Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T14:22:20.847Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The chromosomal locations in wheat of genes conferring differential response to the wild oat herbicide, difenzoquat

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

J. W. Snape ,
W. J. Angus ,
Beryl Parker  and
Debra Leckie
J. W. Snape
Affiliation:
Plant Breeding Institute, Maris Lane, Trumpington, Cambridge
W. J. Angus
Affiliation:
Plant Breeding Institute, Maris Lane, Trumpington, Cambridge
Beryl Parker
Affiliation:
Plant Breeding Institute, Maris Lane, Trumpington, Cambridge
Debra Leckie
Affiliation:
Plant Breeding Institute, Maris Lane, Trumpington, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

F2, monosomic analysis involving crosses between the monosomic series of a resistant wheat variety, Chinese Spring, and a susceptible variety, Sicco, has located a major gene locus, designated Dfql, on chromosome 2B of wheat which determines the differential response of these varieties to treatment with the wild oat herbicide, difenzoquat. The allele from Chinese Spring conferring resistance is dominant and studies of the responses of Chinese Spring single chromosome substitution lines and nullisomic–tetrasomic lines for chromosome 2B indicate that this allele actively promotes resistance to the herbicide. It is suggested that this gene may prevent inhibition of DNA synthesis in the apical meristem, which is the site of action of the herbicide (Pallett & Caseley, 1980).

Other chromosomes were also implicated as carrying ‘modifier genes’ which affect the ratio of resistant: susceptible plants in F2 monosomic families, namely 1D, 2D, 3A, 3B, 5B and 5D. These chromosomes may affect the retention and translocation of the herbicide to the target site and hence the threshold of response.

The simple inheritance of difenzoquat resistance indicates that it should be easy by conventional breeding techniques to transfer the resistance into susceptible varieties.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 108 , Issue 3 , June 1987 , pp. 543 - 548
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1987

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

Law, C. N. & Worland, A. J. (1973). Aneuploidy in wheat and its uses in genetic analysis. Annual Report of the Plant Breeding Institute, Cambridge 1972, pp. 25–65.Google Scholar
Pallett, K. E. (1983). Mechanisms of tolerance of winter wheat cultivars to difenzoquat. Aspects of Applied Bi-ology 3, 1983. Crop Sensitivity to Herbicides, pp. 197–203.Google Scholar
Pallett, K. E. & Caseley, J. C. (1980). Differential in-hibition of DNA synthesis in difenzoquat tolerant and susceptible U.K. spring wheat cultivars. Pesticide Bio-chemistry and Physiology 14, 144–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sears, E. R. (1954). The aneuploids of common wheat. Missouri Agricultural Experiment Station, Research Bulletin 572, pp. 1–58.Google Scholar
Sears, E. R. & Rodenhiser, H. A. (1948). Nullisomic analysis of stem-rust resistance in Triticum vulgare var. Timstein. Genetics 33, 123–124.Google ScholarPubMed
Tottman, D. R., Lupton, F. G. H. & Oliver, R. H. (1984). The tolerance of difenzoquat and diclofop-methyl by winter wheat varieties at different growth stages. Annals of Applied Biology 104, 151–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tottman, D. R., Lupton, F. G. H., Oliver, R. H. & Preston, S. R. (1982). Tolerance of several wild oat herbicides by a range of winter wheat varieties. Annals of Applied Biology 100, 365–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zadoks, J. C., Chang, T. T. & Konzak, C. F. (1974). A decimal code for the growth stages of cereals. Weed Research 14, 415–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar