S5.2  Combining Ability among 19 Inbred Lines of Quality protein Maize in Vietnam Converted from Normal Maize Inbred Lines by Conventioal Backcrossing and Double Haploid Anther Culture Technqiues
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

S5.2 Combining Ability among 19 Inbred Lines of Quality protein Maize in Vietnam Converted from Normal Maize Inbred Lines by Conventioal Backcrossing and Double Haploid Anther Culture Technqiues

on

  • 1,477 views

Presentacion de 11th Asian Maize Conference which took place in Beijing, China from November 7 – 11, 2011.

Presentacion de 11th Asian Maize Conference which took place in Beijing, China from November 7 – 11, 2011.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,477
Views on SlideShare
1,394
Embed Views
83

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
16
Comments
0

1 Embed 83

http://conferences.cimmyt.org 83

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-ShareAlike License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

S5.2  Combining Ability among 19 Inbred Lines of Quality protein Maize in Vietnam Converted from Normal Maize Inbred Lines by Conventioal Backcrossing and Double Haploid Anther Culture Technqiues S5.2 Combining Ability among 19 Inbred Lines of Quality protein Maize in Vietnam Converted from Normal Maize Inbred Lines by Conventioal Backcrossing and Double Haploid Anther Culture Technqiues Presentation Transcript

  • Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development of Vietnam VIETNAM ACADEMY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES (VAAS)Combining Ability among 19 Inbred Lines of Quality protein Maize in VietnamConverted from Normal Maize Inbred Lines by Conventioal Backcrossing and Double Haploid Anther Culture Technqiues Le Quy Kha, Chau Ngoc Ly and Bui Manh Cuong NMRI 229 Nguyen Thai Hoc Street, Dan Phuong district, Ha Noi, Vietnam HA NOI - 2011 National Maize Research Institute of Vietnam (NMRI)
  • 1. Introduction Vietnam has difficulties to reach over 1.3 million ha of maize, due tostrong competition with other crops as cassava, rubber and sugar cane.Therefore, it is highly necessary to meet demand (>7 m tones by 2015) by:1) enhancing productivity of normal maize and2) developing QPM. The second way has been cooperated with CIMMYT (1999 – 2005), released HQ2000.However, the hybrid still had a high rate of ear rot (10-15%) and rather low yield (5-6 tones ha-1), compared to normal hybrid LVN10 (6-7 tones ha-1).Since 1999-2007, NMRI imported hundreds QPM lines from CIMMYT. But percentage of usable lines was only 1-2 %.Therefore, since 2004 – now, conversion of adapted normal inbred lines into QPM by both conventional method and double haploid anther culture has been investigated with a view to developing new QPM hybrids for production
  • 2. Materials and methods2.1. Materials a. Table 1. List of 19 QPM lines No Inbred lines Origin Pedigree Developed by Group I: QPM lines imported from CIMMYT before 2002 1 CDVA16 CIMMYT Mexico CML165 x CL-02839 - B-12-1 Imported from CIMMYT. 2001 2 CML161/422 CIMMYT Mexico CML161/CML422 Imported from CIMMYT. 2001 CML161 (CML161 – 3 Chk1 CIMMYT Mexico G25Qc18MH520 Imported from CIMMYT. 1998 4 HL5(CML165 –Chk 2) CIMMYT Mexico Pob66c1HC144 Imported from CIMMYT. 1998 Group II: New QPM lines developed by conventional backcrossing 5 Q10 NMRI (LCH9 x 24F) Backcross 6 Q11 NMRI (LCH9 x CML161)/24F Backcross 7 Q18 NMRI (CML165 x 24F) Backcross 8 Q21 NMRI (LCH9 x CML161) Backcross Group III. New QPM lines developed by double haploid anther culture 9 KQ7 NMRI (CML161 x Normal lines) x AC24 - Responsive Double haploid anther culture 10 V57 NMRI (CML161 x Normal lines) x AC24 - Responsive Double haploid anther culture 11 V59 NMRI (CML161 x Normal lines) x AC24 - Responsive Double haploid anther culture 12 V63 NMRI (CML161 x Normal lines) x AC24 - Responsive Double haploid anther culture 13 V64 NMRI (CML161 x Normal lines) x AC24 - Responsive Double haploid anther culture 14 V66 NMRI (CML161 x Normal lines) x AC24 - Responsive Double haploid anther culture 15 V68 NMRI (CML161 x Normal lines) x AC24 - Responsive Double haploid anther culture 16 V72 NMRI (CML161 x Normal lines) x AC24 - Responsive Double haploid anther culture 17 V79 NMRI (CML161 x Normal lines) x AC24 - Responsive Double haploid anther culture 18 V181 NMRI (CML161 x Normal lines) x AC24 - Responsive Double haploid anther culture 19 V152 NMRI (CML161 x Normal lines) x AC24 - Responsive Double haploid anther culture
  • The methods of conversion of adapted normal inbred lines into QPM by both - conventional backcrossing and - double haploid anther culture were presented in a paper in proceeding of the 10 Asian Maize Workshop, Indonesia
  • 2. Materials and methods (Continued)b. Evaluation of topcrosses and diallel crosses Check: HQ2000 (Previous QPM hybrid) C919 (Normal – Monsanto)c. Hybrids involved in yield stability analysis Depends on national maize hybrid testing networkd. Hybrid for quality protein analysis HQ2000, LVN154 (New QPM hybrid), C919 (Normal - Monsanto).
  • 2. Materials and methods (Continued)2.2. Contents - Determined opaque-2 gene in the new QPM nurseries - Evaluated agronomical traits and combining ability of the new QPM nurseries - Evaluated agronomical traits and heterosis of topcrosses and diallel crosses - Evaluated potential and factual yield of new QPM hybrids2.3. Locations and time for research2.3.1. Location: breeding at NMRI, testing in different sites in the North,and over the country for commercial production.2.3.2. Time: 2007 – 2010
  • 2.4. Methods2.4.1. Determined opaque –2 gene, genetic diversity of QPM lines applying SSRmarkers by guidelines of AMBIONET2.4.2. Determined opaque –2 applying light table technique (Vasal -2002),evaluation of lines and their topcrosses/diallel crosses (Field Guide forInternational Progeny Testing (IPTT) and Elite Variety (EVT) Trials(CIMMYT, 1986),2.4.4. Analysed of GCA and SCA by NMRI software (Nguyen Dinh Hien, 1996)2.4.5. Calculated heterosis by Omarov formular (1975)2.4.6. New hybrid testing with accordance to proceedure of 10 TCN - 341 - 2006Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development of VN (MARD)2.4.7. Yield stability analysis by model of Ebehart & Russell (1966).2.4.8. Quality protein analysis applying protocol of CIMMYT
  • 2.5. Data collection and analysis- Plant heigh, ear height uniformity (CV%) .- Variance of yield, LSD0.05, CV% of yield trials by IRISTAT5.0.-Hmp, Hs calculated based on yield of topcrosses compared tothat of parents and checks.- GCA and SCA of yield and yeld stability analysis by NMRIsoftware (Nguyen Dinh Hien, 1996).
  • Results and Discussion. Results of determining opaque-2 gene by SSR markers3.1. g1 g2 g1 g2 Phi057 Phi112 Phi057 is correlated to Phi112 is correlated to reccessive o2, which line does dominant O2, which line not appear the band with g1 is appears the band with g2 normal one. is normal one
  • Fig. 1. Result of determining opaque-2 by light table Normal line Clear kernel texture
  • Fig. 2. Genetic distance of 19 new QPM lines based on 20 SSR markers (Spring 2008) CML165 QL1 V68 QL10 V57 QL12 I V79 QL4 V72 QL9 V63 QL6 V64 QL14 C131 QL18 CML161 V152 is differrent from the QL7 II CDVA16 QL8 rest at coefficient of 0.81; QL10MW V66 QL17 CML161/422 QL20 KQ7 QL2 At 0.62, the rest lines are TCH1 QL3 Q10 divided in to 3 groups (I, II, QL15 Q11 III III). QL13 Q21 QL16 Q18 QL5 V181 QL11 V152 QL19 0.19 0.39 0.60 0.80 1.00 Coefficient
  • After 1 season of line evaluation, 2 lines (V79and V181) were discarded due to not good agrotraits and yield and the rest 17 lines werecontinued for study.
  • 3.2. Results of line evaluation Table 2. Growth duration of 17 lines across autumn winter and spring seasons 2007-2009 at Dan Phuong, Ha Noi Autumn - winter SpringNo Lines Planting to … (days) Planting to … (days) Pollen Silking Maturity Pollen Shg Silking Maturity Shg1 CDVA16 53 54 104 69 73 1172 CML161/422 54 56 105 73 77 1213 CML161 (chk1) 57 59 109 75 79 1244 CML165 (chk2) 58 61 108 73 76 1216 Q10 54 56 105 71 74 1197 Q11 54 55 105 71 75 1198 Q18 52 53 103 69 72 1179 Q21 53 54 104 68 71 1165 KQ7 59 61 110 72 75 12110 V57 54 55 105 68 70 11611 V59 55 57 106 70 73 11912 V63 55 57 107 69 72 11713 V64 55 57 106 68 72 11814 V66 55 57 106 69 72 11815 V68 57 59 108 71 73 11916 V72 58 59 108 75 78 12317 V152 57 60 109 73 76 121
  • Table 3. Infection rate of stem borer, BLSB, ear rots, root lodging in spring and autumn winter 2007, 2008 and 2008, 2009 at Dan Phuong – Ha Noi Stem borer (%) BLSB (1-5) Ear rot (%) Root ldg(%)No Lines Spring Au winter Spring Au winter Spring Au winter Spring Au winter 1 CDVA16 27.4 16.4 2.0 2.0 23.9 11.9 30.2 19.8 2 CML161/422 21.2 15.6 2.5 1.5 26.7 35.8 20.6 11.1 3 CML161 (Chk1) 22.7 12.5 2.0 2.0 15.9 17.1 9.2 7.8 4 CML165 (Chk2) 28.2 14.4 3.0 2.0 37.0 45.8 27.6 19.8 5 Q10 16.7 13.9 2.0 1.0 13.2 12.9 10.8 9.5 6 Q11 15.1 9.6 2.0 2.0 9.0 8.3 8.3 2.5 7 Q18 14.3 5.0 2.0 1.0 5.9 4.5 7.1 0.0 8 Q21 12.1 7.6 2.0 1.0 9.5 11.7 21.0 10.6 9 KQ7 11.4 7.3 1.0 1.0 5.8 7.1 3.9 3.210 V57 16.4 6.0 2.0 1.0 11.1 6.9 6.5 1.011 V59 14.3 13.1 2.0 1.0 10.9 9.1 14.0 5.812 V63 13.9 11.4 2.5 1.5 8.4 10.8 9.1 3.013 V64 7.5 5.5 2.0 1.0 5.9 5.3 2.8 2.514 V66 21.8 7.3 2.5 1.5 8.2 9.1 7.8 6.215 V68 19.8 13.7 2.0 2.0 11.9 12.0 14.4 6.316 V72 15.8 8.0 2.0 1.5 9.8 5.3 17.4 14.917 V152 6.5 3.8 2.0 2.0 3.9 4.5 5.8 1.8 Mean over 3 reps 2 season with N = 120
  • Table 4 Yield of 17 QPM lines across 4 seasons at Dan Phuong, Ha Noi Quintals/ha Mean 4NN Lines Autumn Spring Autumn Spring seasons 2007 2008 2008 2009 (Qtl/ha) 1 CDVA16 24.0 25.7 25.5 25.9 25.3 2 CML161/422 32.4 31.2 32.9 31.0 31.9 3 CMl161(chk1) 39.0 39.5 40.8 39.6 39.7 4 CMl165(chk2) 19.2 23.3 22.9 24.2 22.4 5 KQ7 51.1 42.2 49.6 42.8 46.4 6 Q10 28.0 29.5 27.6 30.3 28.8 7 Q11 34.0 35.4 34.9 34.2 34.6 8 Q18 44.1 42.0 43.9 42.7 43.2 9 Q21 38.1 35.3 35.8 34.7 36.010 V57 33.1 29.5 33.6 29.6 31.411 V59 24.0 27.1 25.7 27.5 26.112 V63 27.0 28.9 27.9 29.6 28.413 V64 44.0 43.5 44.4 43.9 44.014 V66 32.0 31.4 31.9 30.2 31.415 V68 31.1 30.6 30.5 30.3 30.616 V72 31.1 30.7 31.8 31.0 31.217 V152 41.1 40.1 41.6 40.9 40.9 LSD0.05 8.24 3.06 4.53 3.60 2.64 H 0.88 0.97 0.96 0.96 0.95
  • Table 5. QPM lines selected by SI across 4 seasons at Dan Phuong, Ha Noi Lines Criteria Target Coeffi Value CML161 V64 KQ7 V152 Q18 V66 161/422 V72SI 13.41 14.20 16.15 16.16 16.56 17.71 18.3 18.42Plant height (cm) 160.8 153.2 182.0 161.3 162.9 157.2 157.9 154.9 2.5 5.0 186.8Ear height (cm) 73.1 66.2 89.2 74.5 72.8 69.6 70.1 69.3 2.5 5.0 89.8Stay green (1-5) 2.00 2.04 2.63 2.96 3.79 3.13 2.75 2.21 -2.5 6.0 1.5Ear length (cm) 14.2 13.5 13.8 16.3 15.0 13.5 13.4 15.4 2.5 6.0 16.5Ear diameter (cm) 4.20 4.13 3.98 3.96 3.93 4.12 4.12 3.87 2.5 5.0 4.3Kernel rows 13.8 15.9 13.7 12.3 13.5 14.5 14.7 12.8 2.5 5.0 15.9Kernel/row 23.8 25.0 24.7 28.9 25.3 24.3 22.6 24.7 2.5 6.0 28.1W of 1000 kernel (g) 289.6 269.0 261.9 302.2 251.7 246.4 267.7 255.5 2.5 5.0 324.2Yield (Qtl/ha) 39.7 43.9 46.4 40.9 43.2 31.4 31.7 31.1 2.5 9.0 51.2Shelling ( %) 77.1 75.3 71.6 73.3 75.9 76.1 74.4 74.2 2.5 7.0 79.8 Value calculated based on mean of 4 seasons from 2007 - 2009
  • Fig. 3. 8 QPMlines selected:- Long staygreen-Long and bigear;-Uniform
  • Table 6. GCA of 14 lines with 2 testers (V152, KQ7) Line TesterNo Name gi Name gj1 CML161/422 -8.368 KQ7 -6.6012 CDVA16 5.167 V152 6.6013 CML161 6.6354 CML165 2.88 Edi = 0.9845 Q11 4.622 Ed(di-dj) = 1.3916 Q18 6.34 LSD0.05 line = 0.9487 Q21 -1.752 Ecj = 0.3728 V57 -1.948 Ed(ck - cl) = 0.5269 V59 5.985 LSD0.05 testers = 0.26310 V63 -6.74811 V64 4.23512 V66 -5.31213 V68 -6.45514 V72 -5.28
  • Table 7. SCA and GCA of 8 lines in a diallel with model of Griffing 4, Spring 2009 SCA (Sij) FemaleMale gi σ2si CML1 Q18 KQ7 V64 Q11 V57 61 V66 V152 Q18 0 -21.538 12.243 -18.013 8.052 10.972 11.766 -3.482 5.679 211.014KQ7 0 2.953 12.704 -1.828 2.318 2.076 3.315 6.079 108.345 V64 0 -10.838 -1.417 -8.78 -7.036 12.876 -1.48 93.753 Q11 0 9.571 -4.486 14.168 -3.107 -4.846 152.916 V57 0 -0.401 -1.163 -12.815 -13.201 53.264CML16 1 0 -11.324 11.701 -3.491 80.056 V66 0 -8.488 -9.278 97.78V152 0 20.537 93.963
  • Remarks Based on the shown and not shown data:New QPM lines developed in Viet Nam compared to previousgenerations:-Healthy seedlings, better plant aspects, medium plant and earheight and medium maturity, bigger tassels,- Better tolerance to BLSB, stem borer and lower ear rotpercentage,-Low % of root lodging- Higher number of yield components, average yield can reach > 3tones per ha.- V152, KQ7, Q18, V64 with many good characteristics forbreeding hybrids.
  • Table 9. Yield and yield components of selected topcrosses in Autumn 2008, Dan Phuong, Ha Noi Ear Kernel Kernel/ Weigh Ear length diameter rows row Shelling 1000 YieldNo Crosses Kern (%) kernel (Qtl/ha) cm CV% cm CV% Row CV% CV% els (g)1 CDVA16 x KQ7 13.8 9.5 4.4 5.4 12.8 7.8 27.4 11.1 77.5 346.5 76.5 Mean 14.8 9.5 4.3 4.5 13.8 6.9 30.3 9.1 75.9 349.5 60.015 V64 x V152 18.0 5.8 5.0 6.5 15.3 9.4 37.6 7.7 78.5 393.5 95.116 Q18 x V152 17.8 9.5 4.3 6.3 13.4 7.0 36.5 13.6 76.3 386.7 90.717 CML161 x V152 16.5 9.5 4.5 5.5 12.7 8.7 33.2 8.6 74.4 356.7 89.618 Q11 x V152 15.3 6.4 4.1 4.4 13.2 7.5 34.4 8.8 77.3 373.5 88.019 V59 x V152 15.5 8.6 4.1 5.1 14.0 7.5 33.9 11.3 76.5 336.5 77.1 Mean 15.5 8.7 4.4 5.7 13.6 7.6 32.2 10.3 76.0 344.2 73.229 HQ2000 (chk1) 15.5 10.3 4.4 6.2 14.5 10.2 29.1 12.2 73.9 346.7 67.530 C919 (chk2) 16.7 7.2 4.6 6.0 14.9 13.1 30.9 9.9 77.4 356.7 71.9 CV% 3.5 LSD0.5 3.9
  • In summary Yield of crosses from 41.6 – 97,6 qtl/ha (Spring) and 39.9 –90.1 qtl/ha (Autumn winter). 4 Crosses with female V152: V152 x V64, V152 x KQ7, V152 x CML161 V152 x Q18, in both spring and autumn winter got yields of 86.7 – 97.6qtls/ha, significantly higher than check 1 C919 (63.2 – 80.3 qlts/ha),check2 HQ2000 (60.9 – 62.8 qtl/ha) at probability of 95%.
  • Table 12. Yield and mid parent (Hmp), standard heterosis (Hs) of crosses in spring and autumn winter 2009, Dan Phuong, Ha Noi Yield Hs (%) Hmp (%) (Qtls/ha) Cross/HQ2000 Cross/C919No Crosses Au- Au- Au- Au- Spring Spring Spring Spring winter winter winter winter1 V152 x V64 97.6 90.1 128.2 114.0 60.3 43.5 54.5 12.22 V152 x KQ7 95.6 87.1 108.6 109.9 57.0 38.7 51.4 8.43 V152 x CML161 94.4 88.3 132.5 120.7 55.1 40.7 49.5 10.04 V152 x Q18 88.4 86.7 107.3 109.3 45.2 38.1 40.0 7.95 V64 x Q18 82.1 82.0 86.2 90.6 25.9 30.5 30.0 2.07 CML161 x Q18 78.8 78.2 88.0 91.0 29.5 24.5 24.8 -2.68 V152 x Q11 78.3 80.1 106.5 112.7 28.5 27.5 23.9 -0.329 HQ2000 (Chk1) 60.9 62.830 C919 (Chk2) 63,2 80,3 CV% 3,3 3,3 LSD0,05 3,57 3,46
  • Table 13. Agronomical traits and yield of promising hybrids in Dan Phuong Ha Noi Hybrids HQ 2000 C919No Criteria Season V152 x V152 x Q18 V152 x V64 V152 x KQ7 (chk 1) (chk 2) CML161 Maturity Spring 127 - 128 120 - 121 126 - 127 122 - 123 121 - 122 124 - 1261 (Days) Au-winter 110 - 112 109 - 110 108 - 109 110 - 112 107 - 109 108 - 109 Plant height* Spring 201 ± 10 194 ± 8 187 ± 6 212 ± 10 189 ± 6 183 ± 92 (cm) Au-winter 208 ± 9 202 ± 9 195 ± 10 215 ± 11 204 ± 9 192 ± 10 Ear height * Spring 105 ± 0.5 114 ± 8 108 ± 4 129 ± 6 107 ± 5 107 ± 53 (cm) Au-winter 118 ± 6 127 ± 7 112 ± 8 122 ± 9 108 ± 4 109 ± 6 Ear aspect Spring 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 – 3.0 3 - 3.5 3 - 3.54 (1-5) Au-winter 3 - 3.5 2.0 1.5 - 2.0 2.5 – 3.0 3.5 2.0 Stem borer Spring 15.5 11.8 21.3 24.1 33.6 22.65 (%) Au-winter 20.2 9.5 9.2 14.4 31.4 24.4 BLSB (1- Spring 1.5 - 2 1.5 - 2.0 1.5 - 2.0 1.5 - 2 2.5 - 3 2 - 2.56 5) Au-winter 1 - 2.5 1 - 1.5 1 - 1.5 1.5 - 2.0 2.5 2.5 - 3 Root lodging Spring 11.5 13.9 4.9 21.7 25.2 16.67 (%) Au-winter 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Stay green Spring 2.0 1.5 2.0 1.5 2.0 2.08 (1-5) Au-winter 1.5 1.5 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.5 Ear rot Spring 12.6 7.7 7.4 7.0 20.8 9.29 (%) Au-winter 6.9 7.8 3.8 3.4 20.8 22.8
  • Table 14. Agronomical traits and yield of promising hybrids in Dan Phuong Ha Noi (Continued) Hybrids HQ 2000 C919No Criteria Season V152 x V152 x Q18 V152 x V64 V152 x KQ7 (chk 1) (chk 2) CML161 Ear/plant Spring 107,7 100.0 100.0 103.7 100.0 101.910 (%) Au-winter 100.2 100.0 103.9 101.8 103.7 101.7 Shelling Spring 78.4 78.1 78.6 77.1 77.2 78.811 (%) Au-winter 77.3 78.1 77.9 76.9 76.8 77.9 1000 Spring 379.8 374.1 374.4 369.1 309.1 363.812 Kernel weight (g) Au-winter 388.5 368.9 368.4 369.1 313.2 350.4 Ear length * Spring 19 ± 2 18 ± 1.5 18 ± 1 18 ± 1.5 16 ± 1 16 ± 113 (cm) Au-winter 19 ± 1 17 ± 1.5 18 ± 1.5 18 ± 2 17 ± 1 16 ± 1 Ear diameter Spring 4.8 ± 0.3 4.7 ± 0.2 5 ± 0.2 4.5 ± 0.3 4.5 ± 0.2 4.5 ± 0.214 * (cm) Au-winter 4.9 ± 0.3 4.8 ± 0.2 5 ± 0.2 4.7 ± 0.2 4.6 ± 0.2 4.6 ± 0.3 Spring 12 - 14 12 - 14 14 - 18 14 - 16 12 - 16 12 - 1615 Kernel rows Au-winter 12 - 16 12 - 16 14 - 18 14 - 16 12 - 16 12 - 16 Spring 37 ± 3 37 ± 4 36 ± 2 38 ± 4 33 ± 3 35 ± 316 Kernel/row* Au-winter 37 ± 3 35 ± 4 35 ± 4 36 ± 3 35 ± 3 35 ± 4 Yield Spring 94.4 88.4 97.6 95.6 60.9 63.217 (Qtl/ha) Au-winter 88.3 86.7 90.1 87.1 62.8 80.3 * V152 is different with V64 0.81 and got highest yield among tested hybrids
  • V152 x V64:- Lower rate of ear rot, BLSB, root lodging- Preferrable ear aspect- Highest yield mong testcrosses- Namely hybrid LVN154 for larger scale testing
  • Fresh cobs of LVN154:- Long and big;- Uniform Fig. 4. Some promising hybrids
  • Table 15. Yield of LVN154 across testing sites by authors Yield of other hybrids (Qtl/ha) LVN154Season Year Provinces % LVN99 C919 NK66 LVN10 mean Qtl/ha Check 2009 Thai Nguyen 72.66 72.66 89.56 123.26Spring 2010 Phu Tho 53.70 53.70 57.40 106.89 2010 Hoa Binh 78.90 106.70 92.40 92.67 112.40 121.29Autumn 2009 Phu Tho 46.50 46.50 51.40 110.54winter 2010 Hoa Binh 79.50 86.70 83.10 88.60 106.62
  • Table 16. Yield of LVN154 across VCU testing sites by national network Winter2009 Winter 2010 Spring 2010No Province LSD CV CV LSD LVN154 C919 CV% LVN154 C919 LSD0,05 LVN154 C919 0,05 % % 0,051 Hanoi 66.0 56.5 7.7 7.8 49.0 50.5 5.3 4.38 72.5 68.1 3.1 3.52 CaoBang 61.2 63.8 4.1 5.78 46.4 66.2 6.3 6.17 68.2 56.8 4.6 4.883 Thanh Hoa 52.0 53.5 4.3 4.02 51.7 52.3 5.5 4.62 80.3 75.1 4.4 5.484 NgheAn 51.0 59.8 7.4 7.71 63.5 53.3 6.1 5.74 82.9 74.6 5.4 7.185 PhuTho 63.8 58.7 6.6 6.15 59.0 54.0 4.3 3.75 65.2 58.8 4.6 4.746 HaiDuong 51.9 52.5 4.2 2.82 64.0 63.0 4.8 4.87 76.7 71.4 4.2 4.767 ThaiBinh 63.0 60.0 4.7 4.718 Mean 57.5 57.4 7.7 7.8 56.7 57.0 74.3 67.4 3.1 3.5 Over check 2/6 3/7 6/6 *Source: National Center for Testing new Maize Hybrids and Fertilizer Product winter 2009, spring and winter 2010
  • Tbale 17. Results of quality protein analysis, winter 2010 Compared to N Lysine HQ2000, LVN154 Starch Protein Tryptophan Hybrids (% DM) (% DM) (% (%protein) has higher content o protein) of starch, similar content of protein, LVN154 lysine and 1 68.25 11.86 4.09 0.90 tryptophan/proten; (New QPM hybrid) 2 C919 (Normal) 60.40 7.95 2.59 0.43 Compared to C919, starch and protein content is HQ2000 3 61.65 10.12 4.12 0.83 higher than 7.85 (Previous QPM ) and 3.9% respectively , and*Source: Lab for Agri-product Analysis in Northern Mountainous Agro- Forestry Institute (NOMAFI) lysine/protein andValue is on average of 3 reps. tryptophan/protein is double.
  • Table 18. Yield stability of LVN154 over 6 locations in North Vietnam, Spring 2010 Mean yield Regression coefficient Regression deviation Hybrids (Qtl/ha) b-1 Ttn P S2D Ttn PLVN154 74.31 0.201 1.194 0.851 2.256 2.076 0.912AG-69 72.27 -0.209 0.629 0.717 14.812 8.063 1*S6226 71.41 -0.006 0.013 0.506 28.059 14.381 1*SSC7830 68.40 -0.858 2.254 0.957 * 20.07 10.571 1*LVN4 68.26 0.34 1.06 0.825 13.646 7.507 1*C919 67.47 0.362 1.6 0.908 5.733 3.734 0.993LVN169 66.78 -0.084 0.238 0.592 17.049 9.13 1*SB09-9 66.38 0.598 1.048 0.822 47.681 23.738 1*AK5443 65.60 -0.124 0.314 0.618 21.903 11.445 1*HB558 65.43 -0.219 0.392 0.644 45.795 22.838 1
  • 86 84 82 Linear LVN154 = 1.200x + 74.31 S2D = 2.256 80 78 76 Yield of LVN154Yield (quintals ha -1) 74 72 is higher than 70 68 other hybrids in 66 Linear C919 = 1.362x + 67.47 64 S2D =5.733 6 locations 62 60 Linear LVN4= 1.339x + 68.25 S2D = 13.646 58 56 54 52 Environmental index, Spring 2010 50 -10 -5 0 5 Phu Thu Cao Bang Hai Duong Ha Noi Nghe An Thai Binh LVN154 AG-69 S6226 SSC7830 LVN4 C919 LVN169 SB09-9 AK5443 HB558 Linear (LVN154) Linear (LVN4) Linear (C919) Fig. 5. Yield stability across 6 locations in North Vietnam, Spring 2010
  • Tbale 19 . Yield stability of LVN154 over 5 locations in North Vietnam, Winter 2010 Mean yield Regression coefficient Regression deviationHybrids (Qtl/ha) b-1 Ttn P S2D Ttn PLVN154 60.26 0.073 0.272 0.602 3.429 2.643 0.947SSC7830 58.79 0.668 1.694 0.906 9.982 5.784 0.999 *C919 56.54 -0.065 0.22 0.584 4.712 3.258 0.975 *LVN4 56.49 -0.11 0.61 0.707 0.448 1.215 0.691BH.101 54.16 -0.167 0.191 0.573 57.358 28.488 1.000 *B265 53.45 -0.723 1.167 0.836 27.670 14.260 1.000 *TC202 51.79 0.496 0.962 0.796 18.552 9.891 1.000 *LNS242 51.64 -0.366 1.058 0.815 7.183 4.442 0.994 *BC81163 51.55 -0.113 0.22 0.583 18.259 9.750 1.000 *NK7328 49.11 0.307 0.501 0.675 27.058 13.967 1.000 *
  • 68 66 64 62 Linear C919 = 0,9439x + 56,543 60 S²D = 4,712Yield (Quinatal ha -1) Linear LVN154 = 1,0138x + 60,26 58 S²D =3,429 56 Linear LVN4 = 0,8871x + 56,489 S²D = 0,448 54 52 50 48 46 44 42 Enviromental index winter 2010 40 -10.0 -8.0 -6.0 -4.0 -2.0 .0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 Thanh Hoa Nghe An Phu Tho Cao Bang hai Duong LVN154 BH.101 BC.81163 B265 NK7328 SSC7830 LVN4 C919 LNS242 TC202 Linear (LVN154) Linear (LVN4) Linear (C919) Fig. 6. Yield stability of LVN154 across 5 locations in North Vietnam, winter 2010
  • Result of widening acreage of LVN154 New QPM hybrid was released for production in April2011 and transferred PR to a private seed company inVietnam (Dai Thanh Ltd), with a new name GS8 (LVN154). Total acreage up to August 2011 was about 3,000hectares .
  • Fig. 7. Ceremony of transferring LVN154 PR to Dai Thanh Seed Ltd
  • Table 20. Area of GS8 across regions of Vietnam (To August. 2011) Ecological 2010 (ha) 2011 (ha)No Provinces Total (ha) regions Winter SSilkinging Summer 1 Dak Lak 3 50 300 353 Central1 2 Dak Nong 10 100 110 highland 3 Lam Dong 25 25 South 4 Ninh Thuan 20 202 eastern 5 Dong Nai 20 20 North 6 Nghe An 5 25 50 803 centeral 7 Thanh Hoa 3 30 100 133 8 Thai Binh 4 15 80 99 9 Ha Nam 10 25 60 95 10 Hung Yen 100 110 210 Red river4 11 Bac Ninh 10 25 35 delta 12 Ha Noi 15 50 65 13 Ha Tay 10 15 90 115 14 Vinh Phuc 10 8 100 118 15 Hoa Binh 15 40 60 115 16 Son La 100 100 17 Ha Giang 10 50 60 18 Yen Bai 5 10 100 115 19 Lao Cai 10 20 30 Northern 20 Lai Chau 20 205 mountainou 21 Tuyen Quang 14 6 20 s 22 Phu Tho 14 25 200 239 23 Thai Nguyen 15 30 80 125 24 Bac Giang 4 5 70 79 25 Lang Son 4 108 120 232 26 Cao Bang 105 100 205 27 Bac Kan 82 100 182 Total 116 834 2050 3000
  • Yen Binh – Yen Bai Da Bac – Hoa Binh Doan Hung – Phu ThoXuan Loc – Dong Nai Mai Son – Son La Dac Lac Fig. 8. GS8 (LVN154) in several locations
  • Conclusions and suggestionConclusions1. Applying SSR makers and light table technique determined 13 new QPM lines developed in Vietnam having opaque-2 gene.2. New QPM lines showed better than that of old generationlines: - Better toleant to root lodging, ear rot and BLSB - Diversified genetic distant among new QPM lines - High GCA and SCA on yield: CML161, Q18, V59,Q11, V64, V152; - 4 QPM lines with better tolerance to stresses, highGCA and SCA include V152, KQ7, Q18, V64; theses QPMlines can be involved in new commercial hybrid creation.
  • 3. 6 topcrosses with higher yield than checks: V64 x V152, Q18 x V152, CML161 x V152, Q11 x V152, V59 x V152 and CDVA16 x KQ7.- 4 diallel crosses including -V152 x Q18; - V152 x V64; -V152 x CML161; -V152 x KQ7, - Specifically V152 x V64 was selected and namely as LVN154.
  • 4. Result fo VCU testing LVN154 showed that this hybridwith high yield, better tolerance to stresses, lower rate of eatrot, root lodging, stem borer, high quality protein.Suggestions:-Government support for a specific QPM project atministerial level in Vietnam- Continue to provide CIMMYT QPM materials to Vietnam.
  • Thanks very much for your attention! normal one
  • Following slides are methods of conversion ofadapted normal inbred lines into QPM by both - conventional backcrossing and - double haploid anther culture were presented in a paper in proceeding of the10 Asian Maize Workshop, Indonesia
  • 2.2.1. Conversion of normal into QPM lines:a) DH by anther culture (Bui Manh Cuong, 2006) from 8 normallines including C2, C4, C153, C154, C164, C172, T2, T5, 4 normalhybrids: SC1614, SC18161, SC 7114, C919 and HQ2000 (QPMhybrid) crossed with DH responsive AC24, then crossed withCML161 (CIMMYT line with o2o2). Immature anthers (Figure 1) from these crosses were culturedbased embryo initiation YP media,; plant regeneration media: N6+ 2ppm Kinetin; complete plant regeneration media: MS + 2ppmαNAA; glass house plant media 1/10MS + rice straw ash.
  • Season 1 (Year 1): Normal x AC24 (Callus/embryo initiationresponsive)Season 2 (Year 1): F1 x QPM (CML161)Season 3 (Year 2): Anther culture and plant regenerationSeason 4 (Year 2): Field evaluationFigure 1. DH QPM conversion by anther culture
  • b) Conventional conversion of normal into QPM lines (Hans Gevers, 2002; Vasal, 2002)From normal TCH1 (parent of LCH9 single cross) and DF7 (parent of LVN4 single cross)crossed with QPM lines from CIMMYT (CML161 and CML165).Season 1. Materials QPM x NormalLocus ( o2o2) (NN)Season 2. Materials F1 x NormalLocus (N o2) (NN)Season 3. Materials BC1Locus (50% NN and 50% N o2)Season 4: Selfing BC1Figure 2. Conventional conversion of normal into QPM linesWhen harvest, after observing segregation of opaque-2 on the ear, discarded about 50% ofnormal ears, selected 50% of seeds with modified QPM under florescence lamp, sowedwell modified seeds into S1 generation, then continued backcrossing until stable o2o2kernels obtained and analysed protein, amino acid contents of the converted QPM lines.Through 5 backcrossing generations (Figure 2) combined with QPM selection underflorescence lamp, 7 QPM lines were developed.