Figures
Abstract
Tibetan semi-wild wheat (Triticum aestivum ssp. tibetanum Shao) is a semi-wild hexaploid wheat resource that is only naturally distributed in the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Brittle rachis and hard threshing are two important characters of Tibetan semi-wild wheat. A whole-genome linkage map of T. aestivum ssp. tibetanum was constructed using a recombinant inbred line population (Q1028×ZM9023) with 186 lines, 564 diversity array technology markers, and 117 simple sequence repeat markers. Phenotypic data on brittle rachis and threshability, as two quantitative traits, were evaluated on the basis of the number of average spike rachis fragments per spike and percent threshability in 2012 and 2013, respectively. Quantitative trait locus (QTL) mapping performed using inclusive composite interval mapping analysis clearly identified four QTLs for brittle rachis and three QTLs for threshability. However, three loci on 2DS, 2DL, and 5AL showed pleiotropism for brittle rachis and threshability; they respectively explained 5.3%, 18.6%, and 18.6% of phenotypic variation for brittle rachis and 17.4%, 13.2%, and 35.2% of phenotypic variation for threshability. A locus on 3DS showed an independent effect on brittle rachis, which explained 38.7% of the phenotypic variation. The loci on 2DS and 3DS probably represented the effect of Tg and Br1, respectively. The locus on 5AL was in very close proximity to the Q gene, but was different from the predicted q in Tibetan semi-wild wheat. To our knowledge, the locus on 2DL has never been reported in common wheat but was prominent in T. aestivum ssp. tibetanum accession Q1028. It remarkably interacted with the locus on 5AL to affect brittle rachis. Several major loci for brittle rachis and threshability were identified in Tibetan semi-wild wheat, improving the understanding of these two characters and suggesting the occurrence of special evolution in Tibetan semi-wild wheat.
Citation: Jiang Y-F, Lan X-J, Luo W, Kong X-C, Qi P-F, Wang J-R, et al. (2014) Genome-Wide Quantitative Trait Locus Mapping Identifies Multiple Major Loci for Brittle Rachis and Threshability in Tibetan Semi-Wild Wheat (Triticum aestivum ssp. tibetanum Shao). PLoS ONE 9(12): e114066. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0114066
Editor: Guoping Zhang, Zhejiang University, China
Received: July 14, 2014; Accepted: October 21, 2014; Published: December 4, 2014
Copyright: © 2014 Jiang et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: The authors confirm that all data underlying the findings are fully available without restriction. All relevant data are available at Figshare: http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1225680.
Funding: Funding provided by the State Key Program of National Natural Science of China (Grant No. 31230053) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (30471088; 30370883) http://www.nsfc.gov.cn/. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
Cereal crops, the world’s primary food source, have been domesticated from a diverse array of grass species. In wheat, domestication has occurred at all three ploidy levels. The cultivated forms of wheat are Triticum monococcum ssp. monococcum (2n = 2x = 14) at the diploid level, Triticum turgidum ssp. durum (2n = 4x = 28) at the tetraploid level, and Triticum aestivum ssp. aestivum (2n = 6x = 42) at the hexaploid level. The major traits subjected to selection include loss of spike shattering, loss of tough glumes, increased seed size, reduced number of tillers, change in plant architecture, and reduced seed dormancy [1].
Unlike cultivated wheat, wild wheat shows characteristic traits such as brittle rachis, tough glume, and hard-threshing features, which help the wild species survive and multiply in nature. In polyploid wheats, a major modifier gene for a domestication-related trait (q gene) has been identified on the long arm of chromosome 5A; this gene affects brittle rachis, tough glume, and hard-threshing features [2]–[11]. Q gene is well known and has been cloned and is known to be a member of the APETALA2 family of transcription factors [8], [10]. The tenacious glume trait was found to be controlled by Tg gene, which was mapped on the short arm of group-2 chromosomes [12]–[16]. Tg also has a strong effect on threshability, which could be simultaneous detected by threshability and glume tenacity [12], [13]. The brittle rachis trait is primarily controlled by Br gene, which was mapped on homoeologous group 3 chromosomes [17]–[22] and chromosome 2A [23]. Unlike Tg, Br is not linked with threshability and showed an independent effect on brittle rachis [23].
Tibetan semi-wild wheat (T. aestivum ssp. tibetanum Shao) is an endemic hexaploid wheat group in China; it is found only in the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau of China and was recognized as the subspecies of the hexaploid wheat [24]. The typical primitive and classified characters of Tibetan semi-wild wheat are spontaneous spike disarticulation and tough glume, indicating that it is closer to the wild wheat than other existing T. aestivum species [24]. Spike disarticulation pattern of the Tibetan semi-wild wheat is wedge type, and its disarticulation occurs above the junction of the rachis with the rachilla, unlike that in spelt wheat, which occurs below the junction of the rachis and rachilla [25]. In contrast to spelt wheat, Tibetan semi-wild wheat rachis are fractured much more easily [26].
The brittle rachis of Tibetan semi-wild wheat was mapped to the short arm of chromosome 3D and designated as Br1 [18], [26], [27]. However, Br1 might be not the only gene responsible for brittle rachis in Tibetan semi-wild wheat. Cao et al. [25] suggested that three brittle rachis genes were involved in the progenies of hybrid of Tibetan semi-wild wheat with spelt wheat. Chen et al. [28] supported the result and believed that other genes for brittle rachis might exist. In our study, many intermediate types of brittle rachis were found in the population from Q1028×ZM9023, suggesting that several genes for brittle rachis might exist in Q1028. Previously, the lack of genome-wide molecular marker analysis might have hindered the identification of potential genes for brittle rachis in Tibetan semi-wild wheat. Moreover, further studies are needed to explain the reason for extremely brittle rachis in Tibetan semi-wild wheat and to determine whether this trait is controlled by a single gene or multiple major genes. Investigation of the control of domestication-related traits such as brittle rachis and threshability might improve our knowledge on the evolution of Tibetan semi-wild wheat.
To better understand the genetic control of brittle rachis and threshability in Tibetan semi-wild wheat, we constructed a high-density genetic map by using a recombinant inbred line (RIL) population and multiple types of molecular markers, including diversity array technology (DArT) and simple sequence repeats (SSRs). This quantitative trait locus (QTL) mapping revealed new QTLs for brittle rachis and threshability in T. aestivum ssp. tibetanum.
Materials and Methods
Plant materials
The 186 RILs used in the present study were developed using a single-seed-descent method from a cross between Tibetan semi-wild wheat accessions Q1028 (brittle rachis; hard threshing) and ZM9023 (tough rachis; free threshing). In October 2011 and 2012 respectively, 186 RILs at generations F10 and F11 and the parents of these RILs were planted in the experimental field of Triticeae Research Institute, Sichuan Agricultural University, China. Each line was single-seed planted in two 2-m long rows, with 30-cm distance between rows and 10-cm spacing within rows. Field management followed common practices for wheat production.
Assessment of brittle rachis and threshability
In May 2012 and 2013, after harvest, the 186 RILs were kept under indoor ventilation and air-dried for about one week to ensure that all the spikes had relatively identical moisture content.
In this study, brittle rachis and threshability were evaluated as two quantitative traits [12]. Five randomly chosen spikes of each line were passed through an electric-powered single-plant thresher (2800 r/min), and the number of average spike rachis fragments (RF) were measured after mechanical threshing. Threshability (free threshing, FT) was calculated as the percentage of completely threshed seeds from all seeds harvested.
Molecular marker analyses
We used SSR and DArT markers to construct a high-density genetic map of Tibetan semi-wild wheat. Genomic DNA was extracted from fresh leaf tissue (1-week-old seedlings) by using the cetyltrimethylammonium bromide method [29]. A total of 1,089 SSR primers were tested for polymorphisms, and 118 polymorphic SSR markers between the parents were used to screen the RIL populations. For SSR analysis, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was performed as described by Sood et al. [14]. After the PCR products were electrophoresed on 8% polyacrylamide gels, amplified fragments were detected by silver staining.
DArT was used to identify polymorphic markers for the construction of a linkage map. DNA from the 186 lines and two parents were sent to Diversity Arrays Technology Pvt. Ltd. (http://www.diversityarrays.com) for whole-genome profiling. The procedures used for hybridization of DNA to the DArT array and for image analysis and polymorphism scoring were according to those described by Wenzl et al. [30].
Data analysis and QTL mapping
SPSS version 17.0 for Windows (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL) was used for basic statistical analyses and graph production. JointMap 4 [31] was used for linkage analysis of marker data. A minimum limit of detection (LOD) of ≧3.0 was used to develop the linkage map. Recombination frequencies were converted to centimorgans (cM) by using the Kosambi mapping function. The segregation ratio of each marker and its deviation from the expected ratio were evaluated using the chi-square test. QTL analysis was conducted using QTL IciMapping version 3.2 [32] following inclusive composite interval mapping (ICIM) [33]. An LOD score of ≧2.5 was used to detect a QTL, and the walk speed was 1.0 cM. The QTLNetwork program version 2.1 based on a mixed linear model [34] was used to identify the epistatic QTL for brittle rachis and threshability in joint analysis of the phenotypic values for the data collected over two years. Briefly, the values for testing window and filtration window were set at 10 cM, and the walking speed was 1 cM. The LOD threshold of QTL was determined using a 1,000 permutation test at 95% confidence level. The proportion of observed phenotypic variance explained by each additive and epistatic QTL and the corresponding additive effects were also estimated.
Results
Analysis of phenotypic data
The two parents, Q1028 and ZM9023, showed significant differences in both brittle rachis and threshability (Figs. 1–3). The brittle rachis of Q1028 was 13.6–14.8, which was significantly higher than that of ZM9023 (2–2.4), whereas the threshability of Q1028 was 5.6%–7.5%, which was significantly lower than that of ZM9023 (88.42%–91.50%). The mean values of brittle rachis and threshability in the RIL populations in 2012 and 2013 were 8.94–9.36 and 57.85%–64.78%, respectively (Table 1). All data for the two trials for two years showed continuous distribution in the RIL populations (Figs. 2 and 3). The correlation coefficients (R) of the trials between the two years were 0.93 for brittle rachis and 0.94 for threshability, indicating that the two traits remained relatively stable (Table 2). There were significant and negative correlations between brittle rachis and threshability, with R ranging from −0.49 to −0.52 (Table 2).
a Comparison of spikes between ZM9023 and Triticum aestivum ssp. tibetanum Shao accession Q1028. b The phenotypes after mechanical threshing between ZM9023 and Triticum aestivum ssp. tibetanum Shao accession Q1028 showed significant difference both in brittle rachis and threshability.
RF2012 and RF2013 were obtained from crosses between Triticum aestivum ssp. tibetanum Shao population Q1028×ZM9023 established in 2012 and 2013, respectively. P1: Q1028, P2: ZM9023. RILs: recombinant inbred lines. Mean: average value of the trait. N: the number of RILs.
FT2012 and FT2013 were obtained from crosses between Triticum aestivum ssp. tibetanum Shao population Q1028×ZM9023 established in 2012 and 2013, respectively. P1: Q1028, P2: ZM9023. RILs: recombinant inbred lines. Mean: average value of the trait. N: the number of RILs.
Construction of the genetic map
A whole-genome genetic map was constructed using 186 RIL populations by using 564 DArT and 117 SSR markers, which were distributed in 22 linkage groups and covered a genetic distance of 2727 cM (Figure S1). The distribution of markers was not uniform across the genome. Coverage of most chromosomes was obtained except for 4D and 5D.
The major QTLs for brittle rachis
Four QTLs for brittle rachis were identified in the mapping populations by using ICIM analysis, and all the positive alleles were derived from the brittle rachis parent, Q1028 (Table 3). All QTLs were significantly detected in the two years (Table 3). The range of phenotypic variation explained (PVE) was 5.3%–38.7% for all QTLs in the general average data of brittle rachis, and the total PVE of brittle rachis was >79%. The QTLs of brittle rachis were detected on chromosome arms 2DS, 2DL, 3DL, and 5AL (Figs. 4–6), which were designated Qbr.sau-2D1, Qbr.sau-2D2, Qbr.sau-3A, and Qbr.sau-5A, respectively, following the convention that “br” and “sau” stand for “brittle rachis” and “Sichuan Agricultural University,” respectively.
QTL detected on chromosome 2D in the Triticum aestivum ssp. tibetanum Shao population from accessions Q1028×ZM9023. Marker positions are shown on the right of the linkage map, and distances between loci (in centimorgans, cM) are shown on the left. The vertical dashed line indicates the significance threshold (LOD = 2.5).
Marker positions are shown on the right of the linkage map, and distances between loci (in centimorgans, cM) are shown on the left. The vertical dashed line indicates the significance threshold (LOD = 2.5).
Marker positions are shown on the right of the linkage map, and distances between loci (in centimorgans, cM) are shown on the left. The vertical dashed line indicates the significance threshold (LOD = 2.5).
Qbr.sau-2D1, which was located on the 2D short arm region between Xgpw361 and Xgdm35 (Fig. 4), showed a minor effect on brittle rachis and explained 6.6% and 5.1% of phenotypic variation in 2012 and 2013, respectively (Table 3).
Qbr.sau-2D2, which was located on the 2D long arm region between wPt-666518 and wPt-730613, was considerably distant from Qbr.sau-2D1 (Fig. 4). It was a major QTL for brittle rachis and explained 18.2% and 18.4% of phenotypic variation in 2012 and 2013, respectively (Table 3).
Qbr.sau-3D, the most significant QTL for brittle rachis, was located on the 3DS region between wPt-9258 and wPt-672034 (Fig. 5) and explained 39.3% and 36.9% of phenotypic variation in 2012 and 2013, respectively.
Qbr.sau-5A, which was located on 5A long arm region between Xgpw2059 and Xgpw4457 (Fig. 6) explained 16.6% and 17.0% of phenotypic variation in 2012 and 2013, respectively.
The major QTLs for threshability
A total of three QTLs for threshability were identified by the ICIM analysis, and all the negative alleles were derived from the hard-threshing parent, Q1028 (Table 3). All QTLs were significantly detected in the two years (Table 3). The range of PVE was 13.2%–27.7% for all QTLs in the FT combined, and the total PVE was >65%. QTLs were detected on chromosome arms 2DS, 2DL, and 5AL (Figs. 4 and 6), which were designated Qft.sau-2D1, Qft.sau-2D2, and Qft.sau-5A, respectively, following the convention that “ft” and “sau” stand for “free threshing” and “Sichuan Agricultural University,” respectively. Moreover, the three QTLs for brittle rachis and threshability on 2DS, 2DL, and 5AL were located in very close proximity.
Qft.sau-2D1 was located on 2D short arm region between Xcfd53 and Xgpw4080 (Fig. 4), and a QTL (Qbr.sau-2D1) with a minor effect on brittle rachis was found in the adjacent region. Qft.sau-2D1 was a major QTL for threshability. It explained 17.5% and 16.2% of phenotypic variation in 2012 and 2013, respectively.
Qft.sau-2D2, which was located on the same region as Qbr.sau-2D2 between wPt-3692 and wPt-7160 (Fig. 4), explained 13.1% and 12.5% of phenotypic variation in 2012 and 2013, respectively. Its effect on threshability was slightly lower than that of Qft.sau-2D1.
Qft.sau-5A, which was located on the same region as Qbr.sau-5A between Xgpw4457 and Xgpw2273 (Fig. 6), accounted for 38.3% and 29.9% of the phenotypic variation in 2012 and 2013, respectively.
Epistatic analysis for brittle rachis and threshability
Three and two epistases were detected for brittle rachis and threshability, respectively (Fig. 7 and Table 4). All of them showed only epistatic main effect and non-significant epistatic × environment interaction. Further, two major additive QTLs (Qbr.sau-2D2 and Qft.sau-5A) showed a significant interaction in brittle rachis. Three minor additive QTLs for threshability could be detected using QTLNetwork 2.1 (Table S1).
The chromosome names are listed on the left of the bar, the map distances (cM) are shown below the bar, and the markers are shown above the bar. The major additive loci are annotated in red color.
Discussion
Multiple major loci for brittle rachis and threshability in Tibetan semi-wild wheat
The effect of several major genes for brittle rachis and threshability were identified in Tibetan semi-wild wheat by using the ICIM analysis. Four QTLs for brittle rachis were identified on 2DS, 2DL, 3DS, and 5AL; three QTLs for threshability were identified on 2DS, 2DL, and 5AL. However, three loci on 2DS, 2DL, and 5A simultaneously controlled brittle rachis and threshability, which could explain the significant correlation between brittle rachis and threshability.
Two loci for brittle rachis and threshability on 2D were identified in the RILs in this study. The reported major gene for threshability in 2D was Tg, which was reported to be located on 2D short arm. Qbr.sau-2D1 and Qft.sau-2D1 were located in an adjacent region on chromosome 2D short arm, which was very close to the region containing Tg [13], [14]. Previous reports showed that Tg was the major gene for glume tenacity on 2DS in Tibetan semi-wild wheat [25], [35]. Therefore, the effect of Qbr.sau-2D1 should be derived from Tg, which was also reported to affect brittle rachis and threshability [12], [13].
Another locus was located on the 2D long arm region between wPt-666518 and wPt-730613 with a 6.7-cM flanking interval. It explained 18.6% and 13.2% of phenotypic variation in brittle rachis and threshability, respectively, and had a major effect on both brittle rachis and threshability. It interacted with the locus on 5AL to affect brittle rachis, probably via the regulatory relationships between them. This locus has never or rarely been reported in common wheat but was prominent in T. aestivum ssp. tibetanum accession Q1028. Therefore, it might be a special variation in Tibetan semi-wild wheat to allow its adaptation to the severe semi-wild environment in the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau.
A major locus for brittle rachis and threshability was identified on 5AL of Tibetan semi-wild wheat, which was not reported previously [7]. Comparisons of our genetic map with those reported previously revealed that this QTL was located very close to the Q gene. However, the locus in Tibetan semi-wild wheat was speculated to be different from the well-known q gene in Triticum spelta and was almost the same as that found in the wheat line ‘Chinese Spring’, i.e., domestication type, by sequencing (unpublished data). Further studies are warranted to perform detailed analysis on this locus.
A QTL for brittle rachis was identified on 3DS as expected. Several previous studies indicated that the brittle rachis of Tibetan semi-wild wheat was governed by Br1 [25], [26], which was located on the short arm of chromosome 3DS. In this study, Qbr.sau-3D was found to be a major QTL for brittle rachis, which explained 39.36% of phenotypic variation. It was located clearly in the chromosome 3DS region with a 10.8-cM interval between wPt-9258 and Xgdm72, which almost corresponded to the location of Br1 locus reported by Watanabe et al. [18]. Qbr.sau-3D should be Br1, which was the most important locus for brittle rachis in Tibetan semi-wild wheat.
Phylogenetics of Tibetan semi-wild wheat
Several major genes for brittle rachis and threshability were identified in Tibetan semi-wild wheat; the identification of these genes not only improved the understanding of brittle rachis and threshability in wheat but also revealed a possibility of special evolution in Tibetan semi-wild wheat. The brittle rachis feature in Tibetan semi-wild was significantly different from that in spelt wheat [25]. The brittle rachis of spelt wheat was controlled by the q gene, which showed pleiotropism for brittle rachis, tough glume, and threshability characters. However, in Tibetan semi-wild wheat, brittle rachis was controlled by four genes. This suggested that there were entirely different systems for controlling brittle rachis between Tibetan semi-wild wheat and spelt wheat.
Hexaploid wheat has been speculated to have originated by hybridization of domesticated emmer with Aegilops tauschii. Tibetan semi-wild wheat was a subspecies of T. aestivum [24], which is a characteristic type of hexaploid wheat in China. The hexaploid ancestor of this wheat was thought to have originated from Middle East, rather than China [36]–[38]. However, although synthesized hexaploid wheat had the primitive D-genome from Ae. tauschii with a brittle rachis gene [17], it shows tough rachis character. The two major QTLs for brittle rachis located on 2DL and 3DS, which were identified in our study, have never been reported in any other hexaploid wheat, except that a gene for brittle rachis on Br1 region was reported in a Triticum aestivum-Aegilops tauschii introgression line [19]. Our results implied that Tibetan semi-wild wheat could have originated by de-domestication, or an extra hybridization with Ae. tauschii relative to its original type. However, the characters of brittle rachis, tough glume, hard threshing, and strong seed dormancy [39] in Tibetan semi-wild wheat might have resulted from natural selection in the wild state.
Supporting Information
Figure S1.
The linkage map of Q1028×ZM9023 by using 564 DArT and 117 SSR makers. Numbers on the left are genetic distances in centiMorgan.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0114066.s001
(PDF)
Table S1.
The additive QTLs for brittle rachis and threshability in joint analysis of two years data by QTLNetwork 2.1.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0114066.s002
(DOCX)
Author Contributions
Conceived and designed the experiments: YFJ XJL YLZ. Performed the experiments: YFJ WL XJL YMW PFQ. Analyzed the data: YFJ XJL XCK YXL QTJ. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: JRW YYP GYC SFD. Contributed to the writing of the manuscript: YFJ XJL PFQ.
References
- 1. Dubcovsky J, Dvorak J (2007) Genome plasticity a key factor in the success of polyploid wheat under domestication. Science 316:1862–1866.
- 2.
MacKey J (1954) Neutron and X-ray experiments in wheat and a revision of the speltoid problem: Berlingska Boktryckeriet.
- 3.
Sears ER (1954) Aneuploids of common wheat.
- 4. Muramatsu M (1986) The vulgare super gene, Q: its universality in durum wheat and its phenotypic effects in tetraploid and hexaploid wheats. Canadian journal of genetics and cytology 28:30–41.
- 5. Kato K, Miura H, Sawada S (1999) QTL mapping of genes controlling ear emergence time and plant height on chromosome 5A of wheat. Theoretical and applied genetics 98:472–477.
- 6. Kato K, Sonokawa R, Miura H, Sawada S (2003) Dwarfing effect associated with the threshability gene Q on wheat chromosome 5A. Plant breeding 122:489–492.
- 7. Faris JD, Gill BS (2002) Genomic targeting and high-resolution mapping of the domestication gene Q in wheat. Genome 45:706–718.
- 8. Faris JD, Fellers JP, Brooks SA, Gill BS (2003) A bacterial artificial chromosome contig spanning the major domestication locus Q in wheat and identification of a candidate gene. Genetics 164:311–321.
- 9. Faris J, Simons K, Zhang Z, Gill B (2005) The wheat super domestication gene Q. Wheat Info Serv. 100:129–148.
- 10. Simons KJ, Fellers JP, Trick HN, Zhang Z, Tai YS, et al. (2006) Molecular characterization of the major wheat domestication gene Q. Genetics. 172:547–555.
- 11. Zhang Z, Belcram H, Gornicki P, Charles M, Just J, et al. (2011) Duplication and partitioning in evolution and function of homoeologous Q loci governing domestication characters in polyploid wheat. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 108:18737–18742.
- 12. Jantasuriyarat C, Vales MI, Watson CJ, Riera-Lizarazu O (2004) Identification and mapping of genetic loci affecting the free-threshing habit and spike compactness in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Theor Appl Genet 108:261–273.
- 13. Nalam VJ, Vales MI, Watson CJ, Johnson EB, Riera-Lizarazu O (2007) Map-based analysis of genetic loci on chromosome 2D that affect glume tenacity and threshability, components of the free-threshing habit in common wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Theor Appl Genet 116:135–145.
- 14. Sood S, Kuraparthy V, Bai G, Gill BS (2009) The major threshability genes soft glume (sog) and tenacious glume (Tg), of diploid and polyploid wheat, trace their origin to independent mutations at non-orthologous loci. Theor Appl Genet 119:341–351.
- 15. Dvorak J, Deal KR, Luo MC, You FM, von Borstel K, et al. (2012) The origin of spelt and free-threshing hexaploid wheat. J Hered 103:426–441.
- 16. Faris JD, Zhang Z, Chao S (2014) Map-based analysis of the tenacious glume gene Tg-B1 of wild emmer and its role in wheat domestication. Gene 542:198–208.
- 17. Watanabe N, Takesada N, Shibata Y, Ban T (2005) Genetic mapping of the genes for glaucous leaf and tough rachis in Aegilops tauschii, the D-genome progenitor of wheat. Euphytica 144:119–123.
- 18. Watanabe N, Fujii Y, Kato N, Ban T, Martinek P (2006) Microsatellite mapping of the genes for brittle rachis on homoeologous group 3 chromosomes in tetraploid and hexaploid wheats. J Appl Genet 47:93–98.
- 19. Watanabe N, Fujii Y, Takesada N, Martinek P (2006) Cytological and microsatellite mapping of the gene for brittle rachis in a Triticum aestivum-Aegilops tauschii introgression line. Euphytica 151:63–69.
- 20. Nalam VJ, Vales MI, Watson CJ, Kianian SF, Riera-Lizarazu O (2006) Map-based analysis of genes affecting the brittle rachis character in tetraploid wheat (Triticum turgidum L.). Theor Appl Genet 112:373–381.
- 21. Li W, Gill BS (2006) Multiple genetic pathways for seed shattering in the grasses. Funct Integr Genomics 6:300–309.
- 22. Yoshiya K, Watanabe N, Kuboyama T, Lapochkina I (2012) Genetic mapping of the gene for brittle rachis in a Triticum aestivum–Aegilops triuncialis introgression line. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 59:67–72.
- 23. Peleg Z, Fahima T, Korol AB, Abbo S, Saranga Y (2011) Genetic analysis of wheat domestication and evolution under domestication. J Exp Bot 62:5051–5061.
- 24. Shao Q-Q, Li C-S, basang C-R (1980) semi-wild wheat from Xizang (Tibet). Acta Genetica Sinica 7:150–156.
- 25. Cao W, Scoles G, Hucl P (1997) The genetics of rachis fragility and glume tenacity in semi-wild wheat. Euphytica 94:119–124.
- 26. Chen QF, Yen C, Yang JL (1998) Chromosome location of the gene for brittle rachis in the Tibetan weedrace of common wheat. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 45:407–410.
- 27. Watanabe N, Sugiyama K, Yamagishi Y, Sakata Y (2002) Comparative telosomic mapping of homoeologous genes for brittle rachis in tetraploid and hexaploid wheats. Hereditas 137:180–185.
- 28. Chen QF (2001) Inheritance of disarticulation derived from some hexaploid brittle rachis wheat. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 48:21–26.
- 29. Devos K, Gale MD (1992) The use of random amplified polymorphic DNA markers in wheat. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 84:567–572.
- 30. Wenzl P, Carling J, Kudrna D, Jaccoud D, Huttner E, et al. (2004) Diversity arrays technology (DArT) for whole-genome profiling of barley. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 101:9915–9920.
- 31.
JW VO (2006) JointMap 4, Software for the calculation of genetic linkage maps in experimental populations. Wageningen: Kyazma B.V.
- 32.
Wang J, Li H, Zhang L, Li C, Meng L (2012) Users’ Manual of QTL IciMapping v3.2.
- 33. Wang D, Zhu J, Li Z, Paterson A (1999) Mapping QTLs with epistatic effects and QTL× environment interactions by mixed linear model approaches. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 99:1255–1264.
- 34. Yang J, Hu C, Hu H, Yu R, Xia Z, et al. (2008) QTLNetwork: mapping and visualizing genetic architecture of complex traits in experimental populations. Bioinformatics 24:721–723.
- 35. Chen Q-F, Yen C, Yang J-L (1999) Chromosome location of the gene for the hulled character in the Tibetan weedrace of common wheat. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 46:543–546.
- 36. Wei Y-M, Zheng Y-L, Liu D-C, Zhou Y-H, Lan X-J (2002) HMW-glutenin and gliadin variations in Tibetan weedrace, Xinjiang rice wheat and Yunnan hulled wheat. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 49:327–330.
- 37. Liu D-C, Fang H (2003) Study on the role of Chinese Ae. tauschii in the evolution of Chinese common wheat landraces. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences 16:32–35.
- 38. Wang H, Wang Xe, Chen P, Liu D (2007) Assessment of genetic diversity of Yunnan, Tibetan, and Xinjiang wheat using SSR markers. Journal of Genetics and Genomics 34:623–633.
- 39. Lan XJ, Wei YM, Liu DC, Yan ZH, Zheng YL (2005) Inheritance of seed dormancy in Tibetan semi-wild wheat accession Q1028. J Appl Genet 46:133–138.