Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T01:19:43.094Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Quantitative genetic analysis in Phalaris tuberosa II. Assortative mating and maternal effects in the inheritance of date of ear emergence, seed weight and seedling growth rate

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

B. D. H. Latter
B. D. H. Latter
Affiliation:
Division of Plant Industry, C.S.I.R.O., Canberra, Australia
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The variation shown by the Australian Commercial population of P. tuberosa in respect of date of ear emergence, seed weight and seedling weight has been analysed, and the interrelationships among the variables characterized. All three characters show appreciable additive genetic variation, in the sense that approximately seven generations of artificial selection would be sufficient to push the population mean for each trait beyond the range shown by introduced ecotypes.

Apart from the positive association between seed weight and seedling weight due to maternal influence, the three variables are to a large extent genetically independent in this locally adapted interbreeding population. It is therefore probable that the negative ecotypic correlations between seedling growth rate and date of ear emergence, and between seed weight and date of ear emergence, would rapidly be dispelled under random mating in a synthetic population.

Under open-pollination, date of ear emergence has been shown to be subject to phenotypic assortative mating of degree ρ = 0·78, approximately 53% of the variation being additive genetic. Variation in seed weight within the strain is extensive, with a heritability of 0·79. Neither character shows evidence of important genotype × years interaction.

Variation in seedling weight involves an appreciable genotype × environment interaction component, and has a heritability of only 0·17 which includes variation due to genetically determined maternal effects. The correlation between the seed weight of an ovule parent and the ‘ true’ mean seedling weight of the derived maternal half-sib group is of the order of 0·57. It has been estimated that the correlated response per generation in seedling weight, due to selection for seed weight, is 0·54 times that expected from direct selection.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 6 , Issue 3 , November 1965 , pp. 371 - 386
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1965

References

REFERENCES

Cooper, J. P. (1959). Selection and population structure in Lolium. II. Genetic control of date of ear emergence. Heredity, Lond. 13, 445–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falconer, D. S. (1952). The problem of environment and selection. Am. Nat. 86, 293–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, R. A. (1918). On the correlation between relatives on the supposition of Mendelian inheritance. Trans. R. Soc. Edinb. 52, 399–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardner, C. O. (1963). Estimates of genetic parameters in cross-fertilizing plants and their implications in plant breeding. In Statistical Genetics and Plant Breeding (Hanson, W. D. & Robinson, H. F., eds.). National Academy of Sciences—National Research Council Pub. 982, 225–252.Google Scholar
Kehr, W. R. & Gardner, C. O. (1960). Genetic variability in Ranger alfalfa. Agron. J. 52, 41–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latter, B. D. H. (1964). Selection methods in the breeding of cross-fertilized pasture species. In Grasses and Grasslands (Barnard, C., ed.), chapter 10, pp. 168–181. London: MacMillan.Google Scholar
Latter, B. D. H. (1965). Quantitative genetic analysis in Phalaris tuberosa. I. The statistical theory of open-pollinated progenies. Genet. Res. 6, 360–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McWilliam, J. R. (1962). Interspecific hybridization in Phalaris: hybrids between Phalaris tuberosa and the hexaploid race of Phalaris arundinacea. Aust. J. agric. Res. 13, 585–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McWilliam, J. R. (1963). Selection for seed retention in Phalaris tuberosa L. Aust. J. agric. Res. 14, 755–764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mode, C. J. & Robinson, H. F. (1959). Pleiotropism and the genetic variance and covariance. Biometrics, 15, 518–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neal-Smith, C. A. (1955). Herbage plant exploration in the Mediterranean region. F.A.O. Report No. 415, 39 pp.Google Scholar
Prout, T. (1962). The error variance of the heritability estimate obtained from selection response. Biometrics, 18, 404–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, A. (1959). The sampling variance of the genetic correlation coefficient. Biometrics, 15, 469–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. (1956). Statistical Methods Applied to Experiments in Agriculture and Biology. Iowa State College Press.Google Scholar
Trumble, H. C. (1935). A note on the origin of ‘Toowoomba canary grass’ (Phalaris tuberosa L.). J. Coun. scient. ind. Res. Aust. 8, 195–202.Google Scholar
Trumble, H. C. & Cashmore, A. B. (1934). The variety concept in relation to Phalaris tuberosa and allied forms. Herb. Rev. 2, 1–4.Google Scholar