Sel’skokhozyaistvennaya Biologiya [Agricultural Biology], 2018, Vol. 53, ¹ 1, p. 151-156.
(how to cite this article)

doi: 10.15389/agrobiology.2018.1.151eng

UDC 634.1.055:575.22:575.162:575.167

Acknowledgements:
Supported financially by a grant from Russian Foundation for Basic Research (project ¹ 16-04-00199)

 

TO THE EXPERIMENTAL CONFIRMATION OF THE HYPOTHESIS
ABOUT AN ECO-GENETIC NATURE OF THE PHENOMENON
GENOTYPE * ENVIRONMENT INTERACTION FOR WOODY PLANTS

V.A. Dragavtsev1, I.A. Dragavtseva2, I.L. Efimova2, A.P. Kuznetsova2, A.S. Morenets2

1Agrophysical Research Institute, Federal Agency for Scientific Organizations, 14, Grazhdanskii prosp., St. Petersburg, 195220 Russia, e-mail dravial@mail.ru (✉ corresponding author);
2North Caucasian Federal Research Center of Horticulture, Viticulture, Wine-making, Federal Agency for Scientific Organizations, 39, ul. 40-letiya Pobedy, Krasnodar, 350901 Russia, e-mail i_d@list.ru, efimiril@mail.ru, anpalkuz@mail.ru, funny_annie91@mail.ru

ORCID:
Dragavtsev V.A. orcid.org/0000-0002-0934-020X
Dragavtseva I.A. orcid.org/0000-0003-2557-1822
Efimova I.L. orcid.org/0000-0002-0835-9996
Kuznetsova A.P. orcid.org/0000-0003-4829-6640
Morenets A.S. orcid.org/0000-0003-3199-2308

Received May 17, 2017

 

The hypothesis of the eco-genetic nature of the phenomenon genotype ½ environment interaction (GEI) was developed by Russian scientists in 1984 after discovering an epigenetic phenomenon, the change in the spectra of genes that determine the same quantitative trait in annual crops with a change in the limiting factor. Perennial fruit trees are ideal objects for studying mechanisms of genotype ½ environment interaction. Genetic diversity within a fruit tree variety is practically zero as the trees are genetically homogeneous clones due to grafting, plants in a commercial garden are of the same age because of simultaneous planting, and they have the same soil area of nutrition, that is, there is no superposition of genetic and environmental competition. Annual growth in thickness of trunk and branches is very informative, and the pattern of a tree's annual growth rings records information about growth conditions, above all weather conditions, for many years. We studied apple (Malus domestica Âorkh.) and apricot (Prunus armeniaca L.) varieties of northern and southern origin which possess different tolerance to weather stressors. To reveal alterations in the spectra of genes determining an increase in the thickness of a tree trunk and branches, we compared annual rings in the commercially grown trees of different adaptiveness which undergone the action of various limiting weather factors changing over a long period, particularly the effects of dry and hot years in contrast to the wet and cool years. It was revealed that wet and cold weather caused a bigger increase in branch thickness in the northern-originated apple variety Krasa Severa from Ekaterinburg with better genetic and physiological systems for cold resistance, whereas dry and hot weather similarly affected the southern-originated variety Bahorn from Uzbekistan. Pubescence of leaves and cuticle thickness which contribute to drought resistance can not contribute to an increase in cold resistance. Hence, a change in the incremental thickness grades suggests a change in the set of component traits, and, therefore, the sets of genes that determine these traits, with a change in the limiting factors of the environment. Thus, due to the choice of the varieties of different origin and adaptability and the years with contrasting limiting environmental factors, we succeeded to discover the facts that were predicted by the hypothesis of the nature of the genotype × environment interaction phenomenon.

Keywords: nature of genotype × environment interaction, fruit crops, adaptability, change of gene spectra.

 

Full article (Rus)

Full article (Eng)

 

REFERENCES

  1. Dragavtsev V.A., Litun P.P., Shkel' N.M., Nechiporenko N.N. Doklady AN SSSR, 1984, 274(3): 720-723 (in Russ.).
  2. Dragavtsev V.A., Tsil'ke R.A., Reiter B.G., Vorob'ev V.A., Dubrovskaya A.G., Korobeinikov N.I., Novokhatin V.V., Maksimenko V.P., Babakishiev A.G., Ilyushchenko V.G., Kalashnik N.A., Zuikov Yu.P., Fedotov A.M. Genetika priznakov produktivnosti yarovykh pshenits v Zapadnoi Sibiri [Genetics of spring wheat productivity in Western Siberia]. Novosibirsk, 1984 (in Russ.).
  3. Saini P., Sandhya C. A review on genotype environment interaction and its stability measures. International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR), 2015, 4(1): 1210-1213 CrossRef
  4. Greenfield M.D., Danka R.G., Gleason J.M., Harris B.R., Zhou Y. Genotype * environment interaction, environmental heterogeneity and the lek paradox. J. Evolution Biol., 2012, 25(1): 1-13 CrossRef
  5. Kosev V., Georgieva N. Evaluation of genotypic and genetic variances of quantitative traits in pea (Pisum sativum L.). Emir. J. Food Agr., 2016, 28(11): 755-763 CrossRef
  6. Sinskaya E.N. O kategoriyakh i zakonomernostyakh izmenchivosti v populyatsiyakh vysshikh rastenii. Problemy populyatsii u vysshikh rastenii [On the categories and regularities of variability in populations of higher plants. Problems of higher plant populations]. Leningrad, 1963 (in Russ.).
  7. Inge-Vechtomov S.G. Genetika s osnovami selektsii [Genetics and fundamentals of breeding]. Moscow, 1989 (in Russ.).
  8. Roeder A.H. Use it or average it: stochasticity in plant development. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol., 2018, 41: 8-15 CrossRef
  9. Schmiedel J.M., Klemm S.L., Zheng Y., Sahay A., Blueyhen N., Marcs D.S., van Oud-enaarden A. MicroRNA control of protein expression noise. Science, 2015, 348: 128-132 CrossRef
  10. Rinott R., Jaimivich A., Friedman N. Exploring transcription regulation through cell-to-cell variability. PNAS USA, 2011, 108(15): 6329-6334 CrossRef
  11. Raj A., Rifkin S.A., Andersen E., van Oudenaarden A. Variability in gene expression underlies incomplete penetrance. Nature, 2010, 463: 913-918 CrossRef
  12. Kaern M., Eiston T.C., Blake W.J., Collins J.J. Stochasticity in gene expression: from theories to phenotypes. Nat. Rev. Genet., 2005, 6(6): 451-464 CrossRef
  13. Pirson K. Grammatika nauki [Grammar of science]. Moscow, 1905 (in Russ.).
  14. Fisher R.A. The genetics theory of natural selection: 2nd ed. NY, 1958.
  15. Genet T. Genotype-environment interactions in Vernonia galamensis. Ethiopian Journal of Science and Technology, 2006, 3(2): 1-14.
  16. Saleem N., Ahmad M., Wani S.A., Vashnavi R., Dar Z.A. Genotype-environment interaction and stability analysis in Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) for protein and gluten contents. Journal of Scientific Research and Essays, 2015, 10(7): 260-265 CrossRef
  17. Yang R.C., Crossa J., Cornelius P.L., Burgueso J. Biplot analysis of genotype * environment interaction: proceed with caution. Crop Sci., 2009, 49(5): 1564-1576 CrossRef
  18. Tariku S., Lakew T., Bitew M., Asfaw M. Genotype by environment interaction and grain yield stability analysis of rice (Oryza sativa L.) genotypes evaluated in north western Ethiopia. Net Journal of Agricultural Science, 2013, 1(1): 10-16.
  19. Mustapha M., Bakari H.R. Statistical evaluation of genotype by environment interaction for grain yield in Millet (Penniisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br). The International Journal of Engineering and Science, 2014, 3(9): 7-16.
  20. Ashwinin K.T., Gulshan L. Genotype-environment interaction and stability analysis in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.). Indian Journal of Hill Farming, 2014, 27(2): 16-18.
  21. Dragavtsev V.A. Biosfera, 2012, 4(3): 251-262 (in Russ.).
  22. Dragavtsev V.A., Dragavtseva I.A., Efimova I.L., Morenets A.S., I.Yu. Trudy Kubanskogo gosudarstvennogo agrarnogo universiteta, 2016, 2(59): 105-121 (in Russ.).
  23. Crossa J. From genotype × environment interaction to gene × environment interaction. Curr. Genomics, 2012, 13: 225-244 CrossRef
  24. Teren'ko G.N. Produktivnost' plodovykh derev'ev [Productivity of fruit trees]. Krasnodar, 2003 (in Russ.).
  25. Dragavtseva I.A., Bandurko I.A., Efimova I.L. Novye tekhnologii, 2013, 2: 110-114 (in Russ.).

back