Spot blotch (SB) of wheat is emerging as a major threat to successful wheat production in warm and humid areas of the world. SB, also called leaf blight, is caused by Bipolaris sorokiniana, and is responsible for high yield losses in Eastern Gangetic Plains Zone in India. More recently, SB is extending gradually toward cooler, traditional wheat-growing North-Western part of the country which is a major contributor to the national cereal basket. Deployment of resistant cultivars is considered as the most economical and ecologically sound measure to avoid losses due to this disease. In the present study, 89 backcross introgression lines (DSBILs) derived from Triticum durum (cv. PDW274-susceptible) × Aegilops speltoides (resistant) were evaluated against SB for four consecutive years, 2016–2020. Phenotypic evaluation of these lines showed a continuous variation in disease severity indicating that the resistance to SB is certainly quantitative in nature. Phenotypic data of DSBILs were further used for mapping QTLs using SNPs obtained by genotyping by sequencing. To identify QTLs stable across the environments, Best Linear Unbiased Estimates (BLUEs) and Predictions (BLUPs) were used for mapping QTLs based on stepwise regression-based Likelihood Ratio Test (RSTEP-LRT) for additive effect of markers and single marker analysis (SMA). Five QTLs, Q.Sb.pau-2A, Q.Sb.pau-2B, Q.Sb.pau-3B, Q.Sb.pau-5B, and Q.Sb.pau-6A, linked to SB resistance were mapped across chromosomes 2A, 2B, 3B, 5B, and 6A. Genes found adjacent to the SNP markers linked to these QTLs were literature mined to identify possible candidate genes by studying their role in plant pathogenesis. Further, highly resistant DSBIL (DSBIL-13) was selected to cross with a susceptible hexaploidy cultivar (HD3086) generating BC2F1 population. The QTL Q.Sb.pau-5B, linked to SNP S5B_703858864, was validated on this BC2F1 population and thus, may prove to be a potential diagnostic marker for SB resistance.

Abstract-Mobile ad hoc network is an infrastructure less network. Each node consists of a router and a host, usually on the same computer. If these nodes are directly in contact with each other they can communicate directly, otherwise the nodes have to communicate by using the intermediate node. These protocols have limited bandwidth, limited power supply, mobility and routing overhead. A number of routing protocols have been designed to overcome these issues. Table driven, On-demand and Hybrid routing are types of MANET routing protocols. In this paper, we present review for hybrid routing protocols Zone Routing Protocol (ZRP), Hybrid Cluster Routing (HCR) and AntHocNet. We compare these protocols based on the routing methodology and information. Keywords-ZRP, HCR, AntHocNet, Hybrid Routing Protocol, MANET, Routing Protocols I. INTRODUCTIONMANET is an infrastructure less network opposed to infrastructure network. In infrastructure less network nodes are communicate without any centralized control or established infrastructure [1]. Due to these MANET is used in different area: Military Use, Search and rescue, Vehicle-to-Vehicle communication in intelligent transportation, Temporary networks in meeting rooms, airports etc. In MANET node acts as a router. Routing is challenging task in MANET due to limited bandwidth and transmission range. As nodes are moved quickly in MANET and changes their path quickly. There are different types of routing protocols are comes with different routing methodology so as to overcome the challenging task in MANET routing. Based, on these routing protocols in MANET are divide into three categories[2]:

Mobile ad hoc networks are data networks entirely made up of end user communication terminals (known as nodes). Each node in the network can act as an information sink (i.e. a receiver), a source and a router. All nodes have a transmission range, which is limited by their transmission power, attenuation and interference. Recently, a number of routing protocols have been designed to overcome limited bandwidth in the wireless medium, limited power supply, mobility and routing overhead. These protocols are classified into three different categories: Proactive Routing Protocols, Reactive Routing Protocols and Hybrid Routing Protocols. In this paper, we provide overview of hybrid routing protocols, Zone Routing Protocol (ZRP), Hybrid Cluster Routing (HCR) and AnthocNet. The comparison of Zone Routing Protocol (ZRP), Hybrid Cluster Routing (HCR) and AnthocNet are analysed on the basis of network performance parameters Throughput, Load, Packet Delivery Ratio using simulator OPNET 14.0