Paper · 1976 · Crop Science

Flag Smut Reaction in Wheat: Its Genetic Control and Associations with Other Traits1

R. E. Allan

10
claims
20
verbatim quotes
3
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

The reaction to flag smut [ Urocystis agropyri (Preuss) Schroet.] of F 3 and F 4 lines of 10 wheat ( Triticum aestivum L. em Thell.) crosses involving the parents ‘Spinkcota’, ‘lowin’ (highly resistant); ‘Games’, ‘Hurt’, ‘Golden’, ‘Dickson 114’ (resistant); ‘Ridit’ (moderately resistant); and CI 13749 (susceptible) was studied in a field near Bickleton, Wash. Segregation ratios in five crosses between highly resistant and resistant parents suggested that different large‐effect genes governed resistance to flag smut; no completely susceptible lines were recovered, which indicated that the parental combinations tested had one or more small‐effect genes for resistance in common with one another. Evidence suggested that lowin has two large‐effect genes for resistance that differ from those possessed by Spinkcota, Dickson 114, and Gaines. Ridit probably has one gene for moderate resistance that is not common to Spinkcota, Dickson 114, and Gaines. The segregation patterns for reaction of two crosses involving the susceptible parent, CI 13749, suggested complementary resistance. Results indicated that a minimum of four different large‐effect and three small‐effect genes for flag smut resistance were represented among the eight parents studied. No associations were found between percentage of flag smut and plant height, stripe rust reaction, maturity, and spike type. Percentage of flag smut was associated with chaff color in two of seven crosses and with awn expression in one of five crosses.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 10

Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Segregation in five crosses suggested distinct large effect genes for flag smut resistance.

Interactor
flag smute0pathogen
Gene
different large‐effect genese0
Outcome
resistance to flag smute0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Segregation ratios in five crosses between highly resistant and resistant parents suggested that different large‐effect genes governed resistance to flag smut”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 362–520 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–27 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

No completely susceptible lines were recovered, suggesting shared small effect resistance genes.

Gene
small‐effect genese0
Outcome
no completely susceptible lines were recoverede0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“no completely susceptible lines were recovered, which indicated that the parental combinations tested had one or more small‐effect genes for resistance in common with one another”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 522–700 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–27 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Lowin appeared to have two large effect resistance genes different from those in three other parents.

Material
lowine0
Gene
two large‐effect genese0
Outcome
resistancee0
Comparator
Spinkcota, Dickson 114, and Gainese0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“lowin has two large‐effect genes for resistance that differ from those possessed by Spinkcota, Dickson 114, and Gaines”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 726–844 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–27 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Ridit probably has one moderate resistance gene absent from three other parents.

Material
Ridite0
Gene
one genee0
Outcome
moderate resistancee0
Comparator
Spinkcota, Dickson 114, and Gainese0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Ridit probably has one gene for moderate resistance that is not common to Spinkcota, Dickson 114, and Gaines”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 846–954 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–27 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Segregation in two crosses involving CI 13749 suggested complementary resistance.

Material
CI 13749e0
Outcome
complementary resistancee0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The segregation patterns for reaction of two crosses involving the susceptible parent, CI 13749, suggested complementary resistance”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 956–1087 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–27 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

At least four distinct large effect genes were represented among eight parents.

Gene
genese0
Outcome
large‐effecte0
Value
foure0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“a minimum of four different large‐effect and three small‐effect genes for flag smut resistance were represented among the eight parents studied”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1112–1255 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–27 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

At least three small effect genes were represented among eight parents.

Gene
genese0
Outcome
small‐effecte0
Value
threee0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“a minimum of four different large‐effect and three small‐effect genes for flag smut resistance were represented among the eight parents studied”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1112–1255 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–27 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Flag smut percentage was not associated with plant height, stripe rust reaction, maturity or spike type.

Organ / stage
plant height, stripe rust reaction, maturity, and spike typee0
Outcome
percentage of flag smute0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“No associations were found between percentage of flag smut and plant height, stripe rust reaction, maturity, and spike type”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1257–1380 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–27 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Flag smut percentage was associated with chaff color in two of seven crosses.

Organ / stage
chaff colore0
Outcome
Percentage of flag smute0
Value
two of seven crossese0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Percentage of flag smut was associated with chaff color in two of seven crosses”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1382–1461 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–27 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Flag smut percentage was associated with awn expression in one of five crosses.

Organ / stage
awn expressione0
Outcome
awn expressione0
Value
one of five crossese0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“with awn expression in one of five crosses”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1466–1508 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–27 · show in text ↑