Next Article in Journal
Compatibility and Stability Analysis of Haploid Inducers under Different Source Germplasm and Seasons in Maize Using GGE Biplot
Previous Article in Journal
A Deeper Insight into the Yield Formation of Winter and Spring Barley in Relation to Weather and Climate Variability
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Agronomy
Volume 14
Issue 7
10.3390/agronomy14071504
agronomy-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Molecular Marker-Assisted Selection of a New Water-Saving and Drought-Resistant Rice (WDR) Restoration Line, Hanhui 8200, for Enhanced Resistance to Rice Blast

by
Guolan Liu
1,2,3,†,
Peiwen Zhu
1,2,3,†,
Yi Liu
1,2,3,
Deyan Kong
1,2,
Jiahong Wang
1,2,
Lijun Luo
1,2,3,* and
Xinqiao Yu
1,2,3,*
1
Shanghai Agrobiological Gene Center, Shanghai 201106, China
2
Key Laboratory of Grain Crop Genetic Resources Evaluation and Utilization, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Shanghai 201106, China
3
Shanghai Collaborative Innovation Center of Agri-Seeds, Shanghai Agrobiological Gene Center, Shanghai 201106, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Agronomy 2024, 14(7), 1504; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14071504
Submission received: 17 June 2024 / Revised: 2 July 2024 / Accepted: 3 July 2024 / Published: 11 July 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Pest and Disease Management)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Through backcrossing and marker-assisted selection, gene Pi9 for resistance to rice blast was introduced into the water-saving and drought-resistant rice variety, Hanhui 3. The genetic background identity between Hanhui 8200 and Hanhui 3 was 91.4%. The drought resistance and drought avoidance abilities of Hanhui 8200 were equivalent to those of Hanhui 3. The resistance to rice blast was improved from grade 7 to grade 1. The rice quality of Hanhui 8200 meets the Ministry of Agriculture’s grade 3 rice standards. The two-line and three-line hybrids formulated with Hanhui 8200 have high yield potential. Among them, the three-line hybrid Hanyou 8200 (Approval No.: Evaluated Rice 20210073), formulated with Huhan 7A, passed the Hubei Provincial approval in 2021, and the two-line hybrid Hanyouliangyou 8200 (Approval No.: Nationally Validated Rice 20210448), formulated with Huhan 82S, passed the national variety approval in 2021. Both hybrids demonstrated strong resistance to rice blast, moderate resistance to bacterial leaf blight, strong drought resistance, high quality, and high yield.

1. Introduction

Rice (Oryza sativa L.) is a crucial food crop in China, with hybrid rice providing a solid guarantee for food security. Hybrid rice occupies over 35% of the world’s total rice-growing areas, even though conventional inbred rice varieties remain competitive in quality and yield [1]. The history of hybrid rice breeding includes two significant journeys: the utilization of three-line hybrid advantages and the utilization of two-line hybrid advantages [2]. The restoration line materials have evolved throughout the development of hybrid rice. Public data from the National Rice Data Center indicate that Minghui 63 is the restoration line with the widest application area, and Huanghuazhan is the restoration line with the most allotments. Minghui 63 is a long-grain, high-yielding cultivar with suitable disease resistance and quality, used as a fertility restorer for widely deployed hybrids [3,4]. Shanyou 63 is the most widely cultivated hybrid rice in China [5]. Huanghuazhan, which meets the first level of the national standard, has good resistance to fertiliser and heat and wide adaptability. From 2009 to 2012, it became a leading variety in the Hubei Province [6].
The molecular marker-assisted (MAS) improvement of restoration lines has been reported in some cases. A combination of phenotypic selection and MAS was utilized to enhance the drought stress resistance of line F6 through the introgression of qSDT12-2 [7]. The elite rice restorer line, Fuhui 673, had three blast resistance genes, Pi1, Pi9, and Pi-kh, introduced through successive backcrosses followed by selfing using MAS [8]. The Marker-assisted backcross breeding (MABB) method facilitated the introgression of two bacterial blight resistance genes, Xa13 and Xa21, and one blast resistance gene, Pi54, into JGL1798 [9]. Two BPH resistance genes, Bph14 and Bph15, were pyramided into a susceptible CMS restorer line, Huahui938, using MAS [10]. Additionally, a novel WDR PTGMS line, Huhan74S, was developed by integrating three genes, Pi9, Pi5, and Pi54, using MAS and conventional hybridization [11].
Water-saving and drought-resistant rice (WDR) cultivars combine both the high yield potential and acceptable grain quality of lowland paddy rice with the water-saving properties and drought resistance of upland rice [12]. WDR cultivars combine high yield potential and acceptable grain quality with the water-saving properties and drought resistance of upland rice. They are popular with farmers for their water-saving and drought-resistant characteristics and are widely planted in various provinces. Enhancing pest and disease resistance in WDR hybrid parents can promote WDR cultivation in more suitable regions, making the varieties more sustainable.
In this study, we focused on enhancing rice blast resistance in the current core parent of water-saving and drought-resistant rice, Hanhui 3. While aiming to retain the advantages of Hanhui 3, such as good drought resistance and strong combining ability, this study also sought to increase its yield. The goal was to develop a water-saving and drought-resistant rice combination with improved yield and resistance.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Planting Materials

Water-saving and drought-resistant rice core parents Hanhui 3, BL675-1-127, and B5 were used in this study. BL5 carries the Pi1 and Pi2 genes, 75-1-127 carries the Pi9 gene, and B5 carries the Bph14 and Bph15 genes. All plant materials were provided by the Shanghai Agrobiological Gene Center (SAGC).

2.2. Breeding Process

In the summer of 2011, Hanhui 3 was crossed with BL6 and 75-1-127 in Shanghai. F1 plants were grown in Hainan during the winter of the same year. Concurrently, Hanhui 3 was crossed with B5. In spring 2012, the resulting F1 plants were crossed to obtain four seeds. These seeds were used as the mother parent for further crosses with the F1 hybrids (Hanhui 3/B5) in Shanghai. In the winter of 2012, the F1 plants were grown in Hainan, and molecular marker detection was conducted. A single strain carrying the target gene for rice blast resistance (Pi9) was selected for backcrossing with Hanhui 3. This process was repeated in Shanghai in 2013 to continue backcrossing. BC2F1 plants were grown in Hainan during the winter of 2013, yielding over 5000 seeds. BC2F2 plants were grown in Anji during the summer of 2014, with resistant gene lines being selected and mixed for harvest. BC2F3 plants were grown in Hainan in the winter of the same year, and the target traits were selected. BC2F4 plants were grown in the rice blast area of Jinggangshan in the summer of 2015, and the lines with good characteristics and strong rice blast resistance were selected. BC2F5 plants were grown in Hainan in the winter of 2015, with 38 single plants selected for drought resistance and rice blast resistance. Excellent single strains were tested and crossed with Shanghai Drought 7A in the summer of 2016. Heterosis was investigated in Hainan in the winter of the same year, and the high-quality lines were selected for further testing. Multi-point tests were conducted in Shanghai, Anhui, and Hubei in 2017, with the combination of strain 18S8200 performing well and being named Hanhui 8200.

2.3. Identification of Drought Resistance

Drought resistance was evaluated by setting water stress and conventional water control, using Hanyou 73 as the control. Each material was planted in a 9 × 9 row arrangement with three replicates per treatment. Water supply was stopped at stage II for water stress, and soil water potential was maintained at −1500 kPa to −50 kPa for up to 20 days. Rehydration was performed after water stress. Yield was measured at maturity, and the drought resistance index was calculated according to the industry standard for water-saving and drought-resistant rice (NY/T2863-2015) [13]. Agronomic traits and rice quality testing were conducted, with samples sent to the China Rice Institute for quality testing.

2.4. Identification of Drought-Avoidance Characteristics

Drought-avoidance characteristics were analyzed using the basket method. Full seeds were soaked and germinated, and consistent seedlings were selected after two weeks of cultivation. The seedlings were transplanted to the center of the field baskets with a planting depth of 2 cm. Routine rice planting management measures were used, keeping the soil moist. After 40 days of culture, the seedlings were extracted from the ground, and the roots were categorized as deep or shallow. The deep root ratio was calculated as the number of deep roots (DRs) divided by the total number of deep roots (DRs) and shallow roots (SRs) as a measure of drought tolerance [14].

2.5. Identification of Rice Blast Disease

Rice blast resistance was evaluated through naturally induced identification in the rice blast-infected area of Jinggangshan (NY/T 2646–2014) [15]. Six plants per material were planted in four lines, with six varieties planted in the middle of the corridor. Three replicates were set up. The disease incidence and loss rates of the spike blast were investigated and graded based on the International Rice Research Institute’s (IRRI) 0–9 grading standard from http://www.knowledgebank.irri.org/images/docs/rice-standard-evaluation-system.pdf (accessed on 10 July 2024) [16].

2.6. Identification of Resistance to White Leaf Blight

White leaf blight resistance was identified at the tillering stage using artificial leaf shear inoculation with PXO99 [4]. Each material was inoculated with 10 strains, and the disease incidence was evaluated 15 days post-inoculation. Resistance levels were categorized as resistant (R), medium resistance (MR), moderate sensitivity (MS), sense (S), and high sensitivity (HS) based on the percentage of spot areas on the leaf.

2.7. Mark-Assisted Detection

Genomic DNA was extracted from fresh young leaves at the peak tillering stage using the CTAB method. Early-generation blast disease resistance was selected using the Pi9-Pro marker, closely linked to the Pi9 gene [17]. Leaf blight resistance was selected using the BB3 marker, closely linked to the Xa3 gene [18] (Table S1). PCR amplification was conducted, and the products were detected by polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (Figure S1).

3. Results

3.1. Genetic Background Analysis of Hanhui 8200

Before a variety can be marketed and accepted by farmers, it must pass various regional trials. Resistance to rice blast is a critical factor in these trials, as it is a one-vote veto system. In the breeding selection process, the progeny obtained by crosses with the rice blast resistance donors were selected at the seedling stage of each generation. Plants carrying the gene for rice blast resistance were selected based on their comprehensive trait performance at the adult stage, combined with drought resistance screening and field-induced identification of resistance to white leaf blight. The stable strain, Hanhui 8200, was selected for its overall performance in resistance to rice blast and leaf blight, as well as drought resistance screening (Figure 1).
The genetic background analysis using a 56 K microarray showed a 91.4% genetic background consistency between Hanhui 8200 and the water-saving and drought-resistant rice restoration line, Hanhui 3. There were 31,179 concordant and 2935 divergent loci widely distributed across the 12 chromosomes of rice. Chromosome 6 had the highest number of differential loci (481), while chromosome 2 had the lowest number (1) (Figure 2; Supplementary File S1).

3.2. Identification of Drought Tolerance in Hanhui 8200

To test the drought resistance of Hanhui 8200 in actual production conditions, drought resistance was identified through the drought-resistant mobile greenhouse. The results showed that Hanhui 8200 had a yield of 1.84 kg in dryland plots and 2.54 kg in paddy fields, with a drought index of 0.98. The drought index of Hanhui 3 was also 0.98, indicating that the comprehensive drought resistance of Hanhui 8200 and Hanhui 3 was consistent (Table 1).
Drought avoidance and drought tolerance constitute the main components of crop drought resistance. Drought avoidance is the ability of crops to increase water absorption and reduce water loss under drought conditions, and its strength determines crop drought resistance. The deep root ratio of the Hanhui 8200 and Hanhui 3 varieties was detected using the basket method. The results showed that Hanhui 3 had 104.6 shallow roots, 140 deep roots, and a deep root ratio of 57.2%. Hanhui 8200 had 109.9 shallow roots, 129.9 deep roots, and a deep root ratio of 54.3% (Table 2; Figure 3).

3.3. Identification of Blast Resistance in Hanhui 8200

To further determine the field resistance of Hanhui 8200 to rice blast, naturally induced characterization was conducted in the rice blast-infected area of Jinggangshan, Jiangxi Province. The results showed that Hanhui 8200 was significantly more resistant to rice blast compared to Hanhui 3. Hanhui 8200 had a 16.0% incidence rate of blast, a 3.8% loss rate of blast, a composite index of 2.8, and a grade 1 resistance to rice blast. Hanhui 3 had an 85.0% incidence rate of blast, a 33.5% loss rate of blast, a composite index of 7.3, and a grade 7 resistance to rice blast (Table 3; Figure 4).

3.4. Agronomic Performance of Hanhui 3 and Hanhui 8200

To investigate whether the improvement of blast resistance in HanHui 8200 also affected other agronomic traits, an evaluation of its agronomic characteristics was conducted. Hanhui 8200 was sown on 15 May 2017, and spiked on September 2 (124 days), with a plant height of 113.9 cm, 8.7 effective spikes per plant, a spike length of 22.2 cm, 146 grains per spike, a fruiting rate of 95.2%, and a 1000-grain weight of 28.3 g. Compared with the control, Hanhui 3, the agronomic traits were similar, except for an improvement in the number of grains per spike and the fruiting rate. Hanhui 8200 also showed an adjusted upward content of straight-chain starch (Table 4).

4. Evaluation of the Combination Benefits of Hanhui 8200

4.1. Comparison of Hanyou 8200 and Hanyou 73

The new high-yielding, water-saving, and drought-resistant rice combination, Hanyou 8200, formulated with the water-saving and drought-resistant three-line sterile line Huhan 7A, was validated in Hubei Province in 2021. Over a two-year period, it achieved an average yield of 658.55 kg per mu in the water-saving and drought-resistant rice group of the Hubei Seed Industry Innovation Testing Consortium. This yield represented a significant increase of 8.25% compared to the control, Hanyou 73, which was formulated with Huhan 7A and Hanhui 3. The growth period was 120.8 days, which was 3.4 days longer than the control. Hanhui 8200 demonstrated resistance to leaf blight and moderate resistance to rice blast (with a rice blast index of 3.6) and achieved a whole fine rice percentage of 62.5%, a chalky rice percentage of 10%, a chalkiness degree of 2.1%, an amylose content of 16.5%, and a gel consistency of 60 mm. The plant height was 118.9 cm, with 179,000 effective panicles per mu, 180.3 total grains per panicle, 151.2 grains per spike, a seed setting rate of 83.88%, and a 1000-grain weight of 27.04 g. Field performance was moderate, with straight sword leaves and uniform traits. Lemma tips were colorless and awnless. Drought resistance was classified as medium (Table 5; Table S2).

4.2. Comparison of Agronomic Traits of Hanliangyou 8200 with Hanyou 3

The combination Hanliangyou 8200, consisting of Hanhui 8200 and the water-saving and drought-resistant two-line sterile line Huhan 82S, was nationally validated in 2021. This indica-type two-line hybrid rice variety was grown in the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River as one-season medium rice. Its growth period was 117.2 days, 2.2 days longer than the control, Hanyou 73. Hanliangyou 8200 had a plant height of 116.0 cm, a spike length of 24.4 cm, an effective number of panicles per mu of 205,000, a total number of grains per spike of 168.8, a seed setting rate of 88.4%, and a 1000-grain weight of 26.3 g. In terms of resistance, the rice blast index was 3.5 and 3.7 over two years, respectively, and it exhibited grade 3 resistance to leaf blight but was highly susceptible to brown planthopper. The main quality indices were a whole fine rice percentage of 54.5%, a chalkiness degree of 4.1%, an amylose content of 16.4%, a gel consistency of 67 mm, and an alkali spreading value of 6.7. The grain length/width ratio was 3.4, meeting the third-grade standard of the “Quality of Edible Rice Varieties” of the agricultural industry.
In the 2019 regional trial of special rice varieties in the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River, Hanliangyou 8200 achieved an average yield of 549.68 kg per mu, 5.03% higher than the control, Hanyou 73. In 2020, it continued to perform well with an average yield of 573.77 kg per mu, 2.41% higher than the control. Over the two-year regional trial, the average yield was 561.73 kg per mu, a 3.68% increase compared to Hanyou 73. In the 2020 production test, the average yield was 604.01 kg per mu, reflecting a 4.2% yield increase over Hanyou 73.

5. Discussion

5.1. Combination of Molecular Marker-Assisted Selection and Traditional Breeding Methods

In this study, MAS proved effective for selecting rice blast resistance [19]. Utilizing markers for these genes in the segregating generation ensured their consistent presence and prevented loss. Due to Hanhui 3’s inherent low tillering, we aimed to enhance its tillering and yield capabilities. Thus, we performed only two generations of backcrossing, combining it with phenotypic selection to improve yield while retaining strong drought resistance, high fruit set, and excellent overall traits [20,21].
Despite an 8.6% difference in the genetic background, we did not investigate which genes within this difference were linked to productivity, as yield is a comprehensive quantitative trait [22]. Traditional selection methods may be more effective for improving quantitative traits like yield, while MAS is more effective for qualitative traits such as disease resistance [23,24].

5.2. Loss of Genes for Resistance to Brown Planthopper

This study primarily focused on selecting for rice blast resistance due to the stringent requirements of the rice blast district test, which employs a one-vote veto system. Consequently, we did not specifically target brown planthopper resistance during selection. However, in phenotypic selection, preference was given to materials exhibiting denser leaf hairs, as donor parents carrying the BPH15 gene also displayed this phenotype [25]. This observation suggests a potential pleiotropic effect, leading us to prioritize combined trait selection over marker-assisted selection (MAS) for brown planthopper resistance alone. Had we relied solely on marker results, we might have overlooked parents with the same yield and adaptability advantages as Hanhui 8200 [26]. Our approach ensured comprehensive trait selection, prioritizing rice blast resistance.

5.3. Identification of Leaf Blight Resistance in Hanhui 8200

In addition to focusing on the drought resistance, blast resistance, yield, and quality of Hanhui 8200, we also evaluated its resistance to leaf blight through artificial inoculation. The results showed that Hanhui 8200 had strong resistance to leaf blight, with a leaf spot area of about 10% and a resistance level of R. Hanhui 3 had a leaf spot area of about 50% and was moderately susceptible or susceptible to leaf blight (Table 6; Figure 5). This improvement may be attributed to the incorporation of additional resistance genes beyond Xa3 during the multiple parental crosses [27] (Figure S1). The resistance to leaf blight of Hanyou 8200 and Hanliangyou 8200, which were developed from the Hanhui 8200 cross, also improved to level 3. This improvement is likely due to the additional resistance benefits gained by Hanhui 8200.

5.4. Differences in agronomic traits between Hanhui 8200 and Hanhui 3

Genetic background analysis shows that Hanhui 8200 and Hanhui 3 have a high degree of similarity, but there are 2935 different loci on 12 chromosomes, indicating potential differences in several agronomic traits between the two. After excluding some heterozygous and missing loci, there are 2260 different genetic loci, which may affect key traits such as yield, disease resistance, abiotic stress tolerance, and nutrient use efficiency. For example, the GNP6 gene on chromosome 6 is related to panicle development and affects the seed setting rate [28]. The locus AX-116855710 is located in the promoter region of this gene and may affect the transcription level of GNP6, which is crucial for increasing yield. The OsNAC23 gene has been reported to influence phenotypes, such as total starch content, chalky endosperm, and total sugar content in rice [29]. The locus AX-15506792911 is located about 1 kb upstream of the OsNAC23 gene promoter and may affect its transcription. The OsGS1;1 gene encodes cytosolic glutamine synthetase, which influences rice growth rate and grain filling. The OsGS1;1 transgenic lines show significantly enhanced photosynthetic performance and agronomic traits during the reproductive stage under drought and salt stress, with significantly higher grain filling rates and yield under stress conditions compared to the controls [30]. Overexpression of the high-activity transcript, OsGS1;1b, enhances nitrogen uptake and assimilation, improving nitrogen use efficiency (NUE); it affects sugar metabolism, promotes amylose degradation, and influences grain formation, leading to increased grain length and weight, reduced amylose and protein content, unchanged total starch content, and improved rice quality [31]. The locus AX-165086173 is located in the 5′ UTR of this gene and may affect its function. Understanding these different loci can provide valuable insights into breeding strategies for Hanhui 8200 and its potential advantages over Hanhui 3.

6. Conclusions

This study focused on enhancing rice blast resistance by improving the current core parent of water-saving and drought-resistant rice, Hanhui 3. Simultaneously, we aimed to increase the yield of Hanhui 3 while retaining its advantages of good drought resistance and strong overall performance. The resulting Hanhui 8200 represents a successful selection of a water-saving and drought-resistant rice combination with better yields and improved resistance.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/agronomy14071504/s1: Figure S1: Genotypic analysis of Hanhui 8200 and Hanhui 3; Table S1: Gene specific markers used in this study; Table S2: Agronomic traits of Hanyou 8200 and Hanyou 73 in a two-year regional trial in Hubei, China. Supplementary File S1: The genetic background analysis of Hanhui 8200 and Hanhui 3

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: G.L., L.L. and X.Y.; writing—original draft preparation: G.L. and P.Z.; investigation: J.W.; resources: Y.L.; data curation: D.K. and P.Z.; methodology: Y.L. and D.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Shanghai Municipal Commission of Science and Technology (Grant No. 21N11900200), the earmarked fund for China Agriculture Research System-Rice (CARS-01), and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (INV-033236-3).

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article/Supplementary Material; further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors.

Acknowledgments

We thank the anonymous researchers, breeders, technicians, and students who are not listed as the authors for their contributions or help to this manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Jia, Y.; Jia, M. Physiological, Ecological and Genetic Interactions of Rice with Harmful Microbes. In Cereal Grain; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  2. Luo, L.; Mei, H.; Yu, X.; Xia, H.; Chen, L.; Liu, H.; Zhang, A.; Xu, K.; Wei, H.; Liu, G.; et al. Water-saving and drought-resistance rice: From the concept to practice and theory. Mol. Breed 2019, 39, 145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Chen, H.; Wang, S.; Zhang, Q. New gene for bacterial blight resistance in rice located on chromosome 12 identified from minghui 63, an elite restorer line. Phytopathology 2002, 92, 750–754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Sun, X.; Cao, Y.; Yang, Z.; Xu, C.; Li, X.; Wang, S.; Zhang, Q. Xa26, a gene conferring resistance to Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae in rice, encodes an LRR receptor kinase-like protein. Plant J. 2004, 37, 517–527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Xie, F.; Zhang, J. Shanyou 63: An elite mega rice hybrid in China. Rice 2018, 11, 17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Zhou, S.; Li, H.; Huang, D.; Lu, D.; Lai, H.; Wang, Z.; Zhou, D.; Li, K.; Wang, Z.; Li, H. Breeding and Application of Huanghuzhan—A New Variety with 1st Class Rice Quality of National Standard. Hubei Agric. Sci. 2012, 51, 1960–1964. [Google Scholar]
  7. Luo, Y.; Lao, L.; Ai, B.; Xie, J. Development of a drought stress-resistant rice restorer line through Oryza sativa-rufipogon hybridization. J. Genet. 2019, 98, 55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Chen, Z.; Guan, H.; Wang, X.; Dong, R.; Zhuo, C.; Mao, D.; Pan, R.; Zhou, Y.; Wu, W. Pyramiding of 3-resistant-gene to improve rice blast resistance of a restorer line, Fuhui 673. Chin. J. Biotechnol. 2019, 35, 837–846. [Google Scholar]
  9. Swathi, G.; Durga Rani, C.V.; Md, J.; Madhav, M.S.; Vanisree, S.; Anuradha, C.; Kumar, N.R.; Kumar, N.A.P.; Kumari, K.A.; Bhogadhi, S.C.; et al. Marker-assisted introgression of the major bacterial blight resistance genes, Xa21 and xa13, and blast resistance gene, Pi54, into the popular rice variety, JGL1798. Mol. Breed. 2019, 39, 58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Wang, H.; Ye, S.; Mou, T. Molecular Breeding of Rice Restorer Lines and Hybrids for Brown Planthopper (BPH) Resistance Using the Bph14 and Bph15 Genes. Rice 2016, 9, 53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Liu, Y.; Zhang, F.; Luo, X.; Kong, D.; Zhang, A.; Wang, F.; Pan, Z.; Wang, J.; Bi, J.; Luo, L.; et al. Molecular Breeding of a Novel PTGMS Line of WDR for Broad-Spectrum Resistance to Blast Using Pi9, Pi5, and Pi54 Genes. Rice 2021, 14, 96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Wang, F.; Liu, Y.; Zhang, A.; Kong, D.; Bi, J.; Liu, G.; Yu, X.; Luo, L. Breeding an early maturing, blast resistance water-saving and drought-resistance rice (WDR) cultivar using marker-assisted selection coupled with rapid generation advance. Mol. Breed. 2022, 42, 46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. NY/T 2863-2015; Drought Resistance Identification Technology for Water-saving and Drought-resistant Rice. Chinese Ministry of Agriculture, China Standards Press: Beijing, China, 2015.
  14. Lou, Q.; Chen, L.; Mei, H.; Wei, H.; Feng, F.; Wang, P.; Xia, H.; Li, T. Quantitative trait locus mapping of deep rooting by linkage and association analysis in rice. J. Exp. Bot. 2015, 66, 4749–4757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. NY/T 2646–2014; Development and Verification of Specific Molecular Markers for Pigm Gene Associated with Broad-spectrum Resistance to Rice Blast. Chinese Ministry of Agriculture, China Standards Press: Beijing, China, 2014.
  16. International Rice Research Institute (IRRI). Standard Evaluation System for Rice (SES); IRRI: Los Banos, CA, USA, 2002.
  17. Tian, D.; Chen, Z.; Chen, Z.; Zhou, Y.; Wang, Z.; Wang, F.; Chen, S. Allele-specific marker-based assessment revealed that the rice blast resistance genes Pi2 and Pi9 have not been widely deployed in Chinese indica rice cultivars. Rice 2016, 9, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Hur, Y.J.; Jeung, J.-U.; Kim, S.Y.; Park, H.-S.; Cho, J.-H.; Lee, J.Y.; Sohn, Y.-B.; Song, Y.C.; Park, D.-S.; Lee, C.-W.; et al. Functional markers for bacterial blight resistance gene Xa3 in rice. Mol. Breed. 2013, 31, 981–985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Thomson, M.J.; Zhao, K.; Wright, M.; McNally, K.L. High-throughput single nucleotide polymorphism genotyping for breeding applications in rice using the BeadXpress platform. Mol. Breed. 2010, 25, 441–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Ashikari, M.; Sakakibara, H.; Lin, S. Cytokinin oxidase regulates rice grain production. Science 2005, 309, 741–745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Septiningsih, E.M.; Pamplona, A.M.; Sanchez, D.L. Development of submergence-tolerant rice cultivars: The Sub1 locus and beyond. Ann. Bot. 2009, 103, 151–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Chen, W.; Gao, Y.; Xie, W. Genome-wide association analyses provide genetic and biochemical insights into natural variation in rice metabolism. Nat. Genet. 2014, 46, 714–721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Peng, S.; Cassman, K.G.; Virmani, S.S. Yield potential trends of tropical rice since the release of IR8 and the challenge of increasing rice yield potential. Crop Sci. 1999, 39, 1552–1559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Yano, M.; Tuberosa, R. Genome mapping and molecular breeding in plants. Genomics Rice 2009, 1, 23–30. [Google Scholar]
  25. Chen, S.; Huang, Z.; Dai, Y.; Qin, S.; Zhang, L.; Ma, J. Marker-assisted selection and pyramiding of three brown planthopper resistance genes, Bph14, Bph15, and Bph18, in rice. Plant Breed. 2012, 131, 541–547. [Google Scholar]
  26. Jena, K.K.; Mackill, D.J. Molecular markers and their use in marker-assisted selection in rice. Crop Sci. 2008, 28, 794–800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Khush, G.S. What it will take to Feed 5.0 Billion Rice consumers in 2030. Plant Mol. Biol. 2005, 59, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Zhang, Z.; Sun, X.; Ma, X.; Xu, B.; Zhao, Y.; Ma, Z.; Li, G.; Khan, N.U.; Pan, Y.; Liang, Y.; et al. GNP6, a novel allele of MOC1, regulates panicle and tiller development in rice. Crop J. 2021, 9, 57–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Li, Z.; Wei, X.; Tong, X.; Zhao, J.; Liu, X.; Wang, H.; Tang, L.; Shu, Y.; Li, G.; Wang, Y.; et al. The OsNAC23-Tre6P-SnRK1a feed-forward loop regulates sugar homeostasis and grain yield in rice. Mol. Plant 2022, 15, 706–722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. James, D.; Borphukan, B.; Fartyal, D.; Ram, B.; Singh, J.; Manna, M.; Sheri, V.; Panditi, V.; Yadav, R.; Achary, V.M.M.; et al. Concurrent overexpression of OsGS1;1 and OsGS2 genes in transgenic rice (Oryza sativa L.): Impact on tolerance to abiotic stresses. Front. Plant Sci. 2018, 9, 786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Liu, X.; Tian, Y.; Chi, W.; Zhang, H.; Yu, J.; Chen, G.; Wu, W.; Jiang, X.; Wang, S.; Lin, Z.; et al. Alternative splicing of OsGS1;1 affects nitrogen-use efficiency, grain development, and amylose content in rice. Plant J. 2022, 110, 1751–1762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Agronomy 14 01504 g001
Figure 1. Breeding process of Hanhui 8200. × and ⊗ represent selfing and crossing, respectively.
Figure 1. Breeding process of Hanhui 8200. × and ⊗ represent selfing and crossing, respectively.
Agronomy 14 01504 g001
Agronomy 14 01504 g002
Figure 2. Distribution of differential SNPs across 12 chromosomes in Hanhui 8200 and Hanhui 3. Blue areas indicate Hanhui 3; red areas indicate Hanhui 8200.
Figure 2. Distribution of differential SNPs across 12 chromosomes in Hanhui 8200 and Hanhui 3. Blue areas indicate Hanhui 3; red areas indicate Hanhui 8200.
Agronomy 14 01504 g002
Agronomy 14 01504 g003
Figure 3. (A): Growth of Hanhui 8200 and Hanhui 3 plants; (B): deep root ratio phenotype of the reference materials Hanhui 3 and Hanhui 8200.
Figure 3. (A): Growth of Hanhui 8200 and Hanhui 3 plants; (B): deep root ratio phenotype of the reference materials Hanhui 3 and Hanhui 8200.
Agronomy 14 01504 g003
Agronomy 14 01504 g004
Figure 4. Comparison of panicle blast resistance between Hanhui 8200 and Hanhui 3 in Jinggangshan; scale bars: 5 cm.
Figure 4. Comparison of panicle blast resistance between Hanhui 8200 and Hanhui 3 in Jinggangshan; scale bars: 5 cm.
Agronomy 14 01504 g004
Agronomy 14 01504 g005
Figure 5. Comparison of panicle bacterial blight resistance between Hanhui 8200 and Hanhui 3; scale bars: 3 cm.
Figure 5. Comparison of panicle bacterial blight resistance between Hanhui 8200 and Hanhui 3; scale bars: 3 cm.
Agronomy 14 01504 g005
Table 1. Evaluation of drought tolerance of Hanhui 8200 and Hanhui 3 under field conditions.
Table 1. Evaluation of drought tolerance of Hanhui 8200 and Hanhui 3 under field conditions.
Species NameDrought Field Yield (kg)Paddy Field Yield (kg)Drought Resistance IndexDrought Resistance LevelsDrought Evaluation
Hanhui 82001.842.540.982R
Hanhui 31.712.370.982R
Hanyou73 (CK)2.082.82
Note: CK represents the control group. R: Resistant.
Table 2. Statistical analysis of Hanhui 8200 and Hanhui 3 deep root ratio.
Table 2. Statistical analysis of Hanhui 8200 and Hanhui 3 deep root ratio.
Variety NameNumber of Shallow RootsNumber of Deep RootsTiller NumberTotal Number of RootsRatio of Deep Roots
Hanhui 3104.58 ± 32.3140.00 ± 31.38.66 ± 2.28244.58 ± 64.5557.25% ± 3.61%
Hanhui 8200109.92 ± 27.1129.92 ± 30.578.33 ± 2.76239.83 ± 55.3754.33% ± 3.86%
Table 3. Evaluation of panicle blast resistance of Hanhui 8200 and Hanhui 3 in blast epidemic fields.
Table 3. Evaluation of panicle blast resistance of Hanhui 8200 and Hanhui 3 in blast epidemic fields.
Variety NameIncidence Rate (%)Incidence LevelLoss Rate (%)Loss LevelComposite Index Loss Rate LevelResistance Evaluation
Hanhui 82001653.812.81R
Hanhui 385933.577.37S
R: Resistant; S: susceptible.
Table 4. Agronomic performance of Hanhui 3 and Hanhui 8200.
Table 4. Agronomic performance of Hanhui 3 and Hanhui 8200.
TraitsHanhui 8200Hanhui 3
Duration from sowing to heading (d)124.6 ± 2.0125.1 ± 2.5
Plant height (cm)113.9 ± 2.2114.0 ± 2.4
No. of panicles per plant8.7 ± 1.57.2 ± 1.7
Panicle length (cm)22.2 ± 0.622.4 ± 0.5
No. of spikelets per panicle146.2 ± 13.4141.3 ± 10.2
Seed setting rate (%)95.2 ± 4.592.1 ± 3.8
1000-grain weight (g)28.3 ± 0.528.6 ± 0.6
Grain length (mm)7.4 ± 0.37.2 ± 0.5
Grain length/width ratio3.2  ± 0.23.1 ± 0.4
Brown rice percentage (%)79.1  ± 3.878.0  ± 4.2
Milled rice percentage (%)52.8 ± 2.458.0 ± 3.7
Chalkiness degree (%)0.2 ± 0.10.8 ± 0.3
Alkali spreading value6.9  ± 0.37.0  ± 0.5
Gel consistency (mm)78  ± 6.374  ± 5.4
Amylose content (%)15.3 ± 1.213.0 ± 0.8
Chalky rice percentage (%)3 ± 0.28 ± 0.5
The values are presented as means ± standard deviation.
Table 5. Comparison of rice quality between Hanyou 8200 and Hanyou 73.
Table 5. Comparison of rice quality between Hanyou 8200 and Hanyou 73.
TraitsHanyou 8200Hanyou 73
Brown rice percentage (%)79.0 ± 4.578.1 ± 3.6
Whole fine rice percentage (%)60.9 ± 5.353.3 ± 3.9
Chalk percentage (%)10 ± 1.313 ± 1.5
Chalkiness degree (%)2.1 ± 0.22.5 ± 0.3
Amylose content (%)16.5 ± 1.815.5 ± 1.5
Gel consistency (mm)60 ± 3.567 ± 4.6
Alkali spreading value6.0 ± 0.55.0 ± 0.3
Grain length/width ratio3.2 ± 0.13.1 ± 0.4
Comprehensive standard23.2
The values are presented as means ± standard deviation.
Table 6. Results of identifying bacterial blight (BB) resistance by inoculation.
Table 6. Results of identifying bacterial blight (BB) resistance by inoculation.
Variety NamePercentage of Diseased Spot AreaResistance Evaluation
Hanhui 82009.8%R
Hanhui 347~56%MS/S
R: Resistant; MS: Medium susceptible; S: Susceptible.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Liu, G.; Zhu, P.; Liu, Y.; Kong, D.; Wang, J.; Luo, L.; Yu, X. Molecular Marker-Assisted Selection of a New Water-Saving and Drought-Resistant Rice (WDR) Restoration Line, Hanhui 8200, for Enhanced Resistance to Rice Blast. Agronomy 2024, 14, 1504. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14071504

AMA Style

Liu G, Zhu P, Liu Y, Kong D, Wang J, Luo L, Yu X. Molecular Marker-Assisted Selection of a New Water-Saving and Drought-Resistant Rice (WDR) Restoration Line, Hanhui 8200, for Enhanced Resistance to Rice Blast. Agronomy. 2024; 14(7):1504. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14071504

Chicago/Turabian Style

Liu, Guolan, Peiwen Zhu, Yi Liu, Deyan Kong, Jiahong Wang, Lijun Luo, and Xinqiao Yu. 2024. "Molecular Marker-Assisted Selection of a New Water-Saving and Drought-Resistant Rice (WDR) Restoration Line, Hanhui 8200, for Enhanced Resistance to Rice Blast" Agronomy 14, no. 7: 1504. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14071504

APA Style

Liu, G., Zhu, P., Liu, Y., Kong, D., Wang, J., Luo, L., & Yu, X. (2024). Molecular Marker-Assisted Selection of a New Water-Saving and Drought-Resistant Rice (WDR) Restoration Line, Hanhui 8200, for Enhanced Resistance to Rice Blast. Agronomy, 14(7), 1504. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14071504

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop