Journals / Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 25 - Sayı: 1

Production of Double Haploid Plants Using In Vivo Haploid Techniques in Corn

Pages
62–69
Publication Date
2022-10-17
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Average chromosome doublingrate is lower than other researchers’ results, it is also effcted by genotype and chromosome doubling methods.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This research was conducted at the breeding station of the Turkish breeding company Agromar A.Ş in the city of Bursain Turkey during the 2013 and 2014 growing seasons.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Used from within the same heterotic group crossings, 7 donormaterials were obtained during the 2012 winter season in the greenhouse.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Average chromosome doublingrate is lower than other researchers’ results, it is also effcted by genotype and chromosome doubling methods.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2013 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This research was conducted at the breeding station of the Turkish breeding company Agromar A.Ş in the city of Bursain Turkey during the 2013 and 2014 growing seasons. Used from within the same heterotic group crossings, 7 donormaterials were obtained during the 2012 winter season in the greenhouse. The inducer line RWK-76xRWS, providedby University of Hohenheim, Germany, was used for generating haploid seeds. The donor and inducer crossing wasperformed during the 2013 summer season. The haploid selection and chromosome doubling were performed duringthe 2014 summer season. Seven donors were used for haploid induction which name are DNR1, DNR2, DNR3,DNR4, DNR5, DNR6, DNR7 respectively, from each donor diffrent amount of ear crosses were performed (DNR1:16ears, DNR2:10 ears, DNR3:10 ears, DNR4:12 ears, DNR5:11 ears, DNR6:13 ears, DNR7:11 ears). According to thepresent study, the average induction rate found ranged from 7.1 to 12.8%, and the average seedling survival rate in thegreenhouse after colchicine application ranged from 57.9 to 77.6%. After transplanting to the fild, 78.3-92.6% of theseplants survived. As a result of this research, the chromosome doubling rate ranged from 22.5 to 48.3% depending onthe donor material. These result indicates that maternal haploid selection visually is easy. Haploid induction rate (HIR)changes from donor to donor, its mean genotype and environment is effctive for HIR. Average chromosome doublingrate is lower than other researchers’ results, it is also effcted by genotype and chromosome doubling methods.

🔖

Cite This Article

BILGIN, B., Yanıkoğlu, S., ZARARSIZ, D., ÖZTÜRK, L., TURGUT, İ., KIZIK, S. (2022). Production of Double Haploid Plants Using In Vivo Haploid Techniques in Corn. Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 25 - Sayı: 1, 62–69. https://ajindex.com/articles/594837

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Battiselli G M, Von Pinho R G, Justus A, Couto E.G.O & Balestre M (2013). Production and identifiation of doubled haploids in tropical maize. Genetics and Molecular Research 12(4): 4230-4242
  2. Bernardo R, Lorenzana R E & Mayor P J (2010). Exploiting both doubled haploids and cheap and abundant molecular markers in corn breeding. Illinois Corn Breeders School 46: 40-53
  3. Cengiz R (2016). Development of double haploid maize lines by using in vivo haploid technique. Graduate Theses and Dissertations. Master thesis, Namık Kemal Üniversitesi (Published), Tekirdağ Cerit İ, Cömertpay G, Oyucu R, Çakır B, Hatipoğlu R & Özkan H (2016). Melez mısır ıslahında in-vivo katlanmış haploid tekniğinde kullanılan farklı inducer genotiplerin haploid indirgeme oranları belirlenmesi. Tarla Bitkileri Merkez Araştırma Enstitüsü Dergisi 25(özel sayı): 52-57
  4. Chaikam V, Nair S K, Babu R, Martinez L, Tejomurtula J & Boddupalli P M (2015). Analysis of effctiveness of R1-nj anthocyanin marker for in vivo haploid identifiation in maize and molecular markers for predicting the inhibition of R1-nj expression. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 128(1): 159-171
  5. Chaikam V, Martinez L, Melchinger A E, Schippark W & Boddupali P M (2016). Development and validation of red root marker-based haploid inducers in maize. Crop Science 56: 1678-1688
  6. Chalky S T (1994). Properties of maternal haploid maize plants and potential application to maize breeding. Euphytica 79: 13-18
  7. Chidzanga C, Muzawazi F, Midzi J & Hove T (2017). Production and use of haploids and doubled haploid in maize breeding: A review. African Journal of Plant Breeding ISSN: 2375-074X Vol. 4(4): 201-213
  8. Couto E G O, Davide L M C, Bustamante F O, Pinho R G V & Silva T N (2013). Identifiation of haploid maize by flw cytometry, morphological and molecular markers. Science and Agrotechnology 37(1): 25-31
  9. Dang N C (2010). Improvement of protein quality in waxy maize (Zea mays L.) by doubled haploid and marker asisted selection techniques. PhD Thesis, University of Thai Nguyen (Published), Zürich Dang N C, Munsch M, Aulinger I, Renlai W & Stamp P (2011). Inducer line generated double haploid seeds for combined waxy and opaque 2 grain quality in subtropical maize (Zea mays. L.). Euphytica DOI 10.1007/s10681-011-0423-0
  10. Deimling S, Röber F K & Geiger H H (1997). Methodology and genetics of in vivo haploid induction in maize. Vortr Pflnzenzuchtg 38: 203-224
  11. Gayen P, Madan J K, Kumar R & Sarkar K R (1994). Chromosome doubling in haploids through colc