The American Journal of Agriculture and Biomedical
Engineering
6
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajabe
TYPE
Original Research
PAGE NO.
6-16
10.37547/tajabe/Volume07Issue05-02
OPEN ACCESS
SUBMITED
28 March 2025
ACCEPTED
24 April 2025
PUBLISHED
26 May 2025
VOLUME
Vol.07 Issue05 2025
CITATION
Uzbek Academy of Sciences, Research Institute of Plant Genetics and
Experimental Biology, Tashkent, UzbekistanDurdona Shokirova, Xurshid
To‘raqulov, Toxir Bozorov, Sodir Meliev, Shohida Ibragimova, Fazlidin
Meliqo‘ziev, Abdurauf Dolimov, Bexruz Ochilov, So
jida Murodova, & Ilham
Aytenov. (2025). Genetic identification of yellow rust disease resistance in
soft wheat (Triticum Aestivum l.) Samples using DNA markers. The
American Journal of Agriculture and Biomedical Engineering, 7(05), 6
–
16.
https://doi.org/10.37547/tajabe/Volume07Issue05-02
COPYRIGHT
© 2025 Original content from this work may be used under the terms
of the creative commons attributes 4.0 License.
Genetic identification of
yellow rust disease
resistance in soft wheat
(Triticum Aestivum l.)
Samples using DNA
markers
Durdona Shokirova¹, Xurshid To‘raqulov¹, Toxir
Bozorov¹, Sodir Meliev¹, Shohida Ibragimova²,
Fazlidin Meliqo‘ziev², Abdurauf Dolimov
¹, Bexruz
Ochilov ¹, Sojida Murodova², Ilham Aytenov²
¹, ²Uzbek Academy of Sciences, Research Institute of Plant Genetics and
Experimental Biology, Tashkent, Uzbekistan
Abstract:
This study assessed the genetic polymorphism
of wheat samples in relation to yellow rust disease
resistance through DNA markers genetically linked to
this trait. According to the analysis, the markers
Xgwm140 (PIC = 0.72) and Xgwm340 (PIC = 0.53)
exhibited the highest levels of polymorphism, playing a
significant role in the identification of yellow rust-
resistant alleles, with 305 and 220 base pairs,
respectively. Phylogenetic analysis revealed genetic
diversity among the genotypes and indicated that
resistant genotypes tended to cluster into distinct
groups. The findings of this study provide a reliable tool
for identifying resistant genotypes, which can be
effectively utilized in the selection process during wheat
breeding programs aimed at enhancing resistance to
yellow rust disease. This version reflects a more detailed
and formal scientific tone, maintaining the essence of
your original text while providing further clarity on the
methods and outcomes. Let me know if you need any
further adjustments. In 2024 field trials, wheat varieties
were tested for yellow rust resistance using molecular
markers for Yr genes. Varieties with Yr5 and Yr15
showed full resistance, while those with Yr6, Yr9, Yr7,
and Yr27 were susceptible. Yr62 alone was weak but
enhanced resistance when combined with other genes.
Yr5 and Yr15 were identified as the most effective for
The American Journal of Agriculture and Biomedical
Engineering
7
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajabe
The American Journal of Agriculture and Biomedical Engineering
breeding resistant varieties.
Keywords:
Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), DNA
markers, PCR, yellow rust, genetic polymorphism,
resistance alleles.
Introduction:
Wheat is a major staple crop, covering
more than 219 million hectares worldwide, with
annual production exceeding 760 million tons. Wheat
provides approximately 20% of the daily caloric needs
of the global population. Today, due to the negative
consequences of climate change in agriculture, several
issues related to both biotic and abiotic factors have
emerged. Factors such as high temperatures, drought,
and rust diseases are creating significant challenges in
wheat production. Biotrophic pathogens, particularly
fungi, are the primary cause of rust diseases, which
result in substantial economic damage to wheat
cultivation. Each year, fungi and insects contribute to a
21.5% reduction in wheat yield worldwide. Yellow rust
infection can develop at any stage of the plant's life
cycle, from the seedling stage to maturity, meaning it
can progress throughout the entire vegetative period
of the plant. Cases of yellow rust are frequently
observed in over 60 countries, and the disease is found
on every continent except Antarctica [1].
Wheat stripe rust, caused by Puccinia striiformis f. sp.
tritici, is recognized as one of the most significant biotic
stresses impacting wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) on a
global scale [2]. The disease typically induces damage
to wheat crops within the range of 0.1% to 5.0%, with
potential yield losses extending from 5% to 25% [3].
Under unfavorable environmental conditions or during
severe outbreaks, the extent of yield loss can reach up
to 100%. Genotypes possessing a limited number of
resistance genes, such as Yr5 and Yr15, have been
identified as highly effective against Pst (Puccinia
striiformis) and are widely adopted worldwide as part
of integrated disease management strategies [4]. The
genetic variability of the Yr gene family plays a pivotal
role in controlling the dynamics of yellow rust
epidemics. Moreover, non-race-specific resistance,
exemplified by genes such as Yr18, which confer
resistance in older plant stages, contributes
significantly to the overall durability and effectiveness
of wheat resistance. These resistance mechanisms
have been extensively employed in wheat breeding
programs for several decades [5,6].
Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) is one of the most
important cereal crops globally and holds particular
agricultural significance in Uzbekistan. Improving
wheat productivity and quality, particularly by
developing and introducing cultivars resistant to major
diseases such as yellow rust, is of paramount scientific
and practical importance [7]. The yellow rust pathogen
represents a critical constraint to wheat production,
severely affecting plant development and reducing
yields. Puccinia striiformis f. sp. tritici is considered the
principal biotic stress factor in wheat cultivation across
Central Asia, where fungicide applications are the
primary control method, particularly in winter wheat
fields [8]. This widespread use of fungicides in response
to the pathogen underscores the ongoing challenge of
managing this disease across the region, as indicated by
various studies and field observations [9]. To assess the
impact of yellow rust (Puccinia striiformis f. sp. tritici) on
wheat yield, a field experiment was conducted with
three treatments: an untreated control, a bio-treatment
background, and a fungicide-treated background.
Urediniospores of the pathogen were inoculated to
ensure consistent disease pressure. Results showed that
the untreated control experienced the highest disease
severity, while both bio-treatment and fungicide
applications significantly reduced infection rates and
improved plant health. Yield analysis confirmed that
both treatments resulted in higher yields compared to
the control, demonstrating the effectiveness of bio-
based and chemical treatments in managing yellow rust
and enhancing crop productivity. [10].
In recent years, the emergence of yellow rust in major
wheat-producing countries has led to significant crop
losses. Recent advancements in molecular marker
technologies have created effective tools to address
such complex problems. For example, the use of DNA
molecular markers based on polymerase chain reaction
(PCR) offers several advantages over traditional
phenotypic trait selection [11]. Marker-assisted
selection (MAS) has been widely applied to target rust
resistance genes in various generations. These methods
can improve selection efficiency in plant breeding,
particularly when applied to overcome some of the
challenges associated with classical phenotypic
screening approaches. When MAS is used in the early
hybrid generations of plants, multiple DNA markers are
employed simultaneously to check several genes at
once.
METHODS
Molecular research was conducted at the Molecular and
Biochemical Genetics Laboratory of the Institute of
Genetics and Experimental Plant Biology, Academy of
Sciences of Uzbekistan. The list of samples taken from
this collection is presented in Table 1.
Plant Materials. Within the scope of this study, the soft
wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) samples listed in the table
below were used as plant materials for analysis.
The American Journal of Agriculture and Biomedical
Engineering
8
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajabe
The American Journal of Agriculture and Biomedical Engineering
Table 1
List of soft wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) varieties and samples used in the study
№
Research
samples
№
Research samples
№
Research samples
№
Research
samples
№
Research samples
1 Ezoz ,.
15 Heine’s Kolben
(S;Yr6+1)
29 Yr10/6 Avoset S
43 Yelanchik
57 Avocet-YRA 3/3/
ALTAR84/
AESQ//APATA
2 Pervitsa
16 Heine’s Peko
(S;Yr6+?)
30 Bobur
44 Yr18/3
Avoset S
58 Krasnadar
3 Yr 1/6 avocet
S
17 Fielder
31 Moro (W;Yr10)
45 Zamin 1
59 Lal Bahadur/Pavon
1BL
4 Yr 1/6 avS
18 Yr7/6 Avoset S
32 Yr15/6 Avoset S
46 Hamkor
60 AVOCET
YRA*3/PASTOR
5 Yr 15
19 Tanya
33 Yr17/6 Avoset S
47 Vexa
61 PASTOR
6 216
20
Morocco
34 Do’stlik
48 Evelena
62 DAVR
7 Kalyansoma
(S)
21 Reichersberg 42
(W;Yr7+?)
35 Yuka
49 Bezostiya
63 TEMIRYAZOVKA
150
8 Grom
22 Thatcher
36 Yr32/6 Avoset S
50 Lemhi
64 ANTANINA
9 Xisorach
23 Yr8/6 Avoset S
37 Carstens(W;Yr32)
51 TP 981
65 SABRBOSH
10 Vassa
24 Compair(S;Yr8)
38 Yr SP/6 Avoset S
52 TP 1295
66 Yr10
11 Hybrid 46
(W;Yr4)
25 Yr9/6 Avoset S
39 Spaldings prolific
W;Yr SP
53 Yr27/6
Avoset S
67 Andijon 2
12 Yr 5/6
Avocet S
26 Fed4/Kavkaz
(Yr9)
40 Asr
54 Ciano 79
68 G’ozg’on
13 TRITICUM
spelta (Inter
Yr 5)
27 Clement(W;Yr9+
Yr2+?)
41 Yaksart
55 ATTILA CM
85836-50Y
69 Andijon 4
14 Yr 6/6
Avocet S
28 Grut
42 Starshina
56 OPATA 85
70 Alekseyevich
Genomic DNA Extraction
. Genomic DNA was extracted
from young leaf tissues of wheat plants using a slightly
modified version of the CTAB method developed by
Paterson et al. (1993) [12].
Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) Analysis
. For
molecular analysis, a total of 11 highly reliable
microsatellite (SSR) markers associated with yellow
rust resistance were selected based on peer-reviewed
publications in international journals. PCR reactions
were carried out using the T100 Thermal Cycler (BIO-
RAD, USA), employing the "Hot Start" protocol to
enhance specificity and efficiency.
Gel Electrophoresis and Genotyping
. Genotyping of
the samples was performed based on the molecular
weight of PCR products using gel electrophoresis. The
electrophoresis was conducted on 2.5
–
3.0% agarose
gels (CondaLab, Spain). Results were documented using
the GelDoc Go Gel Imaging System (BIO-RAD, USA).
Characterization of Polymorphic Markers
. For each
polymorphic marker, the Polymorphism Information
Content (PIC) and heterozygosity (He) values were
calculated using the iMEC web-based software. PIC
values indicate the discriminatory power of a marker,
while He reflects the degree of genetic variation within
the population.
RESULTS
The American Journal of Agriculture and Biomedical
Engineering
9
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajabe
The American Journal of Agriculture and Biomedical Engineering
To assess the genetic polymorphism of the wheat
varieties using the panel of DNA markers, genomic
DNA was extracted using the CTAB method. The quality
and quantity of DNA samples were evaluated using
0.9%
agarose
gel
electrophoresis
and
spectrophotometric analysis, after which PCR
amplification was performed.
Genotyping and PCR Screening
. PCR screening was
performed on the extracted DNA samples using
primers genetically linked to yellow rust resistance.
Genotyping was conducted with the help of the
GelAnalyzer software. According to the analysis results,
among the 11 polymorphic DNA markers associated
with yellow rust resistance, two markers exhibited a
Polymorphism Information Content (PIC) value higher
than 0.5. The primer pairs Xgwm340 (PIC = 0.53) and
Xgwm140 (PIC = 0.72) demonstrated the highest levels
of polymorphism, indicating their strong discriminatory
power (Table 2).
Table 2
Panel of DNA markers genetically associated with yellow rust resistance in soft wheat
samples and their characteristics
№
Marker
Primer sequences
5’-3’
PIC
He
1
Xgwm140
AAGGCAAAGGCAAAGTGG
0.72
0.73
TGATCTTTACCAAGCATTCG
2
Xgwm501
AAGAATACTTTAATGAA
0.44
0.46
CAAACTTATCAGGATTAC
3
Xgwm340
TAATTGGGACCGAGAGACG
0.53
0.55
TTCTTGCAGCTCCAAAACCT
4
barc0187
CGAATAGCCGCTGCACAAG
0.41
0.42
TATGCATGCCTTTCTTTACAAT
5
gwm413
GGTCGCCCTGGCTTGCACCT
0.36
0.34
TGCTTGTCTAGATTGCTTGGG
6
XPSP3000
GATCGTCTCGTCCTTGGCA
0.29
0.31
GATATAGTGGCAGCAGGATA
7
XGWM493-
3BS
TACAATTCACCTAGAGT
0.39
0.37
GCAAGTTTTCTCCCTATT
8
xgwm268
CAAACTTATCAGGATTAC
0.35
0.39
GGTCGCCCTGGCTTGCACCT
9
barc008
CAGACAAACAGAGTACGGGC
0.47
0.46
GGTGCAATTTGAGTTTGGAGT
10
S23M41
TCAACGGAACCTCCAATTTC
0.28
0.30
AGGTAGGTGTTCCAGCTTGC
The American Journal of Agriculture and Biomedical
Engineering
10
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajabe
The American Journal of Agriculture and Biomedical Engineering
11
Barc349
CGAATAGCCGCTGCACAAG
0.33
0.34
TATGCATGCCTTTCTTTACAAT
According to the results, the Gwm340 marker was
genetically associated with yellow rust resistance
through the presence of a 220 bp allele, while the
Gwm140 marker was associated with yellow rust
resistance through the 305 bp allele (Figure 1).
Figure 1.
Electropherogram of PCR amplicons using polymorphic
DNA markers genetically associated with yellow rust
resistance in soft wheat samples. M
–
molecular weight
marker; bp
–
base pairs. Sample order (1
–
70)
corresponds to Table 1.
As indicated by the results of the study, analysis based
on the Gwm340 DNA marker revealed the presence of
two distinct alleles (260 bp and 220 bp) associated with
yellow rust resistance in wheat populations. These
alleles primarily reflect genetic variations within the
wheat genome that confer resistance to yellow rust.
During the study, out of 70 wheat samples, the
resistance allele (260 bp) was found in only 10 samples,
representing a relatively small proportion of
individuals with yellow rust resistance traits. This
suggests that resistance alleles are present in low
frequencies within the overall wheat population,
underscoring the need for focused attention on
selection processes to increase the prevalence of this
trait in breeding programs. Furthermore, the Gwm140
DNA marker was used to study yellow rust resistance.
Based on the results of the PCR analyses, the yellow
rust resistance-specific 305 bp allele was found in the
genomes of 16 wheat samples. This suggests the
presence of genetic markers associated with yellow rust
resistance within the wheat genome. Consequently, it
highlights the existence of potential genetic resources
for promoting and selecting this allele to further
enhance yellow rust resistance in wheat. Such studies
are essential for developing more effective strategies to
combat yellow rust and play a crucial role in improving
wheat resistance.
A phylogenetic analysis of the yellow rust resistance
alleles was conducted using 11 DNA markers obtained
in the study. According to the results of the phylogenetic
analysis, divergence and differences were observed
among these markers, reflecting the genetic diversity of
wheat and the distribution of yellow rust resistance
alleles across various populations and genetic groups.
Phylogenetic divergence, in turn, illustrates the varying
degrees of genetic variation in the genetic resources
conferring resistance to yellow rust and their genetic
relationships. Studying this analysis will help identify
which genetic variants and alleles need to be
incorporated into breeding programs to ensure
resistance (Figure 2).
The American Journal of Agriculture and Biomedical
Engineering
11
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajabe
The American Journal of Agriculture and Biomedical Engineering
Figure 2
Phylogenetic tree based on the polymorphism of DNA
markers genetically associated with yellow rust
resistance alleles in soft wheat samples.
In this study, a phylogenetic analysis was conducted to
determine the level of yellow rust (Puccinia striiformis
f. sp. tritici) resistance in wheat genotypes using
molecular markers. As a result of this analysis, the
genotypes were grouped according to their genetic
similarity, and the results were presented in the form
of a radial phylogenetic tree (dendrogram).
The overall structure of the dendrogram clearly
indicates the genetic diversity among the genotypes.
Several major clusters are distinguished in the tree,
reflecting a high level of genetic similarity between
certain genotypes. Notably, some genotypes are
closely grouped in small branches, suggesting their
allele composition is similar. Other genotypes,
however, are placed in independent branches,
indicating they are genetically distinct from the rest.
The clustering observed in the phylogenetic tree
confirms the presence of varying levels of resistance or
susceptibility to yellow rust disease. Specifically, certain
clusters contain genotypes that are closely grouped,
with resistant samples potentially dominating these
groups. This provides an opportunity to identify
potential resistant genotypes based on molecular
analyses and use them in breeding programs.
Additionally, the presence of genetically distinct
genotypes in the tree highlights their significance as
unique genetic resources. These samples are considered
promising for expanding genetic diversity in new
hybridization programs.
This phylogenetic analysis served to identify genetic
differences among wheat genotypes based on yellow
rust resistance alleles. The results have significant
implications for selecting high-resistance genotypes in
breeding programs, grouping genetic resources, and
organizing breeding efforts effectively. Notably, working
with genetic clusters identified through this analysis will
facilitate more targeted and purposeful breeding.
The American Journal of Agriculture and Biomedical
Engineering
12
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajabe
The American Journal of Agriculture and Biomedical Engineering
Table 3
Disease severity to stripe rust and presence of Yr genes in wheat genotypes
from Uzbekistan
№ Research samples
Yr-gen
Yellow
Rust
Severity
%, RT
b
S23M41 gwm413 P6M12 P6M12 xgwm526 gwm192
2024
year
Yr5
Yr15
Yr9
Yr9
Yr7
yr62
1 Ezoz
5MR
0
1
0
0
0
1
2 Pervitsa
80MS
0
0
1
1
1
1
3 Yr 1/6 avocet S
Yr1
80MS
0
0
0
0
1
0
4 Yr 1/6 avS
NIL 1
90MS
0
0
0
0
1
0
5 Yr 15
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
6 216
50S
0
0
0
0
1
1
7 Kalyansoma (S)
Yr 2
90S
0
0
0
0
1
1
8 Grom
50MS
0
0
0
0
1
1
9 Xisorach
R
1
1
0
0
1
1
10 Vassa
80S
0
0
1
1
1
1
11 Hybrid 46 (W;Yr4)
(W;Yr4)
10MR
1
1
0
0
1
1
12 Yr 5/6 Avocet S
Yr 5
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
13
TRITICUM spelta
(Inter Yr 5)
Yr 5
0
1
1
0
0
1
1
14 Yr 6/6 Avocet S
Yr 6
100S
0
0
0
0
1
0
15
Heine’s Kolben
(S;Yr6+1)
(S;Yr6+1)
70MS
0
0
0
0
1
0
16
Heine’s Peko
(S;Yr6+?)
(S;Yr6+1)
10MR
1
0
0
0
1
1
17 Fielder
Yr6,Yr20
100MS
0
0
0
0
1
0
18 Yr7/6 Avoset S
Yr7
90MS
0
0
0
0
1
0
19 Tanya
50MS
0
0
1
1
0
1
20 Morocco
1
0
0
0
0
1
21
Reichersberg 42
(W;Yr7+?)
(W;Yr7+?)
40MS-
MR
0
0
0
0
1
1
22 Thatcher
Yr7
60MS-
MR
0
0
0
0
1
1
23 Yr8/6 Avoset S
Yr8
50MS-S
0
0
0
0
1
0
24 Compair(S;Yr8)
(S;Yr8)
70MS
0
0
0
0
1
1
25 Yr9/6 Avoset S
Yr9
0
1
0
0
1
1
26 Fed4/Kavkaz (Yr9) Yr9
80S
0
1
1
1
1
0
The American Journal of Agriculture and Biomedical
Engineering
13
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajabe
The American Journal of Agriculture and Biomedical Engineering
27
Clement(W;Yr9+
Yr2+?)
(W;Yr9+
Yr2+?)
70MS
0
0
1
1
1
1
28 Grut
70MS-
MR
0
0
1
1
1
0
29 Yr10/6 Avoset S
Yr10
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
30 Bobur
70MS-
MR
1
1
0
0
0
1
31 Moro (W;Yr10)
(W;Yr10)
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
32 Yr15/6 Avoset S
Yr15
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
33 Yr17/6 Avoset S
Yr17
70MS-S
0
0
0
0
1
0
34 Do’stlik
50MS-
MR
0
0
0
0
1
1
35 Yuka
40MS
1
1
1
1
0
1
36 Yr32/6 Avoset S
Yr32
50MS
1
0
1
1
1
0
37 Carstens(W;Yr32)
(W;Yr32)
90S
0
0
0
0
1
1
38 Yr SP/6 Avoset S
Yr SP
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
39
Spaldings prolific
W;Yr SP
W;Yr SP
20MS
1
0
0
0
1
0
40 Asr
50MS
0
1
0
0
1
0
41 Yaksart
60S
0
1
0
0
1
1
42 Starshina
60MS
0
0
0
0
1
0
43 Yelanchik
60MR
1
0
0
0
0
1
44 Yr18/3 Avoset S
Yr18
90S
0
1
0
0
1
0
45 Zamin 1
90MS
0
0
0
0
0
1
46 Hamkor
30MS
1
0
0
0
0
1
47 Vexa
80MS
0
1
1
1
0
0
48 Evelena
70MS
0
1
1
1
0
1
49 Bezostiya
70MS
0
0
1
1
0
1
50 Lemhi
yr21
100S
0
1
0
0
1
1
51 TP 981
-
60MS
0
1
0
0
1
0
52 TP 1295
50MS
0
1
0
0
1
0
53 Yr27/6 Avoset S
Yr27
50MS
1
0
1
1
1
0
54 Ciano 79
Yr27
100S
0
0
0
0
1
1
55
ATTILA CM
85836-50Y
Yr27+?
80MS
0
0
0
0
1
0
56 OPATA 85
Yr27+
Yr18
100S
0
0
0
0
1
0
57
Avocet-YRA 3/3/
ALTAR84/
AESQ//APATA
Yr 28
90S
0
1
0
0
0
0
58 Krasnadar
40MS
0
0
0
0
0
0
The American Journal of Agriculture and Biomedical
Engineering
14
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajabe
The American Journal of Agriculture and Biomedical Engineering
59
Lal Bahadur/Pavon
1BL
Yr29
50S
0
0
0
0
0
1
60
AVOCET
YRA*3/PASTOR
Yr31
100S
0
1
0
0
1
0
61 PASTOR
Yr31+APR 80MS
1
0
0
0
0
1
62 DAVR
70S
0
0
0
0
0
0
63
TEMIRYAZOVKA
150
20MS
1
0
1
1
1
1
64 ANTANINA
80MS
0
0
1
1
1
0
65 SABRBOSH
40MS
1
0
0
0
0
1
66 Yr10
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
67 Andijon 2
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
68 G’ozg’on
70S
0
0
0
0
1
1
69 Andijon 4
70MS
1
0
0
0
0
1
70 Alekseyevich
30MS
1
0
0
0
0
1
b—Values indicate severity, RT—reaction type. “1”, “0” indicate the presence, absence of
corresponding gene, respectively.
Identification of Genes Based on Molecular Markers
Molecular markers are regarded as highly efficient
tools for detecting and combining multiple resistance
genes, as accomplishing this process based solely on
phenotypic data is often complex and, at times,
unfeasible [13]. Several scientific studies have
successfully identified the sources of key Yr resistance
genes (Yr9, Yr5, and Yr15) within winter wheat
breeding materials, underscoring their importance in
developing disease-resistant cultivars [14,15,16].
Molecular markers linked to the Yr15 gene were first
identified by Sun et al. (1997), Peng et al. (2000), and
Murphy et al. (2009) [17
–
19]. This gene was mapped
to a genetic interval of 6.4 centimorgans (cM), flanked
by the markers Xgwm413. The Xgwm413 marker is
positioned 2.5 cM on the proximal (closer to the
center) side. Research by Murphy et al. (2009)
Xgwm413 are highly reliable diagnostic tools for
identifying the Yr15 gene across nearly all genetic
backgrounds tested [19].
In the field trials of 2024, wheat varieties were tested
for resistance to yellow rust (Puccinia striiformis f. sp.
tritici). Additionally, molecular markers were used to
identify the presence of Yr genes (e.g., Yr5, Yr15, Yr9,
Yr7, Yr62) conferring resistance to yellow rust in these
varieties. Varieties such as Yr5/6 Avocet S, Yr15/6
Avocet S, Yr10/6 Avocet S, and Yr SP/6 Avocet S
showed no signs of the disease, and they are
considered fully resistant. These varieties possess Yr5,
Yr15, or Yr10 genes, which are highly effective in
suppressing the disease either completely or very
strongly. In contrast, varieties like Fielder, Avocet-
YRA/PASTOR, Ciano 79, and OPATA 85 were 100%
susceptible (completely affected by the disease). The
Yr6, Yr31, Yr27 genes present in these varieties did not
provide adequate protection, casting doubt on their
potential for disease resistance. The results indicated
that Yr5 and Yr15 genes are the most effective in
providing protection against yellow rust. Varieties
possessing these genes showed almost no signs of the
disease. On the other hand, varieties carrying Yr9, Yr7,
and Yr27 genes showed intermediate (MS) or full (S)
susceptibility. These genes alone are not sufficiently
protective and, therefore, are recommended for use in
combination with other more effective genes. The Yr62
gene, although found in many varieties, was not highly
effective when used alone. However, when combined
with other Yr genes, it can provide strong resistance.
CONCLUSION
The results of the study demonstrate the effectiveness
of using DNA markers to evaluate the yellow rust
resistance levels in wheat samples. The markers
Xgwm140 and Xgwm340, which exhibited the highest
polymorphism, were genetically associated with
resistance alleles, making them valuable tools for
marker-assisted selection (MAS) in breeding programs.
The relatively low frequency of resistant alleles
underscores their importance as genetic resources and
The American Journal of Agriculture and Biomedical
Engineering
15
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajabe
The American Journal of Agriculture and Biomedical Engineering
emphasizes the need to strengthen selection efforts.
Phylogenetic analyses identified the genetic diversity
within the population, enabling effective genotype
grouping and laying the foundation for future selection
strategies. These approaches provide a scientific basis
for developing wheat varieties with enhanced
resistance to yellow rust.
Recommended Genes for Breeding: Yr5, Yr15, Yr10
–
these genes have shown consistent and stable
resistance in both field and marker-based results.
Marker-Assisted Selection (MAS): Through the use of
these markers, it is possible to accelerate the breeding
process by identifying the genes at an early stage
(during the seedling stage). This allows for faster and
more efficient selection of resistant varieties.
REFERENCES
Schadt, E.E.; Linderman, M.D.; Sorenson, J.; Lawrence
Lee, L.; Garry, P.; Nolan, G.P. Computational solutions
to large-scale data management and analysis. Nat. Rev.
Genet. 2010, 11, -P. 647
–
657
Wellings C.R. Global status of stripe rust: a review of
historical
and
current
threats.
Euphytica.2011;179:129
–
141.
Ali S., Leconte M., Rahman H., Saqib M.S., Gladieux P.,
Enjalbert J., de Vallavieille-Pope C. A high virulence and
pathotype diversity of Puccinia striiformis f.sp. tritici at
its centre of diversity, the Himalayan region of
Pakistan. Eur J Plant Pathol.2014;140:275
–
290.
Randhawa, H., Puchalski, B. J., Frick, M., Goyal, A.,
Despins, T., Graf, R. J., et al. (2012). Stripe rust
resistance among western Canadian spring wheat and
triticale varieties. Can. J. Plant. Sci. 92 (4), 713
–
722.
doi:10.4141/cjps2011-252
Krattinger, S. G., Sucher, J., Selter, L. L., Chauhan, H.,
Zhou, B., Tang, M. Z.,et al. (2016). The wheat durable,
multipathogen resistance gene Lr34 confers partial
blast resistance in rice. Plant Biotechnol. 14, 1261
–
1268. doi:10.1111/pbi.12491
Sharma-Poudyal, D., Chen, X. M., Wan, A. M., Zhan, G.
M., Kang, Z. S., Cao, S.Q., et al. (2013). Virulence
characterization of international collections of the
wheat stripe rust pathogen, Puccinia striiformis f. sp.
tritici. Plant Dis. 97, 379
–
386. doi:10.1007/s00122-
023-04374-2doi:10.1094/PDIS-01-12-0078-RE
Chen X.M. Epidemiology and control of stripe rust
[Puccinia striiformis f. sp.tritici] on wheat. Can J Plant
Path. 2005;27: 314
–
337.
Wellings C.R. Global status of stripe rust: a review of
historical
and
current
threats.
Euphytica.
2011;179:129
–
141.
To‘raqulov X.S., Baboev S.K., Gulmurodov R.A. (2015).
Wheat Rust Diseases. Monograph. Navruz Publishing
House, Tashkent. 116 pages.
Shokirova, D., Turakulov, Kh., Bozorov, T., Meliev, S.,
Chinniqulov, B., Meliqoziev, F., Isoqulov, S., Ochilov, B.
Influence of Environmental Factors on the Development
of Yellow Rust Disease in Soft Wheat
. International
Journal of Science and Technology ISSN 3030-3443
Volume 1, Issue 25, November 2024. 59-94.
Todorovska E, Christov N, Slavov S, et al. Biotic stress
resistance in wheat breeding and genomic selection
implications. Biotechnol Biotec Eq. 2009;23(4): -P. 417
–
1426.
Paterson, A. H., Brubaker, C. L., & Wendel, J. F. A rapid
method for extraction of cotton (Gossypium spp.)
genomic DNA suitable for RFLP or PCR analysis. Plant
Molecular Biology Reporter. 1993; 11: 122
–
127. doi:
10.1007/BF02668079
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02668079
Olson, E.L.; Brown-Guedira, G.; Marshall, D.S.; Jin, Y.;
Mergoum, M.; Lowe, I.; Dubcovsky, J. Genotyping of US
wheat germplasm for presence of stem rust resistance
genes Sr24, Sr36 and Sr1RSAmigo.
Crop Sci.
2010,
50
,
668
–
675. [
CrossRef
]
Ullah, N.; Ali, N.; Iqbal, M.; Aziz-ud-Din, K.; Hussain, S.;
Inayat, U.R.; Ahmad, H. Markers assisted selection for
multiple stripe rust resistance genes in spring bread
wheat lines.
Int. J. Biol.
2016,
8
, 63
–
74.
Huang, L.; Xiao, X.Z.; Liu, B.; Gao, L.; Gong, G.S.; Chen,
W.Q.; Zhang, M.; Liu, T.G. Identification of Stripe Rust
Resistance Genes in Common Wheat Cultivars from the
Huang-Huai-Hai Region of China.
Plant Dis.
2020,
104
,
1763
–
1770. [
CrossRef
]
Tabassum, S.; Ashraf, M.; Chen, X.M. Evaluation of
Pakistan wheat germplasms for stripe rust resistance
using molecular markers.
Sci. China Life Sci.
2010,
53
,
1123
–
1134. [
CrossRef
]
Sun, G.L.; Fahima, T.; Korol, A.B.; Turpeinen, T.; Grama,
A. Identification of molecular markers linked to the Yr15
stripe rust resistance gene of wheat originated in wild
emmer wheat, Triticum dicoccoides.
Theor. Appl. Genet.
1997,
95
, 622
–
628. [
CrossRef
]
Plants
2021
,
10
, 2303 18
of 18
Peng, J.H.; Fahima, T.; Roeder, M.S.; Huang, Q.Y.; Dahan,
A.; Li, Y.C.; Grama, A.; Nevo, E. Highdensity molecular
map of chromosome region harboring stripe-rust
resistance genes YrH52 and Yr15 derived from wild
emmer wheat,
Triticum dicoccoides
.
Genetica
2000
,
109
, 199
–
210. [
CrossRef
] [
PubMed
]
Murphy, L.R.; Santra, D.; Kidwell, K.; Yan, G.P.; Chen,
X.M.; Garland Campbell, K. A Linkage maps of wheat
stripe rust resistance genes Yr5 and Yr15 for use in
marker-assisted selection.
Crop Sci.
2009
,
49
, 1786
–
790.
The American Journal of Agriculture and Biomedical
Engineering
16
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajabe
The American Journal of Agriculture and Biomedical Engineering
[
CrossRef
]
