Genetic Architecture of Chilling Tolerance in Sorghum Dissected with a Nested Association Mapping Population

Abstract

Dissecting the genetic architecture of stress tolerance in crops is critical to understand and improve adaptation. In temperate climates, early planting of chilling-tolerant varieties could provide longer growing seasons and drought escape, but chilling tolerance (75,000 data points from [~]16,000 plots) in multi-environment field trials in Kansas under natural chilling stress (sown 30-45 days early) and normal growing conditions. Joint linkage mapping with early-planted field phenotypes revealed an oligogenic architecture, with 5-10 chilling tolerance loci explaining 20-41% of variation. Surprisingly, several of the major chilling tolerance loci co-localize precisely with the classical grain tannin (Tan1 and Tan2) and dwarfing genes (Dw1 and Dw3) that were under strong directional selection in the US during the 20th century. These findings suggest that chilling sensitivity was inadvertently selected due to coinheritance with desired nontannin and dwarfing alleles. The characterization of genetic architecture with NAM reveals why past chilling tolerance breeding was stymied and provides a path for genomics-enabled breeding of chilling tolerance.\n\nArticle SummaryChilling sensitivity limits productivity of tropical-origin crops in temperate climates, and remains poorly understood at a genetic level. We developed a nested association mapping resource in sorghum, a tropical-origin cereal, to understand the genetic architecture of chilling tolerance. Linkage mapping of growth traits from early-planted field trials revealed several major chilling tolerance loci, including some colocalized with genes that were selected in the origin of US grain sorghum. These findings suggest chilling sensitivity was inadvertently selected during 20th century breeding, but can be bypassed using a better understanding of the underlying genetic architecture.\n\nDisclaimerMention of a trademark, warranty, proprietary product, or vendor does not constitute a guarantee by the USDA and does not imply approval or recommendation of the product to the exclusion of others that may be suitable. USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.