Occurrence of self-compatibility, self-incompatibility and unilateral incompatibility after crossing diploid S-tuberosum (SI) with S-verrucosum (SC):I. Expression and inheritance of self-compatibility
R. Eijlander et al., Occurrence of self-compatibility, self-incompatibility and unilateral incompatibility after crossing diploid S-tuberosum (SI) with S-verrucosum (SC):I. Expression and inheritance of self-compatibility, EUPHYTICA, 115(2), 2000, pp. 127-139
Diploid Solanum tuberosum (tbr), 2n=2x=24, can be crossed with S. verrucosu
m (ver) only when the latter is used as a pistillate parent but not recipro
cally. This conforms to the phenomenon of unilateral incompatibility (UI) w
here a self-compatible species, like ver (SC) cannot be used as a male pare
nt to cross with a self-incompatible (SI) parent like tbr. Even if ver x tb
r hybrids are made, the F1 hybrids possess cytoplasmic male sterility and t
hus hinder genetic analysis of crossing barriers. Exceptionally, however, s
ome diploid genotypes of tbr (SI) can be used as pistillate parents to cros
s with ver, and such exceptional tbr clones are called 'acceptors'. Repeate
d backcrossing of acceptors to ver have resulted in male fertile genotypes
that possess tbr cytoplasm and ver nucleus. These genotypes were used for t
he genetic analysis of 'acceptance' and UI in thse experiments. It was foun
d that acceptance of ver-pollen by tbr-pistils is based on a dominant gene
A that expresses only in the absence of an inhibitor I. In the F-1 hybrids,
only the S-allele of tbr was expressed but not that of ver. Concomitant wi
th this observation, it was shown that ver does not produce style-specific
S-glycoproteins that are responsible for self-incompatible reaction in dipl
oid potato. Although the the F-1 populations were SC, they segregated into
SC and SI genotypes giving skewed segregation ratios for this trait. Becaus
e of this as well as the disappearance and re-appearance of SC trait in the
offspring generations, it was necessary to postulate a more complex intera
ction between A and I. Models are presented in order to explain acceptance,
non-acceptance and the expression of UI. It is concluded that at least fou
r different loci are involved in the expression of UI.