Genetic variation and associations involving Fusarium head blight and deoxynivalenol accumulation in cultivated oat (Avena sativa L.)

2017 ◽  
Vol 136 (5) ◽  
pp. 620-636 ◽  
Author(s):  
Åsmund Bjørnstad ◽  
Xinyao He ◽  
Selamawit Tekle ◽  
Kathy Klos ◽  
Yung-Fen Huang ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Hussein M. Khaeim ◽  
Anthony Clark ◽  
Tom Pearson ◽  
Dr. David Van Sanford

Head scab is historically a devastating disease affecting not just all classes of wheat but also barley and other small grains around the world. Fusarium head blight (FHB), or head scab, is caused most often by Fusarium graminearum (Schwabe), (sexual stage – Gibberella zeae) although several Fusarium spp. can cause the disease. This study was conducted to determine the effect of mass selection for FHB resistance using an image-based optical sorter. lines were derived from the C0 and C2 of two populations to compare genetic variation within populations with and without sorter selection. Our overall hypothesis is that sorting grain results in improved Fusarium head blight resistance. Both of the used wheat derived line populations have genetic variation, and population 1 has more than population 17. They are significantly different from each other for fusarium damged kernel (FDK), deoxynivalenol (DON), and other FHB traits. Although both populations are suitable to be grown for bulks, population 1 seems better since it has more genetic variation as well as lower FDK and DON, and earlier heading date. Lines within each population were significantly different and some lines in each population had significantly lower FDK and DON after selection using an optical sorter. Some lines had significant reduction in both FDK and DON, and some others had either FDK or DON reduction. Lines of population 1 that had significant reduction, were more numerous than in population 17, and FDK and DON reduction were greater.


Agronomy ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 354
Author(s):  
Selamawit Tekle ◽  
Sissela Stråbø Schofer ◽  
Xinyao He ◽  
Yanhong Dong ◽  
Åsmund Bjørnstad

Variation and inheritance of anther extrusion and its effects on Fusarium head blight were studied. On a 0 to 9 scale, variation ranged from 1 to 6 in a North American oat panel and from 0 to 8 in a Nordic population. The inheritance was studied in two recombinant inbred line populations (Fiia × Stormogul and Svea × Stormogul). Fiia and Svea are recent white-seeded cultivars with low to medium anther extrusion, while Stormogul is an old black-seeded cultivar with high anther extrusion. Highly significant transgressive segregations and high heritabilities were observed (h2 = 0.91 in Fiia × Stormogul and h2 = 0.83 in Svea × Stormogul). Another extrusion was negatively correlated with Fusarium head blight and deoxynivalenol in spawn-inoculated field experiments, but significantly only in Fiia × Stormogul where the range in resistance was widest. Correlations were reversed in spray-inoculated greenhouse experiments, apparently spraying open florets defeated the avoidance mechanism. Anther extrusion may help oat avoid Fusarium infection in the field, but the genetic variance is inadequate and high anther extrusion is rare in modern genepools.


2014 ◽  
Vol 65 (1) ◽  
pp. 46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Miedaner ◽  
Carl Friedrich Horst Longin

Durum is one of the most susceptible cereals to infection with Fusarium head blight (FHB) due to the lack of resistance sources. Data on the genetic variation and heritability of FHB in elite durum, and especially the new evolving winter durum, are lacking. Thus, we compared 105 elite, winter durum breeding lines with an international collection of 62 old and new winter durum cultivars. We evaluated the development of FHB after inoculation by Fusarium culmorum, heading time, and plant height at three field environments in Germany. Significant genetic variation for FHB was identified in the elite breeding material as well as in the collection. Mean FHB rating was normally distributed with a heritability of >0.7 for both sets, indicating the quantitative genetic nature of the trait. Taking heading time, plant height, and FHB resistance into account, the most interesting genotypes were identified in the elite breeding material. Consequences for the ongoing global efforts for improvement of FHB resistance of durum are discussed.


2011 ◽  
Vol 74 (12) ◽  
pp. 2188-2191 ◽  
Author(s):  
DOUGLAS C. DOEHLERT ◽  
PATRICIA RAYAS-DUARTE ◽  
MICHAEL S. MCMULLEN

Fusarium head blight, incited by the fungus Fusarium graminearum, primarily affects wheat (Triticum aestivum) and barley (Hordeum vulgarum), while oat (Avena sativa) appears to be more resistant. Although this has generally been attributed to the open panicle of oats, we hypothesized that a chemical component of oats might contribute to this resistance. To test this hypothesis, we created culture media made of wheat, barley, and oat flour gels (6 g of flour in 20 ml of water, gelled by autoclaving) and inoculated these with plugs of F. graminearum from actively growing cultures. Fusarium growth was measured from the diameter of the fungal plaque. Plaque diameter was significantly smaller on oat flour cultures than on wheat or barley cultures after 40 to 80 h of growth. Ergosterol concentration was also significantly lower in oat cultures than in wheat cultures after growth. A hexane extract from oats added to wheat flour also inhibited Fusarium growth, and Fusarium grew better on hexane-defatted oat flour. The growth of Fusarium on oat flour was significantly and negatively affected by the oil concentration in the oat, in a linear relationship. A hexane-soluble chemical in oat flour appears to inhibit Fusarium growth and might contribute to oat's resistance to Fusarium head blight. Oxygenated fatty acids, including hydroxy, dihydroxy, and epoxy fatty acids, were identified in the hexane extracts and are likely candidates for causing the inhibition.


2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (4) ◽  
pp. 969-988 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Steiner ◽  
Sebastian Michel ◽  
Marco Maccaferri ◽  
Marc Lemmens ◽  
Roberto Tuberosa ◽  
...  

2007 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 72-74
Author(s):  
Guo-Liang Jiang ◽  
ZhaoSu Wu ◽  
ZhaoXia Chen ◽  
JiMing Wu ◽  
QiMei Xia ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document