Patent Grant
11130959
The instant application contains a Sequence Listing which has been submitted electronically in ASCII format and is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety. Said ASCII copy, created on Aug. 4, 2017, is named 50970-267333_SEQ.txt and is 58,089 bytes in size.
Mutant rice is disclosed that is (1) resistant/tolerant to ACCase inhibitors at a relatively high concentration of inhibitors due to synergistic action of genes in 2 regions of 2 different chromosomes; (2) resistant/tolerant to both HPPD and ACCase inhibiting herbicides; and (3) resistant/tolerant only to 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD) inhibiting herbicides. Methods of weed control are disclosed using rice with these herbicide resistant/tolerant crops in fields that may be sprayed or otherwise treated with the herbicide. Methods to produce the herbicide resistant/tolerant rice are also disclosed.
Value of Rice Crops
Rice is an ancient agricultural crop and today is one of the principal food crops of the world. There are two cultivated species of rice: Oryza sativa L., the Asian rice, and Oryza glaberrima Steud., the African rice. The Asian species constitutes virtually all of the world's cultivated rice and is the species grown in the United States. Three major rice producing regions exist in the United States: the Mississippi Delta (Arkansas, Mississippi, northeast Louisiana, southeast Missouri), the Gulf Coast (southwest Louisiana, southeast Texas), and the Central Valley of California. Other countries, in particular in South America and the East, are major rice producers.
Rice is one of the few crops that can be grown in a shallow flood as it has a unique structure allowing gas exchange through the stems between the roots and the atmosphere. Growth in a shallow flood results in the best yields and is the reason that rice is usually grown in heavy clay soils, or soils with an impermeable hard pan layer just below the soil surface. These soil types are usually either not suitable for other crops or at best, the crops yield poorly.
The constant improvement of rice is imperative to provide necessary nutrition for a growing world population. A large portion of the world population consumes rice as their primary source of nutrition, and crops must thrive in various environmental conditions including competing with weeds and attacks by unfavorable agents. Rice improvement is carried out through conventional breeding practices and also by recombinant genetic techniques. Though appearing straightforward to those outside this discipline, crop improvement requires keen scientific and artistic skill and results are generally unpredictable.
Although specific breeding objectives vary somewhat in the different rice producing regions of the world, increasing yield is a primary objective in all programs.
Plant breeding begins with the analysis and definition of strengths and weaknesses of cultivars in existence, followed by the establishment of program goals, to improve areas of weakness to produce new cultivars. Specific breeding objectives include combining in a single cultivar an improved combination of desirable traits from the parental sources. Desirable traits may be introduced due to spontaneous or induced mutations. Desirable traits include higher yield, resistance to environmental stress, diseases and insects, better stems and roots, tolerance to low temperatures, better agronomic characteristics, nutritional value and grain quality.
For example, the breeder initially selects and crosses two or more parental lines, followed by selection for desired traits among the many new genetic combinations. The breeder can theoretically generate billions of new and different genetic combinations via crossing. Breeding by using crossing and selfing, does not imply direct control at the cellular level. However, that type of control may be achieved in part using recombinant genetic techniques.
Pedigree breeding is used commonly for the improvement of self-pollinating crops such as rice. For example, two parents which possess favorable, complementary traits are crossed to produce an F1 generation. One or both parents may themselves represent an F1 from a previous cross. Subsequently a segregating population is produced, by growing the seeds resulting from selfing one or several F1s if the two parents are pure lines, or by directly growing the seed resulting from the initial cross if at least one of the parents is an F1. Selection of the best individual genomes may begin in the first segregating population or F2; then, beginning in the F3, the best individuals in the best families are selected. “Best” is defined according to the goals of a particular breeding program e.g., to increase yield, resist diseases. Overall a multifactorial approach is used to define “best” because of genetic interactions. A desirable gene in one genetic background may differ in a different background. In addition, introduction of the gene may disrupt other favorable genetic characteristics. Replicated testing of families can begin in the F4 generation to improve the effectiveness of selection for traits with low heritability. At an advanced stage of inbreeding (i.e., F6 and F7), the best lines or mixtures of phenotypically similar lines are tested for potential release as new parental lines.
Backcross breeding has been used to transfer genes for a highly heritable trait into a desirable homozygous cultivar or inbred line which is the recurrent parent. The source of the trait to be transferred is called the donor parent. The resulting plant is expected to have the attributes of the recurrent parent (e.g., cultivar) and the desirable trait transferred from the donor parent. After the initial cross, individuals possessing the phenotype of the donor parent are selected and repeatedly crossed (backcrossed) to the recurrent parent. The process is used to recover all of the beneficial characteristics of the recurrent parent with the addition of the new trait provided by the donor parent.
Promising advanced breeding lines are thoroughly tested and compared to appropriate standards in environments representative of the commercial target area(s) for at least three or more years. The best lines are candidates for new commercial varieties or parents of hybrids; those still deficient in a few traits may be used as parents to produce new populations for further selection.
These processes, which lead to the final step of marketing and distribution, usually take from 8 to 12 years from the time the first cross is made and may rely on the development of improved breeding lines as precursors. Therefore, development of new cultivars is not only a time-consuming process, but requires precise forward planning, efficient use of resources, and a minimum of changes in direction. The results include novel genetic combinations not found in nature.
Some improvement of rice through breeding may be restricted to the natural genetic variation in rice and hybridizing species, such as wild rice. The introduction of new variation in a breeding program is usually through the crossing program as described, such as pedigree or backcross breeding. However, occasionally natural mutations are found that result in the introduction of new traits such as disease resistance or height changes. Breeders have also developed new traits by inducing mutations (small changes in the DNA sequence) into a rice genome. Some of these mutations or combination of genes are not found in nature. Commonly, EMS or sodium azide plus MNU are used as mutagenic agents. These chemicals randomly induce single base changes in DNA, usually of G and C changed to A and T. Overall effects are unpredictable. Most of these changes have no effect on the crop because they fall either outside the gene coding regions or don't change the amino acid sequence of the gene product. However, some produce new traits or incorporate new DNA changes into previous lines.
Until recently, a breeder had no direct control of mutation sites in the DNA sequence. The identification of useful changes is due to the random possibility that an effective mutation will be induced and that the breeder will recognize the phenotypic effects of the change and will be able to select and expand crops of rice having that mutation.
Seeds are treated with the mutagenic chemical or other agent and immediately planted to grow and produce M2 seed. The M2 seed will carry numerous new variations; therefore, no two experiments will produce the same combinations. Among these variations new traits previously not existing in rice and unavailable for selection by a plant breeder may be found and used for rice improvement.
To find new traits the breeder must use efficient and strategic selection strategies because the mutagenic process has an extremely low frequency of useful new combinations. Among thousands of induced new genetic variants there may be only one with a desirable new trait. An optimal selection system will screen through thousands of new variants and allow detection of a few or even a single plant that might carry a new trait. After identifying or finding a possible new trait the breeder must develop a new cultivar by pedigree or backcross breeding, followed by extensive testing to verify the new trait and cultivar exhibits stable and heritable value to rice producers.
Using recombinant genetic techniques, nucleic acid molecules with mutations that encode improved characteristics in rice, may be introduced into rice that have commercially suitable genomes. New methods of gene manipulation such as CRISPR, and modern sequencing techniques allow breeders to direct complex crop improvements, and accelerate the progress to commercialization. After a mutation is identified by whatever method, it may be transferred into rice by recombinant techniques, and tested to be sure fitness is not deleteriously affected.
Herbicide Resistance in Rice
Weeds and other competitors for resources in crop fields compete for resources and greatly reduce the yield and quality of the crop. Weeds have been controlled in crops through the application of selective herbicides that kill the weeds, but do not harm the crop. Usually selectivity of the herbicides is based on biochemical variations or differences between the crop and the weeds. Some herbicides are non-selective, meaning they kill all or almost all plants. Non-selective or broad spectrum herbicides can be used in crops if new genes are inserted that express specific proteins that convey tolerance or resistance to the herbicide. Resistance to herbicides has also been achieved in crops through genetic mutations that alter proteins and biochemical processes. These mutations may arise in nature, but mostly they have been induced in crops either in vitro in tissue cultures or by inducing mutations in vivo. Unfortunately in some instances, especially with repeated use of a particular herbicide, weeds have developed resistance through the unintended selection of natural mutations that provide resistance. When weeds become resistant to a particular herbicide, that herbicide is no longer useful for weed control. The development of resistance in weeds is best delayed through alternating the use of different modes of action to control weeds, interrupting development of resistant weeds.
Rice production is plagued by broad leaf plants and a particularly hard to control weed called red rice. One difficulty arises because red rice is so genetically similar to cultivated rice (they occasionally cross pollinate) that there are no selective herbicides available that target red rice, yet do not harm the cultivated rice. Control is currently provided in commercial rice production through the development of mutations found in rice that render rice resistant to broad spectrum herbicides e.g. imidazolinone and sulfonylurea herbicides. Rice resistant to herbicides that inhibit other deleterious plants, such as broad leaf plants, are needed.
To date, most herbicide tolerant rice is associated with a single genetic change, notably a change in a target enzyme altering its response to inhibitors. More complex causes of increased resistance/tolerance would be desirable to introduce into plants, because they move further from natural causations, and provide more obstacles to weeds developing resistance.
Finding new mutations in rice that makes it resistant to a variety of herbicides, to combinations of herbicides with alternative modes of action, particularly enhanced resistance, would greatly benefit rice production. Obtaining and incorporating genes for herbicide resistance into rice genomes with additional favorable characteristics, and alternative resistances is challenging, unpredictable, time consuming and expensive, but necessary to meet the world's increasing food needs.
Described and disclosed herein are novel and distinctive rice lines with unique, in some combinations synergistic, resistances to herbicides—in particular to ACCase and HPPD inhibiting herbicides, and combinations thereof. ACCase inhibiting herbicides include quizalofop, propaquizafop and fluazifop. HPPD inhibiting herbicides include mesotrione, benzobicyclon, and combinations thereof.
Genetic Regions Associated with Resistance/Tolerance to FOP Family Herbicides
Mutagenized population development and screening performed for FOP herbicide resistance, allowed the identification of two mutated genetic regions associated with resistance to Quizalofop. One of these resistance causing regions, designated RTA1, was determined to be located in the known target locus of the ACCase gene located in Chromosome 5. It therefore constitutes a typical example of target specific herbicide resistance (TSR). Another agent, designated RTA2, was determined to be located in Chromosome 1, in a region formerly unreported as involved in FOP herbicide tolerance, and unrelated to the ACCase amino acid sequence. This second region appears to be a case of a non-target specific resistance (NTSR) agent.
The genetic backgrounds are not the same in the two lines RTA1 and RTA2. One is mutagenized, the other is converted back to the conventional line.
The RTA1 and RTA2 lines are homozygous for the ACCase inhibitor resistance/tolerant traits and are inbred.
The herbicide tolerance inducing genetic regions of RTA1 and RTA2 have essentially recessive effects that require homozygosity to have the full effect of the tolerance. The lines are designated “RTA1 and RTA2” but these terms also refer to the specific mutated regions within the lines. The regions are associated with herbicide tolerance.
RTA1 Confers Resistance by a TSR Mechanism
The mutated resistance gene RTA1, was determined to be a single point mutation in the DNA of the ACCase gene, wherein a guanine (G) nucleotide in the wild type, unmutated rice is replaced by adenine in the mutant DNA, which results in a change in the amino acid sequence of glycine to serine (G to S) in the expressed protein target site affecting a known active site in the protein (G2096S). This results in change of herbicide action at a critical binding site in the ACCase enzyme (found in chloroplasts), that affects the binding of the herbicide to the ACCase protein, and blocks the expression of phytotoxicity. Thus plants carrying the mutation do not die by contact with the herbicide. The mutation was identified by sequence analysis of the ACCase gene and exactly matches identical FOP-resistance mutations identified in homologous positions in other crops, and in plant species.
RTA2 Confers Resistance by a NTSR Mechanism
In the case of RTA2, the mutation associated with resistance/tolerance was mapped to Chr.1 (unlike RTA1 which is located on Chr.5), as evidenced both by linkage mapping analysis and later by MutMap (mutation mapping by whole genome sequencing strategy). In this region of Chromosome 1 there is no report of duplicated or orthologous ACCase or ACCase-like genes, the target gene of the FOP herbicides. Therefore, the mechanism of tolerance to Quizalofop caused by this mutation RTA2, cannot be characterized as “target site”. Instead, RTA2 is considered a “non-target site” resistance genetic region or site, also referred to in the literature as “non-target site or metabolism based” herbicide tolerance (NTSR).
Weed Control
These new lines present improved opportunities for weed control.
A method to control weeds in a rice field uses the rice in the field resistant to a plurality of herbicides.
The rice field is contacted with at least one herbicide, or a plurality of herbicides, for example, any that may belong to the family of herbicides known as ACCase-inhibitors, or any that may belong to the class of herbicides known as HPPD-inhibiting herbicides.
Producing Herbicide Resistant Rice Plants
A method for growing herbicide resistant/tolerant rice plants includes (a) planting resistant rice seeds; (b) allowing the rice seeds to sprout; (c) applying one or more herbicides to the rice sprouts at levels of herbicide that would normally inhibit the growth of a rice plant, and selecting surviving plants for crop expansion.
Methods of producing herbicide-tolerant rice plants may also use a transgene or plurality of transgenes, or new methods of genetic manipulation such as CRISPR. One embodiment of such a method is transforming a cell of a rice plant with transgenes, wherein the transgenes encode 2 different genetic regions that when combined lead to synergistic resistance to ACCase inhibitors, or an HPPD and an ACCase enzyme that confers tolerance in resulting rice plants to one or more herbicides. Any suitable cell may be used in the practice of these methods, for example, the cell may be in the form of a callus.
A monocot plant tolerant/resistant to ACCase inhibitors, at levels higher than those tolerated by plants without genetic regions from the genomes of rice lines RTA2 and RTA1 or the equivalents, is suitable for weed control and new line development. Equivalents would be genetic regions with the same coding result that is on chromosome 5, and the same vector of mutations as in chromosome 1, with synergistic effects when combined.
The region in the genome of rice line RTA2 is a mutation encoding a substitution of glycine to serine at position 2096.
The region of rice chromosome number 1 in rice line RTA2 is between position C1-32083963 and C1-36386713 with mutant nucleotide sequences as shown in Table 1A and 1B. This region is a tightly linked region with mutations shown at the individual positions in Tables 1A and 1B. When the vector of mutations is in a rice plant the RTA2 effect is present.
Seeds of the rice plants disclosed herein are deposited as ATCC accession numbers PTA-122646 and 124233.
A method of producing rice resistant to ACCase herbicide inhibitors, at levels significantly higher than those tolerated by plants without genetic regions conferring resistance includes:
Cells derived from herbicide resistant seeds, plants grown from such seeds and cells derived from such plants, progeny of plants grown from such seed and cells derived from such progeny are within the scope of this disclosure. The growth of plants produced from deposited seeds, and progeny of such plants will typically be resistant/tolerant to herbicides, e.g. ACCase inhibiting, HPPD inhibiting or both, at levels of herbicides that would normally inhibit the growth of a corresponding wild-type plant. There are some natural (non-induced) levels of tolerance to some herbicides, but those regions cannot protect plants at levels that would be commercially useful.
1. Synergistic ACCase Inhibitor Resistance/Tolerance
Internal-mutagenized population screening at RiceTec, for FOP herbicides, allowed the identification of two mutagenized chromosomal regions, RTA1 and RTA2, that independently conferred tolerance to these herbicides. Each of these independently derived mutant tolerant lines were advanced and evaluated after the initial screening, to further characterize these new variants, assess their tolerance effect, determine the causal mutation or mutations responsible for the new phenotypes and to assess their commercial potential. Completion of these studies required several generations of population advancement and experimentation. These studies included, as main objectives, DNA Marker linkage/QTL mapping of the phenotype to pinpoint chromosomal position; gene action studies; dose, timing of application and herbicides studies to assess product specification and value and also whole genome sequencing/mutation mapping analysis to characterize the mutations associated to these phenotypes. Further studies involving stacking of these two mutation in single genetic backgrounds were also conducted to assess the interaction between these independently developed mutants and their potential antagonistic or synergistic effect in FOP herbicide tolerance.
The mutated tolerance gene RTA1, was found to map exactly to the location of the known target gene for this family of herbicides the interfere with lipid biosynthesis, the Acetyl CoA enzyme locus, in what clearly represents a target site resistance (TSR) occurrence. In TSR typically, the mutated allele has a modification that conditions an amino acid change in the expressed protein that interferes, or blocks, the normal interaction with the herbicide thereby preventing, or limiting, the expression of phytotoxicity. RTA1 was later determined, though mutation mapping analysis, to be a single point mutation in the DNA of the ACCase gene whereby a Guanine nucleotide in the wild type is replaced by an Adenine in the mutant, resulting in change in amino acid (G to S) in the expressed protein at one of the critical binding sites where Acetyl-coA and FOP herbicides interact to onset phytotoxicity. This change at a critical binding site in the ACCase enzyme (found in chloroplasts), reduced affinity to the herbicide, preventing blockage of ACCase activity and phytotoxicity. Thus plants carrying the mutation do not die by the herbicide. The mutation was identified by sequence and exactly matches identical FOP-tolerance mutations identified in homologous positions in other crops, for the same ACCase gene.
In the case of RTA2, the mutation or mutations associated with tolerance are located on Chromosome 1, as shown by linkage/QTL analysis and by sequencing-mutation mapping. Because in this region of rice (Chromosome 1) there are no reports of duplicated or orthologous ACCase or ACCase-like genes, target gene of the FOP herbicides, it is assumed that RTA2 represents a case of non-target site resistance (NTSR).
Embodiments of mutant rice lines designated ML0831265-01493 (ATCC deposit PTA-12933, mutation G2096S, henceforth referred to as “RTA1”) and ML0831265-02283 (ATCC deposit PTA-13619 (“RTA2”)) are resistant/tolerant to ACCase inhibitors singly or in combination. (U.S. Pat. No. 9,370,149 B2).
Table 1A and 1B present the sequence and genetic information for the region in RTA2 associated with herbicide resistance. This region in combination with RTA1 (G2096S) confers synergistic almost independent resistance to FOP herbicide. The overlapping of results obtained from herbicide tolerance effect mapping and F3-4 recombinant fine mapping, with the mutation mapping, identified the above listed 26 mutations, contrasting with both O. sativa (ssp indica), and O. sativa (ssp japonica) sequence references, as the putative causal factors in RTA2 non-target site herbicide tolerance.
A vector of closely linked mutations in chromosome 1 is associated with synergistic action effecting herbicide tolerance when combined with RTA1. The RTA2 mutation initially mapped to a mutation causing a change of G to A in the nucleic acid coding sequence of the gene ZOS1-16 encoding a C2H2 zinc finger protein from Oryza sativa at rice base pair position 3660202 in chromosome 1 region. This region, which is correlated with a synergistic response to ACCase inhibitors, has not been reported before in herbicide tolerant rice. No report was found of another rice region on chromosome 1 conferring resistance to quizalofop. When RTA2 is by itself in rice, there is increased resistance/tolerance to ACCase inhibitors, but the mutation operates to cause resistance/tolerance to ACCase inhibitors best when combined with rice that also expresses the RTA1 mutation.
Because the specific levels of herbicide tolerance of RTA1 and RTA2 plants separately were moderate or low, as previously stated, crosses were made between RTA1 and RTA2 mutant lines to produce a stacked combination of both mechanisms and possible interactions between the novel genetic combination were sought. The end stacked product was rapidly obtained by simple Marker Assisted Selection (MAS) for the chromosome 1 resistant haplotype using markers C1-3208396 and C1-36386713, and using markers for the ACCAse locus in chromosome 5. Experiments of herbicide dose, timing of application and active ingredient, conducted on the RTA1-RTA2 double homozygous line revealed that there exists a very strong synergistic effect between the two independent tolerance variants, whereby the double homozygous mutant tolerates, at the critical early window of desirable application (2-leaf stage), a maximum dose of 80 oz/acre, of Quizalofop with no phytotoxicity, effectively providing near dose-independent tolerance, whereby most reported induced or spontaneous ACCase mutants only tolerate field dose applications.
Stacking of both genetic mutations is exemplified by seeds deposited in the ATCC PTA-122646 (RL-122546-8). Synergistic resistance to ACCase inhibitor was observed in rice with the stacked mutation.
The difference between a “stacked mutant donor” and a “conversion” (Table 9) is that RTA1 and RTA2 are identified independently from the same R0146 mutagenized population. With the intent of evaluating potential synergistic effects between the two independent loci, homozygous RTA1 and RTA2 lines were intercrossed at the F5 level, and F2 progeny carrying both homozygous herbicide tolerant mutations were selected to create the double RTA1-RTA2 stacked donor RL1225468 (PTA-122646).
Stacked donor RL1225468, being an intercross of F5 lines derived from the original mutant populations, carries random mutations across the entire genome. In order to develop a “clean” donor carrying only wild type R0146 alleles throughout the genome, except at the Chr5 ACCase RTA1 locus and the Chr1 RTA2 locus, a backrcross program was conducted to transfer the mutated alleles into a conventional R0146 line. Line 16USGE40004-34, is a BC3F3 selection from the original cross RL1225468/R0146, backcrossed to R0146 three times, and filed with ATCC under PTA-124233. The synergism was present in use of both genetic backgrounds.
It is a surprising and unexpected result to find herbicide resistance/tolerance effected by a combination of a mutation in a target enzyme, disclosed herein RTA1, with RTA2 mutations in a NTSR. Based on sequence analysis, ACCase gene is located on Chromosome 5 in rice. Part of the gene is duplicated on Chromosome 10, but no part of the ACCase gene is reported on Chromosome 1.
Compared with TSR, in which the herbicide resistance mechanism is directly associated with variation in the known target protein/gene, whereby the metabolism of resistance is clearly inferred, as with RTA1, NTSR mechanisms are much more difficult to characterize, and require extensive gene, gene action, and gene interaction studies.
It is postulated that NTSR for FOP herbicides, could arise from onset of mechanisms triggering metabolic resistance such as compartmentalization, blockage of movement, detoxification, blockage of activation or other forms of preventing phytotoxicity. Also, recent studies showed that microRNAs (miRNAs) can be involved in the ‘gene regulation’ mechanisms leading to NTSR. In general, NTSR mechanisms and the molecular interaction involving the herbicide are more complex mechanisms than found in TSR.
Possible mechanisms explaining the synergistic effects of plants carrying the RTA1 mutation and RTA2 region include breaking down the herbicide by biochemical processes (detoxifying the herbicide), or by limiting the translocation of the herbicide to chloroplast, (compartmentalization) or other metabolic functions preventing herbicides affected the ACCase enzyme. Detoxifying the herbicide or indirectly acting as a ‘regulator’ in activating genes involved in cell protection like Cytochrome P450 mono-oxygenase, glutathione transferases, aryl acylamidiases or others, are NTSR mechanisms.
There were significant benefits in stacking the RTA1 and the previously “ACCase Unknown” mutation (now called RTA2), because of synergism in resistance/tolerance of the rice with both mutations in their genome.
The benefits of the double mutations are illustrated in
Table 7 lists criteria for categorizing % injury in the plant sprayed (contacted) with a herbicide.
2. Identification of the Causal Mutation for Tolerance to ACCase Herbicides in Line ML0831265-02283 (RTA2)
Often tolerance to ACCase herbicides is derived from a mutation in the carboxyl transferase region of the ACCase gene, as is the case in tolerant line ML0831265-01493 (mutation G2096S or RTA1). However after sequencing the carboxyl transferase region of the ACCase gene in line ML0831265-02283 no mutation was found. This result indicates that the tolerance in line ML0831265-02283 is derived from a non-target site process.
Finding the causal mutation for tolerance in line ML0831265-02283 involved linkage mapping and mutation mapping as (“mut mapping”) described for finding the causal mutation and native tolerance for HPPD tolerance in line ML0831266-03093.
Linkage mapping to find the chromosomal region or QTL causing the tolerance in line ML0831265-02283 requires a population segregating for the trait. This population was made by crossing the tolerant line with the male sterile cytoplasm line A0109. The F1 collected from this cross was grown and allowed to self-pollinate to make a F2 population. The F2 population segregated for ACCase tolerance. Eight hundred F2 seeds were planted and leaf tissue was collected from the seedlings to allow genotyping of each plant. When the seedlings where three weeks old the whole F2 population was sprayed with quizalfop (116 gmai/ha). The seedlings were evaluated for tolerance nineteen days after the herbicide application. Standard QTL mapping software was used to analyze the genotypes of each F2 individual and the associated tolerance response to identify molecular markers linked to the herbicide tolerance. After this analysis a genomic region (QTL) was identified for the tolerance on chromosome one (
The mutation mapping strategy to find the causal mutation was employed in the same manner as used to find the QTL for HPPD mutation tolerance. A mutation mapping population was created to find the causal tolerance mutation through genomic sequencing by next-generation sequencing. The mutant line ML0831265-02283 was crossed back to the original non-mutant parent R0146. The F1 progeny of the cross were selfed to produce a F2 population that is segregating for the tolerance causing mutation. Only mutations are segregating in this population because the mutations are the only genomic difference between ML0831265-02283 and R0146.
The F2 population was planted as individuals, and leaf tissue was collected and DNA extracted from each individual to use for genotyping after the population was phenotyped. The ACCase herbicide quizalofop was applied to the F2 population at the 3-4 leaf stage and a concentration of 116 gmai/ha. Individuals that survived the herbicide application were scored as tolerant and those that died were scored as susceptible.
The DNA derived from a set of twenty surviving F2 individuals and twenty that were killed was each respectively bulked together and sequenced along with both the mutant line ML0831265-02283 and the non-mutant parent line R0146. Mapping the causal mutation was based on an index accessing the frequency of all mutations in the bulk representing the surviving individuals. The index was derived from the proportion of sequencing reads that carried a variation different from the non-mutant parent line R0146. The more sequencing reads with the variation the closer the index was to one and if all sequencing reads had the variation the index equaled one.
The analysis of these results showed two groups including 19 mutations of eleven mutations on chromosome one with an index score of one (
As in previous trials, injury observed in RTA1+RTA2 is very low across all rates regardless of herbicide chemistry.
3. Mutation Mapping to Find the HPPD Tolerance Causative Mutation
Mutation Mapping analysis, using both japonica (Nipponbare cultivar) and indica (93-11 cultivar) reference genome sequence identified the same Chromosome 1 as associated with the novel FOP tolerance phenotype.
A mutation mapping population was created to find the tolerance causal mutation through genomic sequencing by next-generation sequencing. The mutant line ML0831266-03093 was crossed back to the original non-mutant parent P1003. The F1 progeny of the cross was selfed to produce a F2 population that will be segregating for the tolerance causing mutation. Only mutations will be segregating in this population because the mutations are the only genomic difference between ML0831266-03093 and P1003.
The F2 population was planted as individuals and leaf tissue collected and DNA extracted from each individual to use for genotyping after the population was phenotyped. In this method all of the population will carry the native tolerance gene rendering the population tolerant to a certain level to mesotrione herbicide. To differentiate the native tolerance from the tolerance causal mutation mesotrione was applied to the population with a high rate (840 gmai/ha) so that all individuals without the tolerance causal mutation died.
The DNA derived from a set of twenty surviving F2 individuals and twenty that were killed was each respectively bulked together and sequenced along with both the mutant line ML0831266-03093 and the non-mutant parent line P1003. Mapping the causal mutation was based on an index accessing the frequency of all mutations in the bulk representing the surviving individuals. The index was derived from the proportion of sequencing reads that carried a variation different from the non-mutant parent line P1003. The more sequencing reads with the variation the closer the index was to one and if all sequencing reads had the variation the index equaled one.
A single mutation causing the high tolerance to mesotrione was predicted. Instead the data showed a peak of mutations carrying a score of 1 introducing another level of difficulty in finding the causal mutation. The result did confirm that the QTL on chromosome 1 found through linkage mapping is the genomic location of the tolerance casual mutation (
A set of lines was identified with recombination points evenly distributed within the identified QTLs and mutations (
Through the described strategy the specific genomic regions containing the tolerance causal mutation and the native tolerance gene are now known and useful for developing commercial products. The commercial products are useful in rice production as they survive application of mesotrione herbicide at rates that will control prevalent weeds including red rice without harming the rice crop. The specific genomic location allows the use of molecular markers on the flanking regions of each QTL to select for the HPPD tolerant trait in the development of commercial products.
Genetic mapping of the three groups of F2 individuals including the set of individuals sprayed with mesotrione at only 105 gm ai/ha, the set followed by a sequential application of 630 gm ai/ha, and the final group sprayed with 420 gm ai/ha shows two genes controlling resistance to mesotrione. In the population sprayed with 105 gm ai/ha a single QTL found on chromosome 2 with strong linkage to SNP marker BG-id2004662 acted in a mostly dominate manner. This marker and QTL identifies the inherent tolerance in line P1003. The marker is useful for breeding and selection of new mesotrione tolerant lines. The discovery of this QTL facilitates commercial development of new rice varieties with a new method for controlling weeds through the use of mesotrione herbicide. The finding of the linked marker BG-id2004662 is a novel finding and selection strategy for breeding and selecting the tolerance to mesotrione and other herbicides derived from line P1003.
In the two groups of F2 individuals sprayed with the higher rates of mesotrione (420 and 630 gm ai/ha) a second QTL was found with strong linkage to SNP marker WG-id1002788. This QTL is the demonstrated genetic position of the causal mutation for high tolerance to mesotrione. The combined tolerance of the QTL developed through mutation breeding on chromosome 1 and the QTL discovered in line P1003 provides a novel tolerance to mesotrione and combined with the linked molecular markers facilitates quick and efficient breeding of new rice varieties (
4. Rice Resistant to Both ACCase and HPPD Inhibitors
Embodiments of rice resistant to both ACCase and HPPD inhibitors, include rice designated PL121448M2-80048 (ATCC deposit PTA-121362) and PL 1214418M2-73009 (ATCC deposit PTA-121398). (U.S. Pat. No. 9,303,270 B2).
5. Weed Control
Rice lines having different herbicide resistance genes, either pyramided or stacked in the same genetic background or, as single products that are used alternatively in the rotation used by the farmer, represent a critical tool or strategy in extending the useful life of herbicides because these practices slow the development of herbicide resistant variants among the targeted weeds. Several methods are possible to deploy these resistances into hybrids or varieties for weed control, as well as options for hybrid seed production. The rice lines described herein represent new methods for weed control in rice and can be deployed in any of many possible strategies to control weeds and provide for long-term use of these and other weed control methods. In particular, mutant rice tolerant to ACCase or HPPD inhibiting herbicides, and to both ACCase and HPPD inhibitors, are disclosed.
Through developing sources of resistance to multiple herbicides including different mutations producing tolerance through different mechanics to the same class of herbicide, more options are available for weed control in rice. The rice lines claimed provide the ability to use herbicides with a new mode of action for weed control. For example, the ability to use an ACCase inhibiting herbicide in combination with an HPPD inhibitor, represents a mode of action not previously reported in rice. The use of these rice lines including combining lines with resistance to the same herbicide, but with other modes of causative action, provides new options for weed control in grower's fields thus slowing the development of weed resistance. Several methods are possible to deploy this resistance in hybrids for weed control as well as options for hybrid seed production, with different mutations.
A method for controlling growth of weeds in the vicinity of herbicide resistant/tolerant rice plants is also within the scope of the disclosure. One example of such methods is applying one or more herbicides to the fields of rice plants at levels of herbicide that would normally inhibit the growth of a rice plant. For example, at least one herbicide inhibits HPPD activity.
In order to maximize weed control in a rice field, different herbicides may be required to cover the spectrum of weeds present and, in turn, several applications along the crop cycle may be required for any one particular herbicide depending on the overlap between the window of effective control provided by a single application and the window of time during which its target weed may germinate, which often is longer than the protection afforded by a single herbicide application. Temperature, and soil moisture conditions are key factors that affect both window of herbicide efficacy, window of moment of weed germination and growth. Based on these factors, herbicide control models often include sequential repeated application during the crop cycle.
In a standard herbicide tolerance system, for example, one currently used commercially in rice, for resistance to imidazolinone herbicides, the first application of the herbicide is applied at the 2 leaf stage, with the second application following a minimum of 10 days later just prior to the establishment of permanent flood when the plants are tillering. The purpose of the second application is to eliminate weeds that may have germinated after the first application before they can be effectively suppressed by flooding. In some traits, including ACCase inhibitor herbicides, the timing of herbicide applications can be critical not only for effective weed control, but also for the level of tolerance observed in the plants themselves. In one trait under development at RiceTec, plant injury observed in response to herbicide application, aligns closely with plant stage. In this line, very early post-emergence applications cause much higher injury at the 1 leaf stage, with observed injury declining at each growth stage of the plant through first tiller. Some herbicide tolerance traits even exhibit no tolerance to pre-emergent applications even though post-emergence tolerance is excellent. This variable herbicide response linked to plant growth stage requires careful testing to establish the boundaries of safe usage of a new herbicide tolerant product.
Rice production for good yields requires specific weed control practices. Some herbicides are applied as premergents, after planting but before crop emergence; other as postemergents. In the case of rice, postemergent application can be before the crops are flooded, of after. Preferred applications are normally times, according to the developmental stage of the crop, as defined by the number of open leaves in the growing plant. Timing of herbicide applications is an important factor, not only from the perspective of maximizing the efficiency of weed control, but also from the perspective of minimizing impact on the herbicide tolerant crop. This consideration stems from the fact that mutagenized, naturally occurring or transgenic herbicide resistances often are not completely independent of dose and application timing effects. Different genes of herbicide resistance have different dose responses, as well as timing of application responses whereby, typically, phytotoxity in the resistant crop increases as dose increases beyond a certain level, or phytotoxicity to the resistant crop varies with varying timings of application for a given herbicide dose.
Evaluation of the novel herbicide resistance genes, subject of this application, was conducted with a range of suitable herbicide doses that cover application rates typically used for rice farming operations while also taking into consideration possible deviations from the manufacturer-recommended doses. Considering 1×, the recommended manufacturers or best practice recommended dose, the most frequently evaluated additional doses are 2× and 4× with some experiments including other values. A reference to dose by products and active ingredient content is provided in Table 8.
In the case of rice production, weedy red-rice control, which is a target of ACCase-inhibiting herbicides, and broad-leaf weeds targeted with HPPD-inhibitor mesotrione herbicide, are best utilized during the early stages of vegetative grows, prior to flooding, because this technique itself, in the presence of standing water, provides effective weed suppression, all the way to preharvest. Also, considering that for these herbicides phytotoxicity to the resistant crop is higher for younger seedlings, coinciding with the optimal control window, evaluations of these novel herbicide resistance genes includes application primarily at the 2 leaf stage, and the 4 leaf stage, with flooding preferably occurring at the 5-6 leaf stage.
6. Combination of Herbicides
In considering combinations of different herbicide resistance genes, irrespective of whether the combination includes two or more different modes of action for the same herbicide, or two or more genes for herbicides of different families or functions, antagonistic or synergistic interactions may be observed resulting from gene to gene interactions, as some of the embodiments described herein have evidenced. The combination of the novel mutated genes resistant to ACCase-inhibiting herbicides RTA1 and RTA2, result in a herbicide tolerance that is far superior to the additive resistance of the two genes acting individually, demonstrating synergism. Herbicide tolerance results from two mechanisms of action conferring resistance to the same herbicide.
Also, in considering a combination of different herbicide resistance genes, each specific for a different herbicide family, with the expectation that this combination would enable sprayer tank admixtures of the herbicides which in turn reduces machine passes over the crop, synergistic or antagonistic interactions may occur between the herbicide products, as is also evidenced by some of the embodiments described herein. The resistance conferred to rice plants by the gene G2096S, when challenged by herbicides of the ACCase-inhibitor family, is significantly higher than that shown by a rice plant carrying both the RTA1 gene, and also the HPPD1i+HPPD2ni genes that confer resistance to the HPPD-inhibitor herbicide mesotrione. If the plant is challenged with a tank mix that contained the same dose of ACCase-inhibiting herbicide combined with an equivalent working dose of mesotrione. When the different herbicides are applied individually, in any order, and period is allowed between applications, response to the herbicides is similar to that observed in lines carrying the respective single genes. These effects demonstrate an antagonistic interaction between the formulations, when the two herbicides are combined in the tank for crop application. This observation was made when combining quizalofop with mesotrione.
Mutation Population Establishment
A mutation breeding program was initiated to develop proprietary herbicide resistant/tolerant lines. A permanent mutant population was created by exposing approximately 10,000 seeds (estimated by the average weight of a kernel) of three rice lines including P1003, R0146, and P1062 to both mutagens sodium azide (AZ) and methyl-nitrosourea (MNU). The treated seeds were planted. Individual plants were harvested creating 8,281 potentially mutation lines. The lines have been maintained in confidence as a permanent mutant population for trait screening.
Indica-type restorer line R0146, showing adaptation to US growing conditions, was incorporated into the RiceTec Breeding Program and crossed with 4 other RiceTec restorer R lines to initiate populations required for evaluation. Of different origin when compared to active RiceTec R lines at the time, it was hoped that R0146 would provide novel restoration genes to the RiceTec genetic pool. Showing excellent adaptation, type, productivity and restoration capacity, the use of R0146 and its early selections increased steadily within the US RiceTec Breeding Program. As R0146 and its selections increased in importance in the US breeding pipeline, their utilization also extended to RiceTec South America breeding programs where they also showed outstanding performance. R0146 was the restorer line that stood out as having widest adaptability across testing locations, and highest combining aptitude with diverse female lines, and which consistently produced hybrid combination of high performance. The decision was made to use R0146 as the single restorer line to undergo mutagenesis for discovery of herbicide tolerance traits. No other line had at the time that level of penetration in the RiceTec breeding pipeline, positioning R0146 as the best candidate for rapid and wide utilization of the novel genes sought from the mutagenesis effort.
Enhanced Tolerance/Resistance to ACCase Inhibitors
Validation of the Mutant Line ML0831265-02283 for Tolerance to ACCase Herbicides.
After screening a large mutant population, the line ML0831265-02283 also survived application of the ACCase herbicide quizalofop. The line was increased to obtain sufficient seed for larger trials to evaluate its tolerance to ACCase herbicides. The tolerance to ACCase herbicides in line ML0831265-02283 was validated by planting in the field plots (5 feet by 10 feet) of the line, the non-mutant parent line R0146, a second non-mutant line P1003, and the ACCase tolerant line ML0831265-01493. The ACCase herbicide quizalofop was applied at the four leaf stage at 0.5×, 1×, 2×, and 4× multiples of the labeled rate (77 gmai/ha). Twenty one days after the herbicide was applied the plots were evaluated for percent injury caused to the rice based on control plots that had no herbicide application (
Development of Tolerance to HPPD and ACCase Inhibiting Herbicides by Combining the Tolerances in Lines ML0831266-03093 and ML0831265-01493
Herbicides that target the HPPD enzyme, primarily control broad leaf weeds. However trials in rice show prevalent control of grass weeds in rice, including red weedy rice especially with mesotrione herbicide.
On the other hand, the primary weed target of ACCase herbicides is monocot plants including rice, grass weeds, and red rice. However, some ACCase herbicides have lower activity on rice. This weakness is likely transferred to red rice as the plants are very closely related. Combining the HPPD tolerance and the ACCase tolerance into a single rice line allows a broad spectrum weed control strategy for rice. The HPPD herbicide controls broad leaf weeds and enhances the effect of ACCase herbicides for control of monocot weeds including red rice.
Combining the HPPD tolerance with the ACCase tolerance into a single rice line was initiated with the HPPD tolerance mapping project by crossing the HPPD tolerant line ML0831266-03093 to the ACCase tolerant line ML0831265-01493. In mapping the F2 population plants were selected for HPPD tolerance by applying mesotrione first at a low rate (105 gmai/ha) followed by a high rate (630 gmai/ha). In this process molecular markers were also developed allowing future selection of HPPD tolerance by either markers or herbicide tolerance screening or both.
After identifying plants that were tolerant to the HPPD herbicide mesotrione, they were also tested with the ACCase tolerance functional marker for the RTA1 mutation in the ACCase donor parent line ML0831265-01493. Information to develop ACCase RTA1 markers are in
After this process, a set of 25 F2 plants with the ACCase mutation to herbicide resistance, and the HPPD genetic herbicide resistance on chromosome 1 and chromosome 2, in at least the heterozygous condition, were identified. The plants were transplanted to another field for harvesting at maturity. Out of the 25 plants, eight were homozygous for the ACCase mutation and one plant was homozygous for the ACCase mutation, the HPPD tolerance mutation, and the non-induced tolerance gene. The 25 plants were bagged at flowering and the seed harvested at maturity from each plant individually.
An early maturing group of plants was harvested as early as possible and the seeds planted in the greenhouse to help quickly advance to the F4 generation. Selections on the F3 plants were made by molecular markers flanking the HPPD tolerance mutation and native tolerance the ACCase functional mutation. Homozygous plants for all the selected genomic regions were advanced to the F5 generation. The F5 seed was confirmed to carry tolerance to ACCase herbicides and the HPPD herbicide mesotrione. Among the F5 lines PL1214418M2-80048 was selected due to a high seed yield and being homozygous for the ACCase tolerance mutation at position RTA1, the HPPD tolerance mutation, and the HPPD tolerance native gene. Seed from the line PL1214418M2-80048 was deposited at the ATCC and given a deposit number PTA-121362 (see Table 9).
A second line was developed by planting F3 seed in rows. The plants were sprayed with the HPPD herbicide mesotrione and selected for little or no injury as compared to unsprayed controls. Leaf tissue was also collected and the plants were tested for inheritance of the ACCase tolerance mutation RTA1, the HPPD mutation tolerance, and the HPPD non-induced tolerance. Plants homozygous for all three tolerance genes or QTLs were identified and harvested. The F4 seed (PL1214418M2-73009) was bulked together from plants carrying all three tolerance genes or QTLs and used for testing or as a new donor line for tolerance to both ACCase and HPPD herbicides. Seed of the source PL1214418M2-73009 was deposited at the ATCC and given a deposit number PTA-121398 (see Table 5).
Tolerance of New Lines Combining HPPD and ACCase is Equivalent and Selectable in Breeding Populations
The seed source PL1214418M2-73009 was developed from a cross between the HPPD resistant line ML0831266-03093 and the ACCase resistant line ML0831265-01493 and was sufficient to allow testing to verify equivalent tolerance to HPPD and ACCase inhibitors in new lines. Two trials were conducted to measure recovery of tolerance to both ACCase and HPPD herbicides in the new line PL1214418M2-73009. Recovery of tolerance in the line combining the two traits will illustrate that the traits are heritable and can be used to produce new varieties and hybrids carrying herbicide resistance. These trials are important as often times it is difficult to recover complex QTLs for quantitative traits or in some cases a traits response is dependent upon the genetic background. In the first trail the lines resistance to mesotrione (HPPD herbicide) was evaluated by planting line PL1214418M2-73009, the HPPD resistant line ML0831266-03093 and wild-type rice line P1003 and R0146 in plots (5 feet×10 feet). Mesotrione was applied at 0.5×, 1×, 2×, and 4× multiples of the labeled application rate (210 gmai/ha). Two additional treatments were included with a 1× and 2× rate followed by a second application 14 days afterward with the same rates. Full recovery of the HPPD resistance from line ML0831266-03093 was achieved in the line PL1214418M2-73009 as it and the original trait line had the same response to the herbicide applications (
Another trial was conducted to confirm recovery of the ACCase inhibitor resistance from the RTA1 mutation as in the line ML0831265-01493. In this trial the new line PL1214418-73009 with combined HPPD and ACCase tolerance was planted in a row along with other various lines including the original donor line ML0831265-01493 (planted in a plot), ML0831266-03093, P1003, R0146 parent line for ACCase tolerance. The lines were all tested with the ACCase herbicides fluazifop at 0.5×, 1×, 2×, and 4× multiples of the label application rate (210 gmai/ha) and quizalofop at 0.5×, 1×, 2×, and 4× multiples of the label application rate (77 gmai/ha). In these trials the three new lines that inherited the ACCase tolerance all showed equivalent tolerance to the ACCase herbicides as did the donor line ML0831265-01493 (
The tolerance to HPPD herbicides is more complex than the ACCase tolerance because it requires two genes that are different from the gene targeted by the herbicide. In spite of this greater complexity, the equivalent tolerance was recovered through selection of both the native tolerance gene and the mutation tolerance. The ACCase parent line ML0831265-01493 in this cross was highly sensitive to the HPPD herbicide mesotrione and thus was not expected to contribute any towards HPPD tolerance. Resistance/tolerance to HPPD herbicides is mostly likely caused by these two genes alone as they were the focus of the selection process, and the new line PL1214418M2-73009 shows equivalent resistance. These results show that the resistance for both ACCase and HPPD inhibitors is inherited and can be bred into any rice for commercial development of both HPPD and ACCase inhibitor resistance in rice.
Identification of the Tolerance Contribution from the HPPD Tolerance Mutation and the Non-Induced Tolerance Gene from P1003
During the breeding process to develop new lines (PL1214418M2-80048 and PL1214418M2-73009) with resistance/tolerance to HPPD and ACCase herbicides, two other lines were also investigated to determine the contribution of the HPPD tolerance mutation and the HPPD tolerance native gene. The line PL1214418M2-73001 carries ACCase tolerance and only the HPPD tolerance, whereas mutation PL1214418M2-73013 carries ACCase tolerance and only the HPPD native tolerance gene. These selections allow the estimation of the tolerance effect of each of the two genes required for tolerance to HPPD herbicides. The tolerance effect of each gene was measured by growing the lines in single rows including the newly developed line PL1214418M2-73009 that carries both the HPPD tolerance from the mutation and the non-induced tolerance, the HPPD tolerant line ML0831266-0309, and the non-induced parent line P1003. The field plots were sprayed at the 4 leaf stage with the HPPD herbicide mesotrione at 0.5×, 1×, 2×, and 4× multiples of the labeled application rate of 210 gmai/ha.
The plots were evaluated 4 weeks after the herbicide was applied. The results showed that the native tolerance gene alone (PL1214418M2-73013) gave tolerance levels similar to the parent line P1003 (
Controlling Weeds and Red Rice in Rice Crops with ACCase Inhibitors and HPPD Inhibitors
The herbicide activity or ability to control non-mutant rice, such as line R0146 and P1003, is a good predictor of how well the herbicides will control red rice or wild weedy rice in a rice crop. Red rice and wild weedy rice are very similar to rice, even with the ability to cross with rice. This similarity is the reason these weeds are so difficult to control in a rice crop. The mutant lines (ML0831265-01493, ML0831265-02283, ML0831266-03093, PL1214418M2-80048, and PL1214418M2-73009) disclosed offer a new weed control strategy for red rice, wild weedy rice, and other weeds common in rice crops. These lines give rice tolerance to herbicides that will normally kill or cause yield reducing injury to the rice crop.
While testing the tolerant lines, the parent lines were also tested to serve as controls and as an indication of commercial potential as a red rice/wild weedy rice control strategy. These trials showed that select treatments of the herbicides applied alone or in various combinations and application timings offer a new weed control strategy in rice crops.
Rice is tolerant to certain ACCase inhibitor herbicides, for example cyhalofop is registered for use in rice. However other ACCase herbicides kill or severely injure rice to varying degrees. After testing, several of these other herbicides including fluazifop and quizalofop were found to offer good control of common grass weeds, such as barnyard grass, in rice. Control of common weeds in rice was also achieved with mesotrione alone, especially when applied pre-plant or at higher rates (2× the labeled rate of 210 gmai/ha) (
Development of the HPPD and ACCase tolerance into single lines (PL1214418M2-80048 and PL1214418M2-73009) gives the opportunity for an additional weed control strategy involving applications of ACCase and HPPD herbicides in a tank mix or individually at different times. The very effective pre-plant application of the HPPD herbicide mesotrione can now be followed with ACCase herbicides applied alone or in combination with HPPD herbicides. This strategy provides full spectrum weed control in a rice crop by broad leaf weed control provided by the HPPD herbicide, and grass weed control by the ACCase herbicide. In addition the control of grasses and red rice/weedy rice by ACCase herbicides is greatly enhanced by the activity provided by the HPPD inhibiting herbicide. This strategy is anticipated as being especially effective for control of red rice when an ACCase inhibiting herbicides are used that have lower activity on rice.
This particular weed control system is highly useful in rice crops due to some weeds, including red rice, developing tolerance to currently used herbicides. Use of this weed control strategy allows rotation of different modes of action herbicides in rice crops. By rotating different modes of herbicide action the development of resistant weeds is slowed or prevented allowing for longer term use of all available weed control methods.
Validating the Mutant Line ML0831266-03093 for Tolerance to HPPD Inhibiting Herbicides
After the initial screening of the “mutation population,” the lines with no damage were selected and tested in additional experiments using different rates of the herbicide. In particular, a rate response experiment was conducted in which two different rates of mesotrione were applied pre-emergence, plus an additional foliar application was also applied. This experiment differentiated one mutant line as having superior resistance (less injury) to the mesotrione herbicide as compared to the control (
The mutant line ML0831266-03093 was found to carry tolerance to mesotrione (a common HPPD inhibiting herbicide) through screening the line with different rates of the herbicide. The tolerance level of ML0831266-03093 was found to be much greater than the original non-mutant (native) line P1003.
The original line P1003, carries natural tolerance to mesotrione. This non-induced resistance of the original line sometimes masked the resistance of the mutant line making the enhanced resistance of the mutant line ML0831266-03093 not obvious.
Further validation of the trait involved testing the mutant line ML0831266-03093 in the presence of common rice weeds. The mutant line was completely tolerant to the applied rates of mesotrione whereas the prevalent weed population was well controlled by the herbicide (
Mesotrione and other HPPD inhibiting herbicides target the HPPD gene. An increase in herbicide tolerance could be achieved through a mutation in the HPPD gene. A mutation within the gene sequence can alter the enzyme structure sufficiently to prevent it from being inhibited by the herbicide, but still allow it to carry-out its normal physiological function. Assuming this as a plausible tolerance mechanism, the HPPD gene was sequenced by Sanger sequencing in both the mutant line ML0831266-03093 and the original line P1003. Surprisingly, no mutation was found in the HPPD gene. The herbicide tolerance in line ML0831266-03093 appears to be derived from a non-target site process.
A MutMap population was F2 plants from a cross between rice line R0146 X ML-083126502283F2. Pictures were taken 16 days post herbicide spray.
The herbicide Quizalofop was sprayed on the test fields. Thirty days after the herbicide spray, plants showed very clear ‘black and white response’ to the herbicide [showed either resistance to herbicide (scored 1 or 3) or susceptibility (scored 7 or 9) 16 days after herbicide spray. The plants were scored first at 16 days after the herbicide spray and then at 21 days after herbicide spray.
Mutant plants carrying the ‘unknown mutation RTA2’ were resistant. 3 week old plants were sprayed with Quizalofop and the herbicide response was scored 21 days after the spray. Susceptible symptoms were already observed 7 days after the Quizalofop spray, but scoring was done at 21 days. On the 21st day, a majority of the plants showed very clear ‘black and white’ responses to the herbicide, that is, showed either resistance to herbicide (score 1) or were completely dead (score 9). Few plants scored 3 (little damage on leaves or new leaf growth observed, and most likely plants will survive) or score 5 (half of the canopy is damaged and hard to predict whether the plants will survive or not), or score 7 (more damage on leaves, plants will not survive).
After detection of ACCase resistant mutants in the R0146 rice population, the MutMap approach was used to characterize by linkage analysis the mutation(s) associated with the Quizalofop resistance phenotype.
The MutMap process: Mutagenesis is a rice cultivar with a reference genome sequence by ethyl methane sulfonate (EMS). The mutant generated, in this case a semi dwarf phenotype, was crossed to a wild-type plant of the same cultivar prior to mutagenesis. The resulting F1 was self-pollinated to obtain F2 progeny segregating for the mutant and wild-type phenotypes. Crossing of the mutant to the wild-type parental line ensured detection of phenotypic differences at the F2 generation between the mutant and wild type. DNA of the plants F2 displaying the mutant phenotype were bulked and subjected to whole genome sequencing, followed by alignment to the reference sequence. SNPs with sequence reads composed only of mutant sequences (SNP index of 1) are putatively closely linked to the causal SNP for the mutant phenotype.
The strongest indication of putative mutations associated with ACCase inhibitor resistance was observed by Chromosome 1, with a string of sequential mutations with the highest SNP Index.
The casual region was located to a region in chromosome 1 identified in
The ACCases inhibiting herbicide resistance provided by ML0831265-01493 is deployed individually into hybrids through either the male or female parent resulting in the hybrid seed being resistant to the herbicide. If the resistance is deployed in only the male parent, then in addition to its use for weed control, the herbicide when applied to hybrid seed kills contaminating female selfed seed. On the other hand if the resistance is deployed only through the female parent, growers may eliminate contaminating male selfed seed. Efficacy of this approach depends on the gene action of the herbicide resistant gene, whereby single allele presence must still confer viable herbicide tolerance to be viable.
Growers may alternate the type of resistance they purchase and apply in their fields to reduce the chance that weeds develop resistance to the herbicide. The ACCase inhibiting herbicide, though primarily for control of broad leaf weeds, also allows for some enhanced control of red rice. At higher rates it will kill certain types of rice. If resistance arose in red rice from cross pollination, it could still be controlled with a different herbicide class in the next season.
The HPPD inhibiting herbicide resistance provided by ML0831266-03093 is deployed individually into hybrids through either the male or female parent resulting in the hybrid seed being resistant to the herbicide. If the resistance is deployed in only the male parent, then in addition to its use for weed control, the herbicide when applied to hybrid seed kills contaminating female selfed seed. On the other hand if the resistance is deployed only through the female parent, growers may eliminate contaminating male selfed seed. Efficacy of this approach depends on the gene action of the herbicide resistant gene, whereby single allele presence must still confer viable herbicide tolerance to be viable.
Growers may alternate the type of resistance they purchase and apply in their fields to reduce the chance that weeds develop resistance to the herbicide. The HPPD inhibiting herbicide, though primarily for control of broad leaf weeds, also allows for some enhanced control of red rice. At higher rates it will kill certain types of rice. If resistance arose in red rice from cross pollination, it could still be controlled with a different herbicide class in the next season.
The HPPD inhibiting herbicide resistance provided by ML0831266-03093 or the ACCases inhibiting herbicide resistance provided by ML0831265-01493 are deployed into both the male and female parents of a hybrid. The resulting hybrid seed may carry resistance to mesotrione and other HPPD inhibiting herbicides, or the ACCase-inhibiting herbicides. Resistance provided in this manner is stronger and offers better weed control through the possibility of being able to apply higher rates of herbicide.
Two or more independently genes conferring resistance to a herbicide or a herbicide family or group, are deployed in a single hybrid by adding each one separately to either one or both of the parents of the Hybrid. Depending on the gene action of the genes to be stacked in the hybrid, they may be introgres sing in a single parent, resulting in a single alleleic dose in the commercial hybrid, or they may be added to both Female and Male parental lines, resulting in a homozygous, double allelic dose in the commercial hybrid for that locus. Deployment in this manner results in hybrid seed having higher Herbicide resistance that a hybrid carrying either single resistant gene under identical allelic dosage, due to the complementing effect provided by the different resistance genes. Stacking on the HPPDi mutated gene with the HPPDni alleles in line ML0831266-03093 represents such a case in which different independent resistance loci/alleles for HPPD-inhibiting herbicide tolerance combine to produce a product of greater resistance that that conferred by either of the single genes. Similarly, the ACCase stack of RTA1+RTA2, in line RL1225468 represent a parallel example of added resistance when combining two independent genes for resistance to ACCase-inhibiting herbicides of the FOP family.
1. Resistance to mesotrione and at least one other herbicide class, ACCase-inhibitors, is deployed in a single hybrid by using a male parent that carries resistance to the mesotrione (or the other herbicide class ACCase) and a female that carries the other resistance. The method allows the grower to make a single purchase but to be able to choose which herbicide to apply. A single class of herbicide may be used in any one season and rotated between seasons, or alternatively both herbicides could be applied within a single season. In addition, deployment by this method, elements contaminating selfed seed of both parents in the hybrid seed through application of both herbicides, or one type or the other, are eliminated through application of only one herbicide.
2. In another method of deployment the mesotrione resistance and the ACCAse-inhibitor resistance is deployed through making a hybrid with a male parent that carries both resistances. The grower then has the option to choose which herbicide class to apply or to apply both within a single season. In addition, through the application of either herbicide contaminating selfed female seed would be eliminated. Alternatively both herbicide class resistances are provided in the female parent, giving the grower the same options for weed control.
3. Another embodiment is to deploy the mesotrione resistance to both parents, and another herbicide resistance into only one parent, such as the male parent. The hybrid seed are then homozygous for the mesotrione resistance but not the other. A scheme like this is used to make an early application with the herbicide put into only the male parent, providing weed control and elimination of contaminating female selfs. Later in the season mesotrione may be applied or another HPPD inhibitor herbicide. The useful life of both herbicides is extended through limiting or eliminating the development of weed resistance. In another application this method allows the use of mesotrione or other HPPD inhibitor herbicide to control weeds in seed production fields, allowing for cleaner seed.
4. Alternatively a different herbicide could be deployed in both of the hybrid parents and the mesotrione/HPPD inhibitor is deployed in only the male parent.
5. Other embodiments for deploying herbicide resistant lines include other traits such as resistance to other classes of herbicides, or other traits of importance.
The herbicide resistance is also used for seed production. As an example, if it is deployed into the female parent, making it resistant, the herbicide is applied to the seed production field to kill the male plants before setting seed so that a seed production field is harvested as a bulk. In addition the purity of the seed may also be verified through deploying two herbicide resistances with only one in each parent. Selfed seed is detected and eliminated by applying herbicide put into the other parent.
The resistance when deployed in a hybrid, by any combination, provides resistance to mesotrione or other HPPD inhibiting herbicides. This deployment results in a new mode of action in rice to control broadleaf weeds with some limited control of grasses such as red rice. Further options or broad spectrum control of weeds is provided by deployment in the same hybrid another resistance to herbicides providing grass weed control, such as ACCase inhibiting herbicides. Through deployment with other modes of action development of weed resistance is more likely to be prevented through the use of multiple modes of action.
Selection of material inheriting mesotrione tolerance is accomplished by a simple herbicide bioassay. A high rate of mesotrione (at least 420 gm ai/ha) is applied allowing differentiation of heterozygous individuals from homozygous individuals and the tolerance level of the mutation line from the inherent tolerance level in the background of some types of rice. In one example a rate of 105 gm ai/ha is applied followed three weeks later by a second application of 630 gm ai/ha. In another example a rate of 420 gm ai/ha is applied in a single application. Yet another example entails applying the herbicide at a rate of 630 gm ai/ha. Herbicide applications are done at the three to four leaf stage of seedling growth. The ideal situation is to have also planted near or within the plants to be selected a set of plants from the original mutant mesotrione tolerant donor line ML0831266-03093, a row of plants of the wild-type of the mutation line, P1003, and a row of the line involved as the other parent in the cross. These control lines allow easy differentiation for inheritance of the tolerance provided by the ML0831266-03093 mutant line through comparison of the response in the plants to be selected with the control lines. Only plants that live and are relatively healthy will have inherited and be homozygous for the tolerance level provided by the ML0831266-03093 mutant line.
The mutant line ML0831266-03093 that is tolerant to mesotrione and likely other herbicides including HPPD inhibitors, was crossed with mutant line ML0831265-01493 having tolerance to ACCase herbicides and more specifically “fop” type of ACCase herbicides. In one example the ML0831266-03093 plants are the female parent and pollination is by a plant from line ML0831265-01493. In another embodiment the parents are reversed so that ML0831266-03093 serves as the pollinating parent. The resulting F1 seed are harvested having inherited both mesotrione and ACCase herbicide tolerance. The F1 individual carries tolerance to both herbicides at a partially dominant level so they show some tolerance but not to the same level as the tolerant parent lines.
The F1 seeds are planted and the resulting plants are allowed to self-pollinate to produce F2 seed making a population segregating for tolerance to both mesotrione and ACCase herbicides. This population is screened by an herbicide bioassay to identify individuals that have inherited tolerance from the original mutant line ML0831266-03093 and are homozygous for the resistance. A high rate of mesotrione is applied allowing differentiation of heterozygous individuals from homozygous individuals and the tolerance level of the mutation line from the tolerance level in the background of some types of rice including the original line used for mutation to create the ML0831266-03093 line, which was P1003.
In one example a rate of 105 gm ai/ha is applied followed three weeks later by a second application of 630 gm ai/ha. In another example a rate of 420 gm ai/ha is applied in a single application. Yet another example entails applying the herbicide at a rate of 630 gm ai/ha. Herbicide applications are done at the three to four leaf stage of seedling growth. The ideal situation is to have also planted near or within the F2 population a set of plants from the original mutant mesotrione donor line ML0831266-03093, a row of plants of the wild-type of the mutation line, P1003, and a row of the line involved as the other parent ML0831265-01493. These control lines will allow easy differentiation for inheritance of the tolerance provided by the ML0831266-03093 mutant line through comparison of the response in the F2 plants to these control lines. Only plants that live and are relatively healthy will have inherited and be homozygous for the tolerance level provided by the ML0831266-03093 mutant line.
A simple co-dominant marker assay is available to select for inheritance to ACCase herbicides derived from line ML0831265-01493. The marker is developed as a single nucleotide polymorphic marker and detects the causal mutation at position RTA1 (blackgrass number) for ACCase tolerance in line ML0831265-01493. All of the surviving plants following the mesotrione bioassay as employed in Example 8 are sampled for tissue collection, the DNA is extracted by known methods and the samples are tested with the SNP assay. A subset of the surviving plants are then also identified as carrying homozygous tolerance to ACCase herbicides through marker assisted selection.
Individuals with tolerance to both mesotrione and ACCase herbicides are selfed to produce F3 families and further selected for other important agronomic characters. The F3 lines are selfed and purified to derive a new line or variety with dual resistance to mesotrione and ACCase herbicides. Such lines are highly valuable as the use of both herbicides provides more complete and broad-spectrum weed control.
In another embodiment the individuals with tolerance to both mesotrione and ACCase are used as trait donors in a backcross (BC) breeding program. After selecting one individual or a few individuals they are used either as the pollinating parent or the female parent. Another more elite and desirable line serves as the recurrent parent to which the traits are transferred.
Following the first cross the F1 plants are crossed again to the recurrent parent. The resulting backcross seed from this cross and ongoing crosses to the recurrent parent are tested with either markers or through herbicide bioassays for inheritance of the herbicide tolerance or a combination of markers and bioassays. In the best situation markers for the functional mutations are used. Alternatively an herbicide bioassay for mesotrione is applied to the BC seed or possibly the BC seed is progeny tested to verify inheritance of the tolerance. Furthermore an herbicide bioassay is used to identify individuals that also inherited tolerance to ACCase herbicides. This process is repeated until the recurrent parent genome is recovered along with the two new traits for tolerance to mesotrione and ACCase herbicides. After the last backcross individuals are selfed to recover the dual herbicide tolerances in a homozygous resistant level in at least one plant.
In yet another embodiment the individuals with resistance to both mesotrione and ACCase herbicides are crossed to a third line and subsequently selfed or even crossed with other lines. The resulting new lines and germplasm is tested and evaluated for other agronomic important traits. Finally new varieties or male and female lines are developed with tolerance to both mesotrione or other HPPD herbicides and ACCase herbicides a combination novel to rice.
The mutant line ML0831266-03093 is demonstrated to carry a high tolerance level to mesotrione herbicide beyond the tolerance found naturally in some rice types including the original mutation treated line P1003. The mutant line is planted in rows or alternatively whole plots are planted and rows of the unmutated line (P1003) and other types of rice or whole plots are planted. Mesotrione is applied pre-emergence or alternatively it is applied post-emergence at the three to four leaf stage of the rice plants. Various rates of mesotrione are applied pre-emergence, pre-emergence followed by post-emergent, or post-emergent with a single or sequential application. Post-emergent applications are applied at the 3-4 leaf stage of the rice.
With low rates (105 gm ai/ha) of mesotrione applied both the mutant line as well as the original unmutated line survive. However, other types of rice, such as the mutant line with ACCase tolerance ML0831265-01493 and the associated unmutated line R0146 are killed at these rates of mesotrione. Applying mesotrione herbicide at higher rates clearly shows new and novel tolerance level as only the mutant line ML0831266-03093 survives while the original unmutated line P1003 and all other tested lines are killed or severally injured. The higher tolerance to mesotrione makes the line ML0831266-03093 of commercial value as both the tolerance can be controlled or bred into new varieties and it is of a high enough level to allow commercial weed control in rice with the application of mesotrione herbicide and possibly other HPPD inhibiting herbicides (initial results,
The cross between mutant line ML0831266-03093 (ATCC PTA-13620) carrying tolerance to mesotrione and possibly other HPPD inhibiting herbicides with mutant line ML0831265-01493 with (ATCC PTA-12933) tolerance to ACCase herbicides produced F1 seed inheriting both herbicide tolerances. Following selfing of the F1 plants F2, individuals are selected either through herbicide bioassays or alternatively with molecular markers. In the case of ACCase a functional molecular marker is described such that the mutation at position G2096S (based on the black grass numbering system) is selected. Furthermore using either markers linked to the QTLs on chromosome 1 and chromosome 2 or herbicide bioassays recovery of tolerance to mesotrione and ACCase including other HPPD herbicides or other herbicides.
Individuals selected for tolerance to mesotrione including other HPPD herbicides and possibly other herbicides may be used in a backcross conversion program or in breeding to develop new varieties and hybrids with a commercial level of tolerance to mesotrione and other herbicides. Selection with either bioassays or the chromosome 1 and chromosome 2 QTLs leads to the recovery of the inherent tolerance in P1003 along with the mutant tolerance for development of a novel variety or hybrid with herbicide tolerance and representing new weed control options in rice. The tolerance level of the mutant line is superior to other lines and allows for various commercial application methods.
The individual plants with tolerance to both herbicides are used in breeding to develop new varieties and hybrids with tolerance to both ACCase inhibiting herbicides, mesotrione, other HPPD inhibiting herbicides, and other herbicides. The new varieties and hybrids are commercial products. The commercial products are used commercially for rice production. In the production process both ACCase and mesotrione or other herbicides may be applied to the rice crop to control weeds. In one example mesotrione or other herbicides are applied preplant to control germinating weeds and provide residual weed control. Following germination of the rice crop ACCase herbicides are applied for controlling grass weeds. In another example both mesotrione or the equivalent is applied preplant and a second application is made post emergent along with an ACCase herbicide with one or two applications. In another example both mesotrione and an ACCase herbicide or other herbicides including other HPPD herbicides are applied post emergent with one or two applications. In this manner a new and novel strategy is implemented to provide full spectrum weed control in rice. In addition these herbicides have new not previously used in rice modes of action. This strategy therefore has commercial application not only for weed control but as a method to extend the useful life of this strategy and others through the application of multiple modes of action for weed control.
A simple co-dominant marker assay is available to select for inheritance to ACCase herbicides derived from line ML0831265-01493. The marker is developed as a single nucleotide polymorphic marker and detects the causal mutation at position RTA1 (blackgrass number) for ACCase tolerance in line ML0831265-01493. All of the surviving plants following the mesotrione bioassay as employed in Example 11 are sampled for tissue collection, the DNA is extracted by known methods and the samples are tested with the SNP assay. A subset of the surviving plants are then also identified as carrying homozygous tolerance to ACCase herbicides through marker assisted selection.
In another embodiment the individuals with tolerance to both mesotrione and ACCase are used as trait donors in a backcross breeding program. After selecting one individual or a few individuals they will be used either as the pollinating parent or the female parent. Another more elite and desirable line serves as the recurrent parent to which the traits are transferred. Following the first cross the F1 plants are crossed again to the recurrent parent. The resulting backcross seed from this cross and ongoing crosses to the recurrent parent are tested with either markers or through herbicide bioassays for inheritance of the herbicide tolerance or a combination of markers and bioassays. In the best situation markers for the functional mutations are used. Alternatively an herbicide bioassay for mesotrione is applied to the BC seed or possibly the BC seed is progeny tested to verify inheritance of the tolerance. Furthermore an herbicide bioassay is used to identify individuals that also inherited tolerance to ACCase herbicides. This process is repeated until the recurrent parent genome is recovered along with the two new traits for tolerance to mesotrione and ACCase herbicides. After the last backcross individuals are selfed to recover the dual herbicide tolerances in a homozygous resistant level in at least one plant.
In yet another embodiment the individuals with resistance to both mesotrione and ACCase herbicides are crossed to a third line and subsequently selfed or even crossed with other lines. The resulting new lines and germplasm is tested and evaluated for other agronomic important traits. Finally new varieties or male and female lines are developed with tolerance to both mesotrione or other HPPD herbicides and ACCase herbicides a combination novel to rice.
In the production process both ACCase and mesotrione or other herbicides may be applied to the rice crop to control weeds. In one example mesotrione or other herbicides are applied preplant to control germinating weeds and provide residual weed control. Following germination of the rice crop ACCase herbicides are applied for controlling grass weeds. In another example both mesotrione is applied preplant and a second application is made post emergent along with an ACCase herbicide with one or two applications. In another example both mesotrione and an ACCase herbicide or other herbicides including other HPPD herbicides are applied post emergent with one or two application. In this manner a new and novel strategy is implemented to provide full spectrum weed control in rice. In addition these herbicides have not previously been used in rice modes of action. This strategy therefore has commercial application not only for weed control but as a method to extend the useful life of this strategy and others through the application of multiple modes of action for weed control.
Seed Deposits Under Budapest Treaty (see Tables 5 and 9)
Seed deposits by Ricetec Inc. were made with the American Type Culture Collection (ATCC), 10801 University Boulevard, Manassas, Va 20110, United States of America. The dates of deposit and the ATCC Accession Numbers are: ML0831266-03093 (PTA-13620, Mar. 19, 2013); ML0831265-01493 (PTA-12933, May 31, 2012); ML0831265-02283 (PTA-13619, Mar. 19, 2013); PL1214418M2-80048 (PTA-121362, Jun. 30, 2014), RL-1225468 (PTA-122646, Oct. 30, 2015), PL1214418M2-73009 (PTA-121398, Jul. 18, 2014) and 16USGE40004-34 (PTA-124233, Jun. 7, 2017). All restrictions will be removed upon granting of a patent, and the deposits meet all of the requirements of 37 C.F.R. §§ 1.801-1.809, and satisfy the Budapest Treaty requirements. The deposit will be irrevocably maintained in the depository for a period of thirty years, or five years after the last request, or for the enforceable life of the patent, whichever is longer, and will be replaced as necessary during that period.
In the description and tables which follow, a number of terms are used. In order to provide a clear and consistent understanding of the specification and claims, including the scope to be given such terms, the following definitions are provided:
Acetyl-Coenzyme. A carboxylase (ACCase; EC 6.4.1.2) enzymes synthesize malonyl-CoA as the start of the de novo fatty acid synthesis pathway in plant chloroplasts. ACCase in grass chloroplasts is a multifunctional, nuclear-genome-encoded, very large, single polypeptide, transported into the plastid via an N-terminal transit peptide. The active form in grass chloroplasts is a homodimeric protein.
ACCase enzymes in grasses are inhibited by three classes of herbicidal active ingredients. The two most prevalent classes are aryloxyphenoxypropanoates (“FOPs”) and cyclohexanediones (“DIMs”). In addition to these two classes, a third class phenylpyrazolines (“DENs”) has been described.
Certain mutations in the carboxyl transferase region of the ACCase enzyme results in grasses becoming resistant to ACCase herbicides. In the weed Black-Grass at least five mutations have been described which provide resistance to FOP or DIM class of ACCase herbicides. Some mutations rendering ACCase enzymes resistant to these herbicides may be associated with decreased fitness.
Allele. Allele is any one of many alternative forms of a gene, all of which generally relate to one trait or characteristic. In a diploid cell or organism, the two alleles of a given gene occupy corresponding loci on a pair of homologous chromosomes.
Backcrossing. Process of crossing a hybrid progeny to one of the parents, for example, a first generation hybrid F1 with one of the parental genotypes of the F1 hybrid.
Blend. Physically mixing rice seeds of a rice hybrid with seeds of one, two, three, four or more of another rice hybrid, rice variety or rice inbred to produce a crop containing the characteristics of all of the rice seeds and plants in this blend.
Cell. Cell as used herein includes a plant cell, whether isolated, in tissue culture or incorporated in a plant or plant part.
Cultivar. Variety or strain persisting under cultivation.
Embryo. The embryo is the small plant contained within a mature seed.
Essentially all the physiological and morphological characteristics. A plant having essentially all the physiological and morphological characteristics of the hybrid or cultivar, except for the characteristics derived from the converted gene.
Grain Yield. Weight of grain harvested from a given area. Grain yield could also be determined indirectly by multiplying the number of panicles per area, by the number of grains per panicle, and by grain weight.
Injury to Plant. Is defined by comparing a test plant to controls and finding the test plant is not same height; an abnormal color, e.g. yellow not green; a usual leaf shape, curled, fewer tillers.
Locus. A locus is a position on a chromosome occupied by a DNA sequence; it confers one or more traits such as, for example, male sterility, herbicide tolerance, insect resistance, disease resistance, waxy starch, modified fatty acid metabolism, modified phytic acid metabolism, modified carbohydrate metabolism and modified protein metabolism. The trait may be, for example, conferred by a naturally occurring gene introduced into the genome of the variety by backcrossing, a natural or induced mutation, or a transgene introduced through genetic transformation techniques. A locus may comprise one or more alleles integrated at a single chromosomal location.
Induced. As used herein, the term induced means genetic resistance appeared after treatment with mutagen.
Non-induced. As used herein, the term non-induced means genetic resistance not known to be induced; is at different location in the genome, than induced resistance.
Plant. As used herein, the term “plant” includes reference to an immature or mature whole plant, including a plant from which seed or grain or anthers have been removed. Seed or embryo that will produce the plant is also considered to be the plant.
Plant Part. As used herein, the term “plant part” (or a rice plant, or a part thereof) includes protoplasts, leaves, stems, roots, root tips, anthers, seed, grain, embryo, pollen, ovules, cotyledon, hypocotyl, glumes, panicles, flower, shoot, tissue, cells, meristematic cells and the like.
Quantitative Trait Loci (QTL). Genetic loci that controls to some degree numerically measurable traits that are usually continuously distributed. Recombinant/Non-Recombinant. If non-parental combination occur a rice patent is recombinant.
Regeneration. Regeneration refers to the development of a plant from tissue culture.
Resistance/Resistant1. The inherited ability of a plant to survive and reproduce following exposure to a dose of herbicide normally lethal to the wild type resistance may be naturally occurring or induced by such techniques as genetic engineering or selection of variants produced by tissue culture or mutagenesis. 1 Weed Science Society of America, Weed Technology, vol. 12, issue 4 (October-December, 1998, p. 789)
Single Gene Converted (Conversion). Single gene converted (conversion) includes plants developed by a plant breeding technique called backcrossing wherein essentially all of the desired morphological and physiological characteristics of an inbred are recovered, while retaining a single gene transferred into the inbred via crossing and backcrossing. The term can also refer to the introduction of a single gene through genetic engineering techniques known in the art.
Stacking. Adding more than one thing to the same receiving entity. Methods of achieving the “stacked” state include: methods of vector-stack two or more genes in a single vector and do a single transformation to achieve stack; do sequential transformations into same receptor adding traits stepwise; achieve stacked hybrid simply by end crossing parentals carrying different traits; develop lines with multiple traits by sequential mutagenesis or crossing, and fixing the stacked state into one parent; and variants thereof.
Synergism. As described in the Herbicide Handbook of the Weed Science Society of America, Ninth Edition, 2007, p. 429, “‘synergism’ [is] an interaction of two or more factors such that the effect when combined is greater than the predicted effect based on the response to each factor applied separately.”
The following equation may be used to calculate the expected resistance/tolerance in rice with combinations of mutations to herbicides, e.g., A and B:
Expected=A+B−(A×B/100)
A=observed efficacy of mutation A at the same concentration of herbicide;
B=observed efficacy of mutation B at the same concentration of herbicide.
Synergistic in the herbicide context can mean that the use of herbicide results in an increased weed control effect compared to the weed control effects of A+B that are possible with the use of each herbicide alone. Or synergistic may be considered as the resistance/tolerance level of the rice, with combined mutations (stacked) compared to effects of a rice with a single mutation.
In some embodiments, the damage or injury to the undesired vegetation caused by the herbicide is evaluated using a scale from 0% to 100%, when compared with the untreated control vegetation, wherein 0% indicates no damage to the undesired vegetation and 100% indicates complete destruction of the undesired vegetation.
Tolerance/Tolerant. The inherent ability of a species to survive and reproduce after herbicide treatment implies that there was no selection or generic manipulation to make the plant tolerant.
Resistance/tolerance are used somewhat interchangeably herein; for a specific rice plant genotype information is provided on the herbicide applied, the strength of the herbicide, and the response of the plant.
This vector of closely linked mutations in combination with RTA1 (G2095) confers synergistic resistance to FOP herbicide.
2Includes the shorter version in Table 1A.
3HPPDi = induced HPPD inhibitor tolerance/resistance associated with a change in a genetic region induced chemically.
All publications cited in this application are herein incorporated by reference to the extent they relate materials and/or methods related to the invention
This application claims the benefit of priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(e) to U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 62/371,582, filed Aug. 5, 2016. The disclosure set forth in the reference application is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4443971 | Chaleff | Apr 1984 | A |
| 5290696 | Somers et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
| 5428001 | Somers et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
| 5539092 | Haselkorn et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
| 5736629 | Croughan | Apr 1998 | A |
| 5756290 | Haselkorn et al. | May 1998 | A |
| 5767373 | Ward et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5792627 | Haselkorn et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
| 5801233 | Haselkorn et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5910626 | Haselkorn et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
| 5939602 | Volrath et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5972644 | Haselkorn et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
| 6066779 | Yan | May 2000 | A |
| 6069298 | Gengenbach et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6084155 | Volrath et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6211438 | Anderson et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6211439 | Anderson et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6222100 | Anderson et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6281168 | Shaner et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
| 6282837 | Ward et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
| 6288306 | Ward et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
| 6308458 | Volrath et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6399342 | Haselkorn et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6448476 | Barry | Sep 2002 | B1 |
| 6455688 | Slabas et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
| 6727414 | Moldenhauer et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
| 6808904 | Ward et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
| 6870075 | Beetham et al. | Mar 2005 | B1 |
| 6911589 | Johnson | Jun 2005 | B2 |
| 6943280 | Croughan | Sep 2005 | B2 |
| 6953881 | Tillman | Oct 2005 | B2 |
| 6956154 | Xie | Oct 2005 | B2 |
| 7005567 | Tillman | Feb 2006 | B2 |
| 7094606 | Arntzen et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
| 7141726 | Moldenhauer et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
| 7253347 | Linscombe | Aug 2007 | B2 |
| 7301083 | Sarreal et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
| 7304223 | Sarreal et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
| 7345221 | Croughan | Mar 2008 | B2 |
| 7351891 | Sarreal et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
| 7351892 | Sarreal et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
| 7351893 | Sarreal et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
| 7399905 | Croughan | Jul 2008 | B2 |
| 7429697 | Moldenhauer et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
| 7485784 | Sarreal et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
| 7579531 | Jodari | Aug 2009 | B2 |
| 7612269 | Jodari | Nov 2009 | B2 |
| 7622661 | Johnson | Nov 2009 | B2 |
| 7642434 | Moldenhauer | Jan 2010 | B2 |
| 7642435 | Sarreal et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
| 7671254 | Tranel et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
| 7687690 | Johnson et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
| 7754947 | Croughan | Jul 2010 | B2 |
| 7786360 | Linscombe | Aug 2010 | B2 |
| 7803991 | Daniell | Sep 2010 | B2 |
| 7820883 | Walsh et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
| 7838733 | Wright et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
| 7842856 | Tranel et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
| H2258 | Arnevik et al. | Jun 2011 | H |
| 7973083 | Clemens et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 |
| 8071847 | Walsh et al. | Dec 2011 | B2 |
| 8088979 | Walsh et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
| 8097774 | Hawkes et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
| 8106276 | Luo | Jan 2012 | B2 |
| 8134058 | Moldenhauer | Mar 2012 | B2 |
| 8153870 | Re et al. | Apr 2012 | B2 |
| 8268622 | Gocal et al. | Sep 2012 | B2 |
| 8283536 | Re et al. | Oct 2012 | B1 |
| 8283537 | Re et al. | Oct 2012 | B1 |
| 8288635 | Moldenhauer | Oct 2012 | B2 |
| 8449917 | Hiteshkumar et al. | May 2013 | B2 |
| 8598080 | Linscombe | Dec 2013 | B2 |
| 8796177 | Mann et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
| 8847017 | Poree et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
| 8853495 | Poree et al. | Oct 2014 | B2 |
| 8853496 | Poree et al. | Oct 2014 | B2 |
| 8859856 | Poree et al. | Oct 2014 | B2 |
| 9303270 | Hinga et al. | Apr 2016 | B2 |
| 9370149 | Hinga et al. | Jun 2016 | B2 |
| 20010031704 | Hacker | Oct 2001 | A1 |
| 20040107465 | Tillman et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040123343 | La Rosa et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040242422 | Hofer et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20070074303 | McCutchen et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20080256668 | Beetham et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080300139 | Zawierucha et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20090093366 | Wright et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090165166 | Feng et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090235395 | Arntzen et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
| 20090240073 | Barry et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
| 20100029485 | Livore | Feb 2010 | A1 |
| 20100048405 | Raymer et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
| 20100197503 | Hawkes | Aug 2010 | A1 |
| 20100293628 | Tuinstra et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
| 20110028324 | Cordingley et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
| 20110124503 | Wright et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
| 20110214196 | Raymer et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
| 20120284812 | Mankin | Nov 2012 | A1 |
| 20120284853 | Mankin et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
| 20130019349 | Gocal et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
| 20130023416 | Hinga | Jan 2013 | A1 |
| 20130111618 | Mankin et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
| 20130333062 | Rehman etal. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20140024530 | Poree et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
| 20140045686 | Mankin et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
| 20140250543 | Ostlie et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20140274710 | Mann et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
| 20150038331 | Hinga | Feb 2015 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 2823290 | Jul 2012 | CA |
| 101595886 | Dec 2009 | CN |
| 2453012 | May 2012 | EP |
| WO 9529246 | Nov 1995 | WO |
| WO 9854330 | Dec 1998 | WO |
| WP 2009034188 | Mar 2009 | WO |
| WO 2010040485 | Apr 2010 | WO |
| WO 2010046437 | Apr 2010 | WO |
| WO 2011028832 | Mar 2011 | WO |
| WO 2011028833 | Mar 2011 | WO |
| WO 2011028836 | Mar 2011 | WO |
| WO 2013016210 | Jan 2013 | WO |
| WO 2015025031 | Feb 2015 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| Kukorelli et al. (2013) Int J Pest Manag 59(3):165-73. |
| Kaundun et al. (2013) PLOS ONE 8(2):e58012. |
| Délye (2013) Pest Manag Sci 69:176-87. |
| Goldsbrough et al. (1990) Plant Sci 72:53-62. |
| Sasaki et al. (2002) Nature 420:312-16. |
| Examination Report issued in App. No. PH 1-2014-500183 (dated Jan. 8, 2018). |
| Abe et al., “Genome sequencing reveals agronomically important loci in rice using MutMap,” Nat. Biotech., 30, 174-178 (2012). |
| Chen et al, “Genome-wide association analyses provide genetic and biochemical insights into natural variation in rice metabolism,” Nature Genetics, 46: 714-721 (2014). |
| Collavo, “Resistance to graminicides in monocotyledons weeds, Case studies of Lolium spp. and Phalaris paradoxa in Italy,” Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Padova (2008). |
| Cruz-Hipolito et al., “Resistance mechanism to acetyl coenzyme A carboxylase inhibiting herbicides in Phalaris paradoxa collected in Mexican wheat fields,” Plant Soil, 355:121-130 (2012). |
| Délye et al, “‘Universal’ primers for PCR-sequencing of grass chloroplastic acetyl-CoA carboxylase domains involved in resistance to herbicides,” Weed Research, 45:323-330 (2005). |
| Delye et al., “Cross-resistance patterns to ACCase-inhibiting herbicides conferred by mutant ACCase isoforms in Alopecurus myosuroides Huds. (black-grass), re-examined at the recommend herbicide field rate,” Pest Management Science, 64(11): 1179-86 (2008). |
| Delye et al., “Deciphering the evolution of herbicide resistance in weeds,” Trends in Genetics, 29(11): 649-658 (2013). |
| Délye et al., “An Isoleucine Residue within the Carboxyl-Transferase Domain of Multidomain Acetyl-Coenzyme A Carboxylase Is a Major Determinant of Sensitivity to Aryloxyphenoxypropionate But Not to Cyclohexanedione Inhibitors,” Plant Physiology, 132: 1716-1723 (2003). |
| Délye et al., “Molecular Bases for Sensitivity to Acetyl-Coenzyme A Carboxylase Inhibitors in Black-Grass,” Plant Physiology, 137: 794-806 (2005). |
| Guo et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101: 9205-9210 (2004). |
| Jain, “Tissue culture-derived variation in crop improvement,” Euphytica, 118:153-166 (2001). |
| Liu et al., “Single-Site Mutations in the Carboxyltransferase Domain of Plastid Acetyl-CoA Carboxylase Confer Resistance to Grass-Specific Herbicides,” PNAS, 104(9): 3627-3632 (2007). |
| Matringe et al., “p-Hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase inhibitor-resistant plants,” Pest. Manage. Sci., 61:269-276 (2005). |
| Okuzaki et al., “Chimeric RNA/DNA oligonucleotide-directed gene targeting in rice,” Plant Cell Rep., 22:509-512 (2004). |
| Oryza sativa acetyl-coenzyme A carboxylase mutant G2107S, Database Geneseq [Online], accession No. AZG28702, Apr. 28, 2001. |
| Oryza sativa Japonica Group acetyl-coenzyme A carboxylase, Database Enbl accession No. AZG73608, May 12, 2011. |
| Ostlie et al., “Development and characterization of mutant winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) accessions resistant to the herbicide quizalofop,” Theor. Appl. Genet., 128:343-351 (2015). |
| Ouyang et al., Nucleic Acid Research, 35 Database Issue: D846-851 (Jan. 1, 2007). |
| Rogue, A Novel Herbicide for US Rice Production, Louisiana Agricultural Technology and Management Conference, Feb. 18, 2016. |
| Ruiz-Santaella et al., Detection of a new mutation of glycine to serine in the ACCase of a resistant biotype of Phalaris paradoxa. In: Annual Meeting of the Weed Science Society of America, Abstracts, New York: WSSA, 46:93 (2006). |
| Rutger et al., “Registration of nine indica germplasms of rice,” Crop Sci., 45:1170-1171 (2005). |
| Sandoski et al., Rogue™—A Novel Herbicide for US Rice Production, Louisiana Agrictultural Technology and Management Conference, Feb. 18, 2016. |
| Scarabel et al., “Allelic variation of the ACCase gene and response to ACCase-inhibiting herbicides in pinoxaden-resistant Lolium spp.,” Pest Management Science, 67(8): 932-941 (2011). |
| Sekino et al., “Herbicidal activity of a new paddy bleaching herbicide, benzobicyclon,” J. Pest. Sci., 33(4): 364-370 (2008). |
| Suzuki et al., “MNU-induced mutant pools and high performance Tilling enable finding of any gene mutation in rice,” Mol. Genet. Genomics, 279:213-223 (2008). |
| UniProt Accession No. A2Y2U1. |
| Yu et al., “Diversity of Acetyl-Coenzyme A Carboxylase Mutations in Resistant Lolium Populations: Evaluation Using Clethodim1[OA],” Plant Physiology, 145: 547-558 (2007). |
| Zhu et al., “Computational Simulations of the Interactions between Acetyl-Coenzyme-A Carboxylase and Clodinafop: Resistance Mechanism Due to Active and Nonactive Site Mutations,” J. Chem. Inf. Model, 49(8): 1936-1943 (2009). |
| Zhu et al., The resistance mechanism research of ACCase inhibitor, Journal of Huazhong Normal University Natural Sciences, 43(1): 76-82 (2009). |
| Anyszka et al., “The Response of Snap Bean and Barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) on quizalofop-P-Tefuryl,” Vegetable Crops Research Bulletin, 51:95-102 (1999) (Abstract). |
| Maneechote et al., “Controlling invasive wild rice with ACCase-inhibiting herbicides,” Proceedings of the 4th Int'l Crop Science Congress, Brisbane, Australia (2004). |
| Maneechote et al., “Resistance to ACCase-inhibiting herbicides in sprangletop (Leptochloa chinensis),” Weed Science, 53:290-295 (2005). |
| Kawahara et al., “Improvement of the Oryza sativa Nipponbare reference genome using next generation sequence and optical map data,” Rice 6(4): 1-10 (2013). |
| Int'l Rice Genome Sequencing Project, “The Map-based sequence of the rice genome,” Nature, 436: 793-800 (2005). |
| Tong, “Acetyl-coenzyme A carboxylase: crucial metabolic enzyme and attractive target for drug discovery,” CMLS Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences (2005), 62(16): 1784-1803. |
| Zhao et al, “Target site mutations and cytochrome P450s confer resistance to fenoxaprop-P-ethyl and mesosulfuron-methyl in Alopecurus aequalis,” Pest Manag Sci, (2019) 75: 204-214. |
| Zhao et al., “Trp-1999-Ser mutation of acetyl-CoA carboxylase and cytochrome P450s-involved metabolism confer resistance to fenoxaprop-P-ethyl in Polypogon fugax,” Pest Manag Sci, (2019) 75: 3175-3183. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20180066276 A1 | Mar 2018 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 62371582 | Aug 2016 | US |
