Skip Navigation


Journal of Heredity Advance Access originally published online on December 11, 2006
Journal of Heredity 2007 98(1):79-83; doi:10.1093/jhered/esl049
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
98/1/79    most recent
esl049v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ahuja, S. L.
Right arrow Articles by Dhayal, L. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ahuja, S. L.
Right arrow Articles by Dhayal, L. S.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The American Genetic Association. 2006. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

Brief Communications

Genetics of Resistance to Cotton Leaf Curl Disease in Gossypium hirsutum L. under Field Conditions

Shankar Lal Ahuja, Dilip Monga, and Laxman Singh Dhayal

From the Central Institute for Cotton Research, Regional Station, Sirsa, Haryana 125 055, India

Address correspondence to S. L. Ahuja at the address above, or e-mail: slahuja2002{at}yahoo.com.

One hundred and forty two cotton germplasm lines were screened for cotton leaf curl virus symptoms in field evaluations during 2003, 2004, and 2005. Fifty cross combinations involving 30 of these lines classified resistant or susceptible were used for inheritance study of the disease. All the F1 plants of crosses involving resistant x resistant, resistant x susceptible, and susceptible x resistant parents were resistant, indicating dominant expression of the disease resistance and there were no maternal or cytoplasmic effects detected from reciprocal hybridization. In 22 crosses, 4 types of segregation patterns were obtained in the F2 generations. A good fit for 15 (resistant):1 (susceptible), 13 (resistant):3 (susceptible), 9 (resistant):7 (susceptible) ratios indicated digenic control of the trait with duplicate dominant, dominant inhibitory, and duplicate recessive epistasis, respectively. Three-gene control with triplicate dominant epistasis was obtained in one of the crosses. This segregation pattern, however, needs further confirmation due to smaller population size. The absence of complementary gene action was obtained in 1 susceptible x susceptible and 27 resistant x resistant crosses as their F1s were susceptible and resistant, respectively, and F2 generation lacked segregation.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.