Printer Friendly

Genetics and Cytology of Chromosome Inversions in Soybean Germplasm.

CHROMOSOME ABERRATIONS may result from the loss, multiplication, or rearrangement of the genetic material. Chromosome inversions represent one type of rearrangement that occurs when chromosome segments become detached, inverted, and are reunited so that the gene segment contained therein is in reverse linear order in relationship to the rest of its chromosome (Rieger et al., 1991, p. 281-282). Muller (1940) proposed the following terminology: inversions including the centromere are pericentric and inversions limited to a single chromosome arm are paracentric. If the inverted region is large enough, the homologous chromosomes in an inversion heterozygote pair gene by gene and form a loop configuration that can be observed at pachytene. Crossovers within the loops of both pericentric and paracentric inversions result in chromatids with duplications and deficiencies. Plants heterozygous for either pericentric or paracentric inversions are characterized by pollen abortion as a result of crossing over within the inversion segment. The percentage of sterility is dependent on the amount of crossing over within the inversion segment (Morgan, 1950). Crossing over within paracentric loops alone or with a crossover in the interstitial segment leads to the appearance of chromatin bridges and fragments at anaphase I and II, and subsequently to aborted spores. Dicentric chromatids are responsible for bridges and acentric chromatids (fragments). By contrast, crossovers that occur within inversion loops of percentric inversion heterozygotes do not result in bridges and fragments. Therefore, the observation of bridges and fragments at meiotic anaphase is evidence for the presence of a paracentric inversion (McClintock, 1931).

Cytogenetic studies of interspecific hybrids between the cultivated soybean G. max and the wild annual soybean G. soja revealed the presence of one or more paracentric inversions (Ahmad et al., 1977a, 1977b, 1979, 1983). These interspecific hybrids exhibited marked differences in chromosome behavior and fertility depending on parents and temperature. In general, summer-grown plants had a higher frequency of meiotic irregularities than did winter-grown plants (Ahmad et al., 1977b). Plants grown in controlled environment cabinets confirmed the effect of high temperature causing more irregularities in chromosome behavior (Ahmad et al., 1983). Furthermore, differences among cross-combinations involving two G. max parents with two G. soja parents were genotype specific (Ahmad et al., 1983). Hybrids within the perennial wild soybean species have shown the presence of paracentric inversions (Singh and Hymowitz, 1985; Hymowitz et al., 1991).

In a search for chromosome aberrations among cross-combinations of G. max germplasm, Delannay et al. (1982) and Palmer (1985) reported that seven of 626 combinations gave [F.sub.1] hybrids with 10 to 30% pollen sterility. A similar study with G. soja germplasm showed that 20 suspected inversions from 142 cross-combinations gave 10 to 40% pollen sterility (Delannay et al., 1982; Palmer, 1985). The G. soja accessions from Japan and South Korea had a higher frequency of suspected inversions than did accessions from China, Taiwan, and Russia. One G. soja accession from South Korea, PI 407179, has been confirmed to differ from G. max by a paracentric inversion (Harper, 1992). This PI was backcrossed to the cultivar Hark (Weber, 1967) to create a near-isogenic line homozygous for the paracentric inversion (Palmer, 1981, unpublished data).

Sun et al. (1991) have identified paracentric inversions in two Chinese G. max landraces, Wei Da Yu and Sun Wu Xiao Bai Mei. These landraces have been entered into the USDA soybean germplasm collection as PI 597651 and PI 597652, respectively.

Our objective was to determine if the paracentric inversions identified in G. soja PI 407179 and in G. max PI 597651 and PI 597652 were identical.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The two Chinese G. max landraces, Wei Da Yu and Sun Wu Xiao Bai Mei, were identified previously as differing from other G. max lines by a chromosome inversion (Sun et al., 1991). The two Chinese homozygous inversion genotypes were used directly in cross-pollinations. PI 407179 (G. soja) was identified as differing from G. max by a chromosome inversion (Delannay et al., 1982; Palmer, 1985). The inversion from PI 407179 was backcrossed into cultivar Hark (BC6) to develop a near-isogenic line homozygous for the inversion. Selection for inversion heterozygosity was practiced between each backcross by identifying plants expressing partial pollen sterility. The three homozygous inversion lines (PI 597651, PI 597652, and Hark homozygous inversion from PI 407179) were each crossed to Hark and were intercrossed with each other to create three homozygous inversion x homozygous inversion combinations.

The [F.sub.2] plants from the three homozygous inversion lines x Hark were grown at the Bruner Farm near Ames, IA, which has Clarion and Nicollet loam soils (fine-loamy, mixed, superactive, mesic Typic Hapludoll and fine-loamy, mixed, superactive, mesic Aquic Hapludoll). These plants were used for pollen analyses. The [F.sub.1] plants used for meiotic analyses were grown in the glasshouse at Ames, at 24 [+ or -] 2 [degrees] C (dark) and 29 [+ or -] 2 [degrees] c (light). Day length was 14 h of light and 10 h of darkness. The photosynthetic irradiance range was 270 to 500 [micro]mol photon [m.sup.-2] [s.sup.-1]. At Gongzhuling, China, the [F.sub.1] plants used for meiotic analyses were grown in 5-L pots in fine-silty, mixed, superactive mesic Typic Hapludoll soil outside during the summer under natural photoperiod. Temperatures were 17 [+ or -] 2 [degrees] C (dark) and 22 [+ or -] [degrees]2C (light).

Fertile and heterozygous chromosome inversion plants were identified by squashing anthers in an aqueous solution of I2KI (Jensen, 1962, p. 203). Anthers from fertile plants gave densely stained reddish-brown pollen grains, whereas anthers from heterozygous inversion plants gave both well-stained pollen grains and aborted (smaller and lightly stained) pollen grains. Five hundred pollen grains were counted from each plant examined.

Immature floral buds for meiotic analyses were collected from fertile and heterozygous inversion glasshouse-grown plants (Ames, IA) during the first 6 h of the light cycle. The buds were fixed immediately in either 3:1 absolute ethanol/ chloroform saturated with ferrous acetate or 6:3:2 absolute ethanol/chloroform/propionic acid saturated with ferrous acetate. The buds were fixed for a minimum of 24 h, washed twice with 70% ethanol, and stored at 4 [degrees] C. For microscopic examination, the buds were rinsed with distilled water, placed in 45% propionic acid, and stained with propionocarmine. The microsporocytes were scored for frequencies of bridges and fragments. Pollen grains and anther squashes were viewed on a Zeiss Standard WL Research microscope (Carl Zeiss, Thornwood, NY) using an MC63 Photomicrographic Camera Attachment (Brinkmann Instruments, Des Plaines, IL) and Kodak Techpan film (Eastman Kodak Co., Rochester, NY).(1)

At Gongzhuling, China, all five cross-combinations were evaluated cytologically. Immature floral buds for meiotic analyses were collected and fixed similarly as in Ames, IA. Pollen grains and anther squashes were viewed on a Leitz orthoplan microscope (Leica, Deerfield, IL) with a 35-mm camera attachment and Kodak Techpan film.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Pollen

The intercrosses of the two Chinese landraces gave completely fertile pollen for all the [F.sub.1] and [F.sub.2] plants (Table 1). These two landraces have the identical chromosome inversion, consistent with the observations of Sun et al. (1991).

The three homozygous inversion lines were crossed to cultivar Hark (N N) and pollen was classified from [F.sub.1] and [F.sub.2] plants (Fig. 1A and 1B). The cross of Hark (N N) with Hark homozygous inversion (In In) gave [F.sub.1] plants with about 25% pollen sterility (Table 1). The two Chinese landraces crossed with Hark (N N) had about 18% [F.sub.1] pollen sterility (Table 1).

[Figure 1 ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Table 1. Pollen fertility of [F.sub.1] plants and [F.sub.2] plants from cross-pollinations of homozygous chromosome inversion soybean plants.
                                    [F.sub.1] plants

Cross combinations([dagger])       Sterile pollen      No.
                                          %
PI 597651 x PI 597652             2.1 [+ or -] 0.9       5
Hark N N x Hark In                25.2 [+ or -] 2.4      5
 In([double dagger])
PI 597651 x Hark N N              17.5 [+ or -] 2.3      5
PI 597652 x Hark N N              18.7 [+ or -] 2.5      5
PI 597651 x Hark In In            48.2 [+ or -] 2.5      5
PI 597652 x Hark In In            46.6 [+ or -] 2.6      5

                                    No. [F.sub.2] plants

                                      Sterile pollen

Cross combinations([dagger])      0-10%   11-20%    21-30%
                                                   no.
PI 597651 x PI 597652                20        0         0
Hark N N x Hark In                   46        6        46
 In([double dagger])
PI 597651 x Hark N N                  8       13         4
PI 597652 x Hark N N                  8       10         2
PI 597651 x Hark In In                7        6         7
PI 597652 x Hark In In                7        5         7

                                      No. [F.sub.2] plants

                                         Sterile pollen

Cross combinations([dagger])        31-40%    41-50%    Total

PI 597651 x PI 597652                    0         0       20
Hark N N x Hark In                       6         0      104
 In([double dagger])
PI 597651 x Hark N N                     0         0       25
PI 597652 x Hark N N                     0         0       20
PI 597651 x Hark In In                   3         2       25
PI 597652 x Hark In In                   3         3       25


([dagger]) N N is homozygous normal chromosome structure, and In In is homozygous inversion chromosome structure.

([double dagger]) In In refers to the backcross of PI 407179 to cultivar Hark to create a near-isogenic homozygous inversion line.

The [F.sub.2] Hark cross-combination (N N x In In) gave 46 plants with very low percentage of pollen sterility and 46 plants with a level of pollen sterility similar to the [F.sub.1] plants (Table 1). A few [F.sub.2] plants had slightly lower or slightly higher pollen sterility. The two Chinese landraces crossed with Hark (N N) gave [F.sub.2] plants that were distributed into three pollen sterility categories (Table 1).

The two Chinese landraces crossed with Hark (In In) gave [F.sub.2] plants that were distributed into four sterility categories (Table 1). These pollen sterility categories would be expected to represent no inversion, the Chinese landrace inversion, the Hark (G. soja) inversion, and the two different inversions. The percentage of pollen sterility is dependent on the amount of crossing over within the inverted region. A pollen sterility class of 31 to 40% would include [F.sub.2] plants with variation in crossover frequencies (Dowrick 1957). Suppression of crossing over by asynapsis and nonhomologous pairing would lower the number of crossovers, thereby reducing the percentage of pollen abortion (McClintock, 1931; Maguire, 1966). A pollen sterility class of 41 to 50% would represent those plants with both paracentric inversions.

The minimum genetic length of an inversion may be estimated from pollen abortion frequencies (Morgan, 1950). As a correction, the percentage of pollen abortion occurring in homozygous plants should be deducted from the percentage of pollen abortion in heterozygous inversion plants. The control [F.sub.1] plants grown in Ames, IA had 1% aborted pollen. Therefore, based on pollen data, the minimum genetic length of this inversion is 25.2% - 1.0% = 24.2%. This calculation considers that single crossovers and the average of two-strand, three-strand, and four-strand doubles will produce tetrads with two normal and two aborted microspores (Burnham, 1962). The two Chinese landraces also had about 1% aborted pollen in control plants. Thus the minimum genetic length for this inversion should be reduced by about 1% and becomes 16.5% for PI 597651 and 17.7% for PI 597652.

Cytology

The cross-combination Hark (N N) x Hark (In In) was grown in a glasshouse at Ames, IA, and in the field at Gongzhuling, China. In the Iowa environment, bridges plus fragments were observed in 19.4% of the meiocytes (Fig. 1C and 1D, Table 2). This contrasts to only 2.8% meiotic aberrations for the same cross-combination grown in the China environment (Table 2). Differences in growth conditions may be the explanation for the apparent discrepancy in the number of meiotic aberrations between the same genotype grown in two different environments.

Table 2. Meiotic irregularities of [F.sub.1] plants from cross-pollinations of homozygous inversion soybean plants.
                                              Anaphase I
                                                               No.
                                                          laggards
                                       No.        No.          and
Cross combinations([dagger])         cells    bridges    fragments

Hark N N x Hark In                      100          7           13
 In([double dagger])
Hark N N x Hark In In                    36          0            1
PI 597651 x Hark N N                     17          3            3
PI 597652 x Hark N N                     60         12           12
PI 597651 x Hark In In                   43          5            4
PI 597652 x Hark In In                   45          5           10

                                                  Telophase I
                                                                No.
                                                           laggards
                                        No.        No.          and
Cross combinations([dagger])          cells    bridges    fragments

Hark N N x Hark In           NE([sections])          -            -
 In([double dagger])
Hark N N x Hark In In                    19          0            0
PI 597651 x Hark N N                     41         10            6
PI 597652 x Hark N N                     34          0            8
PI 597651 x Hark In In                    3          0            0
PI 597652 x Hark In In                  214          0            8

                               Telophase I   Metaphase II
                                                            No.
                                                       laggards
                                    No.        No.          and
Cross combinations([dagger])      cells    bridges    fragments

Hark N N x Hark In                   NE          -            -
 In([double dagger])
Hark N N x Hark In In                 37          1            2
PI 597651 x Hark N N                  46          9            4
PI 597652 x Hark N N                  36          8            0
PI 597651 x Hark In In                20          1            0
PI 597652 x Hark In In                12          8            0

                                            Anaphase II
                                                             No.
                                                        laggards
                                     No.        No.          and
Cross combinations([dagger])       cells    bridges    fragments

Hark N N x Hark In                     29          3            2
 In([double dagger])
Hark N N x Hark In In                   7          0            0
PI 597651 x Hark N N                    1          0            0
PI 597652 x Hark N N                    1          0            0
PI 597651 x Hark In In                115         27            9
PI 597652 x Hark In In                 23          4            1

                                           Telophase II
                                                        No.
                                                   laggards

Cross combi-                  No.        No.          and      No.
 nations([dagger])           cells    bridges    fragments    cells

Hark N N x Hark In             NE         -            -       129
 In([double dagger])
Hark N N x Hark In In          42          0            0      141
PI 597651 x Hark N N            0          0            0      105
PI 597652 x Hark N N           10          1            0      141
PI 597651 x Hark In In          1          0            0      182
PI 597652 x Hark In In          6          1            1      110

                                        Total
                                                       Bridges
                                          Laggard      + laggards
                             Bridges      fragments   and fragments
Cross combi-
 nations([dagger])          No.     %    No.     %      No.     %

Hark N N x Hark In          10    7.8    15   11.6      25   19.4
 In([double dagger])
Hark N N x Hark In In        1    0.7     3    2.1       4    2.8
PI 597651 x Hark N N        22   20.9    13   12.4      35   33.3
PI 597652 x Hark N N        21   14.9    20   14.2      41   29.1
PI 597651 x Hark In In      33   18.1    13    7.1      46   25.2
PI 597652 x Hark In In      18   16.3    20   18.2      38   34.5


[dagger] N N is homozygous normal chromosome structure, and In In is homozygous inversion chromosome structure.

([double dagger]) [F.sub.1] plants grown in glasshouse at Ames, IA, with 24 [+ or -] 2 [degrees] C (dark) and 29 [+ or -] 2 [degrees] C (light), the other five cross-combination [F.sub.1] plants were grown in pots outside at Gongzhuling, China, with 17 [+ or -] 2 [degrees] C (dark) and 22 [+ or -] 2 [degrees] C (light).

([sections]) not examined.

More than 100 meiocytes were examined cytologically for the Hark (N N) x Hark (In In) cross-combination. Different scientists made the observations, but that variable should not account for the sevenfold variation in values. Temperature is known to influence crossing over in plants (Dowrick 1957). Percentage of pollen sterility is dependent on the number of crossovers that occur within inversion loops (Morgan 1950). Ahmad et al. (1977b, 1983) demonstrated conclusively that high temperatures increased meiotic aberrations in soybean inversion heterozygotes. Our data from the Hark (N N) x Hark (In In) plants, grown in two contrasting environments, probably are the result of the effect of temperature differences on meiosis. The higher temperatures in Iowa seemed to increase the frequency of bridges plus laggards and fragments. Our data are consistent with the observations of Ahmad et al. (1977b).

In the cross PI 597651 x Hark (N N), almost twice as many cells with bridges were recorded as cells with laggards and fragments (Fig. 1E, Table 2). However, in the cross PI 597652 x Hark (N N), about equal numbers of cells with bridges were recorded as cells with laggards and fragments (Table 2).

Almost three times as many cells with bridges were recorded as cells with laggards and fragments in the cross PI 597651 x Hark (In In) (Fig. 1F, Table 2). About equal numbers of cells with bridges were recorded as cells with laggards and fragments in the cross PI 597652 x Hark (In In) (Table 2).

The meiotic aberrations observed in the two cross-combinations with PI 567651 resulted in more bridges than laggards and fragments (Table 2). Different configurations of dicentric bridges and fragments at anaphase I and II are expected and depend on the types of crossovers within the inversion loop (Singh, 1993). Crossover configurations that gave rise to dicentric chromatids were consistently higher in cross-combinations with PI 567651 than with PI 567652. In addition, cryptic structural differences in chromosomes (Stephens, 1950) between the two Chinese G. max landraces may have influenced chromosome pairing in the crosses with Hark (N N) and its near-isogenic homozygous inversion line (In In).

(1) The mention of a trademark or proprietary product does not constitute a guarantee or warranty of the product by the USDA or Iowa State University and does not imply its approval to the exclusion of other products that may be suitable.

REFERENCES

Ahmad, Q.N., E.J. Britten, and D.E. Byth. 1977a. Cytogenetic relationships between soybean and a related species, Glycine ussuriensis, p. 9.18-9.22. In W. Downes (ed.) 3rd Int. Congress of the Society for the Advancement of Breeding Researches in Asia and Oceania (SABRAO). Canberra, Australia. 14-18 Feb. 1997. CSIRO Conference Section, Canberra, Australia.

Ahmad, Q.N., E.J. Britten, and D.E. Byth. 1977b. Inversion bridges and meiotic behavior in species hybrids of soybeans. J. Hered. 68:360-364.

Ahmad, Q.N., E.J. Britten, and D.E. Byth. 1979. Inversion heterozygosity in the hybrid soybean x Glycine soja. J. Hered. 70:358364.

Ahmad, Q.N., E.J. Britten, and D.E. Byth. 1983. Effects of interacting genetic factors and temperature on meiosis and fertility in soybean x Glycine soja hybrids. Can. J. Genet. Cytol. 26:50-56.

Burnham, C.R. 1962. Inversions. p. 34-65. Discussions in cytogenetics. Univ. of Minn., St. Paul.

Delannay, X., T.C. Kilen, and R.G. Palmer. 1982. Screening of soybean (Glycine max) accessions and G. soja accessions for chromosome interchanges and inversions, p. 63. In Agronomy Abstracts. ASA, Madison, WI.

Dowrick, G.L. 1957. The influence of temperature on meiosis. Heredity 11:37-49.

Harper, T.K. 1992. Genetic and cytologic evaluation of a chromosome inversion in soybean. M.S. thesis, Iowa State Univ., Ames.

Hymowitz, T., R.G. Palmer, and R.J. Singh. 1991. Cytogenetics of the genus Glycine. p. 53-63. In T. Tsuchiya and P.K. Gupta (ed.) Chromosome engineering in plants: genetics, breeding, evolution. Part B. Elsevier, New York.

Jensen, W.A. 1962. Botanical histochemistry. Freeman, San Francisco, CA.

Maguire, M.P. 1966. The relationship of crossing over to chromosome synapsis in a short paracentric inversion. Genetics 53:1071-1077.

McClintock, B. 1931. Cytological observations of deficiencies involving known genes, translocations and an inversion in Zea mays. Mo. Agric. Exp. Stn. Res. Bull. 163:1-30.

Morgan, D.T. 1950. A cytogenetic study of inversions in Zea mays. Genetics 35:153-174.

Muller, H.J. 1940. Bearing of the Drosophila work on systematics, p. 185-268. In J.S. Huxley (ed.) New Systematics, Oxford, Claredon Press, Oxford, UK.

Palmer, R.G. 1985. Soybean cytogenetics, p. 337-344. In R. Shibles (ed.) Proc. World Soybean Research Conference III. Ames, IA. 12-17 Aug. 1984. Westview Press, Boulder, CO.

Rieger, R., A. Michaelis, and M.M. Green. 1991. Glossary of Genetics: Classical and Molecular. 5th ed. Springer-Verlag, New York.

Singh, R.J. 1993. Plant cytogenetics. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.

Singh, R.J., and T. Hymowitz. 1985. Intra- and interspecific hybridization in the genus Glycine, subgenus Glycine Willd.: Chromosome pairing and genome relationships. Z. Pflanzenzucht. 98:289-310.

Stephens, S.G. 1950. The internal mechanism of speciation in Gossypium. Bot. Rev. 16:115-149.

Sun, H., L.M. Zhao, and M. Huang. 1991. The studies on chromosome inversion in cultivated soybean, p. 40 In The 4th Natl. Soybean Symp. Abstr. (In Chinese). Guiyang, Guizhou. 3-7 Nov. 1989. Soybean Div., China Crop Sci. Soc., Beijing, China.

Weber, C.R. 1967. Registration of Hark soybeans. Crop Sci. 7:403.

R. G. Palmer,(*) H. Sun, and L. M. Zhao

R.G. Palmer, USDA ARS CICGR Unit and Departments of Agronomy and of Zoology/Genetics, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011-1010; H. Sun and L.M. Zhao, Jilin Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Gongzhuling, Jilin Province 136100, China. The first two authors contributed equally to this work. This is a joint contribution, Journal Paper J-18412, of the Iowa Agriculture and Home Economics Experiment Station, Ames, IA (project 3352), supported by Hatch Act and State of Iowa, and from the United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Corn Insects and Crop Genetics Research Unit. Received 28 July 1999. (*) Corresponding author (rpalmer@iastate.edu).
COPYRIGHT 2000 Crop Science Society of America
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2000 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Palmer, R. G.; Sun, H.; Zhao, L. M.
Publication:Crop Science
Date:May 1, 2000
Words:3544
Previous Article:PCR-Based Markers Facilitating Marker Assisted Selection in Sunflower for Resistance to Downy Mildew.
Next Article:Response to Leaf Inoculations with Macrophomina phaseolina in White Clover.
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters