| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
a Univ. of Missouri-Delta Center, P.O. Box 160, Portageville, MO 63873
b Division of Plant Sciences, 271-F Christopher S. Bond Life Sciences Center
c USDA-ARS, Plant Genetics Research Unit, 210 Waters Hall, Univ. of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211
d USDA-ARS, North Carolina State Univ., 3127 Ligon St., Raleigh, NC 27695-7631
* Corresponding author (shannong{at}missouri.edu).
Soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] germplasm lines S01-9364 (Reg. No. GP-350, PI 646156), and S01-9391 (Reg. No. 351, PI 646157) were developed and released by the University of Missouri Agricultural Experiment Station, and the USDA-ARS in May, 2006. They have value as parents in soybean improvement programs because of their broad resistance to soybean cyst nematode (SCN) Heterodera glycines Ichinohe populations and seed oil with 30 to 40 g kg–1 linolenic acid content compared to 70 to 80 g kg–1 for commercial cultivars of similar maturity. Low linolenic acid (30 g kg–1 or less) is desirable to improve oil shelf life, stability at high cooking temperatures, and to reduce the need for hydrogenation which produces undesirable transisomers that may be related to increased heart disease in humans (Wilson, 2004).
S01-9364 is an F4 selection composited in the F5 generation from ‘Anand’ (Anand et al., 2001) x a low linolenic acid selection from ‘Delsoy 5710’ (Anand, 2000) x (S92-1403 x N94-2529). S92-1403 is from Pioneer Brand 9581 x ‘Hartwig’ (Anand, 1992). P9581 developed by Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Johnston, IA is from [‘Mack’ (Caviness et al., 1972) x ‘Forrest’ (Hartwig and Epps, 1973)] x J74-90. J74-90 is a sib of ‘Bedford’ (Hartwig and Epps, 1978). N94-2529 is a low linolenic acid selection developed by the USDA-ARS and the North Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station and contains the low linolenic acid gene FAD3A derived from PI 123440 (R. Dewey and J. Burton, personal communication, 2006). N94-2529 was derived from N87-2120-3 x ‘Brim’ (Burton et al., 1994a). N87-2120 is a low-linolenic reduced palmitic F4 selection from the cross, N79-2077 (Burton et al., 1994b) x PI 123440.
S01-9391 is an F4 derived F5 line from S95-1908 x [S93-1495 x (‘Holladay’ (Burton et al., 1996) x N94-2429)]. S95-1908 is from S92-1495 x NKS59-60. S92-1495 is from AT550 x Hartwig. AT550 is a late group V SCN resistant cultivar grown commercially in the early 1990s. NKS59-60 is from Coker 485 x (Coker 237 x ‘Epps’ (Hartwig, 1984). Coker 485 is from ‘Centennial’ (Hartwig and Epps, 1977) x [(‘Hampton 266’ x ‘Bragg’) x ‘Hutton’] (Hinson and Hartwig, 1964; Hinson, 1973). Hampton 266 is a selection from ‘Coker Hampton’ (Webb and Hicks, 1965). S93-1475 is an SCN resistant selection from S85-1706 x Hartwig. S85-1706 is from Bedford x ‘Essex’ (Smith and Camper, 1973).
The low linolenic acid trait in S01-9364 and S01-9391 was recovered by advancing each cycle of crossing in the above pedigrees from the F1 to the F2 generation in the winter nursery. The following spring, one fourth to one third of the seed was cut and removed from each of 200 F2 seeds for a fatty acid profile analysis. The corresponding partial seeds with the embryo intact with < 40 g kg–1 linolenic acid were planted and used for crossing during the summer of each year. After the final cross and F2 seed chips were analyzed, corresponding F2 seed with low linolenic acid were planted and harvested. Seed from 12 low linolenic F2 plants were planted as F3 rows in the winter nursery. Five F3 plants from each row were selected and a five-seed sample from each plant was analyzed in bulk for fatty acid profile. Those plants with seeds low in linolenic acid were planted in F4 rows during the summer of 2000 and four single plants were selected from each row. Again, a five-seed sample from each single plant was analyzed in bulk for fatty acid profile and all plants low in linolenic acid were planted in F5 rows in 2001. Rows S01-9264 and S01-9391 which averaged 34 g kg–1 and 36 g kg–1 linolenic acid, respectively were selected and bulked for yield tests. Both lines were evaluated for reaction to a mixture of SCN HG types (Niblack et al., 2002) 0, 2-, and 1.3- (formerly races 3, 5, and 14) in the greenhouse during the winter of 2001–2002 and found to be resistant. Broad resistance to SCN was relatively easy to recover in these lines because the final two of the three crossing cycles involved highly resistant parents with resistance derived from PI437654 via Hartwig.
To verify that the low linolenic acid phenotype of S01-9364 and S01-9391 was ultimately derived from the fan allele of PI 123440, direct sequencing of intron 2 of the FAD3A gene (R. Dewey, USDA-ARS, North Carolina State University, personal communication, 2006) was performed on amplified DNA from 20 individual F10 S01-9364 plants and 19 individual F10 S01-9391 plants. All samples contained the PI 123440 allele-specific cytosine nucleotide at base 43 in intron 2. None of the plants of each genotype examined appeared to be heterozygous at this nucleotide position.
S01-9364 and S01-9391 are late group V maturity (relative maturity 5.7) with a determinate growth habit. S01-9364 has both purple and white flowers, gray pubescence and tan pods. Seeds are shiny yellow seed with buff hila. S01-9391 has purple flowers tawny pubescence and tan pods. Seeds are shiny yellow with black hila. Both lines were tested in Missouri in research trials at five southeast Missouri locations from 2003 to 2005. In comparison to Anand, S01-9364 and S01-9391 averaged up to 9% more seed yield, 1 d later, 10 cm taller and were more susceptible to lodging, averaged 1.6 to 2.1 g 100 seed–1 smaller seed, and had similar protein and oil contents compared to Anand (Table 1 ). Mean linolenic acid content of both lines over 3 yr ranged from 34 g kg–1 to 41 g kg–1 and averaged 37 g kg–1 compared to an average of 75 g kg–1 for Anand (Table 1). S01-9364 and S01-9391 are moderately resistant and highly resistant, respectively, to populations of SCN HG types 2.5.7, 1.2.5.7, 0, 2-, and 1.3- (formerly race 1, 2, 3, 5, and 14) based on greenhouse screening at Columbia and Portageville, MO during 2003 and 2005. SCN female indexes on S01-9364 for each HG type were 26, 4, 28, 1, and 1, respectively, based on a SCN female index of 100 for the susceptible check. SCN female indexes on S01-9391 for each HG type were 1, 1, 0, 0, and 0, respectively, based on a SCN female index of 100 for the susceptible check. Both lines are resistant to stem canker [caused by Diaporthe phaseolorum (Cooke and Ellis) Sacc. var. meridionalis F. A. Fernandez], bacterial pustule [caused by Xanthomonas axonpodis pv. glycines (Nakano) Vauterin et al.] and sudden death syndrome [Fusarium solani (Mort.) Sacc. f. sp. glycines Roy]. S01-9391 also has shown moderate resistance to southern root knot nematode [Meloidogyne incognita (Kofoid & White) Chitwood] in screening trials planted behind potatoes near Bertrand, Missouri from 2003–2005. S01-9364 and S01-9391 are susceptible to phytophthora root rot caused by Phytophthora sojae M. J. Kaufmann & J. W. Gerdemann.
|
Acknowledgments
The authors thank the United Soybean Board for the financial support in the development of this germplasm line through funding from USB Project 5222 "Development of mid-oleic, low-linolenic, low-saturated substitutes for partially hydrogenated soybean oil."
Footnotes
All rights reserved. No part of this periodical may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Permission for printing and for reprinting the material contained herein has been obtained by the publisher.
Received for publication July 11, 2006.
References
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| The SCI Journals | Agronomy Journal | Crop Science | |||
| Journal of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Education |
Vadose Zone Journal | ||||
| Soil Science Society of America Journal | Journal of Environmental Quality |
The Plant Genome | |||
