Skip to main content

Table 2 QTL results

From: QTL mapping reveals the genetic architecture of loci affecting pre- and post-zygotic isolating barriers in Louisiana Iris

Trait

LG

Position

LR

Additive Effect

R2

2 LOD Interval

(a) BCIB QTL

Flowering time (days)

      

dry 2007, n = 112

1

64.6

32.85

−3.20

0.15

57.1-76.3

dry 2006, n = 115

4

0.0

25.48

−4.71

0.15

0-7.5

dry 2007, n = 112

4

11.2

35.16

−3.22

0.16

0.8-18.7

dry 2007, n = 112

5

13.0

13.2

−1.80

0.05

2.9-26.9

wet 2006, n = 112

7

44.3

13.9

−3.20

0.09

19.1-49.5

wet 2006, n = 112

8

15.0

15.72

−3.76

0.13

0-32.4

dry 2006, n = 115

8

30.8

14.95

−3.74

0.09

7.7-45.3

dry 2006, n = 115

13

40.1

15.22

−4.18

0.10

33.6-41.1

Flood tolerance1 (n = 145)

No QTL detected

-

-

-

-

-

Long-term survival1 (n = 139)

No QTL detected

-

-

-

-

-

Pollen sterility2 (n = 184)

3

0.0

14.61

−17.42

0.05

0-11.9

 

4

0.0

63.01

−38.26

0.26

0-3.4

Growth points/weight (g)

      

dry 2006, n = 158

6

19.0

15.51

0.03

0.08

0-35.3

Inflorescence production1

wet 2007, n = 157

2

78.3

22.24

0.39

0.26

64-97.3

wet 2006, n = 158

11

61.3

12.44

−0.22

0.07

42.4-73.3

Proportion growth points producing an inflorescence

wet 2006, n = 87

16

13.3

13.31

0.14

0.11

2.7-30.7

Flowering nodes per inflorescence

dry 2007, n = 87

4

8.2

23.29

0.55

0.19

0-17.6

wet 2007, n = 130

4

9.2

17.94

0.51

0.11

0-17.4

dry 2006, n = 91

11

61.5

15.27

−0.56

0.12

54.3-73.3

dry 2006, n = 91

17

0.0

15.14

0.53

0.11

0-5.5

Flowers per node

dry 2006, n = 91

1

35.1

14.13

−0.14

0.14

13.6-48.1

dry 2007, n = 87

4

16.2

20.9

−0.09

0.19

8.8-49.6

dry 2007, n = 87

17

24.5

13.7

−0.09

0.11

19.6-34.5

wet 2007, n = 130

19

9.0

17

−0.10

0.11

0-11

Fruit set1

dry 2007, n = 86

4

0.0

47.46

0.51

0.39

0-9.2

wet 2007, n = 130

4

0.0

24.1

0.32

0.14

0-12.5

Proportion of flowers that set fruit

     

dry 2006, n = 48

9

37.4

15.15

0.35

0.20

26.7-40.1

(b) BCIF QTL

Flowering time (days)

      

dry 2007, n = 104

1

31.8

20.87

3.05

0.30

11.2-53.8

dry 2006, n = 97

1

54.5

21.44

4.67

0.15

29.4-66.4

dry 2007, n = 104

4

19.1

16.04

1.93

0.11

2.6-24.5

dry 2006, n = 107

10

7.8

14.28

3.67

0.09

0-17.9

dry 2007, n = 104

13

57.2

13.80

1.78

0.10

37.2-59.2

Flood tolerance1 (n = 145)

16

9

11.27

−0.14

0.07

0-31.4

Long-term survival1 (n = 139)

15

0

19.44

−0.22

0.11

0-18.7

Pollen sterility2 (n = 116)

9

11.4

11.55

6.85

0.08

0-29.2

Growth points/weight (g)

wet 2007, n = 69

6

16.1

13.99

−0.12

0.14

0-25.5

wet 2006, n = 68

8

13

13.16

−0.07

0.18

0-42.8

dry 2006, n = 69

21

0

13.33

0.04

0.14

0-2.6

Inflorescence production1

      

wet 2007, n = 69

3

89.5

13.83

−0.24

0.14

69.9-89.5

Proportion growth points producing an inflorescence

dry 2006, n = 41

5

22.3

13.58

0.31

0.20

22-51.5

wet 2006, n = 48

8

36

14.27

0.24

0.21

0-39.1

dry 2007, n = 42

9

30

29.00

−0.10

0.34

20.4-36.7

dry 2007, n = 42

15

25

14.07

−0.08

0.17

6.2-29.3

Flowering nodes per inflorescence

wet 2006, n = 48

2

97

13.54

−0.56

0.15

65.1-100

dry 2007, n = 42

3

80.5

17.75

−0.73

0.30

60.2-88.5

wet 2006, n = 48

5

41.8

16.46

0.59

0.18

22.1-59.8

wet 2007, n = 64

5

54.5

13.65

0.41

0.17

36.5-83.8

dry 2006, n = 41

6

21.5

19.24

−0.78

0.22

16.2-25.6

dry 2007, n = 42

11

18

23.38

1.07

0.30

11.6-30.4

dry 2006, n = 41

19

9.6

19.19

−0.69

0.21

2.2-13.6

Flowers per node

      

wet 2007, n = 64

1

83.1

18.49

−0.26

0.16

29.9-86.2

dry 2006, n = 41

9

47.1

17.52

−0.25

0.24

44.8-50.1

wet 2006, n = 48

12

48.3

13.76

−0.15

0.20

34.2-48.3

wet 2007, n = 64

19

9.6

13.83

−0.23

0.15

2.9-13.6

Fruit set1

dry 2007, n = 41

8

50.2

20.01

0.33

0.29

32.4-57.4

Proportion of flowers that set fruit

dry 2007, n = 39

11

0

12.17

0.17

0.16

0-9

dry 2007, n = 39

13

39.2

13.32

−0.18

0.16

30.8-59.2

wet 2006, n = 29

14

0

19.99

0.26

0.35

0-4.8

  1. 1measured as proportion of clones.
  2. 2measured as percentage sterile pollen.
  3. Traits assessed in different environmental conditions (wet/dry) and in different years (2006/2007) are noted, along with the number of individuals analyzed for each trait (n). Effects in BCIB are the result of I. fulva alleles and effects in BCIF are the result of I. brevicaulis alleles. Location of each QTL is presented as the linkage group (LG) followed by position on the linkage group (in Kosambi cM). The likelihood ratio (LR), the additive effect, percentage of variance explained (R2) and the 2 LOD confidence interval are also presented.