genotype and growth stage effects on heat stress
TRANSCRIPT
Genotype and Growth Stage Effects on Heat
Stress Susceptibility in Wheat
Henry M Barber Monogram 2016
Twitter: @henrybarber
Henry Barber – Monogram 2016
Heat Stress
Grain set failure in field grown UK wheat (but modified environment) associated with days above 30oC, during the five days before anthesis
Ferris R et al. 1998. Effect of high temperature stress at anthesis on grain yield and biomass of field-grown crops of wheat. Annals of Botany 82, 631-639.
Temperature at flowering (oC)
15 20 25 30 35 40
Gra
in y
ield
rela
tive t
o m
axim
um
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Savannah
6 June
2010
Alghabari et al (2014) Effect of
Rht alleles on the tolerance of
wheat grain set to high
temperature and drought
stress during booting and
anthesis. Journal of Agronomy
and Crop Science 200, 36-45.
Effect of 3- day pot transfers
Henry Barber – Monogram 2016
Susceptible Timings • Experiment in Rice:
SATAKE, T. & YOSHIDA, H. 1978. High
Temperature-Induced Sterility in Indica Rices
at Flowering. Japan Journal of Crop Science,
47, 6-17.
CRAUFURD, P. Q., VADEZ, V., JAGADISH, S.
V. K., PRASAD, P. V. V. & ZAMAN-ALLAH, M.
2013. Crop Science experiments designed to
inform crop modeling. Agricultural and Forest
Meteorology, 170, 8-18.
Henry Barber – Monogram 2016
DH Population
• Savannah (Rht-D1b + 1BL/1RS) x Renesansa (Ppd-D1a x Rht8)
• 62 lines genotyped at JIC
Henry Barber – Monogram 2016
Savannah (Rht-D1b + 1BL/1RS) x Renesansa (Ppd-D1a x Rht8)
BARBER, H. M., GOODING, M. J. & SEMENOV, M. A. 2014.
Improving modelling of wheat responses to high temperature
stress under climate change. European Society of Agronomy
13th Congress. Debrecen, Hungary: European Society of
Agronomy.
Henry Barber – Monogram 2016
Project Overview
• Year 1:
• Heat stress trial on DH parents focussing on timing of stress
• Smaller Experiment on Paragon NILs
• Year 2:
• Heat Stress Trial on all DH population
• Most susceptible GS’s
• Assess for tolerance to HS
Henry Barber – Monogram 2016
Identifying the susceptible timings
Stress Treatment
Control Treatment Spikelet weight
data,
Grain yield data
to be published. Published in:
BARBER, H. M., CARNEY, J.,
ALGHABARI, F. & GOODING, M.
J. 2015. Decimal growth stages for
precision wheat production in
changing environments? Annals of
Applied Biology, 166, 355-371.
Henry Barber – Monogram 2016
Comparing the two Parents
• Significant effects on grain number
• Some grain size compensation at booting, especially
from Savannah
• Parents most susceptible at different stages
• Clear differences in response at anthesis
• Double Gaussian data relative to GS65 to be published.
Henry Barber – Monogram 2016
Was it Rht8 Effects? • 5 timings in experiment
• Significant effects on grain number at booting and early
flowering
• Temperature x timing effects
• No significant effect of Rht8 on response
• Paragon NILs comparison comparing rht8, described in:
KOWALSKI, A. M., et al. 2016. Agronomic
assessment of the wheat semi-dwarfing gene Rht8
in contrasting nitrogen treatments and water
regimes. Field Crops Research.
Henry Barber – Monogram 2016
Comparing the whole population • 3 timings in experiment: Early booting, Mid Booting, onset
of anthesis
• Significant variation in fertility response to high
temperature between genotypes
• Interactions with GS within each timing
• Allele effects at anthesis of Ppd-D1 and Rht-D1
• QTL analysis to be conducted
• Results published in near future
Henry Barber – Monogram 2016
Key Points
• Double dip response seen
• Very discrete differences in HS response due to GS
• This response influenced by genotype
• Both timings need stress when comparing different genotypes
• Grain Size compensation variable due to genotype and
environment.
• Grain Number rather than yield needs to be studied
• No evidence Rht8 increases tolerance to heat stress
• Ppd-D1 and Rht-D1 influence fertility response at anthesis
Henry Barber – Monogram 2016
Future Work
• Why are these effects around anthesis but not at meiosis?
• Why does Ppd-D1 and Rht-D1 cause differences in
response?
• Large variation in response in DH population
• Find out why unexplained variation occurred- QTL?
• Crop Modelling?
Henry Barber – Monogram 2016
Thanks for Listening! • Acknowledgements:
• Mike Gooding, Martin Lukac, Mikhail Semenov
• BBSRC and the University of Reading
• Caroline Hadley, Liam Doherty, Richard Casebow, Laurence Hansen
• Richard Kino, Christina Clarke, Sam Leigh, Jacob Bishop, Pete Mark,
Peter Jackson, Mike Garratt