Submitted to: Rice Technical Working Group Meeting Proceedings
Publication Type: Proceedings
Publication Acceptance Date: 2/8/2002
Publication Date: 6/1/2002
Citation: PINSON, S.R., FJELLSTROM, R.G., BERGMAN, C.J., GRIMM, C.C., CHAMPAGNE, E.T. INHERITANCE OF AROMA: MARKERS HELP TO DISTINGUISH FACT FROM ARTIFACT. RICE TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP MEETING PROCEEDINGS. 2002. p. 54.
Technical Abstract: Current increases in domestic consumption of rice is largely driven by increased demand for soft-cooking, aromatic rice. Jasmine 85 was released in 1989 to fill that market but its marketability is limited due to reduced aromatic intensity. Previous research indicated that Dragon Eyeball 100 from China contains a novel aroma gene in addition to the gene already utilized in US varieties that is known to be linked to the RFLP marker RG28. This study aimed at molecularly tagging the novel gene in DG100 in order to enhance breeders attempts to incorporate it into improved US varieties. We began with marker development because RG28 was not polymorphic in our target population which was comprised of 154 recombinant inbred lines derived from the same Rosemont/DG100 F2 plants whose prior analysis had indicated the presence of two aroma genes. DNA for molecular analysis was extracted from leaves harvested from F8 field plots. Seed samples from these same replicated plots were analyzed for aromatic phenotype in three ways: 1) rated aromatic/not according to smell after KOH treatment, 2) rated aromatic/not according to a rapid evaluation of 2AP content, and 3) a subset of RILs was selected for more precise measurement of 2AP concentration. The segregation ratios of the smell ratings supported the previous determination that DG100 contained two aroma genes. Analysis of rapid 2AP ratings suggested either 1 or 2 aroma genes. When data were corrected using molecular results to eliminate heterozygous aromatic progeny, they clearly indicated the presence of only one aroma gene in DG100. The previous appearance of a second aroma gene in DG100 was an artifact caused by non-random inheritance of fgr1. Molecular marker data was critical to clarifying the inheritance of aroma in DG100.