HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (26) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Zimnoch-Guzowska, E. Articles by Gebhardt, C. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Zimnoch-Guzowska, E. Articles by Gebhardt, C. Agricola Articles by Zimnoch-Guzowska, E. Articles by Gebhardt, C.

QTL Analysis of New Sources of Resistance to Erwinia carotovora ssp. atroseptica in Potato Done by AFLP, RFLP, and Resistance-Gene-Like Markers

^a Plant Breeding and Acclimatization Institute, Mlochów Research Center, 05-832 Rozalin, Poland
^b Max-Planck Institute for Breeding Research, Carl von Linne Weg 10, D-50829 Köln, Germany

View larger version (39K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1 Distributions of tuber resistance (A) and leaf resistance (B) to E. carotovora ssp. atroseptica in F1 hybrids from DG 83-2025 x DG 81-68. Tuber resistance was measured as millimeters of rotted tissue. Leaf resistance was scored from 1 to 5 where score 5 indicates resistance. TR94, TR95 and TR94/95 represent pooled data from two tuber tests each in 1994, 1995, and all four tests in both years, respectively. LR94, LR95, LR96, and LR94/95/96 represent pooled data from three leaf tests in 1994, two tests each in 1995 and 1996 and all seven tests in 3 yr, respectively

View larger version (43K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2 Molecular genetic and QTL map of progeny DG 83-2025 x DG 81-68 (Erwinia population). Marker loci on maternal (P1 = DG 83-2025) and paternal (P2 = DG 81-68) linkage groups are shown as white and black circles, respectively. Map distances in [cM] were calculated according to Kosambi (1944). Ten loci based on markers shared between the parents (common fragments) are included as half white-half black circles positioned between parental linkage groups. AFLP marker loci based on EcoRI–MseI and HindIII–MseI primer combinations are indicated with letters EM and HM, respectively, plus an identification number for primer combination (Table 2) and fragment. Clustered AFLP loci are represented by one bracketed HM and EM marker each from the cluster. RFLP marker loci are underlined. Small letters in parenthesis after the marker identification indicate that more than one locus was detected with the same marker probe. Anonymous genomic DNA and cDNA markers from potato are identified by the letters GP and CP, respectively. Non-anonymous potato RFLP markers included in the map are: St3.3.13, St1.2.1, St1.2.4 (LGs I, III, IV, VI, VII, X, XI, XII) = resistance gene like sequences of potato (Leister et al., 1996); St4cl (LG III) = 4-coumarate:CoA ligase; SBE (LG IV) = starch branching enzyme; Gap C (LG V) = glyceraldehyde phosphate dehydrogenase; GBSSI (LG VIII) = granule bound starch synthase I; pat (LG VIII) = patatin; Ppc (LGs X and XII) = phosphoenolpyruvate carboxylase; potkin (LG XII) = potato protein kinase (further details in Gebhardt et al., 2000). Marker loci linked to QTL for resistance to E. carotovora ssp. atroseptica are indicated by black (tuber resistance) or white (leaf resistance) arrows. Eca QTL as defined in the text are positioned between parental linkage groups

View larger version (44K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3 QTL for resistance to E. carotovora ssp. atroseptica determined on the basis of GLM and datasets TR94/95 and LR94/95/96. Four marker genotypic classes were tested with GLM procedure for differences between class means x13, x14, x23 and x24. Rectangles contain the results obtained for QTL Eca1A, Eca4A, Eca6A, Eca2A and Eca11B (see Fig. 2 for location) including amount of variance explained (R2) and probability level (P) when using pairs of marker fragments, one from the seed and one from the pollen parent. Class means are shown as black bars for tuber resistance (millimeters rotted tissue) and white bars for leaf resistance (visual score for rotted tissue between 1 and 5, where 5 is resistant). Significant differences (P < 0.05) between class means are indicated by a and b. n = number of plants in each marker class. Note that differences between the total number of plants analyzed per locus result from missing values