Selection for economic characters in Lupinus angustifolius and L. digitatus

Abstract

A search among field populations of Lupinus angustifolius L. and L. digitalus Forsk. yielded two morphologically and genetically distinct lines in each species with markedly reduced pod-shattering at maturity. In all four lines, reduced shattering was found to be due to a single recessive gene, the two genes of each species being non-allelic and probably unlinked. Double homozygotes were obtained, and proved to be fully non-shattering in both species. The anatomical changes resulting in reduced- or non-shattering are of at least two types. In one type of each species there is fusion of the normally divided strips of sclerenchyma in the pod seams, similar to that in the non-shattering Strain 3535A of L. luteus. In the others there is a weakening of the sclerified inner layer (endocarp) of the pod walls, similar to that in L. albus, L. mutabilis, and many other cultivated legumes. It is suggested that at least two independent homologous series of genes control pod-shattering in the genus Lupinus.

Development of two sequence-specific PCR markers linked to the le gene that reduces pod shattering in narrow-leafed Lupin (Lupinus angustifolius L.)

“…The second gene lentus (le) modified the orientation of the sclerified endocarp of the pod, resulting in a reduction of torsional forces upon drying, and hence reduced pod shatter. This gene was also associated with a reduction in the thickness of the pod wall, but not to the extent of the previously found strain of von Sengbusch and Zimmerman (1937), leading to the conclusion that the controlling genes were not the same (Gladstones, 1967). This modification was associated with a change in internal pod pigmentation that gave the immature pods a purplish tinge and the inside surface of mature pods a bright yellowish-brown color (Gladstones, 1967).…”

“…This gene was also associated with a reduction in the thickness of the pod wall, but not to the extent of the previously found strain of von Sengbusch and Zimmerman (1937), leading to the conclusion that the controlling genes were not the same (Gladstones, 1967). This modification was associated with a change in internal pod pigmentation that gave the immature pods a purplish tinge and the inside surface of mature pods a bright yellowish-brown color (Gladstones, 1967). In addition, this trait is also associated with development of a reddish pigmentation within the stem of plants older than two months.…”

“…Plants were either rated as LeLe (wild, shattering; pigment absent) or lele (domesticated, reduced shattering; pigment present) based on the method described by Gladstones (1967).…”

“…In the genus Lupinus, this characteristic has long been present in two speciesLupinus albus L., an old crop species of the Mediterranean region, and L. mutabilis (sweet) which has been cultivated in the Peruvian Andes for over 2000 years (Gladstones, 1967).…”

Evaluation Of Morphological Diversity Of Lupinus Angustifolius L. Depending On Growth Stages

“…Among the signs visible to the human eye these are the presence or absence of anthocyanin on the peduncle of the flower raceme and around the edges of leaflets, the color of endocarp, the width of leaflets, the abundance of trichomes on leaves and pods. The color of endocarp of the pod, for example, is a breeding sign, because its red-brown color is a marker of the presence of gene le (the resistance to the pod cracking) (Gladstones, 1967).…”