1,576
Views
10
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Genetic Resources Evaluation

Effects of yield-related QTLs SPIKE and GPS in two indica rice genetic backgrounds

, , , , , & show all
Pages 467-476 | Received 27 Jan 2017, Accepted 02 Sep 2017, Published online: 12 Oct 2017

Figures & data

Figure 1. Graphical genotypes of Takanari, NIL-GPS, IR 64, NIL-SPIKE, and SL2115. White bars, Takanari; black bars, Koshihikari; light gray bars, IR 64; dark gray bars, Daringan.

Figure 1. Graphical genotypes of Takanari, NIL-GPS, IR 64, NIL-SPIKE, and SL2115. White bars, Takanari; black bars, Koshihikari; light gray bars, IR 64; dark gray bars, Daringan.

Figure 2. Gene structure and mutation sites of NAL1 in Takanari, IR 64, Koshihikari, and Daringan. Gray bars represent exons; white bars represent 5′- and 3′-untranslated regions.

Figure 2. Gene structure and mutation sites of NAL1 in Takanari, IR 64, Koshihikari, and Daringan. Gray bars represent exons; white bars represent 5′- and 3′-untranslated regions.

Figure 3. (A) Mean temperature and (B) solar radiation during the rice growth period measured in the experimental field.

Figure 3. (A) Mean temperature and (B) solar radiation during the rice growth period measured in the experimental field.

Table 1. Days-to-heading and growth duration in five cultivars in 2014 and 2015.

Table 2. Yield and yield components in five cultivars in 2014 and 2015.

Table 3. Correlation coefficient (Pearson’s r) between brown rice yield and the three yield components.

Figure 4. Change of (A, B) leaf area index (LAI) in 2014 and (C–E) chlorophyll content (as the SPAD value) in the topmost fully expanded leaves in (C, D) 2014 and (E) 2015 in five cultivars. *** shows p < .001 by student’s t test between the parent and its NIL in 2014 and in the Takanari background in 2015. Different letter shows p < .05 by Tukey’s test among IR 64, NIL-SPIKE, and SL2115 in 2015. n.s. shows not significant.

Figure 4. Change of (A, B) leaf area index (LAI) in 2014 and (C–E) chlorophyll content (as the SPAD value) in the topmost fully expanded leaves in (C, D) 2014 and (E) 2015 in five cultivars. *** shows p < .001 by student’s t test between the parent and its NIL in 2014 and in the Takanari background in 2015. Different letter shows p < .05 by Tukey’s test among IR 64, NIL-SPIKE, and SL2115 in 2015. n.s. shows not significant.

Figure 5. Change of total dry weight in (A, B) 2014 and (C) 2015 in five cultivars. n.s. shows not significant by student’s t test between the parent and its NIL in 2014 and in the Takanari background in 2015, and by Tukey’s test among IR 64, NIL-SPIKE, and SL2115 in 2015.

Figure 5. Change of total dry weight in (A, B) 2014 and (C) 2015 in five cultivars. n.s. shows not significant by student’s t test between the parent and its NIL in 2014 and in the Takanari background in 2015, and by Tukey’s test among IR 64, NIL-SPIKE, and SL2115 in 2015.

Figure 6. Relationship between total dry weight at heading and the number of spikelets m−2 among five cultivars. Dashed lines indicate production of stated spikelets per unit dry weight. Data from 2014 to 2015 are combined.

Figure 6. Relationship between total dry weight at heading and the number of spikelets m−2 among five cultivars. Dashed lines indicate production of stated spikelets per unit dry weight. Data from 2014 to 2015 are combined.