Abstract
Aflatoxin B1, produced by Aspergillus flavus Link ex Fries and A. parasiticus Speare on maize (Zea mays L.), is a potent carcinogen that is linked to liver cancer in animals and humans. Normally, genetic materials are field-inoculated and evaluated by conducting aflatoxin assays in the laboratory to develop host resistance (sporophytic selection). These procedures are costly and time-consuming and limit the amount of genetic material that can be evaluated. Microgametophytic selection (pollen selection) in maize has not been explored for screening genetic material for resistance to Aspergillus spp. and aflatoxin. The objective of this investigation was to examine in vitro pollen germination in the presence of A. flavus and A. parasiticus conidia, and aflatoxin B1 in the F2 generation of a cross between Mp313E (resistant inbred) and SC212M (susceptible inbred). A. flavus conidia significantly inhibited pollen grain germination in comparison with the control and the other two treatments. A. parasiticus and aflatoxin B1 treatments did not differ significantly from each other but differed from the control, suggesting that A. flavus conidia, instead of aflatoxin, could be used for screening germplasm for resistance to Aspergillus and/or aflatoxin. We concluded that pollen grains containing genes for susceptibility to A. flavus can be eliminated in a segregating population and that microgametophytic screening could greatly facilitate recurrent selection and screening of germplasm for resistance to aflatoxin at a much less cost and in a shorter period than field testing. Pollen grains carrying resistance genes can be manipulated to develop recombinant inbred lines to accelerate development of parental inbred lines to produce hybrids possessing tolerance to A. flavus and/or aflatoxin B1.
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 4
Claim · model-written summary
A. flavus conidia significantly inhibited pollen germination versus control and other treatments.
- Treatment
- A. flavus conidiae0
- Interactor
- A. flavus
Aspergillus flavuse0pathogen - Outcome
- pollen grain germinatione0
- Direction
- inhibitede0
- Comparator
- the control and the other two treatmentse0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A. flavus conidia significantly inhibited pollen grain germination in comparison with the control and the other two treatments.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
A. parasiticus and aflatoxin B1 treatments did not differ significantly.
- Treatment
- A. parasiticuse0
- Interactor
- A. parasiticus
Aspergillus parasiticuse0pathogen - Outcome
- treatments did not differ significantlye0
- Direction
- did not differe0
- Comparator
- aflatoxin B1 treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A. parasiticus and aflatoxin B1 treatments did not differ significantly from each other but differed from the control”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The two treatments differed from control.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A. parasiticus and aflatoxin B1 treatments did not differ significantly from each other but differed from the control”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Authors suggest A. flavus conidia for screening resistance.
- Interactor
- A. flavusAspergillus flavuse0pathogen
- Outcome
- screening germplasm for resistance to Aspergillus and/or aflatoxine0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A. flavus conidia, instead of aflatoxin, could be used for screening germplasm for resistance to Aspergillus and/or aflatoxin”
t0“maize”
The same questions in other papers
Aspergillus flavus · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.