Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-cnmwb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T17:32:48.989Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Variation in seedling root traits in wild barley (Hordeum vulgare L. ssp. spontaneum) germplasm

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 July 2014

Kuldeep Tyagi ,
Hyo Jeong Lee ,
Chong Ae Lee ,
Brian J. Steffenson ,
Young Jin Kim  and
Song Joong Yun
Kuldeep Tyagi
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, Chonbuk National University, Jeonju561-756, Republic of Korea
Hyo Jeong Lee
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, Chonbuk National University, Jeonju561-756, Republic of Korea
Chong Ae Lee
Affiliation:
Department of Food Science, Chonbuk National University, Jeonju561-756, Republic of Korea
Brian J. Steffenson
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Pathology, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN55108, USA
Young Jin Kim
Affiliation:
National Institute of Crop Science, RDA, Iksan570-080, Republic of Korea
Song Joong Yun*
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, Chonbuk National University, Jeonju561-756, Republic of Korea
*
* Corresponding author. E-mail: sjyun@jbnu.ac.kr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Improved root architecture of cultivated barley can improve crop performance in drought-prone areas. In this study, seedlings of 315 wild barley (Hordeum vulgare subsp. spontaneum) accessions from the Wild Barley Diversity Collection (WBDC) were grown under hydroponic conditions for 8 d after germination and then root characteristics were analysed. Significant differences were observed among the accessions with regard to seminal root number (SRN), root length (RL), specific root length (SRL), root fresh weight and root dry weight (RDW). Principal component analysis explained about 81% of the total variation for ten traits. Principal component (PC) 1, PC2 and PC3 explained about 38, 30 and 13% of the total variation among the accessions. The two most prominent contributors in each PC were RL and SRL, RDW and SRN, and the longitude and latitude of the collection sites, respectively. Accessions WBDC266, WBDC302, WBDC286 and WBDC011 had the longest RL and the highest RDW, specific dry root weight and SRL, respectively. These accessions may be useful genetic resources for the improvement of these root traits in cultivated barley.

Keywords

genetic resourcesphenotypic variationprincipal component analysis
Type
Research Article
Information
Plant Genetic Resources , Volume 12 , Issue S1: Special issue on the 3rd International Symposium on “Genomics of Plant Genetic Resources” , July 2014 , pp. S79 - S82
Copyright
Copyright © NIAB 2014 

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

Boyer, JS and McPherson, HG (1975) Physiology of water deficits in cereal crops. Advance Agronomy 27: 1–23.Google Scholar
Bengough, AG, Gordon, DC, Al-Menaie, H, Ellis, RP, Allan, D, Keith, R, Thomas, WTB and Forster, BP (2004) Gel observation chamber for rapid screening of root traits in cereal seedlings. Plant and Soil 262: 63–70.Google Scholar
Bengough, AG, McKenzie, BM, Hallett, PD and Valentine, TA (2011) Root elongation, water stress and mechanical impedance: a review of limiting stresses and beneficial root tip traits. Journal of Experimental Botany 62: 59–68.Google Scholar
Ellis, RP, Forster, BP, Robinson, D, Handley, LL, Gordon, DC, Russell, JR and Powell, W (2000) Wild barley, a source of genes for crop improvement in the 21st century? Journal of Experimental Botany 51: 9–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forster, BP, Thomas, WTB and Chloupek, O (2005) Genetic control of barley root system and their associations with plant performance. Aspects Applied Biology 73: 199–204.Google Scholar
Gewin, V (2010) An underground revolution. Nature 466: 552–553.Google Scholar
Grando, S (1986) Studio della variabilita in popolazioni mediterranee, coltivate e spontanee, di Hordeum vulgare e Hordeum spontaneum. PhD Thesis, University of Perugia, Italy (in Italian).Google Scholar
Grando, S and Ceccarelli, S (1995) Seminal root morphology and coleoptiles length in wild (Hordeum vulgare ssp. spontaneum) and cultivated (Hordeum vulgare ssp. vulgare) barley. Euphytica 86: 73–80.Google Scholar
Gregory, P, Bengough, AG, Grinev, D, Schmidt, S, Thomas, WTB, Wojciechowski, T and Young, IM (2009) Root phenomics of crops: opportunities and challenges. Functional Plant Biology 36: 922–929.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gunaskera, D, Santakumari, M, Glinka, Z and Berkowitz, GA (1994) Wild and cultivated barley genotypes demonstrate varying ability to acclimate to plant water deficits. Plant Science 99: 125–134.Google Scholar
Hajjar, R and Hodgkin, T (2007) The use of wild relatives in crop improvement: a survey of developments over the last 20 years. Euphytica 156: 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kondo, M, Pablico, PP, Aragones, DV, Agbisit, R, Abe, J, Morita, S and Courtis, B (2003) Genotyping and environmental variations in root morphology in rice genotypes under upland field conditions. Plant and Soil 255: 189–200.Google Scholar
Løes, AK and Gahoonia, G (2004) Genetic variation in specific root length in Scandinavian wheat and barley accessions. Euphytica 137: 243–249.Google Scholar
Lynch, J (1995) Root architecture and plant productivity. Plant Physiology 109: 7–13.Google Scholar
Ma, S-C, Xu, B-C, Li, F-M, Liu, W-Z and Huang, Z-B (2008) Effects of root pruning on competitive ability and water use efficiency in winter wheat. Field Crops Research 105: 56–63.Google Scholar
Naz, AA, Ehl, A, Pillen, K and Leon, J (2012) Validation for root-related quantitative trait locus effects of wild origin in the cultivated background of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.). Plant Breeding 131: 392–398.Google Scholar
Nevo, E and Chen, G (2010) Drought and salt tolerances in wild relatives for wheat and barley improvement. Plant Cell and Environment 33: 670–685.Google Scholar
Passioura, JB (1972) The effect of root geometry on the yield of wheat growing on stored water. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 23: 745–752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romer, W and Schenk, H (1998) Influence of genotype on phosphate uptake and utilization efficiencies in spring barley. European Journal of Agronomy 8: 215–224.Google Scholar
Roy, JK, Smith, KP, Muehlbauer, GJ, Chao, S, Close, TJ and Steffenson, BJ (2010) Association mapping of spot blotch resistance in wild barley. Molecular Breeding 26: 243–256.Google Scholar
Steffenson, BJ, Olivera, P, Roy, JK, Jin, Y, Smith, KP and Muehlbauer, GJ (2007) A walk on the wild side: mining wild wheat and barley collections for rust resistance genes. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 58: 532–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Talamé, V, Sanguineti, MC, Chiapparino, E, Bahri, H, Salem, BM, Forster, BP, Ellis, RP, Rhouma, S, Zoumarou, W, Waugh, R and Tuberosa, R (2004) Identification of Hordeum spontaneum QTL alleles improving field performance of barley grown under rainfed conditions. Annals of Applied Biology 144: 309–319.Google Scholar
Tyagi, K, Park, MR, Lee, HJ, Lee, CA, Rehman, S, Steffenson, B and Yun, SJ (2011) Fertile Crescent region as source of drought tolerance at early stage of plant growth of wild barley (Hordeum vulgare L. ssp. spontaneum). Pakistan Journal of Botany 43: 475–486.Google Scholar
Volis, S, Mendlinger, S, Turuspekov, Y and Esnazarov, U (2002) Phenotypic and allozyme variation in Mediterranean and desert populations of wild barley, Hordeum spontaneum . Evolution 56: 1403–1415.Google Scholar
Zhao, J, Sun, H, Dai, H, Zhang, G and Wu, F (2010) Difference in response to drought stress among Tibet wild barley genotypes. Euphytica 172: 395–403.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Tyagi Supplementary Material

Tables S1-S3

Download Tyagi Supplementary Material(File)
File 112.5 KB