Mapping of QTL for Fusarium head blight resistance and morphological and developmental traits in three backcross populations derived from Triticum dicoccum × Triticum durum

Abstract

Breeding for resistance to Fusarium head blight (FHB) in durum wheat continues to be hindered by the lack of effective resistance sources. Only limited information is available on resistance QTL for FHB in tetraploid wheat. In this study, resistance to FHB of a Triticum dicoccum line in the background of three Austrian T. durum cultivars was genetically characterized. Three populations of BC1F4-derived RILs were developed from crosses between the resistant donor line T. dicoccum-161 and the Austrian T. durum recipient varieties DS-131621, Floradur and Helidur. About 130 BC1F4-derived lines per population were evaluated for FHB response using artificial spray inoculation in four field experiments during two seasons. Lines were genetically fingerprinted using SSR and AFLP markers. Genomic regions on chromosomes 3B, 4B, 6A, 6B and 7B were significantly associated with FHB severity. FHB resistance QTL on 6B and 7B were identified in two populations and a resistance QTL on 4B appeared in three populations. The alleles that enhanced FHB resistance were derived from the T. dicoccum parent, except for the QTL on chromosome 3B. All QTL except the QTL on 6A mapped to genomic regions where QTL for FHB have previously been reported in hexaploid wheat. QTL on 3B and 6B coincided with Fhb1 and Fhb2, respectively. This implies that tetraploid and hexaploid wheat share common genomic regions associated with FHB resistance. QTL for FHB resistance on 4B co-located with a major QTL for plant height and mapped at the position of the Rht-B1 gene, while QTL on 7B overlapped with QTL for flowering time.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00122-012-1951-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Meta-analysis of Resistance to Fusarium Head Blight in Tetraploid Wheat: Implications for Durum Wheat Breeding

“…Positions of the QTL on 3B and 6B overlapped with those of the well documented genes Fhb1 and Fhb2 , respectively, which were fi rst described in the hexaploid cultivar Sumai-3 (Buerstmayr et al 2009 ). Allele survey at these loci by Buerstmayr et al ( 2012 ) revealed different SSR marker haplotypes between tetraploid lines and Sumai-3. The existence of resistance improving alleles at these loci in tetraploid wheat may circumvent the need to transfer resistance from hexaploid Asian sources into durum wheat.…”

“…Durum wheat itself contributed resistance-improving alleles for the QTL on 2B (Gladysz et al 2007 ;Somers et al 2006 ), 3B (Buerstmayr et al 2012 ;Ghavami et al 2011 ) and 5B (Ghavami et al 2011 ). This backs up the idea that in current durum wheat a certain level of FHB resistance is already available.…”

“…For example, under fi eld conditions with spray inoculation a large effect QTL for FHB resistance was mapped at the position of the major plant height gene Rht-B1 on chromosome 4B and a FHB resistance QTL on 7B coincided with a QTL for heading date (Buerstmayr et al 2012 ). It is not clear yet whether or not these genes have pleiotropic effects or rather an indirect infl uence on FHB resistance due to plant height and fl owering date per se.…”

A valuable QTL for Fusarium head blight resistance from Triticum turgidum L. ssp. dicoccoides has a stable expression in durum wheat cultivars

“…Tetraploid relatives have proved to be an important source of FHB resistance (Prat et al 2014). QTLs conferring resistance were identified in T. carthlicum (Somers et al 2006), T. dicoccum (Buerstmayr et al 2012;Ruan et al 2012;Zhang et al 2014) and T. dicoccoides (Otto et al 2002;Chen et al 2007;Kumar et al 2007;Buerstmayr et al 2013), in some cases were mapped in similar positions as resistance QTLs described for hexaploid wheat.…”

Behaviour of durum wheat cultivars towards deoxynivalenol content: A multi-year assay in Italy

“…Several studies have been so far successfully carried out to identify traits involved in FHB resistance in soft wheat (Triticum aestivum L.); whereas the sources of FHB resistance in durum wheat (Triticum durum Desf.) have not been fully identified yet (Buerstmayr et al, 2009(Buerstmayr et al, , 2012Jauhar and Peterson, 2009;Lionetti et al, 2015;Ruan et al, 2012). Durum wheat is by far more FHB-susceptible than soft wheat, and its susceptibility to FHB disease and mycotoxin accumulation in kernels is of particular concern in Italy because of its key role in pasta production (Bottalico and Perrone, 2002; This work aims at examining the behaviour of several durum wheat cultivars grown in a multi-year period in Italy in relation to deoxynivalenol content detected in kernels.…”