Phenotypic plasticity for biomass partitioning in maize: genotype effects across a range of environments

被引:7
|
作者
Galizia, Luciana A. [1 ,2 ]
Munaro, Eugenia M. [3 ]
Cirilo, Alfredo G. [1 ]
Otegui, Maria E. [1 ,2 ,4 ]
D'Andrea, Karina E. [2 ,4 ]
机构
[1] INTA Estn Expt Agr Pergamino, Av Frondizi Ruta 32 Km 4-5,B2700, Pergamino, Buenos Aires, Argentina
[2] Univ Buenos Aires, Fac Agron, Av San Martin 4453,C1417DSE, Buenos Aires, DF, Argentina
[3] Corteva AgriSci, Johnston, IA USA
[4] Consejo Nacl Invest Cient & Tecn CONICET, Buenos Aires, DF, Argentina
关键词
G x E interaction; inbreds; hybrids; heterosis; diallel mating; PARENT-PROGENY RELATIONSHIPS; KERNEL NUMBER DETERMINATION; INTRA-SPECIFIC COMPETITION; ANTHESIS-SILKING INTERVAL; GRAIN-YIELD COMPONENTS; INBRED LINES; DROUGHT TOLERANCE; TROPICAL MAIZE; SECONDARY TRAITS; STRESS TOLERANCE;
D O I
10.1016/j.fcr.2020.107914
中图分类号
S3 [农学(农艺学)];
学科分类号
0901 ;
摘要
Maize grain yield is determined by genotype (G), environment (E) and G x E interaction effects that influence the expression of traits along the crop cycle. Inbreds and hybrids may differ in their responses to fluctuations in environmental conditions, determining changes in heterosis levels across environments and consequently the target environment for their evaluation. The objectives of this work were (i) to compare traits related to grain yield, aboveground biomass production and its partitioning in two contrasting genotypic groups (inbreds and hybrids) and (ii) to analyze their performance across environments for the assessment of their phenotypic plasticity as well as environmental effects on the expression of heterosis. We built a balanced environmental index based on normalized plant grain yield (BEINPGY) from 14 contrasting environments using a 6-inbred complete diallel mating design and analyzed the response of the 12 evaluated traits to this index for each genotypic group. This approach allowed us to (i) differentiate among traits with simple linear (grain yield, total biomass, kernel numbers, the anthesis-silking interval and plant reproductive efficiency), bilinear (harvest index, individual kernel weight, prolificacy and apical ear reproductive efficiency) or no response (ear and plant growth rates around flowering as well as their relationship) in phenotypic plasticity of each group to the BEINPGY, and (ii) group traits depending upon their absolute heterosis response (i.e., heterosis plasticity) to the BEINPGY, which varied in sign (positive, null or negative) depending upon the trait. There was a clear and positive relationship between absolute heterosis plasticity and traits plasticities, which was mainly driven by hybrids. Genotypic groups differed in the association patterns of traits values per se as well as of their phenotypic plasticities, indicative of the different genetic bases that determine them. The fact that percent heterosis for grain yield and other relevant secondary traits did not vary across environments, whereas heritability is expected to decrease under stressful conditions, may contribute to guide future breeding efforts aiming to develop superior hybrids with successful performance, particularly in future challenging environmental scenarios.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 35 条
  • [1] Genetics of phenotypic plasticity and biomass traits in hybrid willows across contrasting environments and years
    Berlin, Sofia
    Hallingback, Henrik R.
    Beyer, Friderike
    Nordh, Nils-Erik
    Weih, Martin
    Ronnberg-Wastljung, Ann-Christin
    [J]. ANNALS OF BOTANY, 2017, 120 (01) : 87 - 100
  • [2] Phenotypic integration does not constrain phenotypic plasticity: differential plasticity of traits is associated to their integration across environments
    Matesanz, Silvia
    Blanco-Sanchez, Mario
    Ramos-Munoz, Marina
    de la Cruz, Marcelino
    Benavides, Raquel
    Escudero, Adrian
    [J]. NEW PHYTOLOGIST, 2021, 231 (06) : 2359 - 2370
  • [3] Phenotypic plasticity and mechanical stress: biomass partitioning and clonal growth of an aquatic plant species
    Puijalon, Sara
    Bornette, Gudrun
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BOTANY, 2006, 93 (08) : 1090 - 1099
  • [4] Phenotypic plasticity in Populus trichocarpa clones across environments in the Nordic-Baltic region
    Ronnberg-Wastljung, Ann Christin
    Adler, Anneli
    Karacic, Almir
    Liepins, Kaspars
    Richards, Thomas J.
    Ingvarsson, Par K.
    Weih, Martin
    [J]. SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF FOREST RESEARCH, 2022, 37 (01) : 1 - 5
  • [5] Phenotypic plasticity across the species range of a Southern Ocean apex predator, the leopard seal
    Kienle, Sarah
    Borras-Chavez, Renato
    Bonin-Lewallen, Carolina
    Trumble, Stephen
    Sperou, Emily
    Crocker, Dan
    Goebel, Michael
    Kanatous, Shane
    LaBrecque, Erin
    van-der-Linde, Krista
    Costa, Dan
    [J]. INTEGRATIVE AND COMPARATIVE BIOLOGY, 2023, 63 : S240 - S240
  • [6] Temperature effects on radiation use and biomass partitioning in diverse tropical maize cultivars
    Lafitte, HR
    Edmeades, GO
    [J]. FIELD CROPS RESEARCH, 1997, 49 (2-3) : 231 - 247
  • [7] Phenotypic plasticity and carryover effects in an ecologically important bivalve in response to changing environments
    Alma, Lindsay
    Mcelhany, Paul
    Crim, Ryan N.
    Newton, Jan A.
    Maher, Michael
    Mickett, John B.
    Padilla-Gamino, Jacqueline L.
    [J]. FRONTIERS IN MARINE SCIENCE, 2024, 11
  • [8] np2QTL: networking phenotypic plasticity quantitative trait loci across heterogeneous environments
    Ye, Meixia
    Jiang, Libo
    Chen, Chixiang
    Zhu, Xuli
    Wang, Ming
    Wu, Rongling
    [J]. PLANT JOURNAL, 2019, 99 (04): : 796 - 806
  • [9] Grain yield, anthesis-silking interval, and phenotypic plasticity in response to changing environments: Evaluation in temperate maize hybrids
    Silva, Paola C.
    Sanchez, Andrea C.
    Opazo, Marcela A.
    Mardones, Luis A.
    Acevedo, Edmundo A.
    [J]. FIELD CROPS RESEARCH, 2022, 285
  • [10] Evaluating maize phenotypic variance, heritability, and yield relationships at multiple biological scales across agronomically relevant environments
    Tucker, Sarah L.
    Dohleman, Frank G.
    Grapov, Dmitry
    Flagel, Lex
    Yang, Sean
    Wegener, Kimberly M.
    Kosola, Kevin
    Swarup, Shilpa
    Rapp, Ryan A.
    Bedair, Mohamed
    Halls, Steven C.
    Glenn, Kevin C.
    Hall, Michael A.
    Allen, Edwards
    Rice, Elena A.
    [J]. PLANT CELL AND ENVIRONMENT, 2020, 43 (04): : 880 - 902