Selection of Aluminum‐Resistant Wheat Genotypes Using Multienvironment and Multivariate Indices

Abstract

A gain in association was obtained by using a new multivariate index with alleles of TaALMT1 and TaMATE1B genes compared with a previously published index. Wheat is among the major grain crops. Its growth can be affected by aluminum toxicity, an important stress factor that limits plant productivity. Thus, an efficient means to select wheat genotypes that are resistant to this stress is required. Here, 172 wheat cultivars and 23 synthetic hexaploid wheat plants showing different alleles for TaALMT1 and TaMATE1B and different levels of Al resistance in field conditions (phenotyped in two crop seasons) were studied. The modified Lin and Binns method was applied to obtain the phenotype data in a multivariate manner aiming at a general identification of genotypes based on the multiple traits evaluated. The genotype × year interaction was significant for all traits that were evaluated in three growth stages (tillering, silking, and maturation). The top 20 Al‐resistant genotypes obtained by the multivariate method were highlighted as having the best combination of the main desirable traits. Correlation analysis showed a gain in the association of the multivariate index with alleles of TaALMT1 and TaMATE1B genes compared with a previously published index. The superior TaMATE1B allele (having an insertion in the promoter region) contributed a greater Al resistance independent of the TaALMT1 allele. The higher association with Al resistance qualifies the selection index described in this study to be used for wheat breeding programs with the aim of improving the performance of wheat when grown under Al stress. Core Ideas Wheat is among the major grain crops. Its growth can be affected by aluminum toxicity. Genotypes with high adaptability and stability were identified. A new multivariate index allowed greater association with Al resistance.

Aluminum in plant: Benefits, toxicity and tolerance mechanisms

“…While the levels of Al are expressed in its compound forms in some studies (Wang et al, 2016;Li et al, 2018b), others expressed it in a trivalent form which gives a better representation of the amount of Al plant roots are exposed to (Awasthi et al, 2017;Jaskowiak et al, 2018;Sun et al, 2020b). Moreover, the toxic or beneficial effect of Al on plant growth depends largely on the growing conditions, Al concentration and duration of exposure, plant species and physiological age (Huang et al, 1992;Bojo ́rquez-Quintal et al, 2017;Aguilera et al, 2019;Ofoe et al, 2022). For example, low Al concentration of 0.25 and 0.5 mM did not affect Trifolium and tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) seedling root growth whereas high concentrations of 1.25 mM remarkably restricted root growth (Bortolin et al, 2020;Ofoe et al, 2022).…”

“…Aluminum is the third most widespread metal in the earth's crust, and its impact on plants depends largely on concentration, exposure time, plant species, developmental age, and growing conditions (Huang et al, 1992;Bojo ́rquez-Quintal et al, 2017;Aguilera et al, 2019;Ofoe et al, 2022). Beneficial effects of Al including stimulation of plant growth and mitigation of both biotic and abiotic stress have been reported in some plant species, especially in Al-tolerant species and when applied in lower concentrations (Andrivon, 1995;Arasimowicz-Jelonek et al, 2014;Wang et al, 2015b;Sun et al, 2020b;Zahra et al, 2021).…”

Metal ion toxicity and tolerance mechanisms in plants growing in acidic soil

“…In recent years, there are number of crops with definite genotypic background which showed resistance to the toxicity and hence, have been utilized by the plant breeders to develop crops with enhanced resistance to Al 3+ (Arunakumara et al, 2013). The molecular and physiological aspects of these resistant varieties have been put understudy to understand their mechanism of tolerance and the genes related to it (Aguilera et al, 2019).…”

Morpho-physiological parameters of wheat cultivar for cultivation on aluminum-acid soils

“…However, unlike the works of other authors, we showed that this decrease is due to different morphological parameters. There are some articles, for example [17], which use such indicators as the degree of development of ear, the presence of ear-bearing shoots but only for a summary point score of the resistance level; the authors did not make any conclusions on the use of these indicators for breeding purposes.…”