Hostname: page-component-669899f699-cf6xr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-25T00:33:45.563Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Molecular fingerprinting of highly resistant maize lines to turcicum leaf blight

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 September 2024

Dan Singh Jakhar Open the ORCID record for Dan Singh Jakhar [Opens in a new window] ,
Rajesh Singh  and
Shravan Kumar Singh
Dan Singh Jakhar*
Affiliation:
Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi 221 005, Uttar Pradesh, India College of Agriculture, Agriculture University Jodhpur, Sumerpur (Pali) 306 902, Rajasthan, India
Rajesh Singh
Affiliation:
Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi 221 005, Uttar Pradesh, India
Shravan Kumar Singh
Affiliation:
Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi 221 005, Uttar Pradesh, India
*
Corresponding author: Dan Singh Jakhar; Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The present study generates information related to the molecular divergence between turcicum leaf blight (TLB)-resistant and -susceptible lines. During molecular diversity studies, a total of 212 alleles were detected at 75 marker loci and ranged from two to five with an average of 2.83 alleles per locus. A direct correlation for the number of alleles and polymorphism information content (PIC) values was ascertained. For instance, marker phi123 produced high number of alleles (5) with PIC values of 0.77. Using the DARwin 6.0 programme, the UPGMA dendrogram grouped 40 maize inbreds into two distinct clusters, cluster-I (36 inbreds) and cluster-II (4 inbreds). Cluster-I contained two subclusters; the first subcluster contained 28 inbreds and the second subcluster contained eight inbreds whereas cluster-II contained four inbreds. This major cluster-II was further classified into two subclusters which contained two inbreds each. Most of the inbred lines except V-25 from cluster-II were highly resistant to TLB disease. These inbred lines can be used in crossing programmes to develop TLB-resistant hybrids by using divergent parents. In this study, allelic diversity and PIC values indicated a good efficiency of markers for studying the polymorphism level available in studied inbred lines. High level of diversity among the inbreds detected with simple sequence repeat markers indicated their suitability for the further breeding programme.

Keywords

maizemicrosatellite markersmolecular diversityturcicum leaf blight
Type
Research Article
Information
Plant Genetic Resources , Volume 22 , Issue 5 , October 2024 , pp. 319 - 327
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of National Institute of Agricultural Botany

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abebe, D, Singburaudom, N, Sangchote, S and Sarobol, E (2008) Evaluation of maize varieties for resistance to northern leaf blight under field conditions in Ethiopia. Kasetsart Journal Natural Science 42, 1–10.Google Scholar
Alemayehu, H, Tajudin, A and Bayoush, B (2018) Screening of maize inbred lines under artificial epiphytotic condition for their reaction to turcicum leaf blight (TLB) and common leaf rust (CLR). Agricultural Research & Technology: Open Access Journal 19, 556080.Google Scholar
Anderson, JA, Churchill, GA, Sutrique, JE, Tanksley, SD and Sorrells, ME (1993) Optimizing parental selection for genetic linkage maps. Genome 36, 181–186.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Babic, V, Srdic, J, Pajic, Z, Grcic, N and Filipovic, M (2014) The prediction of heterosis based on the phenotypic distance of sweet maize parental lines. Ratarstvo i Povrtarstvo 51, 23–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brewster, VA, Carson, ML and Wicks, ZW III (1992) Mapping components of partial resistance to northern leaf blight of maize using reciprocal translocation. Phytopathology 82, 225–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choukan, R, Hossainzadeh, A, Ghannadha, MR, Warburton, ML, Talei, AR and Mohammadi, SA (2006) Use of SSR data to determine relationships and potential heterotic groupings within medium to late maturing Iranian maize inbred lines. Field Crops Research 95, 212–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Loose, M and Gheysen, G (1995) Identification methods based on molecular techniques. International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants. Working group on biochemical and molecular techniques and DNA-profiling in particular, Wageningen, Netherland.Google Scholar
Gowda, PKT, Shetty, HS, Gowda, BJ, Prakash, HS and Sangam, L (1993) Comparison of two methods for assessment of yield losses due to turcicum leaf blight of maize. Indian Phytopathology 45, 316–320.Google Scholar
Gulzar, S, Dar, ZA, Ahangar, MA, Lone, AA, Bhat, MA, Kamal-ud-din, , Khan, MA, Sofi, PA, Yousuf, V, Yousuf, N and Majid, A (2018) Identification of reaction pattern to turcicum leaf blight among early maturing maize (Zea mays L.) inbred lines. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry 7, 1657–1660.Google Scholar
Haasbroek, MP, Craven, M, Barnes, I and Crampton, BG (2014) Microsatellite and mating type primers for the maize and sorghum pathogen, Exserohilum turcicum. Australasian Plant Pathology 43, 577–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jakhar, DS, Singh, R, Kumar, S, Singh, P and Ojha, V (2017) Turcicum leaf blight: a ubiquitous foliar disease of maize (Zea mays L.). International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences 6, 825–831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jakhar, DS, Singh, R, Singh, SK and Srivastava, RP (2021) Screening of maize inbred lines under artificial epiphytotic condition for turcicum leaf blight resistance. Current Journal of Applied Science and Technology 40, 9–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jakhar, DS, Singh, R, Devesh, P, Kumar, S, Singh, A and Srivastava, RP (2022) Mapping of quantitative trait loci for resistance to turcicum leaf blight in maize (Zea mays L.). Emirates Journal of Food and Agriculture 34, 260–267.Google Scholar
Jakhar, DS, Singh, R and Singh, SK (2024) Mapping of QTL conferring resistance to turcicum leaf blight using microsatellites in maize (Zea mays L.). Maydica 67, 1–12.Google Scholar
Jaya Kumar, T (2010) Detection of polymorphism in parental genotypes of selected mapping populations in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) (M.Sc. (Ag.) Thesis). Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore.Google Scholar
Keerthana, D, Haritha, T, Sudhir Kumar, I and Ramesh, D (2023) Molecular diversity in maize inbred lines for turcicum leaf blight resistance. Plant Science Today 10, 385–392.Google Scholar
Kumar, P, Kumari, R and Sharma, VK (2018) Choice of microsatellite markers for isolation of fertility restorers of wild abortive (WA) type cytoplasmic male sterility in rice. Indian Journal of Genetics and Plant Breeding 78, 202–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumari, R, Kumar, P, Sharma, VK and Kumar, H (2018) Seedling stage salt stress response specific characterization of genetic polymorphism and validation of SSR markers in rice. Physiology and Molecular Biology of Plants 25, 407–419.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lapitan, VC, Brar, DS, Abe, T and Redona, ED (2007) Assessment of genetic diversity of Philippine rice cultivars carrying good quality traits using SSR markers. Breeding Science 57, 263–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonard, KJ and Suggs, EG (1974) Setosphaeria prolata is the ascogenous state of Exserohilum prolata. Mycologia 66, 181–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, Y, Du, J, Wang, T, Shi, Y, Song, Y and Jia, J (2002) Genetic diversity and relationships among Chinese maize inbred lines revealed by SSR markers. Maydica 47, 93–101.Google Scholar
Mallikarjuna, N, Puttaramanaik, N, Kumar, K, Raveendra HR, and Kumar, VBS (2018) Evaluation of maize germplasm for resistance to turcicum leaf blight. Indian Journal of Pure & Applied Biosciences 6, 1601–1605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mehta, B, Hossain, F, Muthusamy, V, Baveja, A, Zunjare, R, Jha, SK and Gupta, HS (2017) Microsatellite-based genetic diversity analyses of sugary1-, shrunken2- and double mutant-sweet corn inbreds for their utilization in breeding programme. Physiology and Molecular Biology of Plants 23, 411–420.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nikolic, A, Ignjatovic-Micic, D, Kovacevic, D, Camdzija, Z, Filipovic, M and Mladenovic-Drinic, S (2015) Genetic diversity of maize inbred lines as inferred from SSR markers. Genetika 47, 489–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payak, MM and Sharma, RC (1985) Maize diseases and approaches to their management. Tropical Pest Management 31, 302–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perrier, X, Flori, A and Bonnot, F (2003) Data analysis methods. In Hamon, P, Seguin, M, Perrier, X and Glaszmann, JC (eds), Genetic Diversity of Cultivated Tropical Plants. Enfield, USA: Science Publishers, pp. 43–76.Google Scholar
Prasanna, BM and Hoisington, D (2003) Molecular breeding for maize improvement: an overview. Indian Journal of Biotechnology 2, 85–98.Google Scholar
Reid, LM, Xiang, K, Zhu, X, Baum, R and Molnar, SJ (2011) Genetic diversity analysis of 119 Canadian maize inbred lines based on pedigree and simple sequence repeat markers. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 91, 651–661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saghai-Maroof, MA, Soliman, KM, Jorgensen, RA and Allard, RWL (1984) Ribosomal DNA spacer-length polymorphisms in barley: Mendelian inheritance, chromosomal location, and population dynamics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 81, 8014–8018.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Singh, R and Srivastava, RP (2017) New quantitative trait loci (QTLs) for turcicum leaf blight in maize. Journal of Biotechnology and Crop Sciences 6, 44–52.Google Scholar
Smith, DR and Kinsey, JG (1993) Latent period – a possible selection tool for Exserohilum turcicum resistance in corn. Maydica 38, 205–208.Google Scholar
Solomon, KF, Martin, I and Zeppa, A (2012) Genetic effects and genetic relationships among shrunken (sh2) sweet corn lines and F1 hybrids. Euphytica 185, 385–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
St Clair, DA (2010) Quantitative disease resistance and quantitative resistance loci in breeding. Annual Review of Phytopathology 48, 247–268.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tefferi, A, Hulluka, M and Welz, HG (1996) Assessment of damage and grain yield loss in maize caused by northern corn leaf blight in western Ethiopia. Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection 103, 353–363.Google Scholar
Xia, XC, Reif, CJ, Hoisington, DA, Melchinger, AE, Frish, M and Warburton, ML (2004) Genetic diversity among CIMMYT maize inbred lines investigated with SSR markers: I Lowland tropical maize. Crop Science 44, 2230–2237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yu, Y, Wang, E, Shi, Y, Song, Y, Wang, T and Li, Y (2007) Genetic diversity and structure of the core collection for maize inbred in China. Maydica 52, 181–194.Google Scholar
Yuan, LX, Fu, JH, Warburton, M, Li, XH, Zhang, SH, Khairallah, M, Liu, XZ, Peng, Z and Li, LC (2000) Comparison of genetic diversity among maize inbred lines based on RFLPs, SSRs, AFLPs and RAPDs. Acta Agronomica Sinica 27, 725–733.Google ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Jakhar et al. supplementary material

Jakhar et al. supplementary material
Download Jakhar et al. supplementary material(File)
File 17 KB