红花双列杂交后代羟基黄色素A含量的遗传效应分析

doi:10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2020.06.007

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

选用6个羟基红花黄色素A（HSYA）含量差异较大的亲本,采用双列杂交方法配制杂交组合,测定2015年和2016年2年亲本及其后代F₁和F₂红花中的HSYA含量。运用双子叶植物种子数量性状遗传模型和统计分析方法,分析胚、细胞质和母体植株3套遗传体系的基因效应和环境互作效应。结果发现：在HSYA含量的遗传体系中,母体遗传效应影响最大,胚效应次之,细胞质效应影响最小。3套遗传体系均表现出基因主效应大于环境互作效应。机误方差较大,说明HSYA含量还受环境机误或抽样误差的影响。亲本遗传效应分析表明,豫红花1号（P₁）做亲本表现稳定,有利于增加杂交后代HSYA含量,达到提高品质、改良品种的效果。胚显性方差和母体显性方差均达到极显著水平,表明同时存在种子杂种优势和母体杂种优势,而且其主效应基因不受环境影响。综合考虑遗传主效应、胚显性效应和母体显性效应,亲本组合（P₁×P₅）有利于提高后代杂交品种的HSYA含量。该研究结果可为后代材料在杂种优势利用中的亲本选择提供理论支持。

关键词: 红花, 双列杂交, 羟基红花黄色素A, 遗传效应, 杂种优势

Abstract:

Six Carthamus tinctorius L. cultivars with great difference in hydroxy safflor yellow A (HSYA) content were used as parents to make incomplete diallel crossing in accordance with the Griffing method Ⅱ to study the genetics of HSYA content in Carthamus tinctorius L. using a full genetic model for quantitative traits of seed for diploid plant. Analysis of diploid embryo, cytoplasm and diploid maternal genetic effects, their GE interaction effects for Carthamus tinctorius L. quality traits, and the genetic correlation among quality traits were conducted by using 2015 and 2016 data. The genetic relationship between Carthamus tinctorius L. quality traits were also analyzed by using a mixed model approaches, which could estimate the genetic covariances between two traits with unequal design matrices. The values of parents were also analyzed in this experiment. The results showed that HSYA content in Carthamus tinctorius L. was mainly controlled by maternal and embryogenic effects, followed by cytoplasmic effects. The main effects of different genetic systems on HSYA content traits were more important than environment interaction effects. The strong dominance effects on HSYA from residual were easily changed by environmental conditions. The analysis of genetic effect of parents showed that the performance of parental Yuhonghua1hao (P₁) was relative more stable. It is beneficial to increase the content of HSYA in hybrid progeny and improve the effect of quality improvement. Both Embryo and maternal dominant variance were highly significant, and it implied that there were both seed heterosis and maternal heterosis, while the main genetic effects were not affected by environmental factors. Comprehensive consideration of main genetic effect, embryogenic dominance and maternal dominance, parental combination (P₁×P₅) was beneficial to increase the content of hydroxy safflor yellow A in the progeny of hybrid varieties. The above results provide theoretical support for parental selection in heterosis utilization.

Key words: Carthamus tinctorius L., Diallel crossing, Hydroxy safflor yellow A, Genetic effect, Heterosis

梁慧珍, 许兰杰, 余永亮, 谭政委, 杨红旗, 董薇, 李磊, 李春明, 刘新梅, 张收良. 红花双列杂交后代羟基黄色素A含量的遗传效应分析[J]. 作物杂志, 2020 (6): 47–53

Liang Huizhen, Xu Lanjie, Yu Yongliang, Tan Zhengwei, Yang Hongqi, Dong Wei, Li Lei, Li Chunming, Liu Xinmei, Zhang Shouliang. Genetic Analysis of Hydroxy Safflor Yellow A Content of Cross Combinations after Diallel Crossing in Carthamus tinctorius L.[J]. Crops, 2020(6): 47–53

图/表 4

表1

表2

表3

表4

参考文献 30

[1]	吕培霖, 李成义, 王俊丽. 红花籽油的研究进展. 中国现代中药, 2016,18(3):387-389.
[2]	梁慧珍, 董薇, 余永亮, 等. 国内外红花种质资源研究进展. 安徽农业科学, 2015,43(16):71-74.
[3]	李晓, 李春阳, 曾晓雄, 等. 响应面试验优化红花籽油水酶法提取工艺. 食品科学, 2017,38(22):231-238.
[4]	郭兰萍, 黄璐琦, 谢晓亮. 道地药材特色栽培及产地加工技术规范. 上海: 上海科学技术出版社, 2016: 155-159.
[5]	Zhu H, Wang Z, Ma C, et al. Neuroprotective effects of Hydroxysafflor yellow A:In vivo and in vitro studies. Planta Medica, 2003,69(5):429-433. pmid: 12802724
[6]	艾散江·艾海提, 王瑾, 关明. 高效液相色谱法分离分析药食同源红花中羟基红花黄色素A. 食品科学, 2016,37(12):152-155.
[7]	朱岩峰, 罗海明, 邓中龙, 等. 红花注射液对急性冠状动脉综合征患者血小板糖蛋白Ⅱb/Ⅲa受体影响的随机对照研究. 中西医结合学报, 2012,10(3):318-323.
[8]	姬生栋, 栗鹏, 李江伟, 等. 水稻株系与亲本间灌浆期POD酶谱及遗传效应分析. 作物杂志, 2018(5):17-20.
[9]	Cailleau A, Grimanelli D, Blanchet E, et al. Dividing a maternal pie among half-sibs:genetic conflicts and the control of resource allocation to seeds in maize. The American Naturalist, 2018,192(5):577-592. pmid: 30332585
[10]	梁慧珍, 李卫东, 曹颖妮, 等. 大豆籽粒异黄酮含量的遗传效应研究. 作物学报, 2006,32(6):856-860.
[11]	赵娜, 缪亚梅, 薛冬, 等. 蚕豆6×6双列杂交子代主要性状的遗传效应分析. 核农学报, 2020,34(1):45-54.
[12]	Liang D, Wang B, Song S, et al. Analysis of genetic effects on a complete diallel cross test of Pinus koraiensis. Euphytica, 2019,215(5):1-12.
[13]	吴沂芸, 陈翠平, 任超翔, 等. 红花黄酮类成分累积量与功能基因表达水平的关联分析. 中国中药杂志, 2017,42(1):83-87.
[14]	许兰杰, 梁慧珍, 余永亮等. 红花轻基黄色素A动态积累规律及热稳定性研究. 中国农学通报, 2016,32(19):87-91.
[15]	许兰杰, 梁慧珍, 余永亮, 等. 红花轻基黄色素A含量与花色相关性及其品种间的差异评价. 中国农学通报, 2018,34(1):41-45.
[16]	Liu B W, Tang T T, Li Y J, et al. SRAP analysis on genetic relationship of Carthamus tinctorius L. varieties in Xinjiang. Agricultural Science and Technology, 2013(9):26-29,68.
[17]	唐洁. 羟基红花黄色素A动态积累规律研究及相关基因的克隆. 上海:第二军医大学, 2009: 36-47.
[18]	Zhu J. Methods of predicting genotype value and heterosis for offspring of hybrids. Journal of Biomathematics, 1993,8(1):32-44.
[19]	Zhu J, Weir B S. Analysis of cytoplasmic and maternal effects:I. A genetic model for diploid plant seeds and animals. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 1994,89:153-159. doi: 10.1007/BF00225135 pmid: 24177822
[20]	Zhu J, Weir B S. Mixed model approaches for diallel analysis based on a bio-model. Genetical Research, 1996,68:233-240. pmid: 9062080
[21]	赵明波, 邓秀兰, 王业玲, 等. 高效液相色谱法测定红花中的羟基黄色素A. 色谱, 2003,21(6):593-595.
[22]	Luo X, Ding Y, Zhang L Z, et al. Genomic prediction of genotypic effects with epistasis and environment interactions for yield-related traits of rapeseed (Brassica napus L.). Frontiers in Genetics, 2017,8:15. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2017.00015 pmid: 28270831
[23]	梁慧珍, 李卫东, 王辉, 等. 大豆粒形性状的遗传效应分析. 遗传学报, 2005,32(11):1199-1204.
[24]	朱军. 包括基因型×环境互作效应的种子遗传模型及其分析方法. 遗传学报, 1996,23(1):56-68.
[25]	温娟. 甘蓝型油菜籽有益脂肪酸组分的种子胚与母体植株QTL定位. 杭州:浙江大学, 2015: 32-33.
[26]	张海珍. 油菜籽品质性状的胚、细胞质和母体遗传效应分析. 杭州:浙江大学, 2004: 78-81.
[27]	Jones D F. Domiance of linked factors as a means of accounting for heterosis. Genetics, 1917,2(5):466-479. pmid: 17245892
[28]	胡秋实. 百日草主要观赏性状遗传规律和杂种优势的初步研究. 武汉:华中农业大学, 2008: 6-8.
[29]	Cockerham C C. An extension of concept of partitioning hereditary variance for analysis of covariances among relatives when epistatic is present. Genetics, 1954,39:859-882. pmid: 17247525
[30]	Li Z K, Pinaon S R M, Park W D, et al. PEpistasis for three grain yield components in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Genetics, 1997,145:453-465. pmid: 9071598

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

亲本 Parent	HSYA (mg/g)			花色 Flower color	花丝产量 Filament yield (kg/hm²)	花丝生育期 Growth period of filament (d)
亲本 Parent	F₁	F₂	平均值Mean	花色 Flower color	花丝产量 Filament yield (kg/hm²)	花丝生育期 Growth period of filament (d)
P₁	16.29	16.21	16.25	红色	365.70	202
P₂	16.12	15.72	15.92	红色	339.15	207
P₃	16.03	15.75	15.89	红色	344.55	210
P₄	14.21	13.91	14.06	橙色	345.90	202
P₅	13.15	12.87	13.01	黄色	355.65	206
P₆	13.51	13.45	13.48	黄色	352.80	205
P₁×P₂	18.17	15.26	16.72	红色	362.40	203
P₁×P₃	17.61	12.29	14.95	红色	348.15	203
P₁×P₄	15.17	10.15	12.66	红色	356.55	202
P₁×P₅	26.19	29.36	27.78	红色	364.80	204
P₁×P₆	11.37	12.36	11.87	橙色	364.35	203
平均Mean	17.70	15.88	16.79	-	359.25	203
P₂×P₃	17.92	16.60	17.26	红色	345.30	209
P₂×P₄	10.03	7.64	8.84	红色	351.15	207
P₂×P₅	17.79	18.22	18.01	橙色	360.15	204
P₂×P₆	16.48	15.86	16.17	红色	355.05	207
平均Mean	15.56	14.58	15.07	-	352.95	207
P₃×P₄	16.41	15.12	15.77	红色	353.85	206
P₃×P₅	15.32	14.03	14.68	橙色	361.65	207
P₃×P₆	14.57	13.21	13.89	红色	357.30	206
平均Mean	15.43	14.12	14.78	-	357.60	206
P₄×P₅	15.78	14.12	14.95	橙色	353.25	203
P₄×P₆	14.89	13.68	14.29	橙色	354.15	203
平均Mean	15.34	13.90	14.62	-	353.70	203
P₅×P₆	15.97	13.64	14.81	黄色	355.80	206
F₁P₁~F₁P₅和F₂P₁~F₂P₅	16.01	14.42	15.22	-	356.26	205
P₁-P₆	-	-	14.77	-	-	-
r_(P/F1)	-	-	0.892^**	-	-	-
r_(P/F2)	-	-	0.903^**	-	-	-
r_(F1/F2)	-	-	0.766^*	-	-	-

参数Parameter	方差Variance	参数Parameter	方差Variance
胚加性方差（V_A）Embryo additive variance	0.000	胚加性互作方差（V_AE）	0.008^**
胚显性方差（V_D）Embryo dominance variance	0.042^**	胚显性互作方差（V_DE）	0.000
细胞质方差（V_C）Cytoplasmic variance	0.000	细胞质互作方差（V_CE）	0.017^**
母体加性方差（V_Am）Maternal additive variance	0.049^**	母体加性互作方差（V_AmE）	0.019^**
母体显性方差（V_Dm）Maternal dominance variance	0.036^**	母体显性互作方差（V_DmE）	0.000
		机误方差（V_e）	0.192^**

亲本 Parent	胚加性效应Embryo additive effect			细胞质效应Cytoplasmic effect			母体加性效应Maternal additive effect			GⅠ	GⅡ
亲本 Parent	A	AEⅠ	AEⅡ	C	CEⅠ	CEⅡ	Am	AmEⅠ	AmEⅡ	GⅠ	GⅡ
P₁	-0.011^**	-0.076^**	-0.033^**	0.006^**	-0.215^**	-0.061^**	-0.222^**	-0.215^**	-0.074^**	0.745	0.285
P₂	-0.005^*	-0.009^*	-0.051^**	0.002^*	-0.132^**	-0.019^**	-0.031^**	-0.011^**	-0.046^**	-0.136	-0.038
P₃	-0.024^**	-0.037^**	-0.021^**	0.002^*	-0.084^**	v0.009^*	-0.108^**	-0.045^**	-0.059^**	-0.222	-0.159
P₄	-0.009^*	-0.039^**	-0.017^**	0.003^**	-0.090^**	-0.079^**	-0.016^**	-0.041^**	-0.052^**	-0.064	0.018
P₅	-0.003	-0.027^**	-0.029^**	0.004^**	-0.102^**	-0.118^**	-0.040^**	-0.039^**	-0.002	-0.201	0.054
P₆	-0.007^*	-0.048^**	-0.097^**	0.002^*	v0.048^**	-0.036^**	-0.101^**	-0.097^**	-0.013^**	-0.203	-0.176

参数 Parameter		显性效应 Dominance effect		显性互作效应Dominance interaction effect
		显性效应 Dominance effect		2015		2016
		组合数 Combination	平均值（极差） Mean (range)	组合数 Combination	平均值（极差） Mean (range)	组合数 Combination	平均值（极差） Mean (range)
胚显性效应 D or DE	总数Total	21	-0.0016(-0.6325~0.3752)	21	v0.0382(-0.8013~0.0816)	21	-0.1006(-0.2010~0.0619)
	正效应Positive	14	-0.1632(0.0052~0.3752)	13	-0.1312(0.0115~0.0816)	9	-0.2879(0.0101~0.0619)
	负效应Negative	7	-0.2675(-0.7765~-0.0612)	8	-0.0901(-0.7037~-0.0103)	12	-0.0692(-0.2013~-0.0092)
母体显性效应Dm or DmE	总数Total	21	-0.0001(-0.2981~0.3102)	21	-0.0526(-0.7035~0.4281)	21	-0.0165(-0.1004~0.7206)
	正效应Positive	10	-0.1327(0.0180~0.3102)	12	v0.2857(0.0159~0.4281)	10	-0.4729(0.0202~0.7206)
	负效应Negative	11	-0.1217(-0.2531~-0.0043)	9	-0.4953(-0.7841~-0.0007)	11	-0.2804(-0.0803~-0.0097)