Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Marker-assisted selection

Marker-assisted selection (MAS) is a molecular breeding technique that employs DNA markers to indirectly select for desirable traits in plants and animals, enhancing the precision and efficiency of conventional breeding programs by identifying genetic variations associated with target phenotypes without relying solely on direct observation of those traits.^[1]^[2] Developed as part of the broader field of molecular breeding, MAS leverages genetic markers—such as restriction fragment length polymorphisms (RFLPs), simple sequence repeats (SSRs), and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs)—that are tightly linked to quantitative trait loci (QTLs) or major genes controlling agronomically important characteristics like disease resistance, yield, and stress tolerance.^[3] By genotyping individuals at early stages, breeders can accelerate selection cycles, reduce the need for extensive field evaluations, and minimize environmental influences on trait expression.^[1] The concept of MAS emerged in the late 1980s with the advent of DNA-based markers, building on earlier work in genetic mapping that demonstrated the potential of molecular tools to track inheritance patterns more reliably than morphological or biochemical indicators.^[1] Key prerequisites for implementing MAS include high-density genetic maps, polymorphic markers closely linked to target traits, and validated marker-trait associations derived from QTL mapping populations.^[3] In practice, MAS operates through strategies such as marker-assisted backcrossing (MAB), where a single gene from a donor parent is introgressed into an elite recurrent parent while recovering the recurrent genome; gene pyramiding, which stacks multiple favorable alleles for enhanced trait performance; and early-generation selection to cull undesirable genotypes in segregating populations like F2 or F3 lines.^[1] These approaches have been particularly effective in crops facing complex challenges, such as incorporating submergence tolerance via the Sub1 QTL in rice or bacterial blight resistance genes (Xa21, Xa4) in the same species.^[1] MAS offers significant advantages over traditional phenotypic selection, including the ability to select at the seedling stage for traits that manifest late in development, such as those requiring maturity or specific environmental conditions, thereby shortening breeding timelines by 2–5 years in some cases.^[1] It also enables single-plant selection in early generations, which is challenging with quantitative traits due to environmental variability, and facilitates the precise recovery of recurrent parent genome (up to 95–99%) during backcrossing, reducing linkage drag from undesirable donor segments.^[3] However, challenges persist, including initial costs for marker development and genotyping (ranging from $0.005 to $1.00 per data point as of 2024, significantly lower than earlier estimates due to advances in high-throughput sequencing), the need for robust marker polymorphism across diverse germplasm, and potential inaccuracies from QTL-by-environment interactions or epistasis that can lower selection efficiency.^[1]^[4] Recent integrations of MAS with next-generation sequencing have further expanded its applications in precision breeding.^[5] Despite these limitations, successful applications in major cereals like maize, wheat, and barley—such as pyramiding Fusarium head blight resistance QTLs in wheat—demonstrate MAS's role in addressing global food security amid climate change and population growth.^[1]

Fundamentals

Definition and Principles

Marker-assisted selection (MAS) is a molecular breeding technique employed in plant and animal programs that utilizes DNA markers associated with target genes or quantitative trait loci (QTL) to indirectly select individuals exhibiting desirable traits, bypassing the need for direct phenotypic assessment.^[6] This approach leverages genetic markers to identify and propagate favorable alleles more efficiently than traditional methods reliant on observable phenotypes.^[7] The foundational principles of MAS center on indirect selection through linkage disequilibrium (LD), where non-random associations between marker alleles and trait-determining loci enable prediction of genotypic superiority.^[6] Selection efficacy depends on the recombination frequency between markers and target loci, with tightly linked markers (ideally within 5 centimorgans) minimizing the risk of recombination events that could dissociate favorable alleles from desired traits.^[6] MAS integrates seamlessly with conventional breeding strategies to accelerate genetic gain, particularly for traits challenging to phenotype, such as those expressed late in development or under specific environmental conditions.^[7] In a basic MAS workflow, breeding populations are genotyped using polymorphic DNA markers to detect associations with target traits, often established through prior QTL mapping or linkage analysis.^[6] Individuals carrying the desired marker alleles are then selected for advancement in the breeding cycle, allowing early-stage decisions that reduce time and resource demands compared to phenotypic selection.^[7] MAS presupposes a solid understanding of genetic linkage, the physical proximity of loci on a chromosome that governs marker-trait co-inheritance, and trait heritability, which quantifies the proportion of phenotypic variation attributable to genetic factors and influences the reliability of marker-based predictions.^[6] These prerequisites ensure that marker associations remain stable across generations, supporting precise and heritable selection outcomes.^[7]

Historical Development

The development of marker-assisted selection (MAS) originated in the 1980s with the advent of restriction fragment length polymorphisms (RFLPs), which enabled the construction of genetic linkage maps for identifying trait-associated regions in crops. In tomato, Steven Tanksley and colleagues pioneered the use of RFLPs to create a high-density linkage map, facilitating the resolution of quantitative traits into Mendelian factors through an interspecific backcross population.^[8] Similarly, in maize, RFLPs were applied to generate the first molecular genetic maps, laying the groundwork for indirect selection of traits via linked markers. These early efforts shifted breeding from phenotypic observation to molecular-informed strategies, though initial applications were limited by the labor-intensive nature of RFLP analysis. The 1990s marked key milestones with the introduction of more user-friendly markers, including microsatellites (simple sequence repeats) and amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLPs), which improved mapping resolution and accessibility for MAS. Microsatellites, first widely adopted around 1991, offered codominant inheritance and high polymorphism, enabling finer linkage detection in diverse species. AFLPs, developed in 1995, provided a rapid, PCR-based method for generating numerous markers without prior sequence knowledge, accelerating genetic mapping projects. By the 2000s, MAS integrated with quantitative trait loci (QTL) mapping became prominent, allowing breeders to target polygenic traits through associated markers, as demonstrated in numerous crop studies. Post-2010, next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies, such as genotyping-by-sequencing, drastically reduced costs and increased marker density, making MAS more scalable and routine in breeding pipelines. Pioneering applications of MAS emerged in the 1990s for disease resistance, with one of the first successes in rice targeting bacterial blight. In 1997, N. Huang and colleagues at the International Rice Research Institute used RFLP and PCR-based markers to pyramid three resistance genes (xa5, xa13, and Xa21) into elite varieties, achieving enhanced resistance without linkage drag.^[9] This work validated MAS as a practical tool for stacking resistance alleles. Expansion to livestock breeding occurred in the 2000s, where markers linked to traits like milk production in cattle and disease resistance in poultry were incorporated into selection indices, improving genetic gain rates over phenotypic methods alone. Adoption trends evolved from experimental research to commercial integration by the 2020s, driven by cost reductions from NGS. In wheat, MAS programs for rust resistance, such as those incorporating Sr59 and YrSLU genes against stem and stripe rust, have been deployed in breeding pipelines to develop resilient varieties for global markets. This shift has broadened MAS's impact, with widespread use in public and private sectors to accelerate variety release and address climate challenges.

Molecular Markers

Types of Markers

Molecular markers used in marker-assisted selection (MAS) are broadly classified into co-dominant and dominant types based on their ability to detect alleles in heterozygous individuals. Co-dominant markers allow the identification of both alleles at a locus, providing more informative genotyping data, while dominant markers reveal only the presence or absence of a band, limiting their resolution for heterozygote detection. This classification is fundamental to their application in genetic mapping and trait selection in breeding programs.^[10] Co-dominant markers include single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), simple sequence repeats (SSRs), and restriction fragment length polymorphisms (RFLPs). SNPs arise from single nucleotide variations in the DNA sequence and are widely utilized for high-density genetic mapping due to their abundance across genomes, enabling precise localization of quantitative trait loci (QTLs).^[11] SSRs, also known as microsatellites, consist of tandemly repeated short DNA motifs (typically 1-6 base pairs) where polymorphism stems from variations in the number of repeats, making them particularly suitable for detecting diversity in breeding populations of crops like wheat and rice.^[10] RFLPs detect variations in DNA fragment lengths resulting from mutations that alter restriction enzyme recognition sites, historically serving as a foundational tool for constructing linkage maps in early MAS applications.^[12] Sequence-tagged sites (STS) represent another co-dominant category, defined by unique, PCR-amplifiable DNA sequences derived from known genomic regions, facilitating targeted identification of specific genes or loci in MAS.^[11] Dominant markers, such as amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLPs) and random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPDs), generate multi-locus profiles through PCR-based amplification. AFLPs involve the digestion of DNA with restriction enzymes followed by selective ligation and amplification of fragments, producing polymorphic patterns based on variations in restriction sites or adjacent sequences.^[10] RAPDs rely on short, arbitrary primers to amplify random segments of genomic DNA, with polymorphisms arising from sequence differences that affect primer annealing.^[12] Hybrid markers, including insertion/deletion polymorphisms (InDels), combine elements of length and sequence variation; these involve small-scale insertions or deletions in DNA that can be detected via PCR, often behaving as co-dominant when size differences distinguish alleles, and are increasingly applied for fine-scale mapping in MAS.^[11] The evolution of these markers in MAS has progressed from low-throughput methods like RFLPs, which required labor-intensive Southern blotting, to high-density approaches such as SNPs enabled by genotyping arrays and next-generation sequencing, allowing genome-wide analysis and accelerated breeding efficiency.^[10]

Ideal Properties for MAS

Molecular markers ideal for marker-assisted selection (MAS) must exhibit high polymorphism to effectively distinguish between different genotypes within a breeding population.^[13] Co-dominance is another essential property, allowing the detection of both homozygous and heterozygous states at a locus, which enhances the precision of selection.^[13] Markers should also be distributed evenly across the genome to provide comprehensive coverage for identifying traits controlled by multiple loci.^[13] Additionally, ease of assay is critical, encompassing low cost, high throughput capability, and simple analytical procedures to facilitate large-scale breeding applications.^[14] For optimal performance in MAS, markers require tight linkage to the target quantitative trait loci (QTL) or genes, with recombination rates ideally below 1 centimorgan (cM) to reduce the risk of false positives or negatives during selection.^[15] This close proximity minimizes the probability of recombination events separating the marker from the desired allele, ensuring reliable transmission across generations.^[12] Sequence-based molecular markers offer inherent stability, as their detection relies on DNA sequences that remain unaffected by environmental variations, unlike phenotypic traits which can be influenced by growing conditions.^[16] Among molecular markers, single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) are particularly preferred for MAS due to their high abundance, with millions present in most plant genomes, enabling dense mapping and broad applicability.^[17] Their compatibility with automated genotyping platforms further supports efficient, high-throughput screening in breeding programs.^[18]

Limitations of Morphological Markers

Morphological markers, which rely on observable physical traits such as plant height, leaf shape, or seed color, have long been employed in plant breeding but present several inherent challenges that limit their utility in efficient selection programs. One primary issue is the need for destructive sampling, particularly for traits like yield or root architecture, where assessing the phenotype requires harvesting or damaging the plant, thereby preventing its use in further breeding cycles or propagation.^[1] Additionally, many morphological traits exhibit late expression, only becoming apparent at advanced developmental stages such as maturity or flowering, which delays selection decisions and extends breeding timelines.^[1] These markers are also highly sensitive to environmental influences, such as soil conditions, temperature, or water availability, resulting in variable phenotypes that reduce heritability estimates and complicate reliable trait assessment across generations or locations.^[1] From a genetic perspective, morphological markers suffer from limited polymorphism, with only a small number of traits available that show sufficient variation within breeding populations to serve as reliable indicators of desired alleles.^[19] Pleiotropy further confounds their application, as a single morphological trait often influences multiple unrelated characteristics, making it difficult to select for specific target genes without unintended effects on other agronomic qualities.^[20] Moreover, detecting recessive alleles is particularly problematic, as these markers typically require progeny testing through multiple generations to reveal homozygous recessive phenotypes, adding significant time and resource demands to the breeding process.^[1] Efficiency drawbacks exacerbate these genetic and phenotypic limitations, as phenotyping large populations with morphological markers is inherently time-consuming, often necessitating extensive field observations over seasons to capture trait variability.^[1] Field evaluations are labor-intensive, involving manual measurements and subjective scoring by trained personnel, which scales poorly for modern breeding programs handling thousands of genotypes and increases the risk of human error.^[21] Historically, prior to the 1980s, plant breeding relied almost exclusively on morphological markers and phenotypic selection, a practice rooted in ancient agricultural traditions but which significantly slowed breeding cycles due to the sequential nature of trait evaluation and the inability to perform early-generation selections.^[12] This dependence persisted through the mid-20th century, with techniques like backcrossing—first described in 1922 and widely used through the mid-20th century—still limited by the absence of non-destructive, genotype-based tools, ultimately driving the adoption of molecular markers to accelerate progress in crop improvement.^[1] In contrast, molecular markers offer stable, early detection without these constraints, enabling more precise MAS applications.^[19]

Selection Strategies

Gene-Marker Linkage

In marker-assisted selection (MAS), the efficacy hinges on the genetic linkage between molecular markers and target genes or quantitative trait loci (QTLs), which allows indirect selection for desirable alleles without relying solely on phenotypic evaluation. Genetic linkage refers to the tendency of alleles at different loci on the same chromosome to be inherited together due to their proximity, reducing the frequency of recombination events between them during meiosis. This contrasts with physical linkage, which describes the actual nucleotide distance between loci on the DNA molecule, often measured in base pairs, while genetic linkage is quantified in map units called centimorgans (cM). One centimorgan corresponds to a recombination frequency of approximately 1%, meaning there is a 1% chance of a crossover occurring between two loci separated by that distance.^[22]^[1] Marker-gene associations are established through mapping studies that identify polymorphisms tightly linked to the target. For QTLs, which control complex traits influenced by multiple genes, flanking markers are typically used; these are positioned on either side of the QTL interval, ideally within 5 cM, to bracket the region and minimize the chance of recombination disrupting the association. In contrast, for known major genes with well-characterized sequences, diagnostic markers are developed directly from polymorphisms within or immediately adjacent to the gene itself, enabling precise allele detection with near-perfect linkage. These associations allow breeders to infer the presence of favorable alleles based on marker genotypes, facilitating early-generation selection in breeding programs.^[1]^[23]^[24] Recombination poses a key risk to MAS accuracy, as crossovers can dissociate markers from target alleles, leading to false positives or negatives in selection. Single recombinants may separate a marker from its linked gene, but the probability increases with map distance; for markers farther than 10-20 cM, linkage becomes unreliable for practical breeding. Double recombinants, involving crossovers on both sides of a target locus (e.g., between two flanking markers), are rarer but can cause complete marker-trait dissociation; their frequency is approximately (θ)² under no interference, where θ is the recombination fraction, though chromosomal interference often reduces this. This risk is mitigated by using multiple flanking markers or confirmatory phenotypic tests in advanced generations. Linkage disequilibrium (LD), the non-random association of alleles at linked loci, decays over generations due to recombination, influencing the persistence of marker-gene associations in populations. Actual decay depends on effective population size and mutation.^[1]^[15]^[25] Molecular markers themselves are typically neutral DNA sequences that do not encode functional proteins or directly influence traits, distinguishing them from the target genes, which are causal variants affecting phenotype. Markers serve as proxies to track the inheritance of linked gene alleles indirectly through co-segregation, relying on the stability of linkage rather than any biological function of the marker locus. This neutrality ensures markers are polymorphic across diverse germplasm without pleiotropic effects, but it also underscores the need for validated linkages to avoid selection errors from recombination or population-specific LD patterns.^[10]^[26]

Positive and Negative Selectable Markers

In marker-assisted selection (MAS), positive selectable markers are DNA markers closely linked to beneficial alleles, such as those conferring disease or pest resistance, enabling breeders to identify and select carrier individuals at early developmental stages without relying on phenotypic expression.^[1] These markers facilitate indirect selection for traits that may be difficult or time-consuming to evaluate phenotypically, such as quantitative resistance loci, thereby accelerating breeding cycles.^[1] Negative selectable markers, in contrast, are those associated with undesirable alleles or genomic segments, allowing breeders to exclude individuals carrying susceptibility loci or unwanted donor DNA from populations.^[1] By targeting these markers, selection against linked deleterious traits, such as linkage drag in backcrossing, becomes feasible, purifying breeding lines more efficiently than phenotypic screening alone.^[27] In applications, positive markers are primarily employed in foreground selection to confirm the presence of target beneficial alleles, ensuring their incorporation into elite germplasm.^[1] Meanwhile, negative markers support background selection to maximize recovery of the recurrent parent genome, minimizing extraneous donor contributions and enhancing genetic purity.^[27] This dual approach leverages gene-marker linkage to optimize MAS outcomes in breeding programs.^[1] Representative examples include the use of positive markers linked to insect resistance genes in cotton, such as those associated with Bt toxin expression for lepidopteran pest control, which have enabled efficient selection of resistant varieties.^[28] For negative selection, markers have been used in potato breeding to exclude lines susceptible to potato virus Y (PVY).^[29]

Favorable Scenarios for MAS

Marker-assisted selection (MAS) is particularly advantageous for traits governed by major genes exhibiting high heritability, such as monogenic disease resistance, where conventional phenotyping may be unreliable due to environmental interactions. For instance, in rice breeding, MAS has been effectively used to pyramid multiple resistance genes against bacterial blight, including Xa21, xa5, and xa13, enabling the development of durable resistant varieties more efficiently than traditional methods.^[6]^[30] Similarly, MAS facilitates selection for difficult-to-phenotype traits that require destructive or labor-intensive evaluations, such as root architecture in cereals or fiber quality in cotton, where markers allow indirect assessment without compromising plant integrity.^[6]^[31] In terms of population structures, MAS excels in early-generation selection within F2 or backcross populations, where it enables the rapid elimination of undesirable genotypes and enrichment for favorable alleles before extensive field evaluation. This approach is especially beneficial when targeting low-frequency alleles in diverse germplasm pools, as markers can identify and fix rare homozygous favorable alleles early, significantly reducing population sizes needed for subsequent breeding steps.^[6]^[32] MAS offers substantial benefits under resource constraints, particularly in managing large populations by minimizing the need for extensive field trials through seedling-stage genotyping, which replaces costly and time-consuming phenotypic assessments. In perennial crops and animals with extended generation times, such as fruit trees or livestock, MAS accelerates breeding cycles by allowing selections at juvenile stages, thereby shortening the overall timeline from cross to commercial release compared to waiting for mature phenotypes.^[6] Economically, MAS is favorable for high-value traits where phenotyping expenses surpass genotyping costs, such as drought tolerance in cereals, enabling cost-effective introgression of resilience QTLs while avoiding resource-intensive stress trials. For example, in rice programs targeting drought-related traits, MAS strategies have demonstrated cost savings relative to traditional approaches, enhancing returns on investment for breeders.^[6]

Implementation Methods

Core Steps in MAS

Marker-assisted selection (MAS) involves a structured, sequential protocol to integrate molecular markers into breeding programs, enabling indirect selection for target traits based on genotypic data rather than solely on phenotypic evaluation. This approach typically encompasses five core steps: identifying the target trait and linked markers, developing a mapping population, genotyping and phenotyping to establish associations, validating the markers, and applying them in selection cycles. These steps allow breeders to accelerate genetic improvement while minimizing the time and resources required for field-based assessments.^[1] The process begins with identifying the target trait, such as disease resistance or yield enhancement, and mapping molecular markers tightly linked to the underlying genes or quantitative trait loci (QTL). Breeders select parents with known genetic diversity and use existing genetic maps or preliminary linkage studies to identify polymorphic markers, such as simple sequence repeats (SSRs) or single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), positioned within 5 centimorgans (cM) of the target locus to ensure reliable association. This step requires assessing the trait's heritability and genetic architecture to prioritize major-effect genes suitable for MAS. Decision points here include evaluating linkage phase—whether markers are in coupling or repulsion—to adjust for potential recombination events that could reduce accuracy.^[33]^[34] Next, a mapping population is developed by crossing selected parents to generate segregating progeny, such as F2 or recombinant inbred lines, which provide the genetic variation needed for analysis. This population must be sufficiently large (often 100-200 individuals) to detect linkage with statistical confidence and should represent the breeding program's genetic background to avoid biases from exotic germplasm.^[1]^[23] In the third step, the population undergoes genotyping with the candidate markers and phenotyping under relevant environmental conditions to confirm marker-trait associations, often incorporating brief QTL mapping to quantify linkage strength. Genotyping identifies individuals carrying the desired alleles, while phenotyping validates the trait's expression; statistical tools like interval mapping help establish the linkage disequilibrium. For polygenic traits, this step integrates preliminary phenotypic data to prioritize markers for major QTL, ensuring the associations hold across replicates.^[33]^[34] Marker validation follows, typically through progeny testing or multi-environment trials, to assess reliability across generations and genetic backgrounds. This involves advancing selected lines and re-genotyping to check for false positives due to recombination or epistasis, with adjustments made if linkage phase shifts or environmental interactions emerge. Validation is crucial for decision points like discarding loosely linked markers (<95% accuracy threshold) or expanding to flanking marker sets for robustness. Only validated markers proceed to ensure MAS efficacy in practical breeding.^[1]^[23] Finally, validated markers are applied in selection cycles, such as backcrossing or early-generation screening, to select progeny carrying favorable alleles. In backcross schemes, foreground selection targets the trait-linked marker, while background selection recovers the recurrent parent's genome to minimize linkage drag. For polygenic traits, MAS is combined with phenotypic selection in a stepwise manner—using markers for major genes and phenotyping for minor effects—to optimize resource allocation and genetic gain. This integration is particularly valuable for traits with low heritability, where MAS reduces the need for extensive field trials. Each MAS cycle typically spans 1-2 years, compared to 5-10 years for conventional phenotyping-dependent breeding, enabling faster cultivar development.^[34]^[33]

QTL Mapping Techniques

Quantitative trait loci (QTL) mapping techniques are essential for identifying genomic regions associated with quantitative traits in marker-assisted selection (MAS), enabling the localization of genetic variants that contribute to trait variation. These methods analyze linkage between molecular markers and phenotypic data in segregating populations to detect QTL with statistical confidence. Early approaches like single-marker analysis were limited by their inability to account for multiple QTL effects, but subsequent advancements have enhanced precision and power.^[35] Composite interval mapping (CIM) represents a key improvement over single-marker methods, integrating interval mapping with multiple regression to control for background genetic variation from other QTL. Developed by Zeng in 1994, CIM scans the genome by testing pairs of flanking markers while including selected markers as covariates, thereby increasing mapping resolution and reducing bias in QTL position estimates. This technique has been widely adopted for biparental populations, demonstrating higher statistical power in detecting QTL compared to simpler models.^[35]^[36] Building on CIM, inclusive composite interval mapping (ICIM) further refines the approach by incorporating all available marker information through a two-step process: first selecting background markers, then performing interval mapping while adjusting for their effects. Proposed by Li et al. in 2007, ICIM effectively handles multiple linked QTL and epistatic interactions, improving detection of small-effect QTL in complex traits. Simulations have shown ICIM to yield more accurate QTL effect estimates and lower false positive rates than standard CIM.^[36]^[37] Appropriate population designs are critical for reliable QTL mapping, with recombinant inbred lines (RILs) providing stable, homozygous lines derived from repeated selfing of F2 individuals, allowing replication across environments to enhance mapping accuracy. RILs facilitate the accumulation of recombination events over generations, increasing resolution for fine-mapping QTL. Similarly, doubled haploid (DH) lines, produced via haploid induction and chromosome doubling, offer rapid generation of completely homozygous populations, ideal for QTL detection in crops like wheat and barley where inbreeding is feasible. DH populations enable immediate fixation of alleles, reducing environmental noise in phenotypic evaluations.^[38]^[39] Statistical models in QTL mapping rely on likelihood ratio tests to assess significance, commonly using LOD (logarithm of odds) scores, where a QTL is declared significant if the LOD exceeds a genome-wide threshold typically around 3.0, determined via permutation tests to control type I error at 5%. LOD scores compare the likelihood of data under a model with versus without a QTL at a given position. QTL effects are estimated using additive and dominance models, partitioning phenotypic variance into contributions from individual loci and their interactions, with additive effects representing the average difference between homozygotes and dominance effects capturing heterozygote deviations.^[40]^[41] Software tools facilitate these analyses, with QTL Cartographer providing a graphical interface for CIM and related methods, supporting linkage map construction, permutation tests, and effect estimation in Windows environments. For open-source alternatives, the R/qtl package offers comprehensive functionality for single- and multiple-QTL mapping, including ICIM variants, cross-validation, and visualization, making it suitable for diverse experimental designs in R. These tools integrate seamlessly into the core steps of MAS by providing validated QTL positions for subsequent marker selection.^[42]^[43]

High-Throughput Genotyping

High-throughput genotyping refers to advanced technologies that enable the simultaneous analysis of thousands to millions of genetic markers across large populations, facilitating efficient marker-assisted selection (MAS) in breeding programs by providing rapid and scalable data on polymorphisms such as single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), which serve as primary targets for trait-associated loci.^[44] These methods have revolutionized MAS by allowing breeders to screen diverse germplasm for favorable alleles without relying on time-consuming phenotypic evaluations.^[45] Key methods include SNP arrays, such as the Illumina GoldenGate assay, which supports genotyping of over 1,500 SNPs per sample through allele-specific oligonucleotide ligation and hybridization on bead arrays, enabling cost-effective analysis in crops like soybean for MAS applications.^[46] Complementing arrays, next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based approaches like genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS) generate data on millions of SNPs by digesting genomic DNA with restriction enzymes, ligating adapters, and sequencing reduced-representation libraries, offering higher resolution for complex traits in large populations.^[44]^[47] Advancements in these technologies trace back to 1990s gel-based methods, such as restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) and simple sequence repeat (SSR) analysis via electrophoresis, which were labor-intensive and limited to few markers, evolving into microarray hybridization in the 2000s and NGS platforms by the mid-2000s for massively parallel processing.^[48] By the 2020s, emerging CRISPR-based detection methods, such as those using Cas12a or Cas13 for SNP-specific cleavage and readout, have begun integrating with high-throughput formats to enhance sensitivity and specificity in targeted genotyping, though they remain supplementary to NGS.^[49] Cost reductions have been dramatic, with per-sample expenses for mid-density arrays (e.g., 5,000 SNPs) dropping to around $10 USD, equating to less than $0.01 per data point by 2025, driven by improved multiplexing and automation.^[50]^[51] The typical workflow begins with DNA extraction from plant tissues, often automated for high volumes, followed by target amplification via PCR or restriction digestion to enrich marker regions.^[52] For arrays, this leads to hybridization on solid supports for allele detection; for NGS like GBS, adapter-ligated fragments undergo sequencing on platforms such as Illumina NovaSeq, generating short reads that are aligned to reference genomes.^[53]^[54] Data analysis then involves bioinformatics pipelines for variant calling, using software like TASSEL or GATK to determine genotypes with high confidence.^[45] Challenges in high-throughput genotyping, such as sequencing errors and missing data, are mitigated through imputation algorithms like Beagle or IMPUTE2, achieving error rates below 1% (often <0.5%) by inferring genotypes from linkage disequilibrium patterns in reference panels.^[55]^[56] Scalability has improved to handle over 10,000 samples per run via multiplexed library preparation and cloud-based computing, supporting population-level MAS without bottlenecks.^[47]^[57]

Advanced Applications

Selection for Major Genes

Marker-assisted selection (MAS) for major genes involves the use of molecular markers tightly linked to known genes that control qualitative traits, enabling breeders to select plants carrying the desired allele without relying on phenotypic expression. This approach is particularly effective for monogenic traits where the gene's location is well-characterized, allowing direct marker-based genotyping in early breeding generations. For instance, in wheat, the Rht1 gene conferring dwarfing and improved lodging resistance has been targeted using markers such as Rht-B1 and Rht-D1, which flank the gene on chromosomes 4B and 4D, respectively. Validation of these markers typically involves co-segregation analysis, where marker alleles are confirmed to consistently inherit with the target gene in segregating populations, ensuring reliability in selection decisions. The primary benefits of MAS for major genes include near-perfect selection accuracy when markers are in complete linkage disequilibrium with the target locus, often achieving 100% efficiency for dominant or codominant markers without recombination events. This precision allows for early-generation pyramiding, where multiple major genes can be stacked in a single genotype to enhance trait durability, such as combining disease resistance genes before field evaluation. Compared to traditional phenotypic selection, which may only achieve around 50% efficiency due to environmental masking or late-stage expression, MAS boosts selection efficiency to over 90%, significantly accelerating breeding cycles by 2-3 years through off-season or seedling-stage screening. A notable case study is the deployment of the Sub1 quantitative trait locus (QTL), effectively functioning as a major gene for submergence tolerance in rice, which was introgressed via MAS into popular varieties like Swarna and IR64 starting in 2006. This effort, led by the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), utilized flanking markers RM219 and RM464A to select for the Sub1A allele, resulting in tolerant lines that maintain yield under 14-17 days of complete submergence, a common stress in flood-prone areas. Another example is the Rx1 gene in potato, which confers extreme resistance to Potato virus X (PVX); MAS using markers like 5Rx1 has enabled efficient introgression into elite cultivars, reducing yield losses from PVX infection to near zero in selected lines, thereby enhancing seed tuber quality.^[58] These applications highlight how MAS for major genes translates research into practical, high-impact breeding outcomes.

Backcross Breeding with MAS

Backcross breeding with marker-assisted selection (MAS) optimizes the traditional backcrossing process by using molecular markers to efficiently introgress a target trait from a donor parent into an elite recurrent parent while minimizing linkage drag and rapidly recovering the recurrent parent's genetic background. The modified protocol involves three key selection stages: foreground selection to confirm the presence and homozygosity of the target gene using closely linked markers; recombinant selection to identify and select crossovers in the flanking regions of the target locus, thereby shortening the size of the introgressed donor segment; and background selection to screen unlinked genomic regions with markers distributed across the genome, selecting progeny that maximize recovery of the recurrent parent genome, typically aiming for 95% or higher recurrent parent genome (RPG) content.^[1]^[27] This approach typically progresses through BC1 to BC3 generations, where MAS enables phenotypic selection to be supplemented or replaced by genotypic screening, significantly reducing the population size needed per generation and accelerating the breeding cycle to approximately one year per generation compared to the longer timelines of conventional backcrossing.^[59]^[60] In background selection, the expected genome recovery rate for unlinked regions can be modeled as $1 - (1 - r)^n, where r represents the recombination fraction (often approximating 0.5 for unlinked loci) and n is the number of backcross generations; with MAS, targeted selection of individuals with the highest recurrent parent allele frequency at marker loci enhances this recovery, allowing near-complete restoration in fewer generations than the conventional rate of $1 - \frac{1}{2^{n+1}}.^[61] Representative examples include the use of MAS in backcrossing restorer genes into elite lines for hybrid rice production, achieving high RPG recovery (over 95%) in BC3 while maintaining fertility restoration. Similarly, MAS has facilitated the backcrossing of transgenes into elite cotton varieties, recovering high RPG in BC3 while preserving fiber quality traits.^[62]

Marker-Assisted Gene Pyramiding

Marker-assisted gene pyramiding is a breeding strategy that stacks multiple favorable alleles, typically major resistance genes, into a single genotype to enhance trait durability and breadth, such as against evolving pathogens. This approach leverages molecular markers tightly linked to target loci for precise selection, enabling the combination of genes from diverse sources while minimizing the introduction of unwanted genomic regions. Common strategies involve sequential introgression, where individual genes are transferred and fixed before adding the next, or simultaneous selection in segregating populations using markers for unlinked genes to identify multi-gene recombinants efficiently. By focusing on unlinked or distantly linked markers, breeders can avoid linkage drag, ensuring the retention of desirable agronomic traits from the elite recurrent parent.^[63] A key challenge in this process is the rarity of obtaining homozygous combinations for multiple unlinked genes, with the theoretical probability decreasing exponentially as (1/4)^n, where n represents the number of genes; for instance, pyramiding three genes yields only a 1/64 chance per individual in an F2 population. Epistatic interactions or environmental influences may also mask additive effects, necessitating rigorous phenotypic validation through multi-location field trials to confirm enhanced performance.^[64] In rice, marker-assisted pyramiding of the blast resistance genes Pi1, Pi54, and Pita into the elite variety Mushk Budji via backcrossing has produced lines with complete resistance to diverse Magnaporthe oryzae isolates, achieving 100% disease control at field hotspots compared to 70% yield losses in the susceptible recurrent parent. Similarly, in tomato, stacking the Ty-2 and Ty-3 genes—encoding RNA-dependent RNA polymerases—has generated broad-spectrum resistance to monopartite and bipartite begomoviruses causing leaf curl disease, with pyramided lines showing significantly reduced symptom severity and virus titers relative to single-gene counterparts under natural infection pressures. These outcomes illustrate cumulative benefits, where multi-gene combinations often provide 80–90% overall disease suppression versus approximately 50% from individual genes, promoting long-term trait stability.^[65]

Single-Step MAS Integrated with QTL Mapping

Single-step marker-assisted selection (MAS) integrated with quantitative trait locus (QTL) mapping enables concurrent genotype-to-phenotype prediction within a single breeding cycle by utilizing mapping populations to identify and select favorable alleles iteratively. This approach, often termed "mapping-as-you-go" or advanced backcross QTL (AB-QTL) analysis, involves continuous backcrossing schemes where phenotypic data from early generations (e.g., BC1 to BC3) refines QTL location and effect estimates, allowing immediate incorporation into selection without separate validation steps.^[66]^[67] By estimating allele substitution effects through single interval mapping on marker data, it facilitates the transfer of QTL from donor lines to elite recipients while accounting for polygenic background effects.^[66] Key techniques include multi-parent advanced generation inter-cross (MAGIC) populations, which enhance fine-mapping resolution through increased recombination and allelic diversity from multiple founders, and nested association mapping (NAM) designs that combine linkage and association mapping for precise QTL detection. MAGIC populations, developed via funnel intercrossing of 4–8 parents followed by advanced recombinant inbred lines, support single-step integration by enabling high-density marker analysis to pinpoint causal variants for complex traits.^[68] As an extension, genomic selection (GS) builds on this framework by incorporating genome-wide markers to predict breeding values, capturing small-effect QTLs overlooked in traditional MAS.^[69] This integration offers advantages in handling polygenic traits by leveraging diverse alleles and reducing linkage disequilibrium, thereby shortening breeding generations through simultaneous discovery and selection. For instance, in maize, the NAM population—comprising 5,000 recombinant inbred lines from 25 diverse founders crossed to a common parent—has identified yield QTLs explaining up to 90% of variation in traits like flowering time, enabling direct MAS for improved lines.^[70] Similarly, sorghum programs in the 2020s have used MAS to introgress stay-green QTLs (e.g., Stg3A and Stg3B on chromosomes SBI-02 and SBI-03), boosting grain yield by 30% under drought stress via marker-assisted backcrossing in mapping populations.^[71] Limitations include the need for large populations (typically 500+ individuals) to maintain statistical power and avoid allele loss, alongside high computational demands for analyzing dense marker data and polygenic models.^[67] Recent advances as of 2025 integrate single-step MAS with CRISPR-Cas9 for precise editing of QTL regions identified during mapping, enhancing allele conversion efficiency in crops like rice and maize for traits such as drought tolerance.^[72]

References

[1]
Marker-assisted selection: an approach for precision plant breeding ...
The use of DNA markers in plant breeding is called marker-assisted selection (MAS) and is a component of the new discipline of 'molecular breeding'. 2. Overview ...
[2]
Marker-Assisted Selection - Objectives and Overview
Marker-assisted selection (MAS) is a method of selecting desirable individuals in a breeding scheme based on DNA molecular marker patterns.
[3]
https://passel2.unl.edu/view/lesson/a7b9c8f0ffa2/1
[4]
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334038466_Introduction_of_High_Throughput_and_Cost_Effective_SNP_Genotyping_Platforms_in_Soybean
[5]
Resolution of quantitative traits into Mendelian factors by using a ...
Oct 20, 1988 · We report the first use of a complete RFLP linkage map to resolve quantitative traits into discrete Mendelian factors, in an interspecific back-cross of tomato.
[6]
Basic concepts and methodologies of DNA marker systems in plant ...
The molecular marker methods that have been extensively reviewed are RFLP, RAPD, SCAR, AFLP, SSR, CpSSR, ISSR, RAMP, SAMPL, SRAP, SSCP, CAPS, SNP, DArT, EST, ...
[7]
https://doi.org/10.1186/s43141-021-00231-1
[8]
Molecular Markers and Marker-Assisted Breeding in Plants
In this article, we will address general principles and methodologies of marker-assisted breeding in plants and discuss some issues related to the procedures ...2.2. Dna Markers · 4. Marker-Assisted Selection · 5. Marker-Assisted...Missing: milestones | Show results with:milestones
[9]
Desirable properties of markers - Integrated Breeding Platform
Polymorphic; Reproducible; Evenly distributed across the whole genome (not clustered in particular regions); Inexpensive; Easy to analyse; Co-dominant (so that ...
[10]
Molecular Markers and Their Applications in Marker-Assisted ... - MDPI
This paper provides updated information on some markers linked to critical traits and their potential applications in wheat breeding programs.Molecular Markers And Their... · 2. Molecular Markers · 2.2. Simple Sequence Repeats...Missing: milestones | Show results with:milestones
[11]
Potential drawbacks of MAS | Marker-Assisted Selection - passel
This is based on the general guideline that across short distances, 1 cM of genetic distance is approximately equal to 1% recombination. The breeder will need ...
[12]
Recent advancements in molecular marker-assisted selection and ...
In this review, we have discussed the positive aspects of molecular marker-assisted selection and its precise applications in plant breeding programmes.Missing: milestones | Show results with:milestones
[13]
Single Nucleotide Polymorphism Genotyping for Breeding and ...
Jul 1, 2013 · Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) are ideal molecular markers due to their higher abundance. Although several types of genotyping ...
[14]
Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms: A Modern Tool to Screen Plants ...
Considering that SNP markers are based on target genes, its abundance in the genome, high automation and multiplexability, has made it a marker of choice and ...
[15]
DNA molecular markers in plant breeding: current status and recent ...
Selection of markers for QTL mapping. Different types of markers like RFLP, AFLP, ISSR, SSR, ESTs, DArT and SNPs have been commonly used for the construction ...
[16]
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8397809/
[17]
Breeder friendly phenotyping - ScienceDirect.com
It frequently requires several replicates, destructive plant sampling methods, and is often problematic to conduct in the field. ... Red arrows indicate possible ...
[18]
Centimorgan - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
Centimorgan; a unit of measurement of recombination frequency. One centimorgan is equal to a 1% chance that a marker at one genetic locus will be separated from ...
[19]
Recent advancements in molecular marker-assisted selection and ...
Common DNA markers like restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP), randomly amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD), and simple sequence repeats (SSRs) have ...
[20]
Diagnostic Kompetitive Allele-Specific PCR Markers of Wheat Broad ...
Nov 1, 2021 · To accurately and efficiently transfer and pyramid these genes using marker-assisted selection (MAS), distinctive single-nucleotide ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[21]
Linkage disequilibrium — understanding the evolutionary past and ...
In both cases, D′ = 1 (D′ is the ratio of D (a measure of linkage disequilibrium) to its maximum possible absolute value, given the allele frequencies). If ...Missing: r2 | Show results with:r2
[22]
Genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS), an ultimate marker-assisted ...
(A) Restriction enzyme digestion, in which no specific SNPs have been identified and ideal for discovering new markers for MAS programs. The complexity of ...Missing: preferred | Show results with:preferred
[23]
Chapter 6: Marker Assisted Backcrossing – Molecular Plant Breeding
During foreground selection, there is a risk that the target gene is lost due to recombination between target gene and flanking marker(s) used for foreground ...
[24]
[PDF] Role of biotechnology in Sustainable Development of Cotton
Aug 20, 2025 · The objective of this paper is to provide a report on three specific areas including transgenic technology, marker assisted selection and cotton ...
[25]
Hypoallergen Peanut Lines Identified Through Large-Scale ...
Nov 26, 2019 · Improving oil quality by altering levels of fatty acids through marker-assisted selection of ahfad2 alleles in peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) ...
[26]
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/plant-science/articles/10.3389/fpls.2014.00484/full
[27]
https://iastate.pressbooks.pub/molecularplantbreeding/chapter/marker-assisted-backcrossing/
[28]
Chapter 7: Marker Assisted Selection and Genomic Selection
Marker-assisted selection (MAS) was applied as early as the 1980s when Tanksley and Rick (1980) used isozymes as markers for introgression of an exotic trait ...Missing: origins RFLPs
[29]
[PDF] breeding in the twenty-first century Marker-assisted selection
Aug 22, 2007 · The use of DNA markers in plant breeding is called marker-assisted selection (MAS) and is a component of the new discipline of 'molecular.
[30]
[PDF] Marker Assisted Selection in Comparison to Conventional Plant ...
Feb 28, 2018 · The objective of this review is to provide an overview of the requirements for conducting a MAS program in crop plants, discuss the breeding ...
[31]
[PDF] Precision Mapping of Quantitative Trait Loci
This test can be constructed by using a combination of interval mapping with multiple regression analysis (ZENG 1993). Various properties of the multiple ...
[32]
A Modified Algorithm for the Improvement of Composite Interval ...
Composite interval mapping (CIM) is the most commonly used method for mapping quantitative trait loci (QTL) with populations derived from biparental crosses.
[33]
Inclusive Composite Interval Mapping of Quantitative Trait Genes
Aug 5, 2025 · We proposed a statistical method for QTL mapping, which was called Inclusive Composite Interval Mapping (ICIM). Two steps were included in ICIM.
[34]
The Power of QTL Mapping with RILs | PLOS One - Research journals
A common strategy of QTL mapping is to use recombinant inbred lines (RILs), which are usually established by several generations of inbreeding of an F1 ...
[35]
The Generation of Doubled Haploid Lines for QTL Mapping - PubMed
In this method, F1 plants are crossed to an engineered haploid inducer to produce haploid plants. The chromosomes of these haploids then spontaneously double, ...
[36]
LOD significance thresholds for QTL analysis in experimental ...
Nov 1, 1999 · In biology one usually desires an experiment-wise significance level of 5%. In the QTL analysis of a single segregating population this is ...
[37]
Significance Thresholds for Quantitative Trait Locus Mapping Under ...
The usual permutation test to establish statistical significance for quantitative trait locus (QTL) mapping can give inappropriate significance thresholds.
[38]
QTL_Cartographer
QTL Cartographer is a suite of programs for mapping quantitative trait loci (QTLs) onto a genetic linkage map. This package consists of several programs ...
[39]
R/qtl software for mapping quantitative trait loci
R/qtl is an extensible, interactive environment for mapping quantitative trait loci (QTL) in experimental crosses. It is implemented as an add-on package for ...Tutorials · Download · Book · Sample graphics from R/qtl
[40]
Genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS), an ultimate marker-assisted ... - NIH
Marker-assisted selection (MAS) refers to the use of molecular markers to assist phenotypic selections in crop improvement. Several types of molecular markers ...
[41]
Development and Applications of a High Throughput Genotyping ...
Feb 5, 2018 · Currently, the most popular high throughput genotyping platforms are the hybridization based SNP array and various NGS enabled genotyping such ...
[42]
[PDF] High-throughput genotyping with the GoldenGate assay in the ...
marker-assisted selection. SNPs have two main advantages over other molecular markers; they are the most abundant form of genetic variation within genomes ...
[43]
Using next-generation sequencing approach for discovery and ...
Next generation sequencing (NGS) has transformed genomics by providing low-cost, high-throughput technologies for the identification of markers in plants. This ...2. Recent Advances In... · 2.2. Illumina Sequencing... · 3. Molecular Markers In...
[44]
Overview of Genotyping Technologies and Methods - Kockum - 2023
Apr 7, 2023 · This overview covers key concepts in genetics, the development of common genotyping methods, and a comparison of several techniques, including PCR, microarrays ...Overview Of Genetics · The Development Of... · General Genotyping Methods
[45]
The rise and future of CRISPR-based approaches for high ... - PubMed
Sep 18, 2024 · This review delves into the mechanism of CRISPRi, compares it with other high-throughput gene-perturbation techniques, and highlights its superior capacities.
[46]
Development of a cost‐effective high‐throughput mid‐density 5K ...
Mar 31, 2025 · A cost-effective, high-throughput, mid-density genotyping assay with 5,081 SNPs was developed for large-scale genomic breeding and genetic ...
[47]
Reduced-Cost Genotyping by Resequencing in Peanut Breeding ...
Oct 24, 2024 · The results indicated that genotyping by a targeted resequencing approach reduced the cost from around USD 28 (SNP chip and GBS) to USD 18 per sample.
[48]
High-Throughput DNA Extraction Using Robotic Automation ... - NIH
Jul 23, 2025 · We introduce a semi-automated, robotic-assisted DNA extraction (RoboCTAB) tailored for large-scale plant genotyping, leveraging advanced yet ...
[49]
[PDF] GoldenGate Assay Workflow - Illumina
GoldenGate ... Array Matrix or BeadChip allows for the separation of the assay products in solution, onto a solid surface for individual SNP genotype readout 7 .
[50]
A high-throughput skim-sequencing approach for genotyping ...
Oct 20, 2022 · Some of the applications of GBS have included genome-wide association studies, marker-assisted and genomic selection, and haplotype demarcation.
[51]
Assessment of Imputation Quality: Comparison of Phasing and ...
We found that all tested programs with the exception of PBWT impute genotypes with very high accuracy (mean error rate < 0.005). PBTW hardly ever imputes the ...
[52]
Accuracy of haplotype estimation and whole genome imputation ...
Jan 26, 2023 · We demonstrate an attenuation in imputation accuracy within samples of non-European origin, highlighting challenges to studying complex traits ...
[53]
Amplicon vs GBS: Best Genotyping Method | Paragon Genomics
Unlike traditional genotyping methods such as PCR or arrays, GBS uses next-generation sequencing (NGS) to offer higher throughput, better scalability, and ...
[54]
Marker-assisted backcrossing: a useful method for rice improvement
The prime aim of backcross breeding is to transfer one or more genes of interest trait from donor parent into the background of the improved variety and recover ...
[55]
Marker assisted backcrossing of alcobaca gene into two elite tomato ...
Dec 21, 2022 · Through MAS, we advanced two backcross generations within one year. When conventional breeding strategies are applied, the advancement of ...
[56]
Selection Theory for Marker-Assisted Backcrossing - PMC - NIH
In this treatise, we develop a theory for marker-assisted selection for the proportion of the genome originating from the recurrent parent in a backcross ...Missing: rate formula
[57]
Marker‐Assisted Backcrossing to Develop an Elite Cytoplasmic ...
Jul 1, 2015 · The WA-CMS system is used for production of hybrid rice seed in most rice producing countries including China, Southwest Asia, India, and Iran ( ...
[58]
Advances in plant biotechnology and its adoption in developing ...
Insect-protected cotton containing a natural insecticide protein from Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt cotton) is providing millions of farmers with increased yields, ...
[59]
Marker-Assisted Breeding as Next-Generation Strategy for Genetic ...
... marker-assisted selection (MAS), genetic engineering, and in vitro ... Prospects for Bt cotton technology in India. AgBioForum. 2004;7(1-2):23–26 ...
[60]
Gene Pyramiding for Sustainable Crop Improvement against Biotic ...
A major challenge of using molecular markers in plant breeding is the high cost to secure and maintain molecular laboratories [88]. There is a huge initial ...
[61]
Toward a Theory of Marker-Assisted Gene Pyramiding - PMC - NIH
We investigate the best way to combine into a single genotype a series of target genes identified in different parents (gene pyramiding).
[62]
Marker-assisted introgression of three dominant blast resistance ...
Mar 6, 2018 · Marker Assisted Backcross Breeding (MABB) strategy was employed to transfer major blast resistance genes Pi54, Pi1 and Pita from a non-aromatic ...
[63]
Combined detection and introgression of QTL in outbred populations
One approach to shorten the time needed for introgression is to combine both QTL identification and introgression, into a single step. This combines the ...
[64]
[PDF] Marker-Assisted Selection as a Component of Conventional Plant ...
ABBREVIATIONS. I. INTRODUCTION. II. SELECTION OF TRAITS FOR MAS. A. Traits with Low Heritability. B. Traits that Are Difficult and/or Expensive to Score.
[65]
The Dawn of the Age of Multi-Parent MAGIC Populations in Plant ...
MAGIC populations are a very powerful tool for the dissection of complex traits, as well as a resource for the selection of recombinant elite breeding material ...
[66]
The accuracy of prediction of genomic selection in elite hybrid rye ...
Jul 4, 2014 · To advance the accuracy of prediction, genomic selection (GS) has been suggested as an extension of MAS [8]. In GS, a large number of molecular ...
[67]
Ten Years of the Maize Nested Association Mapping Population
In addition to the identification of thousands of QTL associated with complex traits, the NAM population has also been used to identify causal genes controlling ...
[68]
Drought Tolerance and Application of Marker-Assisted Selection in ...
Nov 30, 2021 · This review discusses mechanisms of drought tolerance in sorghum focusing on physiological, morphological, and biochemical traits.Missing: 2020s | Show results with:2020s