Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T10:48:38.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genotypic resistance to brown heart incidence in swede parent lines and F1 hybrids and the influence of applied boron

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 December 2013

F. FADHEL ,
A. J. JELLINGS ,
S. KENNEDY  and
M. P. FULLER
F. FADHEL
Affiliation:
School of Biomedical and Biological Sciences, Faculty of Science and Technology, Plymouth University, PL4 8AA Plymouth, Devon, UK Agricultural College, Al-Anbar University, Anbar, Iraq
A. J. JELLINGS
Affiliation:
School of Biomedical and Biological Sciences, Faculty of Science and Technology, Plymouth University, PL4 8AA Plymouth, Devon, UK
S. KENNEDY
Affiliation:
Elsoms Seeds Ltd, Spalding, Lincolnshire, UK
M. P. FULLER*
Affiliation:
School of Biomedical and Biological Sciences, Faculty of Science and Technology, Plymouth University, PL4 8AA Plymouth, Devon, UK
*
*To whom all correspondence should be addressed. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Breeding trials for swede (Brassica napus var. napobrassica) in 2000–2010 showed that 0·85 of the incidence of brown heart (BH) in the trials was associated with genotypes that are progeny of Ag31, Or13 and Me77c. In order to investigate this and the effect of treatment with boron (B), established varieties and improved parent lines carrying male sterility (ms), and their F1 hybrids (test hybrids), were grown in a field trial in the UK in 2011 and subjected to four B treatments (0·00, 1·35, 1·80 and 2·70 kg B/ha). The results confirmed that BH incidence and severity was affected by genotype but could be ameliorated by B application. Genotype Ag31 was very susceptible while Or13 and Me77c were of intermediate susceptibility and the hybrids between susceptible parents were also sensitive. Genotypes Gr19 and Ly01 were highly resistant even in the absence of B application. Hybrids between resistant and susceptible lines were highly resistant. The use of ms had no influence on BH. Resistance to BH was a dominant trait: homozygous dominant (BHBH) or heterozygous (BHbh) genotypes confer this trait, while susceptibility is recessive (bhbh). Some quantitative variation existed, suggesting that resistance was not a single gene effect. There was a significant negative correlation (r=−0·632) between root B content and the severity of BH in susceptible genotypes. Severe BH was associated with 12–21·5 μg B/g of root dry weight at zero B applied. Moderate discolouration was associated with 19·5–24·8 μg B/g recorded at moderate B applied and only Ag31 showed BH at 2·70 kg B/ha. Resistant varieties had root contents of 23 μg B/g or more while susceptible varieties required a minimum of 31 μg B/g to offset BH.

Type
Crops and Soils Research Papers
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 153 , Issue 2 , March 2015 , pp. 195 - 204
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Al-Amery, M. M., Hamza, J. H. & Fuller, M. P. (2011). Effect of boron foliar application on reproductive growth of sunflower (Helianthus annus L.). International Journal of Agronomy 2011, Article ID 230712. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/230712.Google Scholar
Beauchamp, E. G. & Hussain, I. (1974). Brown heart in rutabaga grown on southern ontario soils. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 54, 171–178.Google Scholar
Bloom, A. J. (2002). Mineral nutrition. In Plant Physiology, 3rd edn (Eds Taiz, L. & Zeiger, E.), pp. 67–86. Sunderland, MA, USA: Sinauer Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
Chiang, M. S. & Crete, R. (1987). Cytoplasmic male sterility in Brassica oleracea induced by B. napus cytoplasm-female fertility and restoration of male fertility. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 67, 891–897.Google Scholar
Cutcliffe, J. A. & Gupta, U. C. (1987). Effects of foliar sprays of boron applied at different stages of growth on incidence of brown-heart in rutabagas. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 67, 705–708.Google Scholar
Dannel, F., Pfeffer, H. & Mheld, V. (2002). Update on boron in higher plants-Uptake, primary translocation and compartmentation. Plant Biology 4, 193–204.Google Scholar
Fujiwara, T., Tanaka, M. & Miwa, K. (2010). Optimisation of nutrient transport processes by plants - boron transport as an example. In Proceedings of the 19th World Congress of Soil Science; Soil Solutions for a Changing World. 1–6 August, Brisbane, Australia (Eds Gilkes, R. J. & Prakongkep, N.), pp. 26–29. Brisbane, Australia: IUSS.Google Scholar
Gupta, U. C. & Cutcliffe, J. A. (1971). Determination of optimum levels of boron in rutabaga leaf tissue and soil. Soil Science 3, 382–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gupta, U. C. & Cutcliffe, J. A. (1978). Effects of methods of boron application on leaf tissue concentration of boron and control of brown-heart in rutabaga. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 58, 63–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gupta, U. C. & Munro, D. C. (1969). The boron content of tissues and root of rutabagas and of soil as associated with brown-heart condition. Soil Science Society of America Journal 33, 424–426.Google Scholar
Kelly, J. F. & Gabelman, W. H. (1960). Variability in the tolerance of varieties and strains of red beet (Beta vulgaris L.) to boron deficiency. Proceedings: American Society for Horticultural Science 76, 409–415.Google Scholar
Miwa, K. & Fujiwara, T. (2010). Boron transport in plants: co-ordinated regulation of transporters. Annals of Botany 105, 1103–1108.Google Scholar
Sanderson, K. R., Sanderson, J. B. & Gupta, U. C. (2002). Boron for brown-heart control on two rutabaga cultivars. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 82, 561–565.Google Scholar
Shelp, B. J. & Shattuck, V. I. (1987). Boron nutrition and mobility, and its relation to the elemental composition of greenhouse grown root crops I. Rutabaga. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 18, 187–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shiffler, A. K., Jolley, V. D., Webb, B. L. & Carter, D. (2003). Variations in extractable boron using three extraction methods on boron-treated incubated soils. In Western Nutrient Management Conference, Vol. 5, Salt Lake City, UT, pp. 181–184. Brookings, SD, USA: Potash & Phosphate Institute.Google Scholar
Xu, F., Wang, Y. & Li, J. (1998). Response of different efficient cultivars of rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) to boron deficiency. Journal of Huazhoung Agricultural University 17, 55–60.Google Scholar
Xu, F., Wang, Y., Ying, W. & Meng, J. (2002). Inheritance of boron nutrition efficiency in brassica napus. Journal of Plant Nutrition 25, 901–912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, F. S., Wang, Y. H. & Meng, J. (2001). Mapping boron efficiency gene(s) in Brassica napus using RFLP and AFLP markers. Plant Breeding 120, 319–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, H. & Wang, Y. (1998). Intergranular boundary and reaction front in biopyrible minerals. In Proceedings of the 14th International Congress on Electron Microscopy, Vol. II. (Eds Calderon-Benavides, H., Yacaman, M. J. & Calderon Benavides, H. A.), pp. 665–666. Oxford, UK: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar