VIEW ARTICLE

Genetics

Genetics of Reaction to Maize Dwarf Mosaic Virus Strain A in Several Maize Inbred Lines. C. W. Roane, Professor emeritus, Department of Plant Pathology, Physiology, and Weed Science, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg 24061; S. A. Tolin(2), and H. S. Aycock(3). (2)Professor, Department of Plant Pathology, Physiology, and Weed Science, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg 24061; (3)Assistant professor, Department of Crop and Soil Environmental Sciences, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg 24061, Present address: 5776 Vesper Drive, South Beloit, IL 61080. Phytopathology 79:1364-1368. Accepted for publication 30 June 1989. Copyright 1989 The American Phytopathological Society. DOI: 10.1094/Phyto-79-1364.

Nine maize inbred lines resistant to maize dwarf mosaic virus strain A (MDMV-A) were studied in hybrid combinations for inheritance of reaction to MDMV-A in F₁ and F₂. Plants growing in a field free of natural inoculum were mechanically inoculated at the two- to four-leaf stage. Three to four weeks later they were scored as healthy or symptomatic in response to virus. This was done to detect early symptoms not always apparent after anthesis. After anthesis plants were scored again but on a scale of 1-7; 1 = no infection, and 7 = nearly completely mottled. Plants that had symptoms before but not after anthesis were scored 2. Resistant inbred lines B68, Oh1EP, Oh7B, and Pa405 (the B68 group) behaved homogeneously for virus reactions as lines and the F₁ of crosses with susceptible line Va50 produced only type 1 plants. In the F₂, resistance was monogenic and completely dominant. Since no infected plants were observed in F₂ of crosses of lines within the B68 group, resistance occurred at one locus. The symbol Rmd1 is suggested for this locus. The resistant inbred lines A239, Va53, Va85, and VaOM73 (the Va53 group) produced only type 1 plants, but in the F₁ of crosses with Va50, produced some susceptible plants; however, in F₂ all segregated monogenically. In the F₂ of crosses within the Va53 group and between the Va53 and B68 groups, susceptible segregates appeared. However, since the Va53 group behaved variably in F₁ combination with Va50 it could not be ascertained that genes of the Va53 group were allelic with or different from the resistance gene of the B68 group. Va35 is unstable as a line and produced inconclusive results; in the F₂ of Va50 × Va35, a 1:1 ratio was obtained instead of the expected 3:1. Inconclusive results were also obtained in the crosses Va35 × Pa405 and Va35 × A239.