Abstract
Quantitative trait loci (QTLs) with additive (a), additive × additive (aa) epistatic effects, and their treatmental interactions (at and aat) were studied under salt stress and normal conditions at seedling stage of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). A set of 182 recombinant inbred lines (RILs) derived from cross Xiaoyan 54 × Jing 411 were used. A total of 29 additive QTLs and 17 epistasis were detected for 12 traits examined, among which eight and seven, respectively, were identified to have QTL × treatment effects. Physiological traits rather than biomass traits were more likely to be involved in QTL × treatment interactions. Ten intervals on chromosomes 1A, 1D, 2A (two), 2D, 3B, 4B, 5A, 5B and 7D showed overlapping QTLs for different traits; some of them represent a single locus affecting different traits and/or the same trait under both treatments. Eleven pairs of QTLs were detected on seemingly homoeologous positions of six chromosome groups of wheat, showing synteny among the A, B and D genomes. Ten pairs were detected in which each pair was contributed by the same parent, indicating a strong genetic plasticity of the QTLs. The results are helpful for understanding the genetic basis of salt tolerance in wheat and provide useful information for genetic improvement of salt tolerance in wheat by marker-assisted selection.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Salinity is one of the major problems constraining crop production and food security worldwide (Pitman and Läuchli 2004). Understanding the genetic control of salt tolerance is the basis for breeding new crop plant cultivars with improved productivity in saline environments. Quantitative trait locus (QTL) analysis provides an effective means of dissecting quantitative traits into single components to study their relative impacts on a specific trait (Doerge 2002). Marker-assisted selection (MAS) based on QTL analysis can greatly facilitate crop improvement (Tuberosa and Salvi 2007). Many QTLs for salt tolerance have already been detected in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) (Mano and Takeda 1997), rice (Oryza sativa L.) (Gong et al. 1999; Lee et al. 2006; Lin et al. 2004; Prasad et al. 2000; Takehisa et al. 2004), tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) (Foolad 1999; Foolad and Chen 1999; Foolad et al. 2001; Villalta et al. 2008) and arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana L.) (Quesada et al. 2002).
Epistasis and QTL × environment (Q × E) interaction are important genetic components. Most quantitative traits are greatly affected by either one of them or both (Xu and Crouch 2008). Epistasis and Q × E analyses have been conducted in rice (Cao et al. 2001; Fan et al. 2005; Liao et al. 2001; Liu et al. 2007; Xing et al. 2002), cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) (Shen et al. 2006; Wang et al. 2007), soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.) (Han et al. 2008), maize (Zea mays L.) (Ma et al. 2007b), wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) (Yang et al. 2007a; Zhang et al. 2008, 2009), and other plant species. Trials at different levels of salt stress also have been conducted to determine whether the expression of a trait is constitutive, and to identify salt stress-specific and non-stress-specific traits (Genc et al. 2010). However, differences in mapping results among various environment/treatment combinations have resulted in unreliable indications of the significance of Q × E (Jansen et al. 1995).
In saline field, the concentration of salt is nonuniform, which affects phenotyping greatly; and QTLs obtained under saline field conditions may be not exact for salt tolerance. Hydroponic experiments in different salt concentrations can ensure that the QTLs were definitely associated with the salt treatments. This can give us more accurate evidence to understand the genetic control of salt tolerance. Wheat is one of the most important food crops in the world. It is grown on 17% of all crop area worldwide and represents a staple food for 40% of the world’s population (Gupta et al. 2008). QTL analysis for salt tolerance have been conducted in wheat at germination (Ma et al. 2007a), seedling stage (Genc et al. 2010; Lindsay et al. 2004; Ma et al. 2007a) and at maturity (Quarrie et al. 2005). There have been no reports on QTL analysis for salt tolerance in relation to the root traits of wheat. In the present study, morphological traits and physiological traits related to the roots and the shoots at seedling stage were investigated in a recombinant inbred line (RIL) population under salt stress and normal conditions to (1) study the relationships between the traits at seedling stage under salt stress, (2) detect QTLs with additive (a) and additive × additive (aa) epistatic effects, as well as their treatmental interactions (at and aat), and (3) analyze the differences between the roots and shoots in salt tolerance.
Materials and methods
Plant materials
A population of 182 F11 RILs derived from a cross between wheat cultivars Xiaoyan 54 and Jing 411 was used in this study. Xiaoyan 54 was derived from Xiaoyan 6, a cultivar that has been widely cultivated for the past 25 years in China. Xiaoyan 6 was derived from hybridization of wheat and Thinopyrum ponticum (2n = 10x = 70), and was characterized by high yield potential, wide environmental adaptability, and good bread-making quality (Li et al. 2008). Jing 411 was one of the main cultivars at the Northern Winter Wheat Region of China in the 1990s, and had been widely grown as much as 1.87 million ha.
Experimental design
The experiment was conducted in hydroponic culture under greenhouse condition at Center for Agricultural Resources Research, Institute of Genetics and Developmental Biology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shijiazhuang, China, in November and December 2009. The 182 RILs and their parents were evaluated for salt tolerance at two salt concentrations: 0 (nil) and 150 mM NaCl, designated N treatment and S treatment, respectively. Each treatment had three replicates.
The seeds of each line were surface sterilized in 10% H2O2 for 5 min, rinsed with deionized water, and then allowed to germinate on filter paper in petri dishes containing distilled water for 7 days. The 18 most uniform seedlings of each genotype were selected, and their endosperms were removed. Then they were transplanted into plastic tanks, and fixed on the cover of the tanks using soft sponge rubber on 4.6 cm centers, with three seedlings for each genotype of each replicate. The tanks were opaque and each tank contained 62 L deionized water. Four days after transplanting, half-strength Hoagland’s Nutrient Solution (Hoagland and Arnon 1950) was introduced, and increased to full-strength after 2 days. Three days later, NaCl was added to the solution twice daily over 3 days with an increment of 25 mM each time to a final concentration of 150 mM for the S treatment, while no NaCl was added for the N treatment. The solution was continuously aerated and renewed every 7 days; the pH was maintained at 6.0–6.2, and the air temperature ranged from 15 to 30°C. Tanks were randomly placed and rearranged every week.
Trait measurements
After being treated with 150 mM NaCl for 3 weeks, chlorophyll content (CHL) was measured using a leaf chlorophyll meter (SPAD-502 meter, Minolta, Osaka, Japan). Mean leaf CHL content for each genotype was derived from three readings taken at the base, middle and tip of the youngest fully expanded leaf for every seedling. A salt injury index (SII) was recorded using a scale of 1 for green leaves to 5 for leaf death (Liu et al. 2001). After 4 weeks growth in 150 mM NaCl the roots and the shoots were separately harvested, and rinsed with distilled water. Maximum root length (RL) and shoot height (SH) were recorded. The roots and shoots were then oven-dried at 80°C for 48 h and root (RDW) and shoot (SDW) dry weights were weighed. Total dry weights (TDW) were calculated as RDW + SDW. Harvested roots and shoots were digested in a 5 ml HNO3 + 0.5 ml H2SO4 + 0.5 ml 60% TCA solution at 90°C for 5 min and the Na+ and K+ concentrations were determined with atomic absorption flame emission spectrophotometer (AA-6501F, SHIMADZU, Tokyo, Japan). The root K+ (RKC), root Na+ (RNC), shoot K+ (SKC), shoot Na+ (SNC) concentrations were determined.
Statistical and QTL analysis
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) of the data was performed using SPSS 16.0 software (SPSS Inc, Chicago, USA). Trait measurements were averaged over three replications prior to QTL analysis. The linkage map of the “Xiaoyan 54 × Jing 411” population was used in the QTL analysis. The map included 555 markers distributed on 21 wheat chromosomes, comprising 523 simple sequenced repeats (SSRs), 18 expressed sequence tag-SSRs (EST-SSRs) and 14 Glu loci. Mixed linear composite interval mapping was undertaken in the software QTLNetwork 2.1 to map QTLs with a and aa epistatic effects, as well as their treatmental interactions (at and aat) (Yang et al. 2007b, 2008). Composite interval analysis was undertaken using forward–backward stepwise, multiple linear regression with 1 cM walking speed, 2D genome scan, a probability into and out of the model of 0.05 and window size set at 10 cM. Significant thresholds for QTL detection were calculated with 1,000 permutations and a genome-wide error rate of 0.10 (suggestive) and 0.05 (significant). Multi-trait composite interval mapping (MCIM) (Jiang and Zeng 1995) was conducted using Windows QTL Cartographer 2.5 to detect the pleiotropic QTLs.
Results
Phenotypic variation and correlations among traits
Phenotypes of the RILs and their parents for traits related to seedling growth in the N and S treatments are summarized in Table 1. Xiaoyan 54 produced significantly higher values (8.98–28.67% greater) than Jing 411 for RKC in the N treatment, SDW and RKN in the S treatment, and RL, SH, RDW, TDW and SNC in both the N and S treatments. Jing 411 was significantly higher (9.12–26.51% greater) than Xiaoyan 54 for SKN in the N treatment, RNC in the S treatment, and CHL in both the N and S treatments. The two parents showed little difference for SDW, RNC and RKN in the N treatment, for SII, RKC and SKN in the S treatment, and for SKC in both the N and S treatments.
The phenotypic values for the traits exhibited wide ranges among the 182 RILs, with the coefficient of variation (CV) higher than 10% for all traits except for CHL in both the N and S treatments and SKC in the N treatment (Table 1). Treatment effects were observed for all the traits, the RILs mean values in the N treatment were higher than that in the S treatment for RL, SH, SDW, TDW, RKC, RKN, SKC and SKN, but lower for RDW, CHL, RNC and SNC (Table 1). The frequency distributions of all the traits showed continuous variation and significant transgressive segregation in both directions (Table 1), which might be attributed to the polygenic inheritance of the traits.
The SII showed significantly positive correlation with SNC (r = 0.44, P ≤ 0.01), but negative correlations with SKC (r = −0.44, P ≤ 0.01), SKN (r = −0.43, P ≤ 0.01), CHL (r = −0.28, P ≤ 0.01) and the biomass traits (−0.41 ≤ r ≥ −0.30, P ≤ 0.01) in the S treatment (Table 2). SNC was negatively correlated with the biomass traits in both the N and S treatments, while SKC and SKN were positively correlated with the biomass traits (Table 2). These results indicated that SNC is a major factor constraining salt tolerance and biomass production, while improved SKC and SKN facilitated salt tolerance of the seedlings. In the S treatment, SKC showed a strong negative correlation (r = −0.58, P ≤ 0.01) with SNC, indicating a competition relationship between K+ and Na+. Finally, SNC, SKC and SKN of the shoots were significantly correlated with SII and the biomass traits; while the corresponding traits of roots, RNC, RKC, and RKN had no significant or rather weak correlations with SII and the biomass traits (Table 2). This indicated the mechanisms controlling salt stress in the shoots and roots are different.
QTL with additive and additive × treatment interaction effects
A total of 29 QTLs for 11 traits were detected on 14 chromosomes (Table 3; Fig. 1). Twenty-one of the QTL had only a effects, while eight had both a and at effects. The QTL explained 0.21–14.75% of the phenotypic variation (Table 3).
Four and three QTLs were detected for RL and SH, respectively; and three, one and two QTLs in four chromosomal intervals were detected for RDW, SDW and TDW, respectively. The QTLs QRl-7B and QSh-4B were detected with significant at effects. Both Xiaoyan 54 and Jing 411 alleles contributed to the a and/or at effects of biomass traits, suggesting that the alleles for increased biomass production were dispersed in the two parents, which may have resulted in the observed transgressive segregations (Table 1). The locus QRl-5A was co-located with QRdw-5A, which also had a negative a effect. Two pairs of QTLs, QRdw-2D and QTdw-2D, contributed by Xiaoyan 54, and QSdw-2A and QTdw-2A, contributed by Jing 411 were co-located. The QTL QRdw-3B2 was co-located with QSkc-3B, both contributed by Jing 411 (Table 3; Fig. 1).
Only one QTL was identified for CHL, which was contributed by Xiaoyan 54 allele on chromosome 5B. The QTL accounted for 5.11% of the phenotypic variation.
Four, two and three QTLs were detected for RKC, RNC and RKN, respectively. The QTLs QRkc-5A1 and QRkc-5B for RKC, and QRkn-5B and QRkn-7D for RKN were with significant at effects. Both the Xiaoyan 54- and Jing 411-derived alleles contributed to the QTLs for RKC and RKN, while the Jing 411-derived alleles contributed to the QTLs for RNC. The QTLs QRkc-5B and QRkn-5B were co-located and had similar a and at effects; while QRkn-4B co-located with QSkc-4B, both contributed by Jing 411 allele.
Four and two QTLs were detected for SKC and SNC, respectively. Positive alleles for the QTLs were derived from both the Xiaoyan 54 and Jing 411 alleles. The two QTLs for SNC were detected to have significant at effects.
QTLs with epistasis and epistasis × treatment interaction effects
Seventeen pairs of QTLs with digenic effects were detected for ten traits on 19 chromosomes (Table 4; Fig. 1). Among them, seven were with significant aat effects. These epistatic effects explained 1.78–8.51% of the phenotypic variation (Table 4).
Two epistasis were detected for RL. The QRl-1B/QRl-5A epistasis increased RL by 0.56 (cm) in the recombination type Q1Q1q2q2. The QRl-1D/QRl-6B epistasis was detected to have aat effect, with parental type Q1Q1Q2Q2 increased RL by 1.25 cm in the N treatment, but only by 0.21 cm in the S treatment. The recombinant type q1q1Q2Q2 decreased RL at both the two loci.
Five epistasis were identified for RDW, SDW, and TDW. The parental type Q1Q1Q2Q2 increased RDW (QRdw-2A/QRdw-3B1 epistasis), SDW (QSdw-5B/QSdw-5D epistasis), and TDW (QTdw-1A/QTdw-3A and QTdw-1D/QTdw-4B epistasis), but decreased SDW with the QSdw-2D/QSdw-5A epistasis (Table 4). The recombinant type q1q1Q2Q2 had the reverse effects of Q1Q1Q2Q2.
For CHL, three epistasis (QChl-1D/QChl-4A, QChl-2A/QChl-4D and QChl-6B/QChl-6D) were detected. The CHL values were increased by 0.46–0.48 in the parental type Q1Q1Q2Q2, but decreased in the recombination type q1q1Q2Q2.
Seven epistasis were identified for traits related to K+ and Na+ concentrations, with six had significant aat effects. The parental type Q1Q1Q2Q2 resulted in increased RKC in the QRkc-5A1/QRkc-5B epistasis, while the recombination type Q1Q1q2q2 had the negative effect. Significant aat effects were detected in the QRkc-5A2/QRkc-7B, QRnc-2A/QRnc-7D, QRkn-2B/QRkn-2D, QSnc-2D/QSnc-3D, QSkn-1A/QSkn-3A and QSkn-3B/QSkn-3D epistasis (Table 4). The parental type Q1Q1Q2Q2 increased RKC, SNC and SKN, but decreased RNC and RKN due to aat effects.
MCIM analysis for QTL clusters
Among the QTLs, 21 out of the 29 additive QTLs and 10 out of the 17 epistasis were detected to have no Q × T effects (Tables 3, 4); indicating that the QTLs can affect the traits in both the N and the S treatments. Furthermore, ten intervals on chromosomes 1A, 1D, 2A (two), 2D, 3B, 4B, 5A, 5B and 7D showed overlapping QTL regions for at least two traits (Fig. 1). MCIM analysis using individual treatment data indicated 14 intervals that associated with more than one QTL on chromosomes 1B, 2D, 4B, 5A, 5B, 7A, 7B and 7D (Table 5). Eleven intervals on chromosomes 1B, 2D, 4B, 5A, 5B, and 7B can affect at least one trait in both the N and S treatments, while eleven intervals on chromosomes 2D, 4B, 5A, 5B, 7A, 7B and 7D were associated with more than one trait.
The interval Xcfd53-Xwmc112 on chromosome 2D for biomass production was the most significant of overlapping QTLs. It can affect RDW, TDW and RL with LOD scores more than 2.5; while affect SDW and SKC with lower LOD scores (Table 5; Fig. 2). Furthermore, it was also associated with plant height, spike length and kernel weight per spike at various environments in field experiments (Wang et al. unpublished). The RILs were divided into Xiaoyan 54 and Jing 411 genotype classes according to the presence of the co-segregation marker Xcfd53. The two genotype classes were significantly different for RDW, SDW and TDW in both the N and S treatments (Fig. 3).
Discussion
Relationships between the traits and salt tolerance
Appropriate traits and efficient techniques are necessary for identifying salt tolerance. Both morphological traits and physiological traits can be used as indicators for salt tolerance. A detailed list of traits and techniques used to evaluate salt tolerance was summarized (Munns and James 2003). The Na+ concentration and K+/Na+ ratio were critical measures of salt tolerance in plants (Munns and Tester 2008; Tester and Davenport 2003). The K+/Na+ ratio was regarded as the most important determinant of salt tolerance (Chhipa and Lal 1995; Pardo 2010; Shavrukov et al. 2009).
In our study, all the biomass traits and some of the physiological traits (CHL, SNC, SKC and SKN) were significantly correlated with SII, indicating the traits can be used for evaluating salt tolerance. The Na+ exclusion from the shoots, K+ accumulation in the shoots, and increased K+/Na+ ratio can improve salt tolerance of wheat. The element Na+ inhibits K+ uptake and competes with K+ for binding sites in enzymes due to their physicochemical similarity, and may result in cytotoxicity (Pardo 2010; Qi and Spalding 2004; Rodriguez-Navarro and Rubio 2006; Serrano 1996). In our study, SKC and SNC were negatively correlated (r = −0.58, P ≤ 0.01) in the S treatment, indicating that the uptake of K+ may restrain the uptake of Na+. A similar competition relationship between shoot K+ and Na+ under salt stress was found in rice (Lin et al. 2004).
Relationships between additive, epistatic and Q × T QTLs
Previous studies have demonstrated that the epistatic and Q × E interactions were prevalent in quantitative trait inheritance (Doebley et al. 1995; Yu et al. 1997). QTLs with epistatic and Q × E effects have been detected for plant height (Zhang et al. 2008), heading data (Zhang et al. 2009) and water-soluble carbohydrates (Yang et al. 2007a) in wheat. Trials at different levels of salt stress have also been conducted in wheat to compare QTL expression under different salinity levels (Genc et al. 2010). But there have been no reports on epistatic and Q × E or Q × T interactions for salt tolerance in wheat.
Among the 29 additive QTLs detected in our study, four were involved in digenic effects. Eight out of the 29 additive QTLs and seven out of the 17 epistasis were identified to have significant Q × T interactions. For traits related to Na+, K+ concentrations and K+/Na+ ratio, six out of the 15 additive QTLs and six out of the seven epistatic QTLs were involved in significant Q × T interactions. But none of the QTLs for biomass production were involved in Q × T interaction. These results showed that additive and epistatic effects were common, but the physiological traits rather than biomass traits are more likely to be involved in Q × T interactions at seedling stage of wheat. This could be due to traits related to Na+, K+, especially Na+ concentration had greater differences between the N and S treatments than biomass traits (Table 1).
QTL co-location and trait correlation
QTL clusters and/or co-located QTLs for different traits were reported in many previous studies (Groos et al. 2003; Li et al. 2007; Marza et al. 2006; Quarrie et al. 2005; Sun et al. 2009). Ma et al. (2007a) found four clusters on chromosomes 4D, 3A, 3B and 6D for traits related to salt tolerance. Genc et al. (2010) detected eight loci on chromosomes 1A, 4B, 5A, 5B, 5D, 6A, 6D and 7A that related to at least two QTLs for different traits.
In the present study, ten loci on chromosomes 1A, 1D, 2A (two), 2D, 3B, 4B, 5A, 5B and 7D were detected to affect more than one trait. For each of the ten loci, the correlations between the traits related were consistent with the additive effects of the corresponding QTLs. Among them, seven loci had similar additive effect for the two traits related, and the correlation coefficients between the two traits were significant and positive. As has been previously noted, each cluster may represent a single locus or tightly linked loci (Ma et al. 2007a; Paterson 1995; Veldboom et al. 1994). MCIM analysis indicated 14 chromosome intervals that affect more than one trait or at least one trait in both the N and S treatments. The QTL clusters on chromosomes 2D, 4B, 5B and 7D were detected to be single loci that affect more than one trait. The closely linked marker Xcfd53 for the QTL that affect both seedling and maturity biomass/yield traits on chromosome 2D was effective in MAS.
Homoeologous QTLs
Traits may be controlled by homoeologous genes from different chromosomes due to the allopolyploid nature of the wheat genome. Homoeologous QTLs were reported in both hexaploid (Kumar et al. 2007; Quarrie et al. 2005, 2006) and tetraploid wheat (Peleg et al. 2009). For salt tolerance, homoeologous regions have been reported for SII at germination and seedling stage (Ma et al. 2007a) and yield at adult stage under salt stress (Quarrie et al. 2005) on group 5 of wheat. In the present study, 11 pairs of such QTLs were detected on six chromosome groups of wheat, i.e., group 1 for TDW and RL, group 2 for TDW, SDW and RKN, group 3 for SKN, group 4 for SH and CHL, group 5 for RKC, and group 6 for RL and CHL (Fig. 1). The high ratio of homoeologous QTLs is a great reflection of the synteny among the A, B and D genomes of wheat. Among the homoeologous QTLs, each of ten pairs was contributed by a same parent, indicating a strong genetic plasticity of the QTLs.
Salt tolerance differences between the shoots and the roots
Previous QTL analysis for salt tolerance at seedling stage focused on shoots traits; there was only one study in rice that referred to root traits, which suggested that there was a different genetic basis for salt tolerance of Na+ and K+ transportation between the shoots and roots (Lin et al. 2004). In our study, three intervals on chromosomes 3B, 4B and 5A were effective for both shoot traits and root traits, among which the interval on chromosome 5A affected the corresponding trait (dry weight) of the shoots and the roots.
The QTLs identified in this study, especially those with epistatic effects and Q × T interactions, facilitate better understanding of the genetic basis of salt tolerance at seedling stage, and may facilitate further functional analysis of salt tolerance genes in wheat. The molecular markers closely linked to the QTLs provide useful information for the MAS in wheat breeding.
Abbreviations
- CHL:
-
Chlorophyll content (SPAD value)
- MAS:
-
Marker-assisted selection
- N:
-
Normal water treatment
- QTL:
-
Quantitative trait locus
- Q × E :
-
QTL × environment
- Q × T :
-
QTL × treatment
- a :
-
Additive
- aa :
-
Additive × additive
- at :
-
Additive × treatment
- aat :
-
Epistasis × treatment
- RDW:
-
Root dry weight
- RIL:
-
Recombinant inbred line
- RKC:
-
Root K+ concentration
- RKN:
-
Root K+/Na+ concentration ratio
- RL:
-
Root length
- RNC:
-
Root Na+ concentration
- S:
-
Salt stress treatment
- SDW:
-
Shoot dry weight
- SH:
-
Shoot height
- SII:
-
Salt injury index
- SKC:
-
Shoot K+ concentration
- SKN:
-
Shoot K+/Na+ concentration ratio
- SNC:
-
Shoot Na+ concentration
- TDW:
-
Total dry weight
References
Cao G, Zhu J, He C, Gao Y, Yan J, Wu P (2001) Impact of epistasis and QTL × environment interaction on the developmental behavior of plant height in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Theor Appl Genet 103(1):153–160. doi:10.1007/s001220100536
Chhipa BR, Lal P (1995) Na/K ratios as the basis of salt tolerance in wheat. Aust J Agric Res 46(3):533–539
Doebley J, Stec A, Gustus C (1995) Teosinte branched1 and the origin of maize: evidence for epistasis and the evolution of dominance. Genetics 141(1):333–346
Doerge RW (2002) Mapping and analysis of quantitative trait loci in experimental populations. Nat Rev Genet 3(1):43–52
Fan CC, Yu XQ, Xing YZ, Xu CG, Luo LJ, Zhang QF (2005) The main effects, epistatic effects and environmental interactions of QTLs on the cooking and eating quality of rice in a doubled-haploid line population. Theor Appl Genet 110(8):1445–1452. doi:10.1007/s00122-005-1975-y
Foolad MR (1999) Comparison of salt tolerance during seed germination and vegetative growth in tomato by QTL mapping. Genome 42(4):727–734
Foolad MR, Chen FQ (1999) RFLP mapping of QTLs conferring salt tolerance during the vegetative stage in tomato. Theor Appl Genet 99(1–2):235–243
Foolad MR, Zhang LP, Lin GY (2001) Identification and validation of QTLs for salt tolerance during vegetative growth in tomato by selective genotyping. Genome 44(3):444–454
Genc Y, Oldach K, Verbyla AP, Lott G, Hassan M, Tester M, Wallwork H, McDonald GK (2010) Sodium exclusion QTL associated with improved seedling growth in bread wheat under salinity stress. Theor Appl Genet 121(5):877–894. doi:10.1007/s00122-010-1357-y
Gong JM, He P, Qian QA, Shen LS, Zhu LH, Chen SY (1999) Identification of salt-tolerance QTL in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Chin Sci Bull 44(1):68–71
Groos C, Robert N, Bervas E, Charmet G (2003) Genetic analysis of grain protein-content, grain yield and thousand-kernel weight in bread wheat. Theor Appl Genet 106(6):1032–1040. doi:10.1007/s00122-002-1111-1
Gupta PK, Mir RR, Mohan A, Kumar J (2008) Wheat genomics: present status and future prospects. Int J Plant Genomics 2008(Article ID 896451):1–36. doi:10.1155/2008/896451
Han YP, Teng WL, Sun DS, Du YP, Qiu LJ, Xu XL, Li WB (2008) Impact of epistasis and QTL × environment interaction on the accumulation of seed mass of soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.). Genet Res 90(6):481–491. doi:10.1017/S0016672308009865
Hoagland D, Arnon D (1950) The water culture method for growing plants without soil. California Agricultural Experiment Station Circular: 347
Jansen RC, Vanooijen JW, Stam P, Lister C, Dean C (1995) Genotype-by-environment interaction in genetic mapping of multiple quantitative trait loci. Theor Appl Genet 91(1):33–37
Jiang CJ, Zeng ZB (1995) Multiple trait analysis of genetic mapping for quantitative trait loci. Genetics 140(3):1111–1127
Kumar N, Kulwal PL, Balyan HS, Gupta PK (2007) QTL mapping for yield and yield contributing traits in two mapping populations of bread wheat. Mol Breeding 19(2):163–177. doi:10.1007/s11032-006-9056-8
Lee SY, Ahn JH, Cha YS, Yun DW, Lee MC, Ko JC, Lee KS, Eun MY (2006) Mapping of quantitative trait loci for salt tolerance at the seedling stage in rice. Mol Cells 21(2):192–196
Li SS, Jia JZ, Wei XY, Zhang XC, Li LZ, Chen HM, Fan YD, Sun HY, Zhao XH, Lei TD, Xu YF, Jiang FS, Wang HG, Li LH (2007) A intervarietal genetic map and QTL analysis for yield traits in wheat. Mol Breeding 20(2):167–178
Li ZS, Li B, Tong YP (2008) The contribution of distant hybridization with decaploid Agropyron elongatum to wheat improvement in China. J Genet Genomics 35(8):451–456
Liao CY, Wu P, Hu B, Yi KK (2001) Effects of genetic background and environment on QTLs and epistasis for rice (Oryza sativa L.) panicle number. Theor Appl Genet 103(1):104–111
Lin HX, Zhu MZ, Yano M, Gao JP, Liang ZW, Su WA, Hu XH, Ren ZH, Chao DY (2004) QTLs for Na+ and K+ uptake of the shoots and roots controlling rice salt tolerance. Theor Appl Genet 108(2):253–260. doi:10.1007/s00122-003-1421-y
Lindsay MP, Lagudah ES, Hare RA, Munns R (2004) A locus for sodium exclusion (Nax1), a trait for salt tolerance, mapped in durum wheat. Funct Plant Biol 31(11):1105–1114. doi:10.1071/Fp04111
Liu X, Shi J, Zhang XY, Ma YS, Jia JZ (2001) Screening salt tolerance germplasms and tagging the tolerance gene(s) using microsatellite (SSR) markers in wheat. Acta Bot Sin 43(9):948–954
Liu G, Yang J, Xu H, Zhu J (2007) Influence of epistasis and QTL × environment interaction on heading date of rice (Oryza sativa L.). J Genet Genomics 34(7):608–615
Ma LQ, Zhou EF, Huo NX, Zhou RH, Wang GY, Jia JZ (2007a) Genetic analysis of salt tolerance in a recombinant inbred population of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Euphytica 153(1–2):109–117
Ma XQ, Tang JH, Teng WT, Yan JB, Meng YJ, Li JS (2007b) Epistatic interaction is an important genetic basis of grain yield and its components in maize. Mol Breeding 20(1):41–51. doi:10.1007/s11032-006-9071-9
Mano Y, Takeda K (1997) Mapping quantitative trait loci for salt tolerance at germination and the seedling stage in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.). Euphytica 94(3):263–272
Marza F, Bai GH, Carver BF, Zhou WC (2006) Quantitative trait loci for yield and related traits in the wheat population Ning7840 × Clark. Theor Appl Genet 112(4):688–698. doi:10.1007/s00122-005-0172-3
Munns R, James RA (2003) Screening methods for salinity tolerance: a case study with tetraploid wheat. Plant Soil 253(1):201–218
Munns R, Tester M (2008) Mechanisms of salinity tolerance. Annu Rev Plant Biol 59:651–681. doi:10.1146/annurev.arplant.59.032607.092911
Pardo JM (2010) Biotechnology of water and salinity stress tolerance. Curr Opin Biotechnol 21(2):185–196. doi:10.1016/j.copbio.2010.02.005
Paterson AH (1995) Molecular dissection of quantitative traits: progress and prospects. Genome Res 5(4):321–333
Peleg Z, Fahima T, Krugman T, Abbo S, Yakir D, Korol AB, Saranga Y (2009) Genomic dissection of drought resistance in durum wheat × wild emmer wheat recombinant inbreed line population. Plant, Cell Environ 32(7):758–779. doi:10.1111/j.1365-3040.2009.01956.x
Pitman MG, Läuchli A (2004) Global impact of salinity and agricultural ecosystems. In: Läuchli A, Lüttge U (eds) Salinity: environment-plants-molecules. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, pp 3–20
Prasad SR, Bagali PG, Hittalmani S, Shashidhar HE (2000) Molecular mapping of quantitative trait loci associated with seedling tolerance to salt stress in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Curr Sci India 78(2):162–164
Qi Z, Spalding EP (2004) Protection of plasma membrane K+ transport by the salt overly sensitive1 Na+-H+ antiporter during salinity stress. Plant Physiol 136(1):2548–2555. doi:10.1104/pp.104.049213
Quarrie SA, Steed A, Calestani C, Semikhodskii A, Lebreton C, Chinoy C, Steele N, Pljevljakusic D, Waterman E, Weyen J, Schondelmaier J, Habash DZ, Farmer P, Saker L, Clarkson DT, Abugalieva A, Yessimbekova M, Turuspekov Y, Abugalieva S, Tuberosa R, Sanguineti MC, Hollington PA, Aragues R, Royo A, Dodig D (2005) A high-density genetic map of hexaploid wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) from the cross Chinese Spring × SQ1 and its use to compare QTLs for grain yield across a range of environments. Theor Appl Genet 110(5):865–880. doi:10.1007/s00122-004-1902-7
Quarrie SA, Quarrie SP, Radosevic R, Rancic D, Kaminska A, Barnes JD, Leverington M, Ceoloni C, Dodig D (2006) Dissecting a wheat QTL for yield present in a range of environments: from the QTL to candidate genes. J Exp Bot 57(11):2627–2637. doi:10.1093/Jxb/Erl026
Quesada V, García-Martínez S, Piqueras P, Ponce MR, Micol JL (2002) Genetic architecture of NaCl tolerance in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol 130(2):951–963. doi:10.1104/Pp.006536
Rodriguez-Navarro A, Rubio F (2006) High-affinity potassium and sodium transport systems in plants. J Exp Bot 57(5):1149–1160. doi:10.1093/Jxb/Erj068
Serrano R (1996) Salt tolerance in plants and microorganisms: toxicity targets and defense responses. Int Rev Cytol 165:1–52
Shavrukov Y, Langridge P, Tester M (2009) Salinity tolerance and sodium exclusion in genus Triticum. Breeding Sci 59(5):671–678
Shen XL, Zhang TZ, Guo WZ, Zhu XF, Zhang XY (2006) Mapping fiber and yield QTLs with main, epistatic, and QTL × environment interaction effects in recombinant inbred lines of upland cotton. Crop Sci 46(1):61–66. doi:10.2135/scopsci2005.0056
Sun XY, Wu K, Zhao Y, Kong FM, Han GZ, Jiang HM, Huang XJ, Li RJ, Wang HG, Li SS (2009) QTL analysis of kernel shape and weight using recombinant inbred lines in wheat. Euphytica 165(3):615–624. doi:10.1007/s10681-008-9794-2
Takehisa H, Shimodate T, Fukuta Y, Ueda T, Yano M, Yamaya T, Kameya T, Sato T (2004) Identification of quantitative trait loci for plant growth of rice in paddy field flooded with salt water. Field Crop Res 89(1):85–95. doi:10.1016/j.fcr.2004.01.026
Tester M, Davenport R (2003) Na+ tolerance and Na+ transport in higher plants. Ann Bot (London) 91(5):503–527. doi:10.1093/Aob/Mcg058
Tuberosa R, Salvi S (2007) Dissecting QTLs for tolerance to drought and salinity. In: Jenks MA, Hasegawa PM, Jain M (eds) Advances in molecular breeding toward drought and salt tolerant crops. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 381–411
Veldboom LR, Lee M, Woodman WL (1994) Molecular marker-facilitated studies in an elite maize population: I. Linkage analysis and determination of QTL for morphological traits. Theor Appl Genet 88(1):7–16
Villalta I, Reina-Sanchez A, Bolarin MC, Cuartero J, Belver A, Venema K, Carbonell EA, Asins MJ (2008) Genetic analysis of Na+ and K+ concentrations in leaf and stem as physiological components of salt tolerance in tomato. Theor Appl Genet 116(6):869–880. doi:10.1007/s00122-008-0720-8
Wang BH, Wu YT, Guo WZ, Zhu XF, Huang NT, Zhang TZ (2007) QTL analysis and epistasis effects dissection of fiber qualities in an elite cotton hybrid grown in second generation. Crop Sci 47(4):1384–1392. doi:10.2135/cropsci2006.10.0647
Xing YZ, Tan YF, Hua JP, Sun XL, Xu CG, Zhang Q (2002) Characterization of the main effects, epistatic effects and their environmental interactions of QTLs on the genetic basis of yield traits in rice. Theor Appl Genet 105(2–3):248–257. doi:10.1007/s00122-002-0952-y
Xu YB, Crouch JH (2008) Marker-assisted selection in plant breeding: from publications to practice. Crop Sci 48(2):391–407. doi:10.2135/cropsci2007.04.0191
Yang DL, Jing RL, Chang XP, Li W (2007a) Identification of quantitative trait loci and environmental interactions for accumulation and remobilization of water-soluble carbohydrates in wheat (Tiiticum aestivum L.) stems. Genetics 176(1):571–584. doi:10.1534/genetics.106.068361
Yang J, Zhu J, Williams RW (2007b) Mapping the genetic architecture of complex traits in experimental populations. Bioinformatics 23(12):1527–1536. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btm143
Yang J, Hu CC, Hu H, Yu RD, Xia Z, Ye XZ, Zhu J (2008) QTLNetwork: mapping and visualizing genetic architecture of complex traits in experimental populations. Bioinformatics 24(5):721–723. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btm494
Yu SB, Li JX, Tan YF, Gao YJ, Li XH, Zhang QF, Maroof MAS (1997) Importance of epistasis as the genetic basis of heterosis in an elite rice hybrid. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94(17):9226–9231
Zhang KP, Tian JC, Zhao L, Wang SS (2008) Mapping QTLs with epistatic effects and QTL × environment interactions for plant height using a doubled haploid population in cultivated wheat. J Genet Genomics 35(2):119–127
Zhang KP, Tian JC, Zhao L, Liu B, Chen GF (2009) Detection of quantitative trait loci for heading date based on the doubled haploid progeny of two elite Chinese wheat cultivars. Genetica 135(3):257–265. doi:10.1007/s10709-008-9274-6
Acknowledgments
This research was financially supported by National Basic Research Program of China (No. 2011CB100100) and the Knowledge Innovation Program of Chinese Academy of Sciences (No. KSCX2-EW-J-5).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Xu, YF., An, DG., Liu, DC. et al. Mapping QTLs with epistatic effects and QTL × treatment interactions for salt tolerance at seedling stage of wheat. Euphytica 186, 233–245 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-012-0647-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-012-0647-7