title: Genome-wide association study on stem rust resistance in Kazakh spring barley lines.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Stem rust (SR) is one of the most economically devastating barley diseases in Kazakhstan, and in some years it causes up to 50 % of yield losses. Routine conventional breeding for resistance to stem rust is almost always in progress in all Kazakhstan breeding stations. However, molecular marker based approach towards new SR resistance genes identification and relevant marker-assisted selection had never been employed in Kazakhstan yet. In this study, as a preliminary step the GWAS (genome-wide association study) mapping was applied in attempt to identify reliable SNP markers and quantitative trait loci (QTL) associated with resistance to SR.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Barley collection of 92 commercial cultivars and promising lines was genotyped using a high-throughput single nucleotide polymorphism (9,000 SNP) Illumina iSelect array. 6,970 SNPs out of 9,000 total were polymorphic and scorable. 5,050 SNPs out of 6,970 passed filtering threshold and were used for association mapping (AM). All 92 accessions were phenotyped for resistance to SR by observing adult plants in artificially infected plots at the Research Institute for Biological Safety Problems in Dzhambul region of Kazakhstan. GLM analysis allowed the identification of 15 SNPs associated with the resistance at the heading time (HA) phase, and 2 SNPs at the seed's milky-waxy maturity (SM) phase. However, after application of 5 % Bonferroni multiple test correction, only 2 SNPs at the HA stage on the same position of chromosome 6H can be claimed as reliable markers for SR resistance. The MLM analysis after the Bonferroni correction did not reveal any associations in this study, although distribution lines in the quantile-quantile (QQ) plot indicates that overcorrection in the test due to both Q and K matrices usage.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Obtained data suggest that genome wide genotyping of 92 spring barley accessions from Kazakhstan with 9 K Illumina SNP array was highly efficient. Linkage disequilibrium based mapping approach allowed the identification of highly significant QTL for the SR resistance at the HA phase of growth on chromosome 6H. On the other hand, no significant QTL was detected at the SM phase, assuming that for a successful GWASmapping experiment a larger size population with more diverse genetic background should be tested. Obtained results provide additional information towards better understanding of SR resistance in barley.
authors.affiliation: Institute of Plant Biology and Biotechnology, Almaty, Kazakhstan. yerlant@yahoo.com.
authors.forename: Yerlan
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Turuspekov
authors.affiliation: Institute of Plant Biology and Biotechnology, Almaty, Kazakhstan. or.danara@gmail.com.
authors.forename: Danara
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Ormanbekova
authors.affiliation: Research Institute for Biological Safety Problems, Gvardeiskiy vil, Dzhambul region, Kazakhstan. aralbek@mail.ru.
authors.forename: Aralbek
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Rsaliev
authors.affiliation: Institute of Plant Biology and Biotechnology, Almaty, Kazakhstan. absaule@yahoo.com.
authors.forename: Saule
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Abugalieva
mesh_terms: D001487:Basidiomycota / Q000502:physiology; D005819:Genetic Markers; D018745:Genome, Plant; D055106:Genome-Wide Association Study; D001467:Hordeum / Q000235:genetics* / Q000382:microbiology; D010935:Plant Diseases / Q000235:genetics*; D018547:Plant Stems; D020641:Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide; D040641:Quantitative Trait Loci
chemical_list: D005819:Genetic Markers
references.citation: Genetics. 2000 Jun;155(2):945-59
references.pmid: 10835412
references.citation: Phytopathology. 2009 Apr;99(4):339-43
references.pmid: 19271974
references.citation: Annu Rev Phytopathol. 2007;45:399-436
references.pmid: 17506648
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Sep 30;105(39):14970-5
references.pmid: 18812501
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Dec 14;107(50):21611-6
references.pmid: 21115826
references.citation: Bioinformatics. 2007 Oct 1;23(19):2633-5
references.pmid: 17586829
references.citation: Bioinformatics. 2012 Oct 1;28(19):2537-9
references.pmid: 22820204
references.citation: Nature. 2006 Nov 16;444(7117):323-9
references.pmid: 17108957
references.citation: Mol Gen Genet. 2000 Oct;264(3):283-90
references.pmid: 11085268
references.citation: PLoS Genet. 2011 Jul;7(7):e1002208
references.pmid: 21829384
references.citation: New Phytol. 2015 Nov;208(3):817-29
references.pmid: 26061418
references.citation: Nat Genet. 2010 Apr;42(4):355-60
references.pmid: 20208535
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002 Jul 9;99(14):9328-33
references.pmid: 12077318
references.citation: Curr Biol. 1998 Mar 26;8(7):R226-7
references.pmid: 9545207
references.citation: G3 (Bethesda). 2015 Jan 20;5(3):449-65
references.pmid: 25609748
references.citation: Nat Genet. 2006 Feb;38(2):203-8
references.pmid: 16380716
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 May 9;103(19):7518-23
references.pmid: 16648249
references.citation: Phytopathology. 2009 Oct;99(10):1135-41
references.pmid: 19740026
references.citation: Nat Genet. 2012 Dec;44(12):1388-92
references.pmid: 23160098
references.citation: BMC Genomics. 2014 Oct 17;15:907
references.pmid: 25326272
references.citation: Genetika. 2013 Feb;49(2):224-34
references.pmid: 23668088
references.citation: Mol Plant Microbe Interact. 2013 Apr;26(4):407-18
references.pmid: 23216085
references.citation: PLoS One. 2014 Nov 24;9(11):e113120
references.pmid: 25420105