Identification of Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata. L. (Walp.)) Lines and Polymorphic Genebased. microsatellite Markers for Resistance

Similar documents
Incidence of Podfly, Melanagromyza obtusa (MALLOCH) and its Influence on Weight Loss in Different Pigeonpea Genotypes

2011 Lygus Bug Management Trial in Blackeyes Kearney Research and Extension Center, Parlier, CA C.A. Frate 1, S.C. Mueller and P.B.

Breeding biofortified cowpea lines for semi-arid tropical areas by combining higher seed protein and mineral levels

Climate Change Impacts on Outbreak of Brown Plant Hopper in Vietnam and Options for Prevention

2012 Evaluation of Insecticides for Lygus Bug Control in Blackeye Cowpeas

Transform Insecticide for control of aphids in canola. Dr. Rob Annetts & Melissa Welsh 26 Febuary 2013

Revisiting Soybean Aphids

Virus Diseases Sub-Group Report. CORESTA Meeting, Izmir

ASSESSMENT OF FUNCTIONAL PROPERTIES AND NUTRITIONAL COMPOSITION OF SOME COWPEA (Vigna unguiculata L.) GENOTYPES IN GHANA

Keywords: Soybean varieties, Child nutrition, Dietary diversity, Household, Kano State

Evaluation of Ripe and Unripe Pawpaw Seeds Powder in the Control of Callosobruchus maculatus in Stored Cowpea

2013Evaluation of Insecticides for Lygus Bug Control in Blackeye Cowpeas

SMALL GRAIN CEREAL FORAGES: TIPS FOR EVALUATING VARIETIES AND TEST RESULTS. George Fohner 1 ABSTRACT

Evaluation of JH Biotech, Inc. Products under Egyptian environment

C AN 100% ORGANIC DIET S WORK FOR POULTRY?

Lab Tuesday: Virus Diseases

Exercise 2 Feed Composition and Nutrient Requirements 20 Points

Proceedings of the 2007 CPM Short Course and MCPR Trade Show

Determination of Some Mineral Components of Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp) Using Instrumental neutron activation analysis.

Research on trace minerals in the common bean

Insect Pests of Canola. Dale Whaley

ISSN International Journal of Advanced Research (2014), Volume 2, Issue 10, RESEARCH ARTICLE

Biology 12. Mendelian Genetics

Progress. Agric. 18(2) : 93-97, 2007 ISSN

Matching Hay to the Cow s Requirement Based on Forage Test

Baba SALL 1, Momar Talla SECK2, Jérémy BOUYER3, Marc J.B. VREYSEN4

Lab Tuesday: Virus Diseases

Evaluation of Assail for the Control of Early Season Cotton Aphids in Upland Cotton COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROJECT 2001

Does Soybean Genetics Affect Soybean Aphid/Virus Management?

Dynamics of Meloidogyne incognita Virulence to Resistance Genes Rk and Rk 2 in Cowpea

Trip report Indonesia July 2010 (Cabunagan and Choi)

Final Report Aphid monitoring and virus testing in strawberries

ANALYSIS OF PRESERVATION EFFECTS ON THE CONCENTRATION OF IRON AND IODINE IN SELECTED FISH SPECIES

DECISION DOCUMENTAL. Food and feed safety assessment of maize event MIR604 OECD: SYN-IR6Ø4-5. Directorate of Agrifood Quality

FIRST REPORT AND BIOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF COWPEA MILD MOTTLE VIRUS (CPMMV) INFECTING GROUNDNUTS IN WESTERN KENYA

Assessment of Bruchid (Callosobruchus maculatus) Tolerance of Some Elite Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) Varieties

GENETIC VARIABILITY FOR LOW PHOSPHOROUS TOLERANCE IN COWPEA. A Thesis TULLE WAYNE ALEXANDER

4.1 Cycling of Matter Date: Cycling of Organic and Inorganic Matter. Build your Own Notes:

His Excellency Dr. Tulibano S. Munshingi, U.S. Ambassador to Burkina Faso, visits USAID C4CP Activities at UGCPA/BM

Scouting for Soybean Aphid

PHYSIOLOGICAL BASIS OF WATER STRESS TOLERANCE IN SOYBEAN. Abstract. Introduction. Materials and Methods

COOPERATIVE EXTENSION UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, DAVIS

The data was used to determine which of the relative yield of a range of cultivars.

COLLEGE OF PLANT SCIENCE AND CROP PROD.UCTION UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE, ABEOKUT A, OGUN STATE, NIGERIA.

Genetic diversity in the fungal pathogen Dothistroma septosporum. Angie Dale Masters of Science, NRES Supervisor: Kathy Lewis

Non-Preference / Antixenosis and Antibiosis Mechanism Contributing to BPH Resistance in Certain Identified Elite Rice Genotypes

HAYATI Journal of Biosciences, June 2009, p Vol. 16, No. 2 ISSN: SHORT COMMUNICATION

EUROPEAN ACADEMIC RESEARCH, VOL. I, ISSUE 5/ AUGUST 2013 ISSN , IMPACT FACTOR: (GIF)

BIO-EFFICACY OF PROMISING BOTANICALS AGAINST INSECT INFESTING COWPEA. CV. CO 4

oxysporum f, sp, ciceri and Meloidogyne javanica

Analysis of Quantitative and Qualitative G x E interaction in Mothbean [Vigna acconitifolia (Jacq.)] in the Hot -Arid Climate of Rajasthan, India

Effects of resistance genes and insecticidal seed treatments on soybean. aphid population growth and development

1. INTRODUCTION. oldest commercial crops, plays a key role in the economic and social affairs of the world

54 Trop Anim Prod :1

Evaluation of advanced sorghum lines for bioethanol production related traits

Susceptibility of Three Local Sorghum Varieties to Sitophilus zeamais Motschulsky [Coleoptera: Curculionidae]

MOLECULAR DIVERSITY BASED CLUSTERING OF CHICKPEA (CICER ARIETINUM L.) GERMPLASM

ORGANIC ROMAINE HEARTS LATE SUMMER 2017 SALINAS, CA

New traits related to feed efficiency

Southern Africa: HIV/AIDS and Crisis in the Context of Food Insecurity

Animal Science: Isotopes and Nuclear Techniques

IMPACT OF TRACE MINERAL VARIATION WITHIN FORAGES ON THE RATION FORMULATION PROCESS. J. R. Knapp Fox Hollow Consulting, LLC Columbus, Ohio INTRODUCTION

Evaluation of Suitable Nutrient Management on Dual Purpose Flax (Linum usitatissimum L.) Crop under New Alluvial Zone (NAZ) of West Bengal, India

Effect of supplementation on the feed intake and performance of confined and scavenging crossbred growing chickens in Burkina Faso

MANAGEMENT OF APHIDS AND APHID-TRANSMITTED VIRUSES IN STORED SEED POTATOES IN KENYA

Learning Lab Data dive Mobile for Nutrition. mvam for Nutrition Part I revolutionizing collection of nutrition information

INTERPRETING FORAGE QUALITY TEST REPORTS

Fig Mosaic. Bryce W. Falk and Nida Salem Plant Pathology University of California Davis, CA

BENCHMARKING FORAGE NUTRIENT COMPOSITION AND DIGESTIBILITY. R. D. Shaver, Ph.D., PAS

Unit 4 Genetics. 3. Categorize the following characteristics below as being influenced by genetics or the environment.

Cannabis Aphid (Phorodon cannabis)

Vanilla flavoring made by yeast*

ESTIMATING THE ENERGY VALUE OF CORN SILAGE AND OTHER FORAGES. P.H. Robinson 1 ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION

Forecasting model for aphids on vegetable crops

RFV VS. RFQ WHICH IS BETTER

Genetic Enhancement of Groundnut for Resistance to Aflatoxin Contamination

Veterinary Science Preparatory Training for the Veterinary Assistant. Floron C. Faries, Jr., DVM, MS

USABlight: A tool to fight late blight: a reemerging plant disease that threatens global food security

INFLUENCE OF SOME NATURAL AND SYNTHETIC TOXINS CHARACTERISTIC FOR FUSARIUM FUNGUS ON IZOPEROXIDASES IN SOME WHEAT GENOTYPES

CSIR Biosciences: Natural Products and Agroprocessing

as a new tool for managing virus vectors and virus transmission in oilseed rape

DAIRY FOCUS AT ILLINOIS NEWSLETTER. Focus on Forages Volume 2, Number 1

Evaluation of Four Cowpea Lines for Bruchid (Callosobruchus maculatus) Tolerance

Forage Testing and Supplementation

INTERPRETATION GUIDE TO SOIL TEST REPORTS

The Science of Maryland Agriculture

Global Catastrophic Biological Risks

Understanding Dairy Nutrition Terminology

Improving Management Of Soybean Cyst Nematode Through Extension Demonstration And Outreach

A COLLABORATIVE NATIONAL STRATEGY TO MANAGE FERAL SWINE IMPACTS IN THE U.S.

IB BIO I Genetics Test Madden

EFFECTIVENESS OF SOME INSECTICIDES AGAINST CABBAGE APHID, BREVICORYNE BRASSICAE (LINNAEUS) (APHIDIDAE: HOMOPTERA)

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

Study design of an epidemiological research and sampling methodology for a risk analysis

Factors Related to Zimbabwe Women s Educational Needs in Agriculture. Anna E. Mudukuti, Ph.D. Zayed University

Chandrakala et al. Int. J. Pure Appl. Zool., 1(1): 86-91, 2013

A REVIEW OF AFRICAN CASSAVA MOSAIC VIRUS (ACMV) IRDA SAFNI, SP, MCP. FAKULTAS PERTANIAN Jurusan Hama dan Penyakit Tumbuhan UNIVERSITAS SUMATERA UTARA

CHARACTERIZATION OF EARLY CAULIFLOWER GERMPLASM UNDER TROPICAL CONDITIONS

APPLICATIONS OF VETIVER IN WESTERN AFRICA:

Nutritional requirements

Transcription:

Identification of Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. (Walp.)) Lines and Polymorphic Genebased microsatellite Markers for Resistance to Aphids (Aphis Craccivora Koch) Ouedraogo P. Adelaide, Tignegre Jean-Baptiste, Batieno Benoit Joseph, Poda S. Leandre, Traore Fousseni, Ouedraogo Jeremy, Bao-Lam Huynh, Philip Roberts, and Close Timothy Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Collaborative Research on Grain Legumes

Presentation outline INTRODUCTION MATERIAL and METHODS RESULTATS CONCLUSION and RECOMMANDATIONS

Figure 1:(left) cowpea plant; (right) Seed characteristics of farmer preferred varieties, Kamboinse 2008 Figure 2: Cowpea based-meals Hay for feeding livestock. Important source of income. Cowpea is grown as a green manure and as a cover crop (United States). Figure 3: (TOP) Vigna unguiculata subsp. Unguiculata cv.-gr. Textilis (BOT) California Blackeye 27 Photo by: Mitchell Lucas

Figure 4: Cowpea production by region ( average 1994-2014 ), FAOSTAT 2014 Figure 5: Cowpea production ( top 10 producers), FAOSTAT 2014

Production constraints: biotic, abiotic and socio-economic (Tignegré, 2010). Yields losses related to insect can be up to 100% in sub- Saharan Africa (Singh and Jackai, 1985). Aphis craccivora is one of the insects responsible for yield losses in cowpea. It causes damage by altering the metabolism, taking nutrients from the plant, and by transmitting plant viruses (Blackman and Eastop 2000)

Figure 6: wingless and winged aphids Relatively tiny Adults can be winged or wingless Two reproductive pathways Great adaptability

Figure 7:Resurgence of A. craccivora in farmer field 3 weeks after insecticide application

MAIN OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to contribute to an increase in the yield of cowpea by the identification of aphid resistant lines and polymorphic gene-based markers. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES: To screen cowpea genotypes for resistance to aphids. To characterize populations of aphids that prevail in cowpea growing areas. To identify polymorphic markers for selection purposes.

MATERIALS Kvx396-4-5-2D Figure 8&9:pictures of the 10 varieties of cowpea used for the aphid resistance test Tiligré and Kvx295-2-124-99 for the polymorphism test.

METHODS Source and maintenance of experimental insects Figure 10: Aphids sampling areas located in the three main agro-climatic zones in Burkina. Figure 11: Cages used for aphides maintenance Experimental design: Randomized complete block design with three (3) blocks, five (5) repetitions each. Plants in each block were infested with only one of the three (3) aphid strains.

Figure 12: Infestation technique Observations were made every three days and consisted of measuring some parameters: The number of leaves; Plant survival; The dynamics of the aphid populations.

No aphid 1 to 5 aphids 5 to 20 aphids 20 to 100 aphids 100 to 500 aphids More than 500 aphids Figure 13: Field layout

To look for polymorphic markers, DNA of each parent was extracted, and amplified with each ninety-six (96) pairs of SSR primers. The raw data of 20 DAS, 35DAS, 50 DAS, 65 DAS, one month after infestation and data from the AUDPC were used for several analyzes. XLSTAT 7.1 and SAS 9.4 software were used to analyze the data. The formula used to calculate the AUDPC is: n AUDPC = Σ [(Xi+1 + Xi) / 2] [ti+1 - ti] i=1

RESULTS

IDENTIFICATION OF RESISTANCE SOURCES THE EVOLUTION OF THE INFESTATION Varieties 20 DAS 35 DAS 50 DAS 65 DAS AUDPC B301 3 4.6 5 4.8 202.5 CB 27 2.8 1 2.4 2 87 IT97K-556-6 1.4 2.2 3 3 111 KN-1 3.2 2.2 4 3.8 145.5 KVX295-2- 124-99 3.8 4 4.6 4.6 192 N 2300 4.2 5 3.8 3.8 192 NS-1 4.2 5 4 4 196.5 NS-Farako Bâ 3.2 5 4.8 4.6 205.5 SARC-1-57-2 3.2 3 4 5 166.5 SARC-1-91-1 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 126 Varieties 20 DAS 35 DAS 50 DAS 65 DAS AUDPC B301 1.6 3 2.8 2.8 120 CB 27 1.6 2.8 2 2 99 IT97K-556-6 0.2 0 1 2 31.5 KN-1 1 1 1 0.6 42 KVX295-2-124-99 1.6 3 3.8 3.8 142.5 N 2300 3.8 3.6 4.4 4.4 181.5 NS-1 3 4.4 4.8 4.4 193.5 NS-Farako Bâ 2.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 163.5 SARC-1-57-2 1.6 1.6 2.4 2.4 90 SARC-1-91-1 1.6 2.6 3 3 118.5 Table 1& 2: Means data of degrees of infestation and the AUDPC (Bobo and Kamboinsé)

Varieties 20 JAS 35 DAS 50 DAS 65 DAS AUDPC B301 1.6 2.4 3.6 3.6 129 CB 27 3.4 4.2 4 4.4 181.5 IT97K-556-6 2.4 1.4 0.6 0 48 KN-1 0.8 1 1 2 51 KVX295-2- 124-99 2.6 2.6 3.6 2.6 132 N 2300 2.6 2.6 3.6 3.6 139.5 NS-1 3.2 4 3.8 3.8 169.5 NS-Farako Bâ 3.2 4 4 4 174 SARC-1-57- 2 1.2 1 1 2 54 SARC-1-91- 1 1.6 4 3 4 147 Table3: Means data of degrees of infestation and the AUDPC (Kamboinsé) Table 4,5 &6 : correlation test between degrees of infestation at 20 DAS ; 35 DAS ;50 DAS ; 65 DAS and the AUDPC (respectively aphids strain of Kamboinsé, Bobo and Pobe) Varia ) bles 20 DAS 35 DAS 50 DAS 65 DAS AUDPC Varia bles 20 DAS 35 DAS 50 DAS 65 DAS AUDPC Varia bles 20 DAS 35 DAS 50 DAS 65 DAS AUDPC 0 DAS 1 5 DAS 0.712 1 0 DAS 0.611 0.776 1 5 DAS 0.563 0.733 0.938 1 UDPC 0.745 0.923 0.950 0.915 1 20 DAS 1 35 DAS 0.446 1 50 DAS 0.545 0.613 1 65 DAS 0.582 0.557 0.918 1 AUDPC 0.666 0.850 0.919 0.883 1 20 DAS 1 35 DAS 0.548 1 50 DAS 0.452 0.778 1 65 DAS 0.414 0.719 0.797 1 AUDPC 0.620 0.927 0.933 0.862 1

SIMILARITY AND CORRELATION TEST Table 7:Combined analysis of the AUDPC for the 3 strains of aphids. Fixed term Wald statistic n.d.f. F statistic d.d.f. F pr A.Strains 10.22 2 5.11 120 0.007 Varieties 43.83 9 4.87 120 0.001 Strain * Varieties 18.27 18 1.01 120 0.448 Table 8: Correlations between the 3 variables (number of leaves, survival rate and degree of infestation) N. Lea. 1 N. Lea. D.INF. Surv.R. D.INF. -0.652 1 SURV.R. 0.728-0.628 1

VARIETIES CLASSIFICATION 18 16 16 14 14 12 12 Dissimilarity 10 8 6 4 2 0 IT97K-556-6 KN-1 B301 KVX295-2-124-99 SARC1-91-1 CB 27 SARC-1-57-2 NS-1 N 2300 NS-Farako Bâ Dissimilarity 10 8 6 4 2 0 KVX295-2-124-99 N 2300 SARC1-91-1 CB 27 IT97K-556-6 NS-1 SARC-1-57-2 NS-Farako Bâ B301 KN-1 Figure 14&15 :Dendrogram representing the three classes of varieties (left:strain of kamboinse; right:strain of Bobo)

25 20 Dissimilarity 15 10 5 0 KN-1 KVX295-2-124-99 IT97K-556-6 SARC-1-57-2 B301 SARC1-91-1 Resistant Moderately Resistant N 2300 NS-1 CB 27 NS-Farako Bâ Susceptible Figure 16 :Dendrogram representing the three classes of varieties (Strain of Pobé) Tableau 9: Characteristics of the 10 varieties studied in the three aphid strains. RESISTANTS MODERELY RESISTANTS SUSCEPTIBLES IT97K-556-6 B301 N 2300 VARIETIES SARC1-91-1 CB 27 NS-1 KVX295-2-124-99 SARC-1-57-2 NS-Farako Bâ KN-1

CHARACTERIZATION OF APHID STRAINS Tableau 9:Fisher's F associated with the square of the Mahalanobis Bobo-Dioulasso Kamboinsé Pobé Mengao Bobo-Dioulasso 0.00 Kamboinsé 3.46 0.00 Pobé Mengao 4.20 0.25 0.00

POLYMORPHISM TEST 24 polymorphic markers out 96. Figure 18:Electrophoretic profile

CONCLUSION & RECOMMANDATIONS

Among the 10 varieties: Four(4) resistant varieties, three (3) moderely resistant. The Pobé strain is similar to that of Kamboinsé and these two strains are different from the Bobo one. Twenty four (24) polymorphic markers found.

Validation of polymorphic markers specially codominant ones for selection purposes. Molecular characterization of Bobo, Pobé and Kamboinsé aphid strains in order to give more precise information about the genetics of the different strains of aphids.