Comparison of two methods of reciprocal recurrent selection in maize (Zea mays L.)

被引:21
|
作者
Ordas, B. [1 ]
Butron, A. [1 ]
Alvarez, A. [2 ]
Revilla, P. [1 ]
Malvar, R. A. [1 ]
机构
[1] CSIC, Mision Biol Galicia, POB 28, Pontevedra 36080, Spain
[2] CSIC, Estn Expt Aula Dei, Zaragoza 50059, Spain
关键词
EUROPEAN CORN-BORER; GENETIC-DIVERSITY; HALF-SIB; RESISTANCE; FULL; POPULATIONS;
D O I
10.1007/s00122-011-1778-2
中图分类号
S3 [农学(农艺学)];
学科分类号
0901 ;
摘要
Reciprocal recurrent selection (RRS) was proposed for simultaneously improving two populations and their cross. A modification of the classical full-sib RRS (FS-RRS) was proposed in which the performance of full-sibs and S-2 families is combined in a selection index (FS-S-2-RRS). The Mediterranean corn borer (MCB) is the main corn borer species in the Mediterranean and adjacent areas and produces important yield losses. We started two RRS programs (FS-RRS and FS-S-2-RRS) from the same maize population in which the selection criterion was grain yield under artificial infestation with MCB eggs. Original populations, two cycles of selection derived from them by both RRS methods, and population crosses were evaluated under MCB attack and under insecticide treatment in three different environments. The objective was to compare the efficiency of the FS-RRS and the FS-S-2-RRS methods for improving grain yield. We found that the FS-S-2-RRS method was successful for improving the yield of the population cross under optimum conditions (the regression coefficient over cycles was b = 0.87** Mg ha(-1) cycle(-1)) without losing yield under high pressure of MCB attack (b = 0.07). On the contrary, FS-RRS failed to improve the yield of the population cross under optimum conditions (b = 0.65) and tended to decrease the yield under high levels of MCB attack (b = -0.26). We conclude that for developing high yielding and stable varieties, FS-S-2-RRS is more efficient than the classical FS-RRS method.
引用
收藏
页码:1183 / 1191
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Using new methods in conventional breeding of maize (Zea mays L.)
    Pepo, P
    CEREAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS, 2004, 32 (04) : 485 - 492
  • [22] Comparison of American and European maize (Zea mays L.) protein profiles
    Spalekova, Andrea
    Galova, Zdenka
    JOURNAL OF CENTRAL EUROPEAN AGRICULTURE, 2018, 19 (02): : 453 - 465
  • [23] Maximizing the Reliability of Genomic Selection by Optimizing the Calibration Set of Reference Individuals: Comparison of Methods in Two Diverse Groups of Maize Inbreds (Zea mays L.)
    Rincent, R.
    Laloe, D.
    Nicolas, S.
    Altmann, T.
    Brunel, D.
    Revilla, P.
    Rodriguez, V. M.
    Moreno-Gonzalez, J.
    Melchinger, A.
    Bauer, E.
    Schoen, C-C
    Meyer, N.
    Giauffret, C.
    Bauland, C.
    Jamin, P.
    Laborde, J.
    Monod, H.
    Flament, P.
    Charcosset, A.
    Moreau, L.
    GENETICS, 2012, 192 (02) : 715 - +
  • [24] Safeners for chlorsulfuron on maize (Zea mays L.)
    Stoilkova, Gergana
    Yonova, Petranka
    QUALITY ASSURANCE AND SAFETY OF CROPS & FOODS, 2010, 2 (01) : 28 - 35
  • [25] Dwarf mutants of maize (Zea mays L.)
    Cheng, VC
    Cheng, WY
    Cheng, PC
    Walden, DB
    SCANNING, 2005, 27 (02) : 81 - 82
  • [26] Efficiency of Index-Based Selection Methods for Stem Borer Resistance in Maize (Zea mays L.)
    Oloyede-Kamiyo Q.O.
    Journal of Crop Science and Biotechnology, 2019, 22 (3) : 205 - 211
  • [27] THE MAIZE (Zea mays L.) AND THE MAYAN CULTURE
    Lopez Mazon, Sylvia Lorenia
    Garcia Navarrete, Gilberto
    Ibarra Gutierrez, Brenda Natalia
    BIOTECNIA, 2012, 14 (03): : 3 - 8
  • [28] Heterosis breeding in maize (Zea mays L.)
    Patel, C. G.
    Patel, D. B.
    Prajapati, N. D.
    Patel, M. D.
    Patel, K. R.
    RESEARCH ON CROPS, 2010, 11 (02) : 429 - 431
  • [29] Induced heterofertilization in maize (Zea mays L.)
    Kraptchev, B
    Kruleva, M
    Dankov, T
    MAYDICA, 2003, 48 (04): : 271 - 273
  • [30] PERFORMANCE OF MAIZE IDEOTYPES (Zea mays L.) IN TWO PLANT DENSITIES
    Hidalgo-Sanchez, Marlen G.
    Gonzalez-Hernandez, Victor A.
    Mendoza-Onofre, Leopoldo E.
    Cruz-Huerta, Nicacio
    Ramirez-Ramirez, Ivan
    AGROCIENCIA, 2020, 54 (04) : 491 - 504