Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T04:40:49.807Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetic differentiation and diversity of sugarbeet germplasm resistant to the sugarbeet root maggot

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 November 2019

Karen K. Fugate Open the ORCID record for Karen K. Fugate [Opens in a new window] ,
Larry G. Campbell ,
Giovanny Covarrubias-Pazaran ,
Lorraine Rodriguez-Bonilla  and
Juan Zalapa
Karen K. Fugate*
Affiliation:
USDA-ARS, Edward T. Schafer Agricultural Research Center, 1616 Albrecht Blvd. N., Fargo, ND58102-2765, USA
Larry G. Campbell
Affiliation:
USDA-ARS, Edward T. Schafer Agricultural Research Center, 1616 Albrecht Blvd. N., Fargo, ND58102-2765, USA
Giovanny Covarrubias-Pazaran
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1575 Linden Dr, Madison, WI53705, USA
Lorraine Rodriguez-Bonilla
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1575 Linden Dr, Madison, WI53705, USA
Juan Zalapa
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1575 Linden Dr, Madison, WI53705, USA USDA-ARS, Vegetable Crops Research Unit, 1575 Linden Dr, Madison, WI53705, USA
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: karen.fugate@usda.gov
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Germplasm lines with resistance to the sugarbeet root maggot (SBRM) have been developed and released to the public, providing a means to generate hybrids with resistance against the most devastating insect pest of sugarbeet in North America. Effective use of this germplasm, however, requires knowledge of relative strengths of SBRM resistance between lines and knowledge of the diversity and genetic relationships between germplasm. Therefore, field studies comparing SBRM resistance of four released SBRM-resistant germplasm lines (F1015, F1016, F1024 and F1043), a SBRM-resistant parent (PI 179180) and an unreleased SBRM-resistant population (F1055) were performed, and genetic analysis of the diversity and relationships between SBRM-resistant germplasm and their available parents was conducted using simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers. Under natural SBRM infestations, resistant germplasm exhibited significantly less SBRM damage than a susceptible control, with similar, high levels of resistance in F1016, F1024, F1043, F1055 and PI 179180 and lower resistance in F1015. SSR analysis revealed genetic similarities between F1016, F1024 and F1055, while F1015 and F1043 were genetically distinct from these lines. Among resistant genotypes, F1015 and F1043 exhibited greatest and least within-line genetic diversity, indicating greater and lesser inbreeding for F1043 and F1015, respectively. Similarities in damage ratings and genetics for F1016, F1024 and F1055 indicate that these lines are likely to be equally effective at introducing SBRM resistance into elite populations and in combining ability. In contrast, F1043, with its unique parentage and genetic dissimilarity from other resistant lines, provides a genetically distinct, but similarly effective, source of SBRM resistance.

Keywords

Beta vulgarissimple sequence repeatSSRTetanops myopaeformis
Type
Research Article
Information
Plant Genetic Resources , Volume 17 , Issue 6 , December 2019 , pp. 514 - 521
Copyright
Copyright © NIAB 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†

Retired.

References

Callenbach, JA, Frye, RD and Anderson, AW (1973) Sugarbeet root maggot field investigations – 1973. In: Sugarbeet Research and Extension Reports, vol. 4. Fargo, ND: Cooperative Extension Service, North Dakota State University, pp. 5–13. http://www.sbreb.org/research/ento/ento73/ento73.htm.Google Scholar
Campbell, LG (1990) Registration of F1010 sugarbeet germplasm. Crop Science 30: 429–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, LG (2005) Sugar beet root maggot. In: Biancardi, E, Campbell, LG, Skaracis, GN and Biaggi, M (eds.) Genetics and Breeding of Sugar Beet. Enfield, NH: Science Publishers, pp. 113–114.Google Scholar
Campbell, LG (2017) Sugarbeet root maggot resistance from a red globe-shaped beet (PI 171980). Journal of Sugar Beet Research 54: 50–59.Google Scholar
Campbell, LG (2018) Relative performance of resistant and susceptible sugarbeet hybrids in environments with and without sugarbeet root maggot. Journal of Sugar Beet Research 55: 19–30.Google Scholar
Campbell, LG and Niehaus, W (2008) Sugarbeet root maggot resistance of hybrids with a maggot resistant pollinator. Journal of Sugar Beet Research 45: 85–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, LG, Anderson, AW, Dregseth, R and Smith, LJ (1998) Association between sugar beet root yield and sugar beet root maggot (Diptera: Otitidae) damage. Journal of Economic Entomology 91: 522–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, LG, Anderson, AW and Dregseth, RJ (2000) Registration of F1015 and F1016 sugarbeet germplasm with resistance to the sugarbeet root maggot. Crop Science 40: 867–868.Google Scholar
Campbell, LG, Miller, J, Rekoske, M and Smith, LJ (2008) Performance of sugarbeet hybrids with sugarbeet root maggot resistant pollinators. Plant Breeding 127: 43–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, LG, Panella, L and Smigocki, AC (2011) Registration of F1024 sugarbeet germplasm with resistance to sugarbeet root maggot. Journal of Plant Registrations 5: 241–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dray, S and Dufour, A-B (2007) The ade4 package: implementing the duality diagram for ecologists. Journal of Statistical Software 22: 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fugate, KK, Fajardo, D, Schlautman, B, Ferrareze, JP, Bolton, MD, Campbell, LG, Wiesman, E and Zalapa, J (2014) Generation and characterization of a sugarbeet transcriptome and transcript-based SSR markers. The Plant Genome 7: 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hecker, RJ and Ruppel, EG (1988) Registration of Rhizoctonia root rot resistant sugarbeet germplasm FC709. Crop Science 28: 1039–1040.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hein, GL, Boetel, MA and Godfrey, LD (2009) Sugarbeet root maggot. In: Harveson, RM, Hanson, LE and Hein, GL (eds.). Compendium of Beet Diseases and Pests, 2nd edn. St. Paul, MN: APS Press, pp. 95–97.Google Scholar
Jombart, T (2008) Adegenet: a R package for the multivariate analysis of genetic markers. Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) 24: 1403–1405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kamvar, ZN, Tabima, JF and Grünwald, NJ (2014) Poppr: an R package for genetic analysis of populations with clonal, partially clonal, and/or sexual reproduction. PeerJ 2: e281.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Khan, M (ed.) (2013) Sugar Beet Production Guide. North Dakota State University & University Minnesota Cooperative Extension Service, Fargo, North Dakota, USA: 99 p.Google Scholar
Peakall, R and Smouse, PE (2006) Genalex 6: genetic analysis in Excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research. Molecular Ecology Notes 6: 288–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prevosti, A, Ocana, J and Alonso, G (1975) Distances between populations of Drosophila subobscura, based on chromosome arrangement frequencies. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 45: 231–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
R Development Core Team (2011) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar
Zalapa, JE, Cuevas, H, Zhu, H, Steffan, S, Senalik, D, Zeldin, E, McCown, B, Harbut, R and Simon, P (2012) Using next-generation sequencing approaches to isolate simple sequence repeat (SSR) loci in the plant sciences. American Journal of Botany 99: 193–208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Fugate et al. supplementary material

Table S1

Download Fugate et al. supplementary material(File)
File 19.4 KB