Horticultural Science & Technology (원예과학기술지)

Korean Society of Horticultural Science (한국원예학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Assessment of Chilling Injury and Molecular Marker Analysis in Cucumber Cultivars (Cucumis sativus L.)

  • Ali, Asjad (Department of Life Science, Dongguk University-Seoul) ;
  • Yang, Eun Mi (Department of Life Science, Dongguk University-Seoul) ;
  • Bang, Sun Woong (Department of Life Science, Dongguk University-Seoul) ;
  • Chung, Sang-Min (Department of Life Science, Dongguk University-Seoul) ;
  • Staub, Jack E. (USDA, ARS, Forage and Range Research Laboratory)
  • Received : 2013.08.30
  • Accepted : 2013.11.19
  • Published : 2014.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The responses to chilling temperature of 12 Korean cucumber varieties was compared to those of two U.S.A. (previously determined cold tolerant NC76 and 'Chipper'), and Chinese and Japanese germplasms. Seedlings of each entry were exposed to $4^{\circ}C$ (Experiment 1) and $1^{\circ}C$ (Experiments 2 and 3) at the first-true leaf stage for eight and nine hours, respectively, under 80% relative humidity (RH) and $149{\mu}moles{\cdot}m^{-2}{\cdot}s^{-1}$ photosynthetic photon flux (PPF). The chilling response [damage rating (DR)] of each accession was based on visual ratings (1 to 5) after treatment, where 1 = no damage, 2 = slight, 3 = moderate, 4 = advanced, and 5 = severe damage. Predictably the cumulative average DR of chilling tolerant line NC76 and 'Chipper' after chilling w as 1 and 1.1, respectively. Korean 'Nacdongchungjang' was most sensitive to chilling temperatures [DR = 2.3] when compared to the other entries examined. The sensitivity to chilling of 'Nacdongchungjang' was followed by Chinese 'Dongguan' [DR = 1.7]. In contrast, 'Saeronchungjang' (DR = 1) and 'Janghyungnachap' (DR = 1) were the most chilling tolerant of the Korean accessions examined and equivalent to the response of line NC76 and 'Chipper'. Nevertheless, chloroplast type genotyping of these accessions with known chilling-linked sdCAPS genomic markers revealed genotypic differences between chilling tolerant lines (NC76 and 'Chipper') and all Korean lines examined.

Keywords

References

  1. Ali, A., E.M. Yang, S.Y. Lee, and S.-M. Chung. 2013. Evaluation of chloroplast genotypes of Korean cucumber cultivars (Cucumis sativus L.) using sdCAPS markers related to chilling tolerance. Kor. J. Hort. Sci. Technol. 31:219-223. https://doi.org/10.7235/hort.2013.12161
  2. Brüggemann, W., T.A.W. van der Kooji, and P.R. van Hasselt. 1992. Long-term chilling of young tomato plants under low light and subsequent recovery. Planta 186:172-178. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00196246
  3. Chung, S.-M., D.S. Decker-walters, and J.E. Staub. 2003a. Genetic relationships within the cucurbitaceae as assessed by ccssr marker and sequence analysis. Can. J. Botany 81:814-832. https://doi.org/10.1139/b03-074
  4. Chung, S.-M., V.S. Gordon, and J.E. Staub. 2007. Sequencing cucumber (Cucumis sativus L.) chloroplast genomes identifies differences between chilling-tolerant and -susceptible cucumber lines. Genome 50:215-225. https://doi.org/10.1139/G07-003
  5. Chung, S.-M., J.E. Staub, and G. Fazio. 2003b. Inheritance of chilling injury; A maternally inherited trait in cucumber. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 128:526-530.
  6. Fan, Z., M.D. Robbins, and J.E. Staub. 2006. Population development by phenotypic selection with subsequent marker-assisted selection for line extraction in cucumber (Cucumis sativus L.). Theor. Appl. Genet. 112:843-855. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00122-005-0186-x
  7. Fazio, G., S-M. Chung, and J.E. Staub. 2003. Comparative analysis of response to phenotypic and marker-assisted selection for multiple lateral branching in cucumber (Cucumis sativus L.). Theor. Appl. Genet. 107:875-883. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00122-003-1313-1
  8. Gomes, E., M.K. Jakobsen, K.B. Axelsen, M. Geisler, and M.G. Palmgren. 2000. Chilling tolerance in Arabidopsis involves ALA1, a member of a new family of putative aminophospholipid translocases. Plant Cell 12:2441-2454. https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.12.12.2441
  9. Gordon, V.S. and J.E. Staub. 2011. Comparative analysis of chilling response in cucumber (Cucumis sativus L.) through plastidic and nuclear genetic component analysis. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 136:256-264.
  10. Hetherington, S.E., J. He, and R.M. Smillie. 1989. Photoinhibition at low temperature in chilling-sensitive and resistant plants. Plant Physiol. 90:1609-1615. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.90.4.1609
  11. Hetherington, S.E. and G. Oquist. 1988. Monitoring chilling injury:Comparison of chlorophyll fluorescence measurements, post-chilling growth and visible symptoms of injury in Zea mays. Plant Physiol. 72:241-247. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3054.1988.tb05829.x
  12. Horejsi, T. and J.E. Staub. 1999. Genetic variation in cucumber (Cucumis sativus L.) as assessed by random amplified polymorphic DNA. Genet. Res. Crop. Evol. 46:337-350. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008650509966
  13. Hughes, M.A. and M.A. Dunn. 1996. The molecular biology of plant acclimation to low temperature. J. Exp. Bot. 47:291-305. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/47.3.291
  14. Huner, N.P.A., G. Oquist, and F. Sarhan. 1998. Energy balance and acclimation to light and cold. Trends Plant Sci. 3:224-230. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1360-1385(98)01248-5
  15. Jackman, R.L., R.Y. Yada, A. Marangoni, K.L. Parkin, and D.W. Stanley. 1988. Chilling injury. A review of quality aspects. J. Food Sci. 11:253-277.
  16. Kozik, E.U. and T.C. Wehner. 2008. A single dominant gene Ch for chilling resistance in cucumber seedlings. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 133:225-227.
  17. Kudoh, H. and K. Sonoike. 2002. Irreversible damage to photosystem I by chilling in light: Cause of the degradation of chlorophyll after returning to normal growth temperature. Planta 215:541-548. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00425-002-0790-9
  18. Kuk, Y.I. and J.S. Shin. 2007. Mechanisms of low-temperature tolerance in cucumber leaves of various ages. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 132:294-301.
  19. Nishida, I. and N. Murata. 1996. Chilling sensitivity in plants and cyanobacteria: The crucial contribution of membrane lipids. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 47:541-568. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.arplant.47.1.541
  20. Saltveit, M.E. Jr. and L.L. Morris. 1990. Overview on chilling injury of horticultural crops, p. 3-15. In: C.Y. Wang (ed.). Chilling injury of horticultural crops. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
  21. Smallwood, M. and D.J. Bowles. 2002. Plants in a cold climate. Philos Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B. Biol. Sci. 357:831-847. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2002.1073
  22. Smeets, L. and T. Wehner. 1997. Environmental effects on genetic variation of chilling resistance in cucumber. Euphytica 97:217-225. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003084821178
  23. Sonoike, K. 1996a. Degradation of psaB gene product, the reaction center subunit of photosystem I, is caused during photo-inhibition of photosystem I: possible involvement of active oxygen species. Plant Sci. 115:157-164. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-9452(96)04341-5
  24. Sonoike, K. 1996b. Photoinhibition of photosystem I: Its physiological significance in the chilling sensitivity of plants. Plant Cell Physiol. 37:239-247. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.pcp.a028938
  25. Sonoike, K. 1998. Various aspects of inhibition of photosynthesis under light/chilling stress: "photoinhibition at chilling temperatures" versus "chilling damage in the light". J. Plant Res. 111:121-129. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02507158
  26. Staub, J.E. and T.C. Wehner. 1996. Noninfectious disorders: Temperature stress, p. 66-87. In: T.A. Zitter, D.L. Hopkins, and C.E. Thomas (eds.). Compendium of cucurbit disease Part II. APS press, St. Paul, MN.
  27. Synder, R.L. and J.P. Abreu. 2005. Frost protection: Fundamentals, practice and economics Vol. 1. FAO, Rome.
  28. Thomashow, M.F. 1999. Plant cold acclimation: Freezing tolerance genes and regulatory mechanisms. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 50:571-599. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.arplant.50.1.571

Cited by

  1. TAKING ADVANTAGE OF ORGANELLE GENOMES IN PLANT BREEDING: AN INTEGRATED APPROACH vol.30, pp.1, 2014, https://doi.org/10.35407/bag.2019.xxx.01.05