MOLECULAR CHARACTERIZATION OF MUTATION REGIONS IN HERBICIDE-RESISTANT QUINOA (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) MUTANT LINES

Abstract

Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) is a viable alternative crop due to its adaptability to unfavorable climate and soil conditions, and its seeds are nutritionally rich. However, the lack of selective herbicides for weed control in quinoa fields poses a significant challenge for cultivation. Consequently, developing herbicide-resistant quinoa lines is essential. In this study, the Titicaca variety of quinoa was used. Sodium azide at a concentration of 1.5 mM was employed for mutagenesis. Herbicide-resistant plants were identified by applying herbicides from the imazamox to the M3 generation. The resistant lines were designated as ET-6, ET-7, OT-11, and T-103. Among the four mutant lines obtained through seed mutagenesis, the OT-11 line exhibited a cytosine to adenine (C→A) substitution in the ALS gene, while the ET-6 line showed a thymine to guanine (T→G) substitution. These mutations in the OT-11 and ET-6 genotypes were classified as transversion-type mutations. A transition-type mutation was observed in the T-103 mutant line, involving a thymine to cytosine (T→C) substitution at nucleotide 1114. The findings suggest that effective weed control in quinoa cultivation can be achieved by developing varieties resistant to IMI group herbicides. Continued research on herbicide resistance should focus on the ET-6, OT-11, and T-103 lines in subsequent generations

Keywords

• Chenopodium quinoa
• Herbicide resistance
• Imazamox
• Mutation
• Sodium azide.

References

1. Al-Qurainy, F. and S. Khan. 2009. Mutagenic effects of sodium azide and its application in crop improvement. World Applied Sciences Journal. 6(12): 1589-1601.
2. Ausubel, F.M., R. Brent, R.E. Kingston, D.D. Moore, J.G. Seidman, J.A. Smith and K. Struhl. 1994. Current protocols in molecular biology. Volume 1. Wiley, New York.
3. Basaran, F. 2021. Imidazolinone-tolerant crop plants and their use in weed control. Journal of Agriculture. 4(2): 67-79.
4. Beckie, HJ., G. Seguin-Swartz, H. Nair, S.I. Warwick, and E.Johnson. 2004. Multiple herbicide-resistant canola can be controlled by alternative herbicides. Weed Science. 52:152– 157.
5. Chuchert, S., Nualsrı, C., Soonsuwon, W. 2022. Genetıc Varıabılıty and Dıversıty of Upland Rıce Landraces. Turkish Journal of Field Crops. 2022, 27(2), 175-181.
6. Carpıcı, Budaklı, E., S. Erol, B.B. Asık, O. Arslan. 2023. Influences of sowıng date and harvest stage on dry matter yield and forage qualıty of Quınoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.). Turkish Journal of Field Crops. 28(1): 26-36.
7. Duke, S. O. 2005. Taking stock of herbicide-resistant crops ten years after introduction. Pest Manage Sci. 61: 211–218. FAOSTAT. FAOSTAT Database. 2022. Available Online: https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QCL (accessed time 14 June 2024).
8. Geren, H. 2015. Effects of different nitrogen levels on the grain yield and some yield components of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) under Mediterranean climatic conditions.Turkish Journal of Field Crops. 20(1): 59-64.

9. Gungor, H., Cakır, M.F. Dumlupınar, Z. 2022. Evaluatıon of Wheat Genotypes: Genotype × Envıronment Interactıon and Gge Bıplot Analysıs. Turkish Journal of Field Crops. 2022, 27(1), 149-157.
10. Hall, T.A. 1999. BioEdit: A User-Friendly Biological Sequence Alignment Editor and Analysis Program for Windows 95/98/NT. Nucleic Acids Symposium Series. 41: 95-98.
11. Jacobsen, S.-E. 2003. The worldwide potential for Quinoa (Chenopodium Quinoa Willd.). Food Rev. Int. 19: 167–177.
12. Kanber, R., M.A. Çullu, B. Kendirli, S. Antepli andN. Yılmaz. 2005. Irrigation, Drainage and Salinity, 213-251. 6th Technical Congress of Turkish Agricultural Engineering, Volume I, 3-7 January, Ankara-Turkey.
13. Kirkwood, R.C. 2002. Herbicide-tolerant crops. In: Naylor REL (ed) Weed management handbook. 253–279, Blackwell, Oxford.
14. Langyan, S., P. Yadava, F.N. Khan, Z.A. Dar, R. Singh and A. Kumar. 2022. Sustaining protein nutrition through PlantBased Foods, Volume 8. Mestanza, C., R. Riegel and H. Silva. 2015. Characterization of the acetohydroxyacid synthase multigene family in the tetraploide plant Chenopodium quinoa. Electronic Journal of Biotechnology.18(6): 393-398.
15. Newhouse, K.E., W.A. Smith, M.A. Starrett, T.J. Schaefer and B.K. Singh. 1992. Tolerance to imidazolinone herbicides in wheat. Plant Physiology. 100: 882-886.
16. Ocampo, M., S. Fischer, C. Folch-Cano, A. Pinto and I. Figueroa. 2023.Content and antioxidant capacity of phenolic compounds in quinoa seed: A review. Chilean Journal of Agricultural Research. 83(6)
17. Olsen, O., X. Wang and D. Von Wetttesin. 1993. Sodium azide mutagenesis: Preferential generation of AT -> GC transitions in the barley Antl8 gene. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 90: 8043-8047.
18. Pathan, S., G. Ndunguru, A.G. Ayele. 2024. Comparison of the nutritional composition of Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoaWilld.) inflorescences, green leaves, and grains. Crops. 4: 72–81.
19. Rizwan, M. and S. Akhtar. 2015. Development of herbicide resistant crops through induced mutations. Advancements in Life Sciences, 3(1), 01-08.
20. Sosa-Zuniga, V., V. Brito, F. Fuentes and U. Steinfort. 2017. Phenological growth stages of Quinoa (Chenopodium Quinoa) based on the BBCH scale. Ann. Appl. Biol.171: 117– 124.
21. Tan, M. and S. Temel. 2018. Performance of some quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) genotypes grown in different climate conditions. Turkish Journal of Field Crops. 23(2): 180-186.
22. Tapia, M. E. 2015. The long journey of Quinoa: who wrote its history? State ART Rep. Quinoa 3: 1–605.
23. Webster E.P. and J.A. Masson. 2001. Acetolactate synthaseinhibiting herbicides on imidazolinone-tolerant rice. Weed Sci. 49: 652–657.
24. Yazar A. and C. Ince, Kaya. 2014. A New crop for salt affected and dry agricultural areas of Turkey: quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.), Turkish Journal of Agricultural and Natural Sciences Special Issue: 2, 1440-1446.