Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) were undertaken to identify SNP markers associated with yield and yield-related traits in 123 Pakistani historical wheat cultivars evaluated during 2011-2014 seasons under semi-arid field conditions. The population was genotyped in a high-density Illumina iSelect 90K single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) assay, and finally 14,960 high quality SNPs were used in GWAS. Population structure examined using 1000 unlinked markers identified seven subpopulations (K=7) that were representative of different breeding programs in Pakistan, in addition to local landraces. Forty four stable marker-trait associations (MTAs) with –log p >4 were identified for nine yield-related traits. Nine multi-trait MTAs were found on chromosomes 1AL, 1BS, 2AL, 2BS, 2BL, 4BL, 5BL, 6AL and 6BL, and those on 5BL and 6AL were stable across two seasons. Gene annotation and syntey identified that 14 trait-associated SNPs were linked to genes having significant importance in plant development. Favorable alleles for days to heading (DH), plant height (PH), thousand grain weight (TGW) and grain yield (GY) showed minor additive effects and their frequencies were slightly higher in cultivars released after 2000. However, no selection pressure on any favorable allele was identified. These genomic regions identified have historically contributed to achieve yield gains from 2.63 million tonnes in 1947 to 25.7 million tonnes in 2015. Future breeding strategy can be devised to initiate marker-based breeding to accumulate these favorable alleles of SNPs associated with yield-related traits to increase grain yield. Additionally, in silico identification of 454-contigs corresponding to MTAs will facilitate fine mapping and subsequent cloning of candidate genes and functional marker development.

Aegilops tauschii, the wild relative of wheat, has stronger seed dormancy, a major component of preharvest sprouting resistance (PHSR), than bread wheat. A diploid Ae. tauschii accession (AUS18836) and a tetraploid (Triticum turgidum L. ssp. durum var. Altar84) wheat were used to construct a synthetic wheat (Syn37). The genetic architecture of PHS was investigated in 271 BC1F7 synthetic backcross lines (SBLs) derived from Syn37/2*Janz (resistant/susceptible). The SBLs were evaluated in three environments over 2 years and PHS was assessed by way of three measures: the germination index (GI), which measures grain dormancy, the whole spike assay (SI), which takes into account all spike morphology, and counted visually sprouted seeds out of 200 (VI). Grain color was measured using both Chroma Meter- and NaOH-based approaches. QTL for PHSR and grain color were mapped and their additive and epistatic effects as well as their interactions with environment were estimated by a mixed linear-model approach. Single-locus analysis following composite interval mapping revealed four QTL for GI, two QTL for SI, and four QTL for VI on chromosomes 3DL and 4AL. The locus QPhs.dpiv-3D.1 on chromosome 3DL was tightly linked to the red grain color (RGC) at a distance of 5 cM. The other locus on chromosome 3D, “QPhs.dpiv-3D.2” was independent of RGC locus. Two-locus analysis detected nine QTL with main effects and 18 additive × additive interactions for GI, SI, and VI. Two of the nine main effects QTL and two epistatic QTL showed significant interactions with environments. Both additive and epistatic effects contributed to phenotypic variance in PHSR and the identified markers are potential candidates for marker-assisted selection of favorable alleles at multiple loci. SBLs derived from Ae. tauschii proved to be a promising tool to dissect, introgress, and pyramid different PHSR genes into adapted wheat genetic backgrounds. The enhanced expression of PHS resistance in SBLs enabled us to develop white PHS-resistant wheat germplasm from the red-grained Ae. tauschii accession.

Storage insect pests cause significant losses of food legumes particularly in the Tropics and the Sub-tropics. The most important species of storage insect pests of food legumes include Callosobruchus chinensis, C. maculatus, C. analis, Acanthoscelides obtectus, Bruchus incarnatus, B. rufimanus, B. dentipes, B. quinqueguttatus, B. emarginatus, B. ervi, B. lentis and B. pisorum. Effective post-harvest insect pest control measures should constitute part of the overall crop husbandry practices for preserving the quality of produce. Storage insect pests are commonly controlled using chemical insecticides which, however, bear many drawbacks related to high cost, environmental pollution and food safety risks. Breeding legume crops to improve their resistance against storage insect pests, although having technical limitations, is the best way of overcoming these disadvantages in an environment-friendly manner. In this paper, we present the findings of our extensive reviews on the potential of breeding resistant varieties of food legumes against storage insect pests along with the major technical limitations one would likely encounter and the prospective ways of tackling them.

The causal agent of Ascochyta blight disease of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) is highly variable because of the presence of a sexual phase (Didymella rabiei). There is also selection pressure on the pathogen due to wide adoption of improved resistant chickpea cultivars in some countries. The pathogen is able to produce pathotypes with specific virulence on particular cultivars. Three pathotypes, I, II, and III, have been reported (3). In this study, we confirmed the presence of a new and highly virulent pathotype that we designate as pathotype IV. To test the pathogenicity of the isolates collected and maintained at ICARDA, 10 isolates representing a wide spectrum of pathogenic variation, including those classified by S. M. Udupa et al. (3) and a putatively identified more virulent type, which was collected from a chickpea production field in the Kaljebrine area, Syria, were inoculated onto a set of differential chickpea genotypes. The differential genotypes, ILC 1929, ILC 482, ILC 3279, and ICC 12004, were sown in individual 10-cm-diameter pots containing potting mix and arranged in a randomized block design with three replications in a plastic house maintained at 18 to 20°C. Each differential genotype was inoculated individually with the 10 isolates following the methodology of S. M. Udupa et al. (3). DNA was extracted from single-spored isolates to compare the genotypes of the isolates using three simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers (ArA03T, ArH05T, and ArH06T) (2) and to determine the frequency of mating types (MAT) through the use of MAT-specific PCR primers for MAT1-1 and MAT1-2 (1). Host genotype reactions were measured on a 1 to 9 rating scale (1 = resistant and 9 = plant death). On the basis of the pathogenicity tests, the isolates were classified into four pathotypes: I (least virulent, killed ILC 1929 but not ILC 482, ILC 3279, or ICC12004); II (virulent, killed ILC 1929 and ILC 482 but not ILC 3279 or ICC12004); III (more virulent, killed ILC 1929, ILC 482, and ILC 3279 but not ICC12004); and IV (highly virulent, killed all four host differentials). Of 10 single-spore isolates tested, four showed similar disease reactions unique to pathotype I, four revealed pathotype II reactions, and one isolate each behaved like pathotype III or pathotype IV. SSR fingerprinting of these isolates provided evidence for genetic diversity since SSR ArH05T was highly polymorphic and amplified five bands, including pathotypes III- and IV-specific bands, which need further investigation to discern if this locus has any role to play in the virulence. MAT-type analysis showed that seven isolates were MAT1-1 while the remaining three isolates were MAT1-2. Only pathotype I showed the profile of MAT1-2 and the other three pathotypes were MAT1-1. Initially, a number of chickpea wild relatives were screened to identify sources of resistance to pathotype IV, but none of the accessions tested showed resistance. However, efforts are underway to combine minor and major gene(s) available in the breeding program in addition to a further search of the wild gene pools to control pathotype IV. References: (1) M. P. Barve et al. Fungal Genet. Biol. 39:151, 2003. (2) J. Geistlinger et al. Mol. Ecol. 9:1939, 2000. (3) S.M. Udupa et al. Theor. Appl. Genet. 97:299, 1998.