FHB Resistance in Durum

FHB Resistance in Durum -Progress and Challenge

Elias Elias, Shahryar Kianian, Shaobin Zhong, and Xiwen Cai

North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND

Steven Xu

USDA-ARS, Fargo, ND

Outline

• Sources of resistance for durum

• FHB introgression and variety/germplasm

development in durum

• What we have learned

• Future research

Sources of Resistance for Durum

• Wild emmer wheat – Qfhs.ndsu-3AS

• Tunisian durum lines– Qfhs.ndsu-5BL

• Cultivated emmer, Persian, and Timopheev’s

wheat – Qfhb.rwg-5A.1 and Qfhb.rwg-5A.2

• Hexaploid wheat

• Wild relatives of wheat

Mean FHB Severity of LDN-Wild Emmer Substitution Lines in

the Greenhouse (1996-1998)

Genotypes FHB Severity (%)

LDN-16 50.8

LDN(DIC-1A) 36.5

LDN(DIC-2A) 83.9

LDN(DIC-3A) 19.8

LDN(DIC-4A) 48.3

LDN(DIC-5A) 40.6

LDN(DIC-6A) 72.4

LDN(DIC-7A) 65.7

LDN(DIC-1B) 69.2

LDN(DIC-3B) 57.8

LDN(DIC-4B) 36.6

LDN(DIC-5B) 44.8

LDN(DIC-6B) 35.5

LDN(DIC-7B) 57.4

D91103 (resistant check) 29.6

D87450 (susceptible check) 62.6

R. W. Stack and E. Elias Crop Sci. 42:637 (2002)

Partial Physical Map of Rice 1S

AP003118

AP002523

AP003215

AP002524

AP003047

AP002903

AP003339

AP003301

AP002484

AP002522

4 AP003282

0 k

b

100 k

b

500 k

b

600 k

b

700 k

b

800 k

b

900 k

b

1000 k

b

1100 k

b

1200 k

b

1300 k

b

1400 k

b

1500 k

b

1600 k

b

1700 k

b

1800 k

b

3AS-4 3AS-2 3AL-3

3AL-5

Chromosome 3A

Xfc

p397.1

Xw

gc901

Xw

gc5

00

Xw

gc716

Xw

gc774

Xw

gc510

Xfc

p397.2

Xfc

p402

Xfc

p403.1

Xw

gc929

Wheat Genetic Map of 3AS

Mark

er

cM

Xbcd1532

Xgw

m2

Xgw

m666.1

Xw

gc501/

Xfc

p399

3.4 3.4 3.8 4.8 3.6 1.2 2.4 4.8 2.4 2.4 1.2 2.4 6.1

RICL FHB Severity (%)

LDN-DIC3A-26 32.1

LDN-DIC3A-15 52.5

LDN-DIC3A-49 15.3

LDN-DIC3A-10 23.2

LDN-DIC3A-8 21.5

LDN-DIC3A-30 15.6

LDN-DIC3A-36 36.4

S. Kianian; X. Cai

FHB Resistance QTL Qfhs.ndsu-3AS Derived from Wild Emmer Wheat

Xgwm533-3B.1

Xfba91-3B

Xbcd907-3B

Xgwm389-3B

XksuG53-3B

Xgwm493-3B

Xcdo460-3B

Xtam47-3B

Xtam61-3B

Xgwm533-3B.2

Xcdo1164-3B

80

70

60

50

40

30

10

5

20

Xcdo1435-3A

Xbcd15-3A

Xglk683-3A

Xtam47-3A

Xtam61-3A

Xcdo460-3A

Xcdo1164-3A

Xcdo1345-3A

Xbcd1532-3A

Xmwg22-3A

Xgwm2-3A

Xcdo638-3A

Xgwm32-3A

Xgwm666-3A.1

120

110

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

Xfba91-3A

Xgwm389-3B

Xgwm533-3B.1

XSTS3B-189

XSTS3B-80

XSTS3B-206

XSTS3B-66

Xgwm493-3B

Xgwm533-3B.2

Xfba91-3B 110

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

Xbcd907r

XSTS3B-66

XSTS3B-80

Xgwm666.1 100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

Xfcp401

Xbcd1532

Xfcp402

Xgwm2

Xfcp397.2

Qfhs.ndsu-3AS

Qfhs.ndsu-3BS

a Partial genetic map of the chromosomal region harboring Qfhs.ndsu-3AS; b CMap of 3AS (http://

wheat.pw.usda.gov/GG2/index.shtml); c CMap of 3BS (http:// wheat.pw.usda.gov/GG2/index.shtml);

d Partial fine map of Qfhs.ndsu-3BS (Liu and Anderson, 2003; Liu et al. 2006)

a b c d

Mol. Breed. 2007, 19: 113-124 X. Cai

Wheat 3AS Distal region (4,360 kb) of rice 1S Distal region of Brachypodium 2S

Saturation Mapping and Comparative Analysis of the Chromosomal Region Harboring Qfhs.ndsu-3AS X. Cai

Mean FHB Severity of Tunisian Durum Lines in


E. Elias and S. Kianian

Coefficient

0.00 0.37 0.74 1.11 1.48

WangshuibaiMW

Ben

LDN-16

LDN-Dic3A

Lebsock

Plaza

Maier

Tun18

Tun51

Tun101

Tun73

Tun90

Tun36

Tun84

Tun34

Tun108

Tun7

CIMMYT7

Frontana

Sumai3

Wangshuibai

Genetic Distance-Based Dendrogram of the Resistance Sources

E. Elias

Identification of FHB Resistance QTL from

Tunisian Lines by Association Mapping

• A FHB resistance QTL on 5BL – Qfhs.ndsu-5BL

• A chromosomal region on 3BS potentially

associated with FHB resistance

• Susceptibility or suppressor of resistance gene(s)

on chromosome 2A

S. Kianian

Genotypes Winter 2004 Spring 2005

3w sp* 3w pt§ 3w sp 3w pt

Sumai 3 1.2 7.7 1.2 6.3

Russ 12.7 79.0 6.7 43.9

PI61102 (Persian wheat) 1.7 8.8 3.6 17.4

PI78812 (Persian wheat) 2.0 10.7 1.9 10.7

PI94750 (Persian wheat) 2.6 15.3 2.1 11.6

PI94752 (Persian wheat) 2.4 12.4 1.4 6.7

PI115816 (Persian wheat) 3.8 19.4 3.3 18.3

PI283889 (Persian wheat) 2.2 12.6 1.3 6.6

PI352281 (Persian wheat) 1.4 7.2 3.3 26.5

CI3686 (cultivated emmer) 2.3 13.6 1.8 11.9



LSD (0.05) 2.9 17.2 2.7 16.2

FHB Resistance of Persian and Cultivated Emmer

Wheat in the Greenhouse

S. Xu and X. Cai

* Average number of infected spikelets per spike (sp) and § average percent infection (pt) at

three weeks post-inoculation

Reactions to Fusarium graminearum of cultivated emmer (a-h) and

Persian wheat (i) at 21 days post inoculation in the greenhouse

a b c d e f

g h i

f

S. Xu

Two FHB Resistance QTL on 5AS and 5AL with Possible Origin

of T. timopheevii (PI277012)

Chu et al. 2011 TAG S. Xu

Introgression and Variety/Germplasm

Development

• Wild emmer (Qfhs.ndsu-3AS)–derived durum lines

• Tunisian lines–derived durum lines

• Cultivated emmer, Persian, and Timopheev’s

wheat–derived durum lines

• Sumai 3 (Fhb1)–derived durum lines

• Wild relative–derived durum lines

• Durum varieties

LDN-DIC3A-10 LDN

F1

F2

3A Recombined 3A

F3

Evaluating homozygous recombinants for FHB resistance

X. Cai

Introgression of FHB Resistance from the Tunisian Lines into Durum

Elias & Kianian

2009 Durum Uniform FHB Nursery, Langdon, ND

Divide Emmer-derived durum line

S. Xu

FHB Severity and DON of Durum Wheat Cultivars

(2007 - 2010)

Alkabo 38.0 32.2 1.9

Divide 38.7 30.3 1.6

Grenora 38.8 20.0 3.2

Lebsock 39.4 28.9 2.4

Mountrail 46.5 56.7 3.1

Tioga 44.3 16.5 2.0

E. Elias

Durum Wheat Cultivars Grown in ND

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

%

A

c

r

e

a

g

e

P

l

a

n

t

e

d

Ben

Lebsock

Mountrail

Pierce

Grenora

Alkabo

Divide

E. Elias

What We Have Learned

• FHB resistance of durum materials in the

greenhouse and field conditions

• The role of D genome in FHB resistance

• Suppression of FHB resistance in tetraploid

wheat

• The role of spike structure in FHB resistance

Potential Effect of D genome on FHB resistance

S. Zhong and S. Xu

Durum Cultivar ‘Scoop 1’

(susceptible)

Aegilops tauschii (genome DD)

(reaction to FHB unknown) X

Synthetic Hexaploid Wheat ‘TA4152-60’

(moderate resistance)

Spring Wheat ‘ND495’

(moderate susceptibility) X

Mapping Population: 120 DH Lines

Identified Two FHB Resistance QTL on 5AL and 5BL of TA4152-60, respectively

0.0

LOD

0.8 1.6 2.4 3.2 4.0

Marker Distance (cM)

9.3

14.6

7.6

3.3 2.5 3.3 11.0

6.7

5.9

8.4

6.0

12.1

Xbarc151

Xbarc1061.1

Xgdm132.1

Xcfa2163.1 Xcfa2185 Xcfa2155

Xwmc96.2

Xgwm410.4

Xgwm179.1

Xgwm595

Xgwm291.1

Xgwm410.3

Xgwm410.2

5A

3.5 2.5 7.6 1.0 3.1

7.6

13.2

13.2

12.8

5.0

11.6

7.0

Xbarc138.3 Xgwm540

Xbarc109

Xbarc74 Xgwm213

Xbarc128.4

Xgwm371

Xbarc100.5

Tsn1

Xbarc73

Xwmc75

Xbarc142

Xgdm116.1

Marker Distance (cM)

0.0

LOD

1.4 2.8 4.2 5.6 7.0

FHB 2010 FHB 2007 FHB 2008

5B

Major QTLs on chromosome 5A and 5B identified in the mapping population from the cross between the synthetic wheat

line TA4152-60 and the spring wheat line ND495. The 5A QTL peaked at the interval between Xgdm132.1 and Xgwm410.4,

and explained up to 11% of the phenotypic variation. Whereas the 5B QTL explained up to 20% of the trait variation and

peaked at the interval between markers Xbarc100.5 and Xwmc75. FHB 2007 and FHB2008 were based on the data from

greenhouse inoculation. FHB 2010 was based on the data from the disease nursery located at Fargo, ND.

S. Zhong and S. Xu

Mean FHB Severity of LDN-D genome Substitution Lines in the

Greenhouse (2011)


LDN 1D(1A) 76.89

LDN 2D(2A) 69.38

LDN 3D(3A) 57.25

LDN 4D(4A) 66.77

LDN 5D(5A) 29.60

LDN 6D(6A) 83.80

LDN 7D(7A) 70.18

LDN 1D(1B) 84.53

LDN 2D(2B) 68.66

LDN 3D(3B) 55.87

LDN 4D(4B) 53.24

LDN 5D(5B) 58.04

LDN 6D(6B) 49.40

LDN 7D(7B) 51.46

LDN 70.04

Chinese Spring 73.16

X. Cai

Mean FHB Severity of LDN-Wild Emmer Substitution Lines in



LDN-16 50.8

LDN(DIC-1A) 36.5

LDN(DIC-2A) 83.9

LDN(DIC-3A) 19.8

LDN(DIC-4A) 48.3

LDN(DIC-5A) 40.6

LDN(DIC-6A) 72.4

LDN(DIC-7A) 65.7

LDN(DIC-1B) 69.2

LDN(DIC-3B) 57.8

LDN(DIC-4B) 36.6

LDN(DIC-5B) 44.8

LDN(DIC-6B) 35.5

LDN(DIC-7B) 57.4

D91103 (resistant check) 29.6

D87450 (susceptible check) 62.6

R. W. Stack and E. Elias Crop Sci. 42:637 (2002)

Future Research

• Search for novel/effective sources of resistance,

especially Type I resistance

• Characterize the role of D genome and spike

structure in FHB resistance

• Manipulate D-genome chromosomes and

suppressor genes to enhance FHB resistance in

durum

• Develop elite germplasm and superior varieties

from the resistance sources available for durum

Acknowledgement

• Shiaoman Chao, USDA-ARS, Fargo, ND

• Yanhong Dong, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN

• All researchers and supporting staffs involved in this

coordinated project

• ND Wheat Commission

• ND Agricultural Experiment Station

FHB Resistance in Durum

Documents

Transcript of FHB Resistance in Durum