLs were identified for LPT-related traits in Beijing, and their contributions to phenotypic variations ranged from 7.7% to 16.6%. Among them, 21 (43.8%) QTLs had favorable alleles from donor parent. About 79.6% of the QTLs can be detected repeatedly under two or more treatments, especially QTLs associated with spikelet number per panicle, spikelet fertility and 1000-grain weight, displaying consistent phenotypic effects. Among all the detected QTLs, eight QTLs were simultaneously identified under low phosphorus stress across two environments. These results can provide useful information for the genetic dissection of LPT in rice.

Key words: rice, phosphorus tolerance, yield, introgression line, quantitative trait locus

Chao Xiang, Jie Ren, Xiu-qin Zhao, Zai-song Ding, Jing Zhang, Chao Wang, Jun-wei Zhang, Augustino Joseph Charles, Qiang Zhang, Yun-long Pang, Yong-ming Gao, Ying-yao Shi. Genetic Dissection of Low Phosphorus Tolerance Related Traits Using Selected Introgression Lines in Rice[J]. Rice Science, 2015, 22(6): 264-274.

Figures/Tables 8

References 26

[1]	Carriger S, Vallee D.2007. More crop per drop.Rice Today, 6(2): 10-13.
[2]	Chen M Y, Ali J, Fu B Y, Xu J L, Zhao M F, Jiang Y Z, Zhu L H, Shi Y Y, Yao D N, Gao Y M, Li Z K.2011. Detection of drought-related loci in rice at reproductive stage using selected introgressed lines.Agric Sci China, 10(1): 1-8.
[3]	Dobermann A, Fairhurst T.2000. Rice: Nutrient Disorders & Nutrient Management. Los Banos: Potash & Phosphate Institute, Potash & Phosphate Institute of Canada and International Rice Research Institute: 1-191.
[4]	Gao F Y, Lu X J, Kang H Q, Sun S X, Liu G C, Reng G J.2006. Screening and identification for rice tolerance to Pi deficency at seedling stage.Acta Agron Sin, 32(8): 1151-1155. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[5]	Guo T R, Yao P C, Zhang Z D, Wang J J, Wang M.2013. Involvement of antioxidative defense system in rice seedlings exposed to aluminum toxicity and phosphorus deficiency.Chin J Rice Sci, 27(6): 653-657. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[6]	He Y X, Zheng T Q, Hao X B, Wang L F, Gao Y M, Hua Z T, Zhai H Q, Xu J L, Xu Z J, Zhu L H, Li Z K.2010. Yield performances of japonica introgression lines selected for drought tolerance in a BC breeding programme.Plant Breeding, 129(2): 167-175.
[7]	Huang L F, Tao X T, Gao W, Wang Y L, Zhuang H Y.2014. Effect of reduced phosphorus fertilizer application on yield formation and quality of japonica rice in Jiangsu coastal region.Chin J Rice Sci, 28(6): 632-638. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[8]	Huang X H, Wei X H, Sang T, Zhao Q, Feng Q, Zhao Y, Li C Y, Zhu C R, Lu T T, Zhang Z W, Li M, Fan D L, Guo Y L, Wang A, Wang L, Deng L W, Li W J, Lu Y Q, Weng Q J, Liu K Y, Huang T, Zhou T Y, Jing Y F, Li W, Lin Z, Buckler E S, Qian Q, Zhang Q F, Li J Y, Han B.2010. Genome-wide association studies of 14 agronomic traits in rice landraces.Nat Genet, 42(11): 961-967.
[9]	Ismail A M, Heuer S, Thomson M J, Wissuwa M.2007. Genetic and genomic approaches to develop rice germplasm for problem soils.Plant Mol Biol, 65(4): 547-570.
[10]	Lea P J, Miflin B J.2011. Nitrogen assimilation and its relevance to crop improvement. In: Foyer C H, Zhang H. Annual Plant Reviews. West Sussex, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd: 42: 1-40.
[11]	Li Z K.2005. Strategies for molecular rice breeding in China.Mol Plant Breeding, 3(5): 603-608. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[12]	Loudet O, Chaillou S, Merigout P, Talbotec J, Daniel-Vedele F.2003. Quantitative trait loci analysis of nitrogen use efficiency in Arabidopsis.Plant Physiol, 131(1): 345-358.
[13]	Luo L J.2005. Development of near isogenic introgression lines and molecular breeding on rice.Mol Plant Breeding, 3(5): 609-612. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[14]	Lynch J P.2011. Root phenes for enhanced soil exploration and phosphorus acquisition: Tools for future crops.Plant Physiol, 156: 1041-1049.
[15]	Ma G H, Yuan L P.2015. Hybrid rice achievements, development and prospect in China.Agric Sci China, 14(2): 197-205.
[16]	Meng L J, Lin X Y, Wang J M, Chen K, Cui Y R, Xu J L, Li Z K.2013. Simultaneous improvement of cold tolerance and yield of temperate japonica rice (Oryza sativa L.) by introgression breeding.Plant Breeding, 132(6): 604-612.
[17]	Moncada P, Martinez C P, Borrero J, Chatel M, Gauch Jr H, Guimaraes E, Tohme J, McCouch S R.2001. Quantitative trait loci for yield and yield components in an Oryza sativa-Oryza rufipogon BC2F2 population evaluated in an upland environment.Theor Appl Genet, 102(1): 41-52.
[18]	Mu P, Huang C, Li J X, Liu L F, Liu U J, Li Z C.2008. QTL yield trait variation and QTL mapping in a DH population of rice under phosphorus deficiency.Acta Agron Sin, 34(7): 1137-1142. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[19]	SAS Institute Inc.2008. SAS/STAT Software V9.2 User’s Guide. Cary, North Carolina, USA: SAS Institute Inc: 2430-2611.
[20]	Tanksley S D, Nelson J C.1996. Advanced backcross QTL analysis: A method for the simultaneous discovery and transfer of valuable QTLs from unadapted germplasm into elite breeding lines.Theor Appl Genet, 92(2): 191-203.
[21]	Vinod K K, Heuer S.2012. Approaches towards nitrogen- and phosphorus-efficient rice.AoB Plants, doi: 10.1093/aobpla/pls028.
[22]	Wu P.2013. The research on the molecular mechanism of absorption and utilization of high phosphorus in plant and its application.Chin Sci Technol Achiev, 9: 20. (in Chinese)
[23]	Xu J L, Gao Y M, Fu B Y, Li Z K.2005. Identification and screening of favorable genes from rice germplasm in backcross introgression populations.Mol Plant Breeding, 3(5): 619-628. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[24]	Zang J P, Sun Y, Wang Y, Yang J, Li F, Zhou Y L, Zhu L H, Jessica R, Mohammadhosein F, Xu J L, Li Z K.2008. Dissection of genetic overlap of salt tolerance QTL at the seedling and tillering stages using backcross introgression lines in rice.Sci China: Life Sci, 51(7): 583-591.
[25]	Zhang F, Hao X B, Gao Y M, Hua Z T, Ma X F, Chen W F, Xu Z J, Zhu L H, Li Z K.2007. Improving seedling cold tolerance of japonica rice by using the ‘hidden diversity’ in indica rice germplasm in a backcross breeding program.Acta Agron Sin, 33(10): 1618-1624. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[26]	Zheng T Q, Xu J L, Fu B Y, Gao Y M, Veruka S, Lafitte R, Zhai H Q, Wan J M, Zhu L H, Li Z K.2007. Application of genetic hitch-hiking and ANOVA in identification of loci for drought tolerance in populations of rice from directional selection.Acta Agron Sin, 33(5): 799-804. (in Chinese with English abstract)

Sampling stage	Treatment	Organic matter	Total N	Alkali-hydrolyzable	Olsen-P	Available K	pH
Sampling stage	Treatment	(g/kg)	(g/kg)	N (g/kg)	(g/kg)	(g/kg)	pH
Before sowing	A	13.71	1.11	0.06	0.04	0.1	8.4
	B	7.85	0.57	0.04	0.01	0.07	8.6
	C	8.2	0.62	0.04	0.01	0.07	8.6
Elongation stage (7 d after the first fertilizer application)	A	-	1.12	0.08	0.04	-	-
	B	-	0.55	0.04	0.01	-	-
	C	-	0.56	0.04	0.01	-	-
Before booting stage (before the second fertilizer application)	A	-	0.96	0.07	0.03	-	-
	B	-	0.51	0.04	0.01	-	-
	C	-	0.53	0.04	0.01	-	-
Booting stage (7 d after the second fertilizer application)	A	-	0.95	0.06	0.03	-	-
	B	-	0.55	0.05	0.01	-	-
	C	-	0.48	0.04	0.01	-	-
After harvest	A	13.35	1.02	0.06	0.03	0.08	8.2
	B	7.42	0.53	0.03	0.01	0.06	8.2
	C	7.05	0.54	0.03	0.01	0.06	8.2

Sampling stage	Treatment	Organic matter	Total N	Alkali-hydrolyzable	Olsen-P	Available K	pH
Sampling stage	Treatment	(g/kg)	(g/kg)	N (g/kg)	(g/kg)	(g/kg)	pH
Before sowing	A	13.71	1.11	0.06	0.04	0.1	8.4
	B	7.85	0.57	0.04	0.01	0.07	8.6
	C	8.2	0.62	0.04	0.01	0.07	8.6
Elongation stage (7 d after the first fertilizer application)	A	-	1.12	0.08	0.04	-	-
	B	-	0.55	0.04	0.01	-	-
	C	-	0.56	0.04	0.01	-	-
Before booting stage (before the second fertilizer application)	A	-	0.96	0.07	0.03	-	-
	B	-	0.51	0.04	0.01	-	-
	C	-	0.53	0.04	0.01	-	-
Booting stage (7 d after the second fertilizer application)	A	-	0.95	0.06	0.03	-	-
	B	-	0.55	0.05	0.01	-	-
	C	-	0.48	0.04	0.01	-	-
After harvest	A	13.35	1.02	0.06	0.03	0.08	8.2
	B	7.42	0.53	0.03	0.01	0.06	8.2
	C	7.05	0.54	0.03	0.01	0.06	8.2

Material	Treatment	RRL (cm)	RRW (g)	RSW (g)	RWRSR	RTW (g)
Shuhui 527
Mean ± SD	E-D	1.8 ± 2.6 a	0.015 ± 0.003 b	0.048 ± 0.018 a	0.039 ± 0.027 b	0.062 ± 0.021 a
	F-D	4.0 ± 0.3 a	0.026 ± 0.000 a	0.030 ± 0.009 a	0.207 ± 0.035 a	0.056 ± 0.009 a
Minghui 86
Mean ± SD	E-D	0.1 ± 1.0 a	0.006 ± 0.008 a	0.011 ± 0.015 a	0.011 ± 0.067 b	-0.005 ± 0.062 a
	F-D	0.6 ± 0.9 a	0.008 ± 0.009 a	-0.005 ± 0.023 a	0.160 ± 0.086 a	0.003 ± 0.027 a
Yetuozai (1)
Mean ± SD	E-D	0.5 ± 1.8 a	0.003 ± 0.012 a	0.006 ± 0.038 a	0.021 ± 0.082 a	0.010 ± 0.049 a
	F-D	-0.1 ± 2.8 a	0.009 ± 0.009 a	0.001 ± 0.022 a	0.107 ± 0.086 a	0.009 ± 0.029 a
Yetuozai (2)
Mean ± SD	E-D	0.1 ± 1.1 b	0.001 ± 0.007 a	-0.001 ± 0.008 a	0.013 ± 0.071 a	-0.002 ± 0.015 a
	F-D	1.8 ± 1.6 a	0.001 ± 0.007 a	-0.021 ± 0.020 b	0.135 ± 0.144 a	-0.020 ± 0.022 a
Shuhui 527/Yetuozai population (SY)
Mean ± SD	E-D	0.3 ± 0.9 a	0.005 ± 0.017 a	0.001 ± 0.033 a	0.023 ± 0.042 a	0.008 ± 0.045 a
	F-D	0.6 ± 1.1 a	0.007 ± 0.010 a	-0.015 ± 0.035 a	0.102 ± 0.072 a	-0.007 ± 0.042 a
Range	E-D	-2.1-2.9	-0.037-0.097	-0.153-0.059	-0.102-0.131	-0.180-0.125
	F-D	-2.8-3.1	-0.015-0.040	-0.116-0.073	-0.084-0.406	-0.131-0.093
Minghui 86/Yetuozai population (MY)
Mean ± SD	E-D	0.2 ± 1.2 b	0.001 ± 0.008 a	-0.007 ± 0.019 a	0.026 ± 0.044 b	-0.006 ± 0.025 a
	F-D	0.9 ± 1.0 a	0.004 ± 0.009 a	-0.027 ± 0.019 b	0.154 ± 0.112 a	-0.023 ± 0.026 b
Range	E-D	-2.4-1.6	-0.014-0.014	-0.043-0.044	-0.070-0.127	-0.057-0.057
	F-D	-1.3-3.0	-0.011-0.030	-0.065-0.024	0.054-0.839	-0.064-0.054

Material	Treatment	RRL (cm)	RRW (g)	RSW (g)	RWRSR	RTW (g)
Shuhui 527
Mean ± SD	E-D	1.8 ± 2.6 a	0.015 ± 0.003 b	0.048 ± 0.018 a	0.039 ± 0.027 b	0.062 ± 0.021 a
	F-D	4.0 ± 0.3 a	0.026 ± 0.000 a	0.030 ± 0.009 a	0.207 ± 0.035 a	0.056 ± 0.009 a
Minghui 86
Mean ± SD	E-D	0.1 ± 1.0 a	0.006 ± 0.008 a	0.011 ± 0.015 a	0.011 ± 0.067 b	-0.005 ± 0.062 a
	F-D	0.6 ± 0.9 a	0.008 ± 0.009 a	-0.005 ± 0.023 a	0.160 ± 0.086 a	0.003 ± 0.027 a
Yetuozai (1)
Mean ± SD	E-D	0.5 ± 1.8 a	0.003 ± 0.012 a	0.006 ± 0.038 a	0.021 ± 0.082 a	0.010 ± 0.049 a
	F-D	-0.1 ± 2.8 a	0.009 ± 0.009 a	0.001 ± 0.022 a	0.107 ± 0.086 a	0.009 ± 0.029 a
Yetuozai (2)
Mean ± SD	E-D	0.1 ± 1.1 b	0.001 ± 0.007 a	-0.001 ± 0.008 a	0.013 ± 0.071 a	-0.002 ± 0.015 a
	F-D	1.8 ± 1.6 a	0.001 ± 0.007 a	-0.021 ± 0.020 b	0.135 ± 0.144 a	-0.020 ± 0.022 a
Shuhui 527/Yetuozai population (SY)
Mean ± SD	E-D	0.3 ± 0.9 a	0.005 ± 0.017 a	0.001 ± 0.033 a	0.023 ± 0.042 a	0.008 ± 0.045 a
	F-D	0.6 ± 1.1 a	0.007 ± 0.010 a	-0.015 ± 0.035 a	0.102 ± 0.072 a	-0.007 ± 0.042 a
Range	E-D	-2.1-2.9	-0.037-0.097	-0.153-0.059	-0.102-0.131	-0.180-0.125
	F-D	-2.8-3.1	-0.015-0.040	-0.116-0.073	-0.084-0.406	-0.131-0.093
Minghui 86/Yetuozai population (MY)
Mean ± SD	E-D	0.2 ± 1.2 b	0.001 ± 0.008 a	-0.007 ± 0.019 a	0.026 ± 0.044 b	-0.006 ± 0.025 a
	F-D	0.9 ± 1.0 a	0.004 ± 0.009 a	-0.027 ± 0.019 b	0.154 ± 0.112 a	-0.023 ± 0.026 b
Range	E-D	-2.4-1.6	-0.014-0.014	-0.043-0.044	-0.070-0.127	-0.057-0.057
	F-D	-1.3-3.0	-0.011-0.030	-0.065-0.024	0.054-0.839	-0.064-0.054

Treatment	Population	Trait	QTL	Marker	Chromosome	Position (cM)	Bin	Probability	R²(%)	Additive
A	SY	PN	qPN5.7	RM26	5	118.8	5.7	0.017	10.2	0.47
A	SY	PN	qPN11.3	RM536	11	55.1	11.3	0.005	13	0.29
A	MY	PN	qPN5.3	RM169	5	58	5.3	0.032	8.5	-0.3
A	SY	FGP	qFGP11.6	RM254	11	110	11.6	0.017	9.7	-8
A	SY	SNP	qSNP6.6	RM5463	6	124.4	6.6	0.016	9.8	10.48
A	SY	SNP	qSNP11.6	RM254	11	110	11.6	0.018	9.5	-9.11
A	SY	SF	qSF5.5	RM164	5	78.7	5.5	0.015	10	1.52
A	MY	SF	qSF4.1	RM335	4	22	4.1	0.014	11	-2.53
A	MY	SF	qSF12.1	RM20A	12	3.2	12.1	0.006	13.8	-4.51
A	SY	TGW	qTGW4.1	RM335	4	22	4.1	0.025	8.6	-1.05
A	SY	TGW	qTGW5.5	RM164	5	78.7	5.5	0.04	7.2	0.63
A	SY	TGW	qTGW6.6	RM5463	6	124.4	6.6	0.008	11.9	-1
A	SY	TGW	qTGW9.3	RM219	9	11.7	9.3	0.017	9.5	-0.83
A	MY	TGW	qTGW1.10	RM200	1	143.2	1.1	0.031	8.7	0.55
A	MY	TGW	qTGW3.12	RM514	3	216.4	3.12	0.01	12	0.64
A	SY	GY	qGY6.5	RM541	6	76	6.5	0.009	11	1.15
A	SY	GY	qGY11.6	RM254	11	110	11.6	0.018	9.5	-1.06
B	SY	PN	qPN1.7	RM9	1	92.4	1.7	0.047	6.8	0.32
B	SY	PN	qPN11.3	RM536	11	55.1	11.3	0.003	14.4	0.33
B	SY	PN	qPN12.2	RM155	12	20.9	12.2	0.004	14.4	0.25
B	SY	FGP	qFGP11.6	RM254	11	110	11.6	0.007	12.2	-8.56
B	MY	FGP	qFGP12.4	RM511	12	59.8	12.4	0.007	13.3	14.57
B	SY	SNP	qSNP11.6	RM254	11	110	11.6	0.006	12.7	-9.26
B	MY	SNP	qSNP12.4	RM511	12	59.8	12.4	0.003	16.1	18.81
B	SY	SF	qSF1.7	RM9	1	92.4	1.7	0.022	8.9	-2.3
B	SY	TGW	qTGW4.1	RM335	4	22	4.1	0.005	12.8	-1.32
B	SY	TGW	qTGW6.6	RM5463	6	124.4	6.6	0.002	15.1	-1.17
B	SY	TGW	qTGW7.1	RM481	7	3.2	7.1	0.046	6.7	0.9
B	SY	TGW	qTGW9.3	RM219	9	11.7	9.3	0.014	10	-0.88
B	MY	TGW	qTGW1.10	RM200	1	143.2	1.1	0.002	16.5	0.69
B	SY	GY	qGY6.5	RM541	6	76	6.5	0.024	8.5	0.88
B	SY	GY	qGY11.6	RM254	11	110	11.6	0.013	10.4	-0.98
C	SY	PN	qPN1.2	RM283	1	31.4	1.2	0.001	16.5	-0.42
C	SY	PN	qPN1.7	RM9	1	92.4	1.7	0.005	13	0.54
C	SY	PN	qPN5.7	RM26	5	118.8	5.7	0.007	12.6	0.65
C	SY	PN	qPN6.1	RM589	6	3.2	6.1	0.008	11.4	0.33
C	SY	PN	qPN11.3	RM536	11	55.1	11.3	0.007	11.8	0.35
C	MY	PN	qPN5.3	RM169	5	58	5.3	0.015	11	-0.44
C	SY	SNP	qSNP6.6	RM5463	6	124.4	6.6	0.02	9.2	9.87
C	SY	SNP	qSNP11.6	RM254	11	110	11.6	0.039	7.3	-7.75
C	SY	SF	qSF1.7	RM9	1	92.4	1.7	0.003	14.9	-3.42
C	SY	SF	qSF5.5	RM164	5	78.7	5.5	0.018	9.4	1.62
C	MY	SF	qSF4.1	RM335	4	22	4.1	0.043	7.6	-2.06
C	SY	TGW	qTGW4.1	RM335	4	22	4.1	0.007	12.3	-1.08
C	SY	TGW	qTGW5.5	RM164	5	78.7	5.5	0.004	13.7	0.74
C	SY	TGW	qTGW6.6	RM5463	6	124.4	6.6	0.004	13.7	-0.92
C	SY	TGW	qTGW7.1	RM481	7	3.2	7.1	0.032	7.7	0.8
C	SY	TGW	qTGW9.3	RM219	9	11.7	9.3	0.013	10.1	-0.74
C	MY	GY	qGY1.10	RM200	1	143.2	1.1	0.003	15.8	1.42