Quantitative genetic parameters for yield, plant growth and cone chemical traits in hop (Humulus lupulus L.)

BMC Genetics

Simon P Whittock¹  Anthony Koutoulis²  René E Vaillancourt²  Erin L McAdam² 

[1] Hop Products Australia, 26 Cambridge Road, Bellerive, TAS 7018, Australia;School of Biological Sciences, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 55 Hobart, TAS 7001, Australia

关键词: Quantitative genetics;    Dioecy;    Hop acid;    Genetic correlation;    Narrow-sense heritability;    Humulus lupulus L;   

Others  :  1085812
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2156-15-22

 received in 2013-11-11, accepted in 2014-02-11,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Most traits targeted in the genetic improvement of hop are quantitative in nature. Improvement based on selection of these traits requires a comprehensive understanding of their inheritance. This study estimated quantitative genetic parameters for 20 traits related to three key objectives for the genetic improvement of hop: cone chemistry, cone yield and agronomic characteristics.

Results

Significant heritable genetic variation was identified for α-acid and β-acid, as well as their components and relative proportions. Estimates of narrow-sense heritability for these traits (h² = 0.15 to 0.29) were lower than those reported in previous hop studies, but were based on a broader suite of families (108 from European, North American and hybrid origins). Narrow-sense heritabilities are reported for hop growth traits for the first time (h² = 0.04 to 0.20), relating to important agronomic characteristics such as emergence, height and lateral morphology. Cone chemistry and growth traits were significantly genetically correlated, such that families with more vigorous vegetative growth were associated with lower α-acid and β-acid levels. This trend may reflect the underlying population structure of founder genotypes (European and North American origins) as well as past selection in the Australian environment. Although male and female hop plants are thought to be indistinguishable until flowering, sex was found to influence variation in many growth traits, with male and female plants displaying differences in vegetative morphology from emergence to cone maturity.

Conclusions

This study reveals important insights into the genetic control of quantitative hop traits. The information gained will provide hop breeders with a greater understanding of the additive genetic factors which affect selection of cone chemistry, yield and agronomic characteristics in hop, aiding in the future development of improved cultivars.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 McAdam et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Falconer DS, Mackay TFC: Introduction to quantitative genetics. Harlow, UK: Longman; 1996.
• [2]Lynch M, Walsh B: Genetics and analysis of quantitative traits. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates Inc.; 1998.
• [3]Dudley JW, Moll RH: Interpretation and use of estimates of heritability and genetic variances in plant breeding. Crop Sci 1969, 9:257-262.
• [4]Parker JS, Clark MS: Dosage sex-chromosome systems in plants. Plant Sci 1991, 80:79-92.
• [5]Shephard HL, Parker JS, Darby P, Ainsworth CC: Sexual development and sex chromosomes in hop. New Phytol 2000, 148:397-411.
• [6]De Keukeleire D: Fundamentals of beer and hop chemistry. Quim Nova 2000, 23:108-112.
• [7]Oliveira MM, Pais MS: Glandular trichomes of Humulus lupulus var. Brewer’s gold (hops): ultrastructural aspects of peltate trichomes. J Submicrosc Cytol Pathol 1990, 22:241-248.
• [8]Menary RD, Doe PE: Some morphological and chemical changes in hops during maturation. J Sci Food Agric 1983, 34:921-929.
• [9]Neve RA: Hops. London, UK: Chapman and Hall; 1991.
• [10]Benitez JL, Forster A, De Keukeleire D, Moir M, Sharpe FR, Verhagen LC, Westwood KT: Hops and hop products. Nurenberg, Germany: Hans Carl-Verlag; 1997:975.
• [11]Van Cleemput M, Cattoor K, De Bosscher K, Haegeman G, De Keukeleire D, Heyerick A: Hop (Humulus lupulus)-derived bitter acids as multipotent bioactive compounds. J Nat Prod 2009, 72:1220-1230.
• [12]Shimwell JL: On the relation between staining properties of bacteria and their reaction towards hops antiseptic. J Inst Brew 1937, 43:111-118.
• [13]Hough JS, Howard GA, Slater CA: Bacteriostatic activities of hop resin materials. J Inst Brew 1957, 63:331-333.
• [14]Michener HD, Snell N, Jansen EF: Antifungal activity of hop resin constituents and a new method for isolation of lupulon. Arch Biochem Biophys 1948, 19:199-208.
• [15]Eri S, Khoo BK, Lech J, Hartman TG: Direct thermal desorption-gas chromatography and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry profiling of hop (Humulus lupulus L.) essential oils in support of varietal characterization. J Agric Food Chem 2000, 48:1140-1149.
• [16]Roberts MT, Dufour JP, Lewis AC: Application of comprehensive multidimensional gas chromatography combined with time-of-flight mass spectrometry (GC x GC-TOFMS) for high resolution analysis of hop essential oil. J Sep Sci 2004, 27:473-478.
• [17]Čeh B, Kač M, Košir IJ, Abram V: Relationships between xanthohumol and polyphenol content in hop leaves and hop cones with regard to water supply and cultivar. Int J Mol Sci 2007, 8:989-1000.
• [18]Sharpe FR, Laws RJ: The essential oil of hops a review. J Inst Brew 1981, 87:96-107.
• [19]Pavolovic V, Cerenak A, Pavolovic M, Kosir IJ, Rozman C, Bohanec M, Ceh B, Naglic B: Modelling of quality prediction for hops (Humulus lupulus L.) in relation to meteorological variables. BALWOIS conference proceedings; Ohrid, Republic of Macedonia 2010, 1-10.
• [20]Thomas GG, Schwabe WW: Factors controlling flowering in the hop (Humulus lupulus L.). Ann Bot 1969, 33:781-793.
• [21]Delyser DY, Kasper WJ: Hopped beer: the case for cultivation. Econ Bot 1994, 48:166-170.
• [22]Small E: A numerical and nomenclatural analysis of morpho-geographic taxa of Humulus. Syst Bot 1978, 3:37-76.
• [23]Moir M: Hops - a millennium review. J Am Soc Brew Chem 2000, 58:131-146.
• [24]Henning JA, Townsend MS: Field-based estimates of heritability and genetic correlations in hop. Crop Sci 2005, 45:1469-1475.
• [25]Henning J, Haunold A, Nickerson G: Genetic parameter estimates for five traits in male hop accesssions: a preliminary study. J Am Soc Brew Chem 1997, 55:157-160.
• [26]Henning J, Haunold A, Nickerson G, Gampert U: Estimates of heritability and genetic correlation for five traits in female hop accessions. J Am Soc Brew Chem 1997, 55:161-165.
• [27]Beatson RA, Alspach PA: The use of empirical breeding values to improve genetic progress in hops. Acta Hortic (ISHS) 2008, 848:93-100.
• [28]Keller KR, Likens ST: Estimates of heritability in hop, Humulus lupulus L. Agron J 1955, 47:518-512.
• [29]Roberts DD, Kronstad WE, Haunold A: Genetic variability and association of maturity, yield, and quality characteristics of female hops. Crop Sci 1980, 20:523-527.
• [30]Kralj D, Haunold A: The breeding potential of native hops (Humulus lupulus L.) from Yugoslavia. Monatsschrift Brauwiss 1987, 40:287-293.
• [31]Murakami A: Inheritance of major chemical components in hops. J Inst Brew 1999, 105:107-111.
• [32]Hautke P, Petřiček D: Inheritance of biochemical characteristics in hops - report of a brief study. Wallerstein Comm 1967, 30:135-138.
• [33]Farrar RF, Neve RA, Weston EW: Inheritance of resin characters in hops. In Wye College Department of Hop Research Annual Report. Kent, England, Wye College; 1955:52-59.
• [34]Nesvadba V, Černy J, Krofta K: Transfer fo the hop (Humulus lupulus L.) alpha-bitter acid content to progenies of F1 and I1 generations in selected parental components. Plant Soil Environ 2003, 49:269-276.
• [35]Brooks SN: Effectiveness of selection within Fuggle hops (Humulus lupulus L.). Crop Sci 1962, 2:5-10.
• [36]Versluys JP: Choice of male and female parents of seedling populations of hops in relation to the alpha-acid content and the time fo ripening in the female progeny. J Inst Brew 1969, 75:25-26.
• [37]Likens ST, Nickerson GB, Haunold A, Zimmermann CE: Relationship between alpha acids, beta acids and lupulin content of hops. Crop Sci 1978, 17:380-386.
• [38]Brooks SN: Associaton of quality characters in flowers of male hops. Crop Sci 1962, 2:192-196.
• [39]Brooks SN, Likens ST: Variability of morphological and chemical quality characters in flowers of male hops. Crop Sci 1962, 2:189-196.
• [40]Hill WG: Understanding and using quantitative genetic variation. Phil Trans R Soc B 2010, 365:73-85.
• [41]Perron M, DeBlois J, Desponts M: Use of resampling to assess optimal subgroup composition for estimating genetic parameters from progeny trials. Tree Genet Genomes 2013, 9:129-143.
• [42]McAdam E, Freeman J, Whittock S, Buck E, Jakse J, Cerenak A, Javornik B, Kilian A, Wang C-H, Andersen D, Vaillancourt R, Carling J, Beatson R, Graham L, Graham D, Darby P, Koutoulis A: Quantitative trait loci in hop (Humulus lupulus L.) reveal complex genetic architecture underlying variation in sex, yield and cone chemistry. BMC Genomics 2013, 14:360. BioMed Central Full Text
• [43]Koie K, Inaba A, Okada I, Kaneko T, Ito K: Construction of the genetic linkage map and QTL analysis on hop (Humulus lupulus L.). Acta Hortic (ISHS) 2005, 668:59-66.
• [44]Cerenak A, Satovic Z, Jakse J, Luthar Z, Carovic-Stanko K, Javornik B: Identification of QTLs for alpha acid content and yield in hop (Humulus lupulus L.). Euphytica 2009, 170:141-154.
• [45]Henning JA, Townsend MS, Gent DH, Bassil N, Matthews P, Buck E, Beatson R: QTL mapping of powdery mildew susceptibility in hop (Humulus lupulus L.). Euphytica 2011, 180:411-420.
• [46]Patzak J, Henychova A, Krofta K, Nesvadba V: Study of molecular markers for xanthohumol and DMX contents in hop (Humulus lupulus L.) by QTLs mapping analysis. Brew Sci 2012, 65:96-102.
• [47]Seefelder S, Lutz A, Seigner E: Development of molecular markers for powdery mildew resistance to support breeding for high quality hops. Monatsschrift Brauwiss 2006, 59:100-104.
• [48]O’Reilly-Wapstra JM, McArthur C, Potts BM: Linking plant genotype, plant defensive chemistry and mammal browsing in a Eucalyptus species. Funct Ecol 2004, 18:677-684.
• [49]Moore BD, Foley WJ: Tree use by koalas in a chemically complex landscape. Nature 2005, 435:488-490.
• [50]Jakše J, Kindlhofer K, Javornik B: Assessment of genetic variation and differentiation of hop genotypes by microsatellite and AFLP markers. Genome 2001, 44:773-782.
• [51]Murakami A, Darby P, Javornik B, Pais MSS, Seigner E, Lutz A, Svoboda P: Molecular phylogeny of wild hops, Humulus lupulus L. Heredity 2006, 97:66-74.
• [52]Murphey JM, Probasco G: The development of brewing quality characteristics in hops during maturation. Tech Q Master Brew Assoc Am 1996, 33:149-159.
• [53]Bassil NV, Gilmore B, Oliphant JM, Hummer KE, Henning JA: Genic SSRs for European and North American hop (Humulus lupulus L.). Genet Resour Crop Evol 2008, 55:959-969.
• [54]Henning JA, Steiner JJ, Hummer KE: Genetic diversity among world hop accessions grown in the USA. Crop Sci 2004, 44:411-417.
• [55]Jakše J, Satovic Z, Javornik B: Microsatellite variability among wild and cultivated hops (Humulus lupulus L.). Genome 2004, 47:889-899.
• [56]Murakami A, Darby P, Javornik B, Pais MSS, Seigner E, Lutz A, Svoboda P: Microsatellite DNA analysis of wild hops, Humulus lupulus L. Genet Resour Crop Evol 2006, 53:1553-1562.
• [57]Patzak J, Nesvadba V, Krofta K, Henychová A, Inalovic M, Richards K: Evaluation of genetic variability of wild hops (Humulus lupulus L.) in Canada and Caucasus region by chemical and molecular methods. Genome 2010, 53:545-557.
• [58]Peredo EL, Revilla MÁ, Reed BM, Javornik B, Cires E, Prieto JAF, Arroyo-García R: The influence of European and American wild germplasm in hop (Humulus lupulus L.) cultivars. Genet Resour Crop Evol 2010, 57:575-586.
• [59]Stajner N, Satovic Z, Cerenak A, Javornik B: Genetic structure and differentiation in hop (Humulus lupulus L.) as inferred from microsatellites. Euphytica 2008, 161:301-311.
• [60]Šuštar-Vozlič J, Javornik B: Genetic relationships in cultivars of hop, Humulus lupulus L., determined by RAPD analysis. Plant Breed 1999, 118:175-181.
• [61]Howard EL, Whittock SP, Jakše J, Carling J, Matthews PD, Probasco G, Henning JA, Darby P, Cerenak A, Javornik B, Kilian A, Koutoulis A: High-throughput genotyping of hop (Humulus lupulus L.) utilising diversity arrays technology (DArT). Theor Appl Genet 2011, 122:1265-1280.
• [62]Steane DA, Conod N, Jones RC, Vaillancourt RE, Potts BM: A comparative analysis of population structure of a forest tree, Eucalyptus globulus (Myrtaceae), using microsatellite markers and quantitative traits. Tree Genet Genomes 2006, 2:30-38.
• [63]Dawson T, Geber M: Sexual dimorphism in physiology and morphology. In Gender and sexual dimorphism in flowering plants. New York: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg; 1999:175-210.
• [64]Dzhaparidze L: Sex in plants, part II. Biochemical and physiological sex differences in dioecious plants: problem of influencing sex formation. Jerusalem: IPST Press; 1969.
• [65]Charlesworth D, Willis JH: The genetics of inbreeding depression. Nat Rev Genet 2009, 10:783-796.
• [66]Duvick DN: Biotechnology in the 1930s: the development of hybrid maize. Nat Rev Genet 2001, 2:69-74.
• [67]Patzak J, Nesvadba V, Henychová A, Krofta K: Assessment of the genetic diversity of wild hops (Humulus lupulus L.) in Europe using chemical and molecular analyses. Biochem Syst Ecol 2010, 38:136-145.
• [68]Krofta K: Comparison of quality parameters of Czech and foreign hop varieties. Plant Soil Environ 2003, 49:261-268.
• [69]Rigby FL: A theory on the hop flavour of beer. Proc Am Soc Brew Chem 1972, 46:46-50.
• [70]Meilgaard M: Hop analysis, cohumulone factor and the bitterness of beer: review and critical evaluation. J Inst Brew 1960, 66:35-50.
• [71]Wackerbauer K, Balzer U: Hop bitter compounds in beer, part II: the influence of cohumulone on beer quality. BRAUWELT Int 1993, 11:116-118.
• [72]Kollmannsberger H, Biendl M, Nitz S: Occurence of glycosidically bound flavour compounds in hops, hop products and beer. Monatsschrift Brauwiss 2006, 5:83-89.
• [73]Takoi K, Koie K, Itoga Y, Katayama Y, Shimase M, Nakayama Y, Watari J: Biotransformation of hop-derived monoterpene alcohols by lager yeast and their contribution to the flavor of hopped beer. J Agric Food Chem 2010, 58:5050-5058.
• [74]Lande R, Arnold SJ: The measurement of selection on correlated characters. Evolution 1983, 37:1210-1226.
• [75]Patterson HD, Williams ER: A new class of resolvable incomplete block designs. Biometrika 1976, 63:83-92.
• [76]Roborgh RHJ: Classification and botanical description of imported varieties of hops in Nelson, New Zealand. New Zeal J Bot 1964, 2:10-18.
• [77]Homer CE, Brooks SN, Haunold A, Likens ST: Registration of hop germplasm (Reg. No. GP 2 to 4). Crop Sci 1974, 14:341-341.
• [78]Zimmermann CE, Likens ST, Haunold A, Horner CE, Roberts DD: Registration of Comet hop (Reg. No. 3). Crop Sci 1975, 15:98-98.
• [79]Haunold A, Likens ST, Nickerson GB, Horner CE, Hampton RO: Registration of USDA 63015 M male hop germplasm (Reg. No. GP 14). Crop Sci 1983, 23:600-601.
• [80]Neve RA, Darby P: Yeoman and Zenith: two new varieties. In Wye College Department of Hop Research Annual Report. Kent, England, Wye College; 1984:39-44.
• [81]Kenny ST, Zimmermann CE: Registration of 'Chinook’ hop. Crop Sci 1986, 26:196-197.
• [82]Miyata J: Qualities and ancestry of prominent hop varieties. Brewer Distiller Int 1994, 24-27.
• [83]Patzak J: Characterization of Czech hop (Humulus lupulus L.) genotypes by molecular methods. Rost Výroba 2002, 48:343-350.
• [84]Reed BM: In vitro storage of hop (Humulus L.) germplasm. Acta Hortic (ISHS) 2005, 668:249-256.
• [85]Simply Hops 2012. http://www.simplyhops.co.uk webcite
• [86]Oregon State University High Alpha Acid Breeding Program: Freshops USDA named hop variety descriptions. 2012. http://www.freshops.com/hops/usda-named-hop-variety-descriptions webcite
• [87]USDA ARS: Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN). Beltsville, Maryland: National Germplasm Resources Laboratory; 2012. http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/index.pl webcite
• [88]Gilmour AR, Gogel BJ, Cullis BR, Thompson R: ASReml user guide release 3.0.. Hemel Hempstead, HP1 1ES, UK: VSN International LtdVSN International Ltd; 2009.
• [89]Gilmour AR: ASREML for testing fixed effects and estimating multiple trait variance components. Proc Adv Anim Breed Gen 1997, 12:386-390.
• [90]Gosset WS: The probable error or a mean. Biometrika 1908, VI:1-25. 'Student’