Submitted to: Crop Science
Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal
Publication Acceptance Date: 6/25/1997
Publication Date: N/A
Citation: N/A Interpretive Summary: Soybean mosaic virus is one of the most common soybean viruses and can cause economic losses. The best way of controlling this virus disease is through genetic resistance. The objectives of this research were to determine how the resistance in four soybean varieties from China was inherited and to determine if the resistance in these varieties can be used to improve the resistance in U.S varieties. The resistance in each Chinese variety is controlled by a single gene. That means it would be quite simple for soybean breeders to transfer these resistances to new varieties. Two of the resistances are similar to ones that have already been discovered. The resistances in the other varieties are different for the most common resistances. These results are important to soybean breeders because these new genes could be used to develop new varieties that would be resistant to more strains of the soybean mosaic virus than is currently possible.
Technical Abstract: Soybean mosaic virus is one of the most common soybean viruses and can cause economic losses. The objective of this research was to determine the inheritance of resistance to SMV-G1 in four soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] cultivars from China. Each cultivar was crossed to the susceptible cultivar Williams and to lines with known sources of resistance genes to test for allelism. The crosses were evaluated in the F2 and F3 generations in the field and in the greenhouse for reaction to inoculation with SMV-G1. Results showed that each of the Chinese cultivars has a single dominant gene for resistance to SMV-G1. The resistance gene carried by Feng shou huang (PI 458.507) is at the Rsv1 locus. The resistance gene in Ke feng No. 1 (PI 556.949) is at the non-Rsv1 locus in PI 486.355. The resistance gene carried by Da bai ma (PI 556.948) is not at the Rsv1 locus. The resistance gene in Xu dou No. 1 (PI 556.950) are at neither the Rsv1 locus nor the non-Rsv1 locus in PI 486.355.