title: Using QTL mapping to investigate the relationships between abiotic stress tolerance (drought and salinity) and agronomic and physiological traits.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Drought and salinity are two major abiotic stresses that severely limit barley production worldwide. Physiological and genetic complexity of these tolerance traits has significantly slowed the progress of developing stress-tolerant cultivars. Marker-assisted selection (MAS) may potentially overcome this problem. In the current research, seventy two double haploid (DH) lines from a cross between TX9425 (a Chinese landrace variety with superior drought and salinity tolerance) and a sensitive variety, Franklin were used to identify quantitative trait loci (QTL) for drought and salinity tolerance, based on a range of developmental and physiological traits.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Two QTL for drought tolerance (leaf wilting under drought stress) and one QTL for salinity tolerance (plant survival under salt stress) were identified from this population. The QTL on 2H for drought tolerance determined 42% of phenotypic variation, based on three independent experiments. This QTL was closely linked with a gene controlling ear emergency. The QTL on 5H for drought tolerance was less affected by agronomic traits and can be effectively used in breeding programs. A candidate gene for this QTL on 5H was identified based on the draft barley genome sequence. The QTL for proline accumulation, under both drought and salinity stresses, were located on different positions to those for drought and salinity tolerance, indicating no relationship with plant tolerance to either of these stresses.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Using QTL mapping, the relationships between QTL for agronomic and physiological traits and plant drought and salinity tolerance were studied. A new QTL for drought tolerance which was not linked to any of the studied traits was identified. This QTL can be effectively used in breeding programs. It was also shown that proline accumulation under stresses was not necessarily linked with drought or salinity tolerance based on methods of phenotyping used in this experiment. The use of proline content in breeding programs can also be limited by the accuracy of phenotyping.
authors: University of Tasmania, P.O. Box 46, Kings Meadows, TAS 7249, Australia. Yun.Fan@utas.edu.au.
authors: Yun
authors: Y
authors: Fan
authors: University of Tasmania, P.O. Box 46, Kings Meadows, TAS 7249, Australia. Sergey.shabala@utas.edu.au.
authors: Sergey
authors: S
authors: Shabala
authors: University of Tasmania, P.O. Box 46, Kings Meadows, TAS 7249, Australia. Yanling.ma@utas.edu.au.
authors: Yanling
authors: Y
authors: Ma
authors: Barley Research Institution of Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, 225009, China. rgxu@yzu.edu.cn.
authors: Rugen
authors: R
authors: Xu
authors: University of Tasmania, P.O. Box 46, Kings Meadows, TAS 7249, Australia. mzhou@utas.edu.au.
authors: Meixue
authors: M
authors: Zhou
mesh_terms: D000222:Adaptation, Physiological / Q000235:genetics*; D001947:Breeding; D002874:Chromosome Mapping; D055864:Droughts; D001467:Hordeum / Q000235:genetics* / Q000502:physiology; D010641:Phenotype; D018515:Plant Leaves / Q000235:genetics* / Q000502:physiology; D040641:Quantitative Trait Loci / Q000235:genetics*; D054712:Salinity; D055049:Salt Tolerance / Q000235:genetics; D013312:Stress, Physiological / Q000235:genetics
references: Nature. 2012 Nov 29;491(7426):711-6
references: 23075845
references: Plant Physiol. 2000 Jun;123(2):553-62
references: 10859185
references: Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2008;59:651-81
references: 18444910
references: Planta. 2007 Feb;225(3):753-61
references: 16955270
references: J Exp Bot. 2006;57(5):1059-78
references: 16513812
references: Theor Appl Genet. 2008 Sep;117(5):653-69
references: 18618094
references: Theor Appl Genet. 2005 Nov;111(7):1260-70
references: 16179997
references: Crop Sci. 2002 Jan;42(1):122-131
references: 11756262
references: Theor Appl Genet. 2003 Nov;107(7):1215-25
references: 12898030
references: Plant Mol Biol. 2008 Feb;66(3):277-88
references: 18060533
references: J Exp Bot. 2002 May;53(371):1163-76
references: 11971927
references: Ann Bot. 2007 Jun;99(6):1161-73
references: 17428832
references: Plant J. 1995 May;7(5):751-60
references: 7773306
references: Nat New Biol. 1972 Apr 12;236(67):188-90
references: 4503738
references: PLoS One. 2012;7(8):e43079
references: 22916210
references: Trends Plant Sci. 2002 Sep;7(9):405-10
references: 12234732
references: Amino Acids. 2010 Oct;39(4):949-62
references: 20204435
references: J Exp Bot. 2011 Jan;62(3):1201-16
references: 21047983
references: Plant Physiol. 2002 Feb;128(2):544-51
references: 11842158
references: Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2002;53:247-73
references: 12221975
references: Crop Sci. 2002 Jan;42(1):111-121
references: 11756261
references: J Exp Bot. 2004 Feb;55(396):307-19
references: 14718494
references: Plant J. 2008 Jan;53(1):11-28
references: 17971042
references: Ann Bot. 2013 Nov;112(7):1209-21
references: 24085482
references: Theor Appl Genet. 2010 Oct;121(6):1071-82
references: 20535442
references: Theor Appl Genet. 2004 Nov;109(7):1417-25
references: 15517148
references: Plant Physiol. 2003 Dec;133(4):1755-67
references: 14645724
references: Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2006;57:781-803
references: 16669782
references: Biomol Concepts. 2011 Oct 1;2(5):407-19
references: 25962045
references: New Phytol. 2007;176(3):501-4
references: 17953536
references: Trends Plant Sci. 2011 Dec;16(12):635-44
references: 22074787
references: Mol Genet Genomics. 2010 Nov;284(5):319-31
references: 20803217
references: Plant Physiol. 2013 Jun;162(2):940-52
references: 23624857
references: Funct Integr Genomics. 2010 May;10(2):277-91
references: 20076983
references: Theor Appl Genet. 2012 Nov;125(7):1385-92
references: 22733445
references: Trends Plant Sci. 2005 Dec;10(12):615-20
references: 16280254
references: Plant Cell Environ. 2010 Feb;33(2):211-22
references: 19906151
references: Theor Appl Genet. 2009 Mar;118(5):903-10
references: 19130031
references: BMC Genet. 2012;13:61
references: 22817330
references: Science. 1999 Aug 20;285(5431):1256-8
references: 10455050
references: Plant Cell. 1995 Jul;7(7):1099-1111
references: 12242400
references: Plant J. 1999 Apr;18(2):185-93
references: 10363370
references: Plant Cell Physiol. 2005 Dec;46(12):1924-33
references: 16223738
references: Science. 2010 Feb 12;327(5967):818-22
references: 20150489
references: Theor Appl Genet. 2003 Dec;108(1):181-8
references: 13679983
references: Theor Appl Genet. 2012 Jun;125(1):71-90
references: 22350092
references: J Hered. 2002 Jan-Feb;93(1):77-8
references: 12011185
references: Plant J. 2013 Nov;76(4):718-27
references: 23998490
references: Int J Mol Sci. 2013;14(5):9267-85
references: 23629664
references: Trends Plant Sci. 2010 Feb;15(2):89-97
references: 20036181
references: Trends Plant Sci. 2008 Sep;13(9):499-505
references: 18703379
references: BMC Genomics. 2006;7:206
references: 16904008
references: BMC Genomics. 2008;9:401
references: 18752688
references: Genetics. 2001 Aug;158(4):1737-53
references: 11514459