摘要:
闽恢3301是一个优良籼型恢复系,系谱记载闽恢3301选自明恢86与绵恢436的杂交后代,但一些数据不支持这一亲缘关系。在田间观察显示,闽恢3301一些性状与R527较为类似,而与明恢86相似的特征较少。为了解闽恢3301的遗传来源,比较分析闽恢3301、R527、绵恢436和明恢86的30个形态性状以及712对SSR分子标记特征。方差分析多重比较结果表明,闽恢3301的形态性状与R527或绵恢436较为相似,与明恢86多数形态性状上存在显著或极显著差异。基于形态性状的聚类分析表明,在欧氏遗传距离为8.99处,闽恢3301、R527、绵恢436被分为一类群,明恢86单独为一类。712对SSR分子标记分析结果表明,闽恢3301与R527、绵恢436、明恢86的遗传距离分别为0.140、0.145和0.337。4份恢复系间基于分子标记遗传相似性的聚类分析结果与基于形态学的聚类结果一致。闽恢3301的标记带完全来源于绵恢436和/或R527。综上所述,闽恢3301并不是系谱记载的明恢86与绵恢436的杂交后代,而是来源于绵恢436与R527的杂交后代。
Abstract:
Minhui3301, an elite restorer line of indica rice, was selected from the hybrids of Minghui86 and Mianhui436 in the pedigree record; but some experimental datas failed to support this genetic relationship. We've found that many morphological traits of Minhui3301 were much more similar to those of R527 than those of Minghui86. In order to find out the genetic origin of Minghui3301, 30 morphological traits and 712 SSR markers of the 4 varieties -Minhui3301, R527, Mianhui436 and Minghui86,were analyzed.Multiple comparisons showed that the morphological traits of Minhui3301 were similar to R527 or Mianhui436, but significantly or very significantly different from Minghui86. Minhui3301, R527 and Mianhui436 were clustered into one group, while Minghui86 was divided into another by cluster analysis at the genetic distance 8.99. Meanwhile, SSR markers analysis showed that the genetic distances between Minhui3301 and R527, Mianhui436,Minghui86 were 0.14, 0.145 and 0.337,respectively. The clustering analysis based on the genetic similarity of molecular markers and morphological traits led to the same conclusion—the SSR band patterns of Minhui3301 were just the combination of R527 and Mianhui436. In short, Minhui3301 was originated from R527 and Mianhui436, but not Minghui86 and Mianhui436.
点击查看大图
下载:
