Texas cotton getting a genetic 'tune-up'

Nov 09, 2012

Can you imagine trying to build a competitive race car with old parts? Chances are, the entry would not fare well at the Indy 500. Very much the same thing might be said about today's crops, according to a Texas A&M AgriLife Research scientist.

"Contemporary such as Texas cotton are like finely tuned racing machines—they need high quality parts to perform optimally," said Dr. David Stelly, AgriLife Research cotton geneticist in College Station. "And they constantly need new ones to replace ones that are no longer functional, as well as those that are still effective but no longer at the cutting edge of competition."

Stelly said his role in the AgriLife Research cotton breeding program is to infuse new genes and gene combinations into the genetics and breeding research arena, "so that we can utilize natural genetic resources to help meet the many challenges breeding programs face."

Transferring genes into a cultivated crop from a wild species "is like swimming upstream, one is fighting all sorts of biological and genetic barriers," he said. For years, he and his long-time research assistant, Dwaine Raska, have been transferring the alien genes by a special breeding process called "chromosome substitution."

"Using chromosome substitution, we can target one pair of cultivated cotton chromosomes at a time, and replace it with the corresponding pair of chromosomes from a wild species chosen as the donor. On average, each substitution replaces about 2,000 cotton genes with donor genes," Stelly said.

Having already developed chromosome substitution lines for many chromosomes from three donor species, Stelly is working in collaboration with a former graduate student, Dr. Sukumar Saha, now with the U.S. Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service unit at Mississippi State University, and his associates, to document their effects on cotton plant and fiber improvement.

Stelly noted that the chromosome substitution breeding and research was made possible only because of teamwork among researchers and research supporters, especially AgriLife Research, the Texas State Support Committee, Cotton Inc., the Texas Department of Agriculture's Food and Fiber Research Commission and the Agricultural Research Service.

To significantly advance the cotton industry's "racing machines," breeders must shop around to find the best parts, and figure out how to optimize their contributions to performance, he said.

"Fortunately, nature provides a plethora of genetic variation," Stelly said. "It's up to us to find it, move it into agronomically useful types, and to figure out how to use it wisely. Whether mechanical or genetic, making one change often requires that others be made to achieve superiority."

Contemporary production of cotton in Texas and elsewhere requires cotton seed with superb genes, plus good production infrastructure and technology, superb growers and a good dose of luck, he said.

"If a grower sows cotton seeds lacking a fantastic set of genes that confer high production, high fiber quality, resilience to stresses, pests and pathogens, expectations for the crop would be less than good from the outset."

The grower's requirements pose an extreme challenge for cotton breeding programs that release cultivated varieties, because producers must buy elite genetic types that are good-to-great for all traits, Stelly said.

Because of the ever-present pressure for rapid development of successful cultivars, U.S. breeding programs have historically relied heavily on previously developed cultivars and closely related lines as parents, he said. This recycling of genes from relatively few historically elite agricultural types of cotton has created a genetic "bottleneck."

"We have excellent genetic types of cotton and excellent cotton breeders, but we need 'new blood' or new cotton genes, to create lots of new genetic combinations, of which a few are likely to yield significant improvements," Stelly said.

While Texas leads the U.S. in cotton production, producing about 25 percent of the nation's crop on about 6 million acres, there is competition to this No. 1 cash crop for the state, Stelly said.

"Industrial technologies and competition from synthetic petroleum-based fibers demand significant modifications and enhancements to cotton fiber physical and chemical properties, especially those that affect dying and high-speed processing," he said.

Also, ongoing climate changes will alter the scope and scale of the challenges found in current production areas, and probably lead to production in new areas with new sets of biotic and abiotic problems, Stelly said.

"We can use genes to address these challenges and competition in the field," he said.

Genetic improvements or modifications can help keep pests and pathogens at bay, fight off abiotic stresses such as cold, heat, water deficiencies, salt and nutrient deficiencies, Stelly said.

Stelly sees the opportunities for genetic improvements as almost unlimited, and very exciting.

"A key ingredient, in almost all scenarios, is the availability of ample amounts of genetic variation that is available to the breeder to mold new, improved genetic types using the combinatorial 'magic' of Mendelian heredity," Stelly said. "We are concomitantly developing high-throughput DNA marker methods for cotton to expedite that follow-through work with the chromosome substitution lines."

Traditional breeding methods are not very effective for infusing wild germplasm into cotton, he said, because during the back-crossing process, "we think that the alien genes get eliminated very quickly." Stelly uses a modified method for chromosome substitution to avoid those problems almost completely.

The effects differ among each alien chromosome, he said, ultimately depending on which genes are present on that substituted chromosome, and how they interact with the other approximate 58,000 genes found in Upland cotton.

Stelly said they are beginning to apply genomics tools to determine which are present, which are expressed and how they interact. Once developed, the lines produced by the project can be screened and "used by anyone … and for essentially any trait subject to genetic control," he said.

"The resulting advances will enable the baseline performances of cotton to be elevated, and could lead to unforeseen revolutionary advances."

Stelly said one of the group's main activities at present is to recruit partners – breeders, physiologists, pathologists – in studying these new chromosome substitution lines.

"We are actively seeking partners to help breed derived types that can help the research community pinpoint single-gene and multi-gene effects in manners complementary to other means of genetic analysis," he said. "My expectation is that with the aid of marker-based selection, the breeding community will be able to use these new kinds of wild germplasm resources far, far more effectively than in the past. It just keeps getting more and more exciting."

Explore further: Bitter food but good medicine from cucumber genetics

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

A greener way to raise cotton and combat nematodes

Jul 16, 2012

(Phys.org) -- U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) scientists are using molecular tools to help cotton growers cut back on their use of pesticides in controlling one of their worst adversaries: the root-knot ...

How cotton was born

Jul 28, 2011

A coming together and genetic merging of an American plant with an African or Asian plant one or two million years ago produced the ancestor of the bush that now provides 90% of the world’s commercial cotton. And although ...

Chinese scientists crack the genome of diploid cotton

Aug 28, 2012

The international research team led by Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences and BGI have completed the genome sequence and analysis of a diploid cotton— Gossypium raimondii. The cotton genome provides an invaluable resour ...

Cotton's potential for padding nonwovens

Sep 09, 2011

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) scientists have conducted studies to investigate the use of virgin cotton in nonwoven materials and products. The work was led by cotton technologist Paul Sawhney and his colleagues at ...

Recommended for you

Bitter food but good medicine from cucumber genetics

17 hours ago

High-tech genomics and traditional Chinese medicine come together as researchers identify the genes responsible for the intense bitter taste of wild cucumbers. Taming this bitterness made cucumber, pumpkin ...

New button mushroom varieties need better protection

22 hours ago

A working group has recently been formed to work on a better protection of button mushroom varieties. It's activities are firstly directed to generate consensus among the spawn/breeding companies to consider ...

Cataloguing 10 million human gut microbial genes

Nov 25, 2014

Over the past several years, research on bacteria in the digestive tract (gut microbiome) has confirmed the major role they play in our health. An international consortium, in which INRA participates, has developed the most ...

User comments : 3

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

extinct
1 / 5 (1) Nov 10, 2012
What a bunch of fools in this article. We the people want organic farming. It has been shown to yield 100% to 1000% higher than any genetic modification techniques or radiation-induced gene mutation techniques. These techniques are not only perverse, un-natural, greed-driven and toxic to health, but are also anathema to evolution and natural selection. The lesson these people fail to learn throughout history, time after time, is that when you attempt to dominate mother nature, you will always reap bad results. Regular everyday people don't want to dominate nature; we want to be in resonance and symbiosis with nature. Biotechs represent only themselves, but they certainly do not represent humanity.
Torbjorn_Larsson_OM
not rated yet Nov 11, 2012
@ extinct: What arrogance of yours, pretending to speak for a large heterogeneous group. Statistics shows that few people chose organics, because it costs more.

It would be pertinent to study the facts instead of unwittingly promote moral problems.

This moral problem comes from 3 sources:

1. We have known since the Rome meeting, for 50 years, that organic methods are about half as efficient as standard farming. This is why it costs more.

Despite little research, especially from the organic community, it was again confirmed this spring in a meta-analysis of previous research. (Google it.) The one exception was fruit.

Meta-analysis itself has now been tested. Even when presented with bad research, it will be correct at least 60 % of cases. (Google it.) It is hence better than random guessing. It is hence the organic community that has to show that the result is not wrong.
Torbjorn_Larsson_OM
not rated yet Nov 11, 2012
2. The problem becomes even worse if we look at modern genetic methods that improves on older artificial selection.

What they do is what nature and previous artificial selection methods has always relied on haphazardly, horisontal gene transfer, but in a less wasteful and risky way. Which is what the article describes.

Horisontal gene transfer is ubiquitous in bacteria and plants. It is also what constituted Eukarya, i.e. ultimately species like humans.

3. Organic farming, which is inherently a scam to rip people of money as demonstrated above, has taken to support other scammers as well. Like anthroposophs, a religiously founded group that also has taken homeopathic farming methods and made them acceptable on EU levels as organic.

Probably by making politicians bend over backwards by mouthing off loudly and without factual support "we the people".

Now I will leave facts and make an emotional argument as yours: How dare you pretend a bunch of fools and scammers speak for us! Pfeh!

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.