GrainGenes
A Database for Triticeae and Avena
ࡱ > #` bjbj5G5G B W- W- u# P t 8* 8* 8* 8 p* 4 * t `; < + + " + + + , , , 7: 9: 9: 9: 9: 9: 9: $ < h ? ]: , , , , , ]: + + ; 3 3 3 , l + + 7: 3 , 7: 3 3 3 + + 4MG 8* 1 d 3 4 $ 0; 0 `; 3 ? 1 ? 3 ? 3 8 , , 3 , , , , , ]: ]: 32 , , , `; , , , , t t t 8* t t t 8* D o m i n a n c e a n d r e c e s s i v e n e s s o f p a r a m e t e r s o f A l u m i n u m - r e s i s t a n c e o f b a r l e y F 2 h y b r i d s a t d i f f e r e n t c o n c e n t r a t i o n s o f s t r e s s f a c t o r
E . M . L i s i t s y n a n d I . I . L i s i t s y n a
N o r t h - E a s t A g r i c u l t u r a l R e s e a r c h I n s t i t u t e , 1 6 6 - 0 L e n i n s t r e e t , K i r o v , 6 1 0 0 0 7 , R u s s i a
e - m ail: edaphic@mail.ru
Till now there is no uniform opinion in the scientific literature about number and type of ac tion of genes coding barley aluminum resistance. For example, Rigin, Yakovleva (2001) considers, that it is controlled by two oligogenes, as a minimum, with possible action of genes with weaker effect. Other authors assume the control of the parameter by one dominant gene Pht [Stolen, Andersen, 1978], or gene Alp [Reid, 1971], both located on chromosome 4 [Minella, Sorrells, 1997].
Gourley et al [1990] concluded, that type of action of genes coding aluminum resistance in sorghum (additive, partially or completely dominant), depends not only on a researched geno type, but also on used Al concentration. Aniol [1995, 1996] has established, that when the concentration of aluminum in test solution is low (30-40 ) , c e r e a l c u l t u r e s ( w h e a t , r y e ) u s e m e c h a n i s m s t h a t b l o c k a c c u m u l a t i o n o f a l u m i n u m i n r o o t s ( f o r e x a m p l e , c h e l a t i o n o f a l u m i n u m a t t h e e x p e n s e o f e x u d a t i o n o f o r g a n i c a c i d s b y r o o t s y s t e m ) , a t h i g h e r c o n c e n t r a t i o n o f a l u m i n u m i n r o o t g r o w t h e n v i r o n m e n t ( 2 0 0 - 3 0 0 ) t h e b a s i c r o l e i s p l a y e d b y o t h e r p h y s i o l o g i c a l m e c h a n i s m s o f A l - r e s i s t a n c e . T h u s t h e a u t h o r r e m a r k s [ A n i o l , 1 9 9 7 ] t h a t t h e a l u m i n u m r e s i s t a n c e o f w h e a t p l a n t s a t a c o n c e n t r a t i o n o f 2 9 6 i s c o n t r o l l e d b y 2 g e n e s a n d a t a c o n c e n t r a t i o n o f 5 9 2 a l u m i n u m r e s i s t a n c e i s c o n t r o l l e d b y t h r e e g e n e s . H e w r o t e , t h a t g e n e s l o c a t e d i n D - g e n o m e o f w h e a t , a r e e x p r e s s e d o n l y a t h i g h A l c o n c e n t r a t i o n , a n d g e n e s l o c a t e d o n c h r o m o s o m e 5 a r e e x p r e s s e d a t a l l s t u d i e d c o n c e n t r a t i o n s .
T h e a i m o f o u r r e s e a r c h w a s t o d e t e r m i n e t h e i n f l u e n c e o f A l c o n c e n t r a t i o n o n a d i r e c t i o n a n d c h a r a c t e r o f d o m i n a n c e o f p a r a m e t e r s o f r o o t s g r o w t h o f b a r l e y F 2 h y b r i d s e e d l i n g s .
M a t e r i a l a n d M e t h o d s
T h e d i r e c t a n d r e c i p r o c a l F 2 h y b r i d s o f f o u r s e l e c t i o n n u m b e r s o f b a r l e y ( !! 565-98, 889-93, 999-93 and 1030-93), bred in North-East Agricultural Research Institute (Kirov, Russia) were taken for the analysis. By results of the preliminary laboratory analyses the parental forms of these hybrids differed significantly on a level of Al-resistance that corresponded to the research aim. A level of Al-resistance (relative root length - RRL) was estimated under conditions of rolled culture on five-day barley seedlings according to the technique described earlier [Lisitsyn, 2000] by divi s i o n o f v a l u e o f r o o t l e n g t h o f e a c h i n d i v i d u a l s e e d l i n g i n t e s t t r e a t m e n t v a r i a n t ( 0 . 5 a n d 1 . 0 m M o f a l u m i n u m a s s u l p h a t e s a l t , @ 4 . 3 ) o n v a l u e o f a v e r a g e r o o t l e n g t h o f c o n t r o l v a r i a n t ( w i t h o u t t h e s t r e s s f a c t o r , @ 6 . 0 ) . E a c h s a m p l e v o l u m e c o n s i s t s o f 9 9 - 1 0 5 s e e d l i n g s i n e a c h t r e a t m e n t v a r i a n t .
C h a r a c t e r o f d o m i n a n c e f o r p a r a m e t e r s o f r o o t g r o w t h o f F 2 h y b r i d p l a n t s w a s e s t i m a t e d b y e q u a t i o n [ P e t r , F r e y , 1 9 6 6 ] :
d = F 2 - M P
H P - M P
,
w h e r e d = d e g r e e o f d o m i n a n c e ; F 2 , , = m e a n s o f F 2 h y b r i d s , r e s i s t a n t p a r e n t v a l u e , a n d m i d p a r e n t v a l u e , r e s p e c t i v e l y .
R e s u l t s a n d D i s c u s s i o n
E x p r e s s i o n o f A l - r e s i s t a n c e g e n e s a p p r e c i a b l y d e p e n d o n a c o n c e n t r a t i o n o f a l u m i n u m i n t e s t s o l u t i o n a n d w i t h i t s i n c r e a s e t h e r e s i s t a n c e o f a l l h ybrids was reduced without exception (table 1).
Table 1. Parameters of root growth of barley F2 hybrids under laboratory condition
HybridRoot length, mmRRL, %0 mM Al0.5 mM Al1.0 mM Al0.5 mM1.0 mM565-98 x 889-93109.21.571.21.256.31.065.20.651.60.5889-93 x 565-93103.01.184.71.371.31.282.30.769.20.7565-98 x 999-93113.61.671.81.848.31.263.20.942.60.6999-93 x 565-98103.32.265.80.955.31.263.70.553.50.7565-98 x 1030-93112.71.174.21.157.01.365.80.650.60.71030-93 x 565-98110.81.479.31.365.21.071.60.758.80.5889-93 x 999-93107.72.276.01.761.01.570.50.756.60.8999-93 x 889-93106.91.170.71.558.20.866.10.854.50.4889-93 x 1030-93107.61.475.02.064.51.569.71.159.90.81030-93 x 889-93102.11.679.01.062.90.877.40.661.60.5999-93 x 1030-93104.91.675.61.652.21.772.00.949.80.91030-93 x 999-93111.21.277.41.059.61.269.50.553.60.6
As it is visible from data, submitted in table 2, depending on the cross and aluminum concentration used, for some hybrids the large value of root length was dominated, for others hybrids the smaller value, but for the third part of hybrids dominance of root length was absent practically. It is possible to note the same character of dominance for RRL parameter. The similar phenomenon was earlier marked in the literature for other cereals. So, [Camargo, 1981, 1984] pointed out, that Al-resistance of wheat F2 population was coded by dominant genes at con centration of aluminum 3 mg/l, but became recessive at increase of concentration of the stressful factor up to 10 mg/l. Similar results were described in the researches with wheat [Bona et al., 1994].
Table 2. Influence of direction of crossing on character of dominance of parameters of root growth of barley F2 hybrids
HybridDegree of dominance of a parameterRoot lengthRRL0 mM Al0.5 mM Al1.0 mM Al0.5 mM1.0 mM565-98 x 889-930.33-0.78-1.94-1.21-5.35889-93 x 565-93-0.940.341.260.995.00565-98 x 999-931.19-1.42-1.51-4.65-3.13999-93 x 565-98-0.44-2.12-0.70-4.50-0.85565-98 x 1030-93-0.81-0.45-0.51-0.37-0.401030-93 x 565-98-2.00-0.050.440.110.13889-93 x 999-934.331.181.10-0.160.23999-93 x 889-933.80-0.380.40-1.16-0.47889-93 x 1030-93-0.2510.141.981.671.151030-93 x 889-93-1.1115.961.583.471.40999-93 x 1030-93-0.351.05-4.000.590.171030-93 x 999-930.441.497.000.301.22
As it is follows from data, submitted in table 2, depending on a concrete combination of crossing domination of root length under control conditions, under both Al treatments and of RRL parameter can have positive or negative meanings, changing from negative super-domination till positive super-domination. Character and direction of domination can coincide for parameters of roots length under control conditions and under aluminum treatment, but sometimes can have an opposite direction.
Directions of crossing caused opposite character of dominance of researched p a r a m e t e r s o f A l - r e s i s t a n c e f o r h y b r i d s 5 6 5 - 9 8 E 8 8 9 - 9 3 a n d 8 8 9 - 9 3 E 5 6 5 - 9 8 . T h i s t e n d e n c y i s s o m e l e s s e x p r e s s e d a t h y b r i d s r e c e i v e d f r o m c r o s s i n g o f b r e e d i n g n u m b e r s 5 6 5 - 9 8 a n d 1 0 3 0 - 9 3 . A t t h e s a m e t i m e d i r e c t a n d r e c i p r o c a l h y b r i d s b e t w e e n b r e e d i n g n ^ j L N
q
J ` t ɺɮ}}k_ hh@ CJ aJ mH sH "hBM B*CJ \aJ mH ph sH hBM B*CJ aJ mH ph sH hBM 6CJ aJ mH sH h}m CJ aJ mH sH hBM CJ aJ hBM CJ aJ mH sH h+A 5CJ \aJ mH sH hBM 5CJ \aJ mH sH hh@ hBM 5H*\mH sH hh@ 5\mH sH hh@ hBM 5\mH sH % N
: < f Z \ J $1$ a$ $1$ a$ $
a$gdh@ $
J`Ja$gdh@ $)`)a$ $9`9a$ $`a$ $a$ $a$gdh@ X & @ b f
P t v . " : < L N T V f Z \ $ D J R V Է莁 hy 6CJ aJ mH sH h}m 6CJ aJ mH sH hBM B*CJ aJ mH ph sH hh@ hBM 5CJ aJ hh@ hBM 5CJ aJ mH sH hBM CJ H*aJ mH sH hh@ CJ aJ mH sH hBM CJ aJ hBM CJ aJ mH sH h}m CJ aJ mH sH -V f h l " 4 H ` b l t sggsg[g[[g hPW CJ aJ mH sH hy CJ aJ mH sH hBM CJ H*aJ mH sH h}m CJ aJ mH sH hBM 6CJ ]aJ mH sH hBM CJ aJ mH sH hBM CJ aJ hy hy 6CJ aJ mH sH hy 6CJ aJ mH sH "hy hy 6>*CJ aJ mH sH %hy h}m 6>*CJ H*aJ mH sH hy 6>*CJ aJ mH sH 0 1 2 l f $If e kd $$If 4F . $. ~ $ 4 4
l al f4
$$G$ If a$ $)`)a$ $J`Ja$ $a$gdh@ $g`ga$ 0 2 a b ! !
" @" # # $ $ 8% 9% B% l% n% ~% % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % & & 1& B& `& r& & & & & & & ' '' B' T' o' ' ¾¾¾ hy CJ aJ mH sH hBM hBM CJ aJ hBM CJ H*aJ mH sH hh@ CJ aJ mH sH hBM CJ aJ mH sH hh@ hBM 5CJ aJ mH sH F X P $G$ If kd $$If 4ֈ . $ ~ T $ 4 4
l al f4
$$G$ If a$ * 3 < E Y Q $G$ If kd $$If hֈ . $. T $ 4 4
l al
$$G$ If a$ E N O _ i r { Y Q $G$ If kd $$If hֈ . $. T $ 4 4
l al
$$G$ If a$ d \ Q Q Q Q Q
$$G$ If a$ $G$ If kdh $$If hֈ . $. T $ 4 4
l al d \ Q Q Q Q Q
$$G$ If a$ $G$ If kdG $$If hֈ . $. T $ 4 4
l al
( 1 : C L d \ Q Q Q Q Q
$$G$ If a$ $G$ If kd& $$If hֈ . $. T $ 4 4
l al L M ] g p y d \ Q Q Q Q Q
$$G$ If a$ $G$ If kd $$If hֈ . $. T $ 4 4
l al d \ Q Q Q Q Q
$$G$ If a$ $G$ If kd $$If hֈ . $. T $ 4 4
l al !
! d \ Q Q Q Q Q
$$G$ If a$ $G$ If kd $$If hֈ . $. T $ 4 4
l al
! ! ! &! /! 8! A! J! d \ Q Q Q Q Q
$$G$ If a$ $G$ If kd $$If hֈ . $. T $ 4 4
l al J! K! \! f! o! x! ! ! d \ Q Q Q Q Q
$$G$ If a$ $G$ If kd $$If hֈ . $. T $ 4 4
l al ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! d \ Q Q Q Q Q
$$G$ If a$ $G$ If kd`
$$If hֈ . $. T $ 4 4
l al ! ! ! ! ! $ $ B% d [ R R R [ E $^`a$ $)`)a$ $`a$ kd? $$If hֈ . $. T $ 4 4
l al B% I% l% m% n% z% ~% $If R kd $$If 40 . $. b $ 4 4
l al f4
$$G$ If a$ ~% % % % % % % %
$$G$ If a$ $If e kd $$If 4F . $ b
$ 4 4
l al f4 % % % % % % % % c [ P P P P P
$$G$ If a$ $G$ If kdt
$$If 4ֈ . J $
T F F $ 4 4
l al f4 % % % % % % % & d \ Q Q Q Q Q
$$G$ If a$ $G$ If kdZ $$If hֈ . J $. T F F $ 4 4
l al & & & & & %& +& 1& d \ Q Q Q Q Q
$$G$ If a$ $G$ If kd+ $$If hֈ . J $. T F F $ 4 4
l al 1& 2& B& H& N& T& Z& `& d \ Q Q Q Q Q
$$G$ If a$ $G$ If kd $$If hֈ . J $. T F F $ 4 4
l al `& a& r& x& ~& & & & d \ Q Q Q Q Q
$$G$ If a$ $G$ If kd $$If hֈ . J $. T F F $ 4 4
l al & & & & & & & & d \ Q Q Q Q Q
$$G$ If a$ $G$ If kd $$If hֈ . J $. T F F $ 4 4
l al & & & & & & & & d \ Q Q Q Q Q
$$G$ If a$ $G$ If kdo $$If hֈ . J $. T F F $ 4 4
l al & & & & ' ' ' ' d \ Q Q Q Q Q
$$G$ If a$ $G$ If kd@ $$If hֈ . J $. T F F $ 4 4
l al ' ' '' -' 3' 8' =' B' d \ Q Q Q Q Q
$$G$ If a$ $G$ If kd $$If hֈ . J $. T F F $ 4 4
l al B' C' T' Z' `' e' j' o' d \ Q Q Q Q Q
$$G$ If a$ $G$ If kd $$If hֈ . J $. T F F $ 4 4
l al o' p' ' ' ' ' ' ' d \ Q Q Q Q Q
$$G$ If a$ $G$ If kd $$If hֈ . J $. T F F $ 4 4
l al ' ' ' ' ) ) b* d* * * , t t t /u 8u 9u ;u u u z z z z z "z #z $z %z &z .z Sz Xz z { ҹtd hBM B*CJ aJ mH ph sH %hBM 6B*CJ \aJ mH ph sH hh@ hBM B*CJ \aJ ph "hBM B*CJ \aJ mH ph sH hBM 6B*CJ ]aJ ph hBM B*CJ aJ ph hh@ 5CJ aJ mH sH hh@ hBM 5CJ aJ Uhh@ CJ aJ mH sH hBM CJ aJ mH sH hBM CJ aJ "' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' d \ Q Q Q Q Q
$$G$ If a$ $G$ If kd $$If hֈ . J $. T F F $ 4 4
l al ' ' ' ' ) ) t t d W N E E E N $9`9a$ $`a$ $H^H`a$ kdU $$If hֈ . J $. T F F $ 4 4
l al umber 565-98 and breeding number 999-93 for main part of researched parameters have shown only different degree of dominance, but not its different direction.
Direct and reciprocal hybrids between selection numbers 889-93 and 1030-93 had least dif ferences on a direction and character of dominance.
References:
Aniol A.M. 1995. Physiological aspects of aluminum tolerance associated with the long arm of chromosome 2D of the wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) genome. Theor Appl Genet. 91: 510-516
Aniol A. 1996. Aluminum uptake by roots of rye seedlings of differing tolerance to aluminum toxicity. Euphytica 92: 155-162.
Aniol A. 1997. the aluminum tolerance in wheat. plant Breeding: Theories, achievements and problems. Proc. Int. Conf., Dotnuva - Akademija, Lithuania: 14-22
838= . . , /:>2;520 . . 2 0 0 1 . 5=5B8G5A:85 0A?5:BK B>;5@0=B=>AB8 OG<5=O : B>:A8G=K< 8>=0< 0;N<8=8O [ G e n e t i c a s p e c t s o f b a r l e y t o l e r a n c e a g a i n s t t o x i c A l i o n s ] 5=5B8G5A:85 @5AC@AK :C;LBC@=KE @0AB5=89. 564. =0CG. - ?@0:B. :>=D. , 1 3 - 1 6 =>O1@O, !- 1: 3 9 7 [ In Russian]
Minella E., Sorrells M.E. 1997. Inheritance and chromosom locationof Alp. A gene controlling aluminum tolerance in 'Dayton' barley. Plant Breeding, V.116: 465-469
Reid D.A. 1971. Genetic control of reaction to aluminum in winter barley. Barley Genetics II Proc. 2nd Int. Barley Genetics Symp., Pullman, Wash.: 409-413
Stolen O., Andersen S. 1978. Inheritance of tolerance to low soil pH in barley. Hereditas, V.88. 101-105
Gourley L.M., Rogers S.A., Ruiz-Gomez C., Clark R.B. 1990. Genetic aspects of aluminum tolerance in sorghum. Plant Soil, V.123: 211-216.
Petr F.C., Frey K.J. 1966. Genotype correlations, dominance and heritability of quantitative characters in oats. Crop Sci., V.6. 259-262
Bona L., Carver B.F., Wright R.J., Baligar V.C. 1994. Aluminum tolerance of segregating wheat populations in acidic soil and nutrient solutions. Communic. Soil Sci. Plant Anal., V.25. 327-339
Camargo C.E.O. 1981. Wheat improvement. 1. The heritability of toler t .u /u ;u u mv
w z z N{ { C| | } 2 ބ Q R S X Z [ ] ^ ` $P^`Pa$gdh@ P^`Pgdh@ u^`u $`a$ { { { { A| | } } Q S X Y [ \ ^ _ a b d ֶt hv 0J mH nH uhh@
hh@ 0J j hh@ 0J UhBM hh@ hh@ mH sH hh@ mH sH hv j hv UhBM CJ aJ mH sH U"hBM B*CJ \aJ mH ph sH hBM CJ aJ hBM B*CJ aJ mH ph sH "hBM B*CJ H*aJ mH ph sH & ance to aluminum toxicity. Bragantia, V.40. 33-45
Camargo C.E.O. 1984. Wheat improvement. IV. Heritability studies on aluminum tolerance using three concentrations of aluminum in nutrient solutions. Bragantia, V.44. 49-64
Lisitsyn E. M. 2000. Intravarietal Level of Aluminum Resistance in Cereal Crops. J Plant Nutrit., V.23(6): 793-804
Barley Genetics Newsletter 37:1-4 (2007)
PAGE
PAGE 1
] ^ ` a c d &`#$gdBM $a$gdh@ @ 0&P 1h P :ph@ ;0 / =!"#$% $$If !v h5 . 55~ #v . #v#v~ :V 4$ + , 5 . 55~ / / / / al f4 $$If !v h5 . 55T555#v . #v#vT#v#v#v:V 4$ + , 5 ~ 55T555/ / / / al f4 $$If !v h5 . 55T555#v . #v#vT#v#v#v:V h$ , 5 . 55T555/ / / al $$If !v h5 . 55T555#v . #v#vT#v#v#v:V h$ , 5 . 55T555/
/ / al $$If !v h5 . 55T555#v . #v#vT#v#v#v:V h$ , 5 . 55T555/ / / al $$If !v h5 . 55T555#v . #v#vT#v#v#v:V h$ , 5 . 55T555/
/ / al $$If !v h5 . 55T555#v . #v#vT#v#v#v:V h$ , 5 . 55T555/ / / al $$If !v h5 . 55T555#v . #v#vT#v#v#v:V h$ , 5 . 55T555/
/ / al $$If !v h5 . 55T555#v . #v#vT#v#v#v:V h$ , 5 . 55T555/ / / al $$If !v h5 . 55T555#v . #v#vT#v#v#v:V h$ , 5 . 55T555/
/ / al $$If !v h5 . 55T555#v . #v#vT#v#v#v:V h$ , 5 . 55T555/ / / al $$If !v h5 . 55T555#v . #v#vT#v#v#v:V h$ , 5 . 55T555/
/ / al $$If !v h5 . 55T555#v . #v#vT#v#v#v:V h$ , 5 . 55T555/ / / al $$If !v h5 . 55T555#v . #v#vT#v#v#v:V h$ , 5 . 55T555/ / / al $$If !v h5 . 5b#v . #vb:V 4$ + , 5 . 5b/ / / / al f4 $$If !v h5 . 55
#v . #v#v
:V 4$ + , 5 b55
/ / / / al f4 $$If !v h5 . 555T5F5F#v . #v#v#vT#vF:V 4$ + , 5
555T5F/ / / / al f4 $$If !v h5 . 555T5F5F#v . #v#v#vT#vF:V h$ , 5 . 555T5F/ / / al $$If !v h5 . 555T5F5F#v . #v#v#vT#vF:V h$ , 5 . 555T5F/
/ / al $$If !v h5 . 555T5F5F#v . #v#v#vT#vF:V h$ , 5 . 555T5F/ / / al $$If !v h5 . 555T5F5F#v . #v#v#vT#vF:V h$ , 5 . 555T5F/
/ / al $$If !v h5 . 555T5F5F#v . #v#v#vT#vF:V h$ , 5 . 555T5F/ / / al $$If !v h5 . 555T5F5F#v . #v#v#vT#vF:V h$ , 5 . 555T5F/
/ / al $$If !v h5 . 555T5F5F#v . #v#v#vT#vF:V h$ , 5 . 555T5F/ / / al $$If !v h5 . 555T5F5F#v . #v#v#vT#vF:V h$ , 5 . 555T5F/
/ / al $$If !v h5 . 555T5F5F#v . #v#v#vT#vF:V h$ , 5 . 555T5F/ / / al $$If !v h5 . 555T5F5F#v . #v#v#vT#vF:V h$ , 5 . 555T5F/
/ / al $$If !v h5 . 555T5F5F#v . #v#v#vT#vF:V h$ , 5 . 555T5F/ / / al $$If !v h5 . 555T5F5F#v . #v#v#vT#vF:V h$ , 5 . 555T5F/ / / al d @ d N o r m a l $ *$1$A$ a$ + B* CJ OJ PJ QJ ^J _HaJ mHsHtH D A@ D D e f a u l t P a r a g r a p h F o n t V i@ V T a b l e N o r m a l :V 4 4
l a ( k ( N o L i s t J O J A b s a t z - S t a n d a r d s c h r i f t a r t P OP W W - A b s a t z - S t a n d a r d s c h r i f t a r t R OR W W - A b s a t z - S t a n d a r d s c h r i f t a r t 1 T O!T W W - A b s a t z - S t a n d a r d s c h r i f t a r t 1 1 V O1V W W - A b s a t z - S t a n d a r d s c h r i f t a r t 1 1 1 B OAB A=>2=>9 H@8DB 0170F0 R O bR 03>;>2>:
x $ CJ OJ PJ QJ ^J aJ 6 B@ b6 B o d y T e x t
x ( /@ar( L i s t ^J J O J 0720=85
x x $ 6CJ ]^J aJ 6 O 6 #:070B5;L $ ^J 4 @ 4 H e a d e r
E$ B O B
1KG=K9 ( 251)
CJ 4 @ 4 h@ F o o t e r
! . )@ . h@ P a g e N u m b e r #
# - . p q # # # # # $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - . p q s
t
u
$ . 7 @ I R S c m v ! + 4 = F O P a k t }
) 2 ; D M N _ i r {
, 2 7 < A F G W \ b h n t u & + , < A G L R X Y j p v {
q r ~ 3 M [ ! ! O" " n# o# p# u# x# {# ~# # # # # # # # # # 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 @ 0 @ 0 0 \ 0 0 @ 0 @ 0 0
7 B O O O R V ' { 7 @ E L
! J! ! ! B% ~% % % & 1& `& & & & ' B' o' ' ' t ] ! " # $ % & ' ( ) * + , - . / 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 ? C 7 > B I K R ! ! 8 @ 0 (
B
S ? C D L M
H I ,
4
> @ B D
, F W t + < X j
t u r { ~ R S [ b g o u y |
! ! @ B D E L M O Q f g m n s u x y | } S T Y Z ] ^ f g t u y { ~ t# u# w# x# # # # # # # h@ +A PW }m y v BM
$ . 7 @ I R S c m v ! + 4 = F O P a k t }
) 2 ; D M N _ i r {
, 2 7 < A F G W \ b h n t u & + , < A G L R X Y j p v {
# @ d/ C C C C C C
C C
C C M M " # @ , @ < @ * @ x @ @ U n k n o w n G z T i m e s N e w R o m a n 5 S y m b o l 3& z A r i a l O& k9 ? L u c i d a S a n s U n i c o d e 5& z a T a h o m a B h && Q
J + @ J + @ ! 4 d c# c# 2 HP ? h@ 2 ? ><8=0=B=>ABL 8 @5F5AA82=>ABL ?@87=0:0 0;N<>CAB>9G82>AB8 381@84 L i t o "! V i c t o r i a B l a k e Oh +'0 4H $ 0 @ L ` x
| Доминантность и рецессивность признака алюмоустойчивости гибрид Lito™ Normal.dot Victoria Blake 2 Microsoft Office Word @ F# @ pSc>@ yEG@ yEG J + G 8F VT$m * # . @ Times New Roman - : 2
Barley Genetics Newsletter 37:1 & * * *
2
- 2
4 (2007)
2
'
2
'
2
@ , ' N
2
@ N 1
2
@ N N ' ' @ Times New Roman - R 2
b1/ Dominance and recessiveness of parameters of Al * 0 0 * 2
b uminum 0 1
2
b - + 2
b resistance of barley ' @ Times New Roman - - -
2
i F $ -
2
2 - [ 2
5 hybrids at different concentrations of stress factor
2
' @ Times New Roman -
2
, ' > 2
" E. M. Lisitsyn and I. I. Lisitsyna!
/
!
!
2
T ' @ Times New Roman - 2
R Northm$
2
R - I 2
R)) East Agricultural Research Institute, 166
#
!
2
RX - Ri @ Times New Roman - .
2
Ri . - A 2
R$ Lenin street, Kirov, 610007, Russia
$
!
2
RR '
2
e
2
-
2
* m % ) 2
O ail: edaphic@mail.ru
. &
2
'
2
' 2
[ Till now there is no uniform opinion in the scientific literature about number and type of o
$
%
& ' 2
8, ac 7 2
8X tion of genes coding barley a:
2
8 l
2
8 uminum ) '
& U 2
81 resistance. For example, Rigin, Yakovleva (2001) c
%
"
$
' \ 2
r,6 considers, that it is controlled by two oligogenes, as
$
J 2
r[* a minimum, with possible action of genes &
& &
%
' @ Times New Roman - - 2
,[ with weaker effect. Other authors assume the control of the parameter by one dominant gene o%
%
$
&
&
&
- 2
Phtn -
2
' -
2
, [ , 2
= Stolen, Andersen, 1978
$
2
], or gene
- 2
Alpn - 2
D [ 2
h
Reid, 1971!
= 2
J! ], both located on chromosome 4 [s
% & 2
! Minella, 1-
' 2
, Sorrells, 1997
2
D ]. n
2
o '
2
X ' 2
Gourley e$ 2
jR t al [1990] concluded, that type of action of genes coding aluminum resistance in
&
&
' 2
,[ sorghum (additive, partially or completely dominant), depends not only on a researched geno %
%
&
2
- ' 2
,R type, but also on used Al concentration. Aniol [1995, 1996] has established, that
$
$
2
when the $
' [ 2
>,5 concentration of aluminum in test solution is low (30s
'
%
%
2
>{ - 2
> 40 > @ Times New Roman - .
2
> , . - 2
> ), cerea
5 2
> l cultures (wheat, rye) use $
' 2
w, mechanisms &
& 2
w1
that block v 2
wG accumulation of aluminum in roots (for example, chelation of aluminum &
'
'
&
'
' ' 2
,Y at the expense of exudation of organic acids by root system), at higher concentration of
%
' 2 2
, aluminum in root growth en '
%
# 2
vironment ( & 2
200c
2
- 2
300 r @ Times New Roman - .
2
, . - A 2
$ ) the basic role is played by other
' ( 2
$, physiological mecha
& 2
$ nisms of Al
& $
2
$ - 2
$ resisr
. 2
$B tance. Thus the author
: 2
$; remarks [Aniol, 1997] that the % $
' 2
], aluminum '
& 2
]
resistance of
% 2
] wheat plants at u % 2
]R a 2
]w concentrae 2
]8
tion of 296 ]C @ Times New Roman - .
2
]C , . -
2
]o
2
]~ 7 2
] is controlled by 2 genes and e
' 2
, at i ( 2
b a concentration of 2
592 r ] @ Times New Roman - .
2
] , . -
2
= 2
! aluminum resistance is controllede '
&
; 2
J by three genes. He wrote, that
$ $
' & 2
, genes located in D
$
2
- w 2
H genome of wheat, are expressed only at high Al concentration, and genes % %
$
' . 2
, located on chromosome 5
% &
/ @ Times New Roman - .
2
/ # . - # 2
R are expressed
5 2
at all studied concentration
2
s
2
.
2
'
2
C ' + 2
} The aim of our resear & 2
}X ch was $ % 2
} to determine thes &
P 2
}>. influence of Al concentration on a direction
$
' @ Times New Roman - - - q 2
,D and character of dominance of parameters of roots growth of barley F
&
&
#
-
2
2 - 2
hybrida
2
; seedlings.
2
'
2
' - 2
*, Material0
2
*
2
* ande
2
*C
2
*P Methodsl0
2
*
' - 4 2
c The direct and reciprocal F
-
2
i 2 - c @ Times New Roman - . U 2
c1 hybrids of four selection numbers of barley (
&
0 0 . - 2
c/ 565h
2
cz - 2
c 98,
' 2
, 889
2
w - 2
93, 999l
2
- 2
1 93 and 1030
2
) - & 2
: 93), bred in North
$
2
- [ 2
5 East Agricultural Research Institute (Kirov, Russia)
#
"
$
!
' 2
,b were taken for the analysis. By results of the preliminary laboratory analyses the parental forms $
"
'
& ' \ 2
,6 of these hybrids differed significantly on a level of
2
Al $
2
- A 2
$ resistance that corresponded to the
' 5 2
H , research aim. A level of Al
%
#
$
2
H - = 2
H ! resistance (relative root length h
2
H ^ - 2 2
H o RRL) was estimated under ! ! $
&
' A 2
,$ conditions of rolled culture on five
2
- b 2
: day barley seedlings according to the technique described
' ; 2
, earlier [Lisitsyn, 2000] by divi
m 2
A sion of value of root length of each individual seedling in test
' , @ Times New Roman - . 2
,a treatment variant (0.5 and 1.0 mM of aluminum as sulphate salt, 4.3) on value of average root %
& ,
&
&
$
. - ' .
, @ Times New Roman - . 2
.
,] length of control variant (without the stress factor, 6.0). Each sample volume consists of
% $
%
&
. - 2
.
w 99
2
.
- ' G 2
h
,( 105 seedlings in each treatment variant.
%
2
h
G '
2
' - a 2
9 Character of dominance for parameters of root growth of F !
&
%
$
-
2
? 2 - ; 2
P hybrid plants was estimated by
$
&
' 2
,
equation [
# 2
Petr, Frey, 1966
2
7 ]:
2
V ' @ Times New Roman - - - 2
N H d =
" 2
N
@ Times New Roman - @ Times New Roman - - 2
N F
-
@ ! v S -
-
2
T + 2 -
@ ! X + -
-
2
N <
2
N I - 2
N Y MP
*
-
@ ! S < -
2
N 2
{
HP
$
2
" - 2
3 MP*
2
{ "System p
-
՜. +,0 ` h p |
B @ c# z Доминантность и рецессивность признака алюмоустойчивости гибрид Title
! " # $ % & ' ( ) * + , - . / 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 : ; < = > ? @ A B C D F G H I J K L M N O P Q S T U V W X Y Z [ \ ] ^ _ ` a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q s t u v w x y z { | } ~ R o o t E n t r y F `wEMG D a t a
E & 1 T a b l e R ? W o r d D o c u m e n t B S u m m a r y I n f o r m a t i o n ( r dH D o c u m e n t S u m m a r y I n f o r m a t i o n 8 C o m p O b j q
F Microsoft Office Word Document
MSWordDoc Word.Document.8 9q