Skip to main content
PLOS ONE logoLink to PLOS ONE
. 2023 Mar 10;18(3):e0280762. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0280762

Phenotypic and Genotypic screening of fifty-two rice (Oryza sativa L.) genotypes for desirable cultivars against blast disease

Jeevan B 1,*, Rajashekara Hosahatti 1, Prasanna S Koti 2, Vinaykumar Hargi Devappa 3, Umakanta Ngangkham 4, Pramesh Devanna 5, Manoj Kumar Yadav 6, Krishna Kant Mishra 1, Jay Prakash Aditya 1, Palanna Kaki Boraiah 3, Ahmed Gaber 7, Akbar Hossain 8,*
Editor: Muhammad Abdul Rehman Rashid9
PMCID: PMC10004593  PMID: 36897889

Abstract

Magnaporthe oryzae, the rice blast fungus, is one of the most dangerous rice pathogens, causing considerable crop losses around the world. In order to explore the rice blast-resistant sources, initially performed a large-scale screening of 277 rice accessions. In parallel with field evaluations, fifty-two rice accessions were genotyped for 25 major blast resistance genes utilizing functional/gene-based markers based on their reactivity against rice blast disease. According to the phenotypic examination, 29 (58%) and 22 (42%) entries were found to be highly resistant, 18 (36%) and 29 (57%) showed moderate resistance, and 05 (6%) and 01 (1%), respectively, were highly susceptible to leaf and neck blast. The genetic frequency of 25 major blast resistance genes ranged from 32 to 60%, with two genotypes having a maximum of 16 R-genes each. The 52 rice accessions were divided into two groups based on cluster and population structure analysis. The highly resistant and moderately resistant accessions are divided into different groups using the principal coordinate analysis. According to the analysis of molecular variance, the maximum diversity was found within the population, while the minimum diversity was found between the populations. Two markers (RM5647 and K39512), which correspond to the blast-resistant genes Pi36 and Pik, respectively, showed a significant association to the neck blast disease, whereas three markers (Pi2-i, Pita3, and k2167), which correspond to the blast-resistant genes Pi2, Pita/Pita2, and Pikm, respectively, showed a significant association to the leaf blast disease. The associated R-genes might be utilized in rice breeding programmes through marker-assisted breeding, and the identified resistant rice accessions could be used as prospective donors for the production of new resistant varieties in India and around the world.

Introduction

Rice blast disease, caused by filamentous fungus Magnaporthe oryzae (anamorph Pyricularia oryzae), remains a potential threat to global rice production [1, 2]. The blast pathogen can be found in all stages of plants growth and development, causing damage to leaves (leaf blast), nodes (nodal blast), and panicles (neck blast), as well as decreasing grain yield by up to 90% in favourable environmental conditions [35].

The M. oryzae has been documented all over the world and can infect more than 50 host species in the family Poaceae, including rice, wheat, pearl millet, foxtail millet, and finger millet [68]. Across most of the world’s rice-growing regions, including India, blast disease epidemics have occurred [9, 10]. Between 1980 and 1987, India experienced several deadly blast disease epidemics in Himachal Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, and Haryana [11, 12].

Chemical fungicides have been useful in controlling the disease, but they are expensive [13, 14], ineffective when disease pressure is high [15], and may contribute to pathogen resistance [16]. As a result, the most cost-effective and environmentally acceptable strategy for controlling rice blast disease is to leverage host resistance (R genes). Around 118 R genes have been discovered so far, with 35 of them being successfully cloned and characterized for leaf blast resistance [17, 18]. However, the cloned R genes that possess broad-spectrum resistance to leaf blast, have not been tested for neck blast disease [19]. Even though neck blast is the most devastating stage of the disease, there is relatively little information on the genetic processes that underpin neck blast resistance. Nevertheless, 14 QTLs [18] and a few R genes have been found for neck blast resistance, including Pi25(t) [20], Pb1 [21], Pi64 [22], Pi-jnw1 [23], and Pi68(t) [24]. A large majority of the cloned blast R genes share nucleotide-binding site (NBS) and leucine-rich repeat (LRR) domains in their protein sequences, except for a few (Pid2, pi21, and Ptr) [17, 25, 26]. According to gene-for-gene theory, these R genes are race-specific and related to the hypersensitive response (HR) [27]. The M. oryzae’s genome contains numerous repetitive DNA and retro-transposons [28], which might cause mutations in genes that mediate the pathogen’s virulence and host range [2931], allowing the fungus to develop new deadly races. The emergence of these races results in a change in pathogenicity, posing a threat to existing blast-resistant rice cultivars [32].

By permitting the integration of the desired gene(s) in early breeding generations, marker-assisted selection (MAS) has emerged as a potent method that has advanced the rice breeding effort for blast disease resistance [33]. Many rice cultivars have been improved via MAS by pyramiding targeted R genes, resulting in the rapid release of rice varieties with durable resistance against blast disease [34]. In recent years, molecular markers have been utilized to capitalize on natural variety and pinpoint the gene of interest influencing essential features in different germplasm [35].

There is indeed a lot of genetic variation in the Indian rice germplasm collection [12, 36]. Many of these rice varieties have been reported to have resistance to biotic and abiotic stresses, including blast disease [3739]. However, the distribution of R genes in Indian rice cultivars that confer long-term resistance to leaf and neck blast has not been adequately explored. As a result, it’s critical to comprehend R gene information in rice germplasm as well as the resistant spectrum of relevant R genes against prevailing pathogen races to use the most successful ones in the rice breeding programme to combat blast disease. The present study was carried out to explore the genetic association of 25 mapped resistance genes in 52 rice accessions, including released varieties, advanced breeding materials, and traditional rice varieties using linked/functional markers. The main goal of this study was to find an association between the leaf and neck blast R genes, which impart blast resistance to these lines, and novel blast resistance donor sources (R genes/alleles).

Materials and methods

Plant materials used in the current research

A total of 50 rice accessions were collected based on documented rice blast resistant information from the Rice Genetics laboratory, Crop Improvement Division, ICAR- Vivekananda Parvatiya Krishi Anusandhan Sansthan (VPKAS), Almora, Uttarakhand, India (Tables 1 & 2). The test material includes released varieties (04), advanced breeding materials (44), and traditional rice varieties (02). In addition, two genotypes, PB-1 and Bala, were chosen as leaf and neck blast susceptible controls, respectively (Tables 1 and 2).

Table 1. List of 52 rice accession used in this study.

Planting materials Genotypes
Released varieties VL Dhan 158, VL Dhan 68, VL Dhan 221 and VL Dhan 206
Advanced breeding materials VL 8083, VL 8214, VL 8394, VL 8549, VL 8654, VL 20231, VL 20279, VL 20287, VL 20298, VL 20299, VL 20302, VL 20289, VL 31430, VL 31451, VL 31598, VL 31615, VL 31616, VL 31619, VL 31674, VL 31679, VL 31694, VL 31716, VL 31743, VL 31802, VL 31817, VL 31851, VL 31870, VL 31916, VL 31997, VL 32092, VL 32131, VL 32132, VL 32168, A-57, BL-122, BL-245, GSR-102, GSR-106, GSR-124, GSR-125, GSR-132, GSR-142, VOHP-3102 and VL 32197
Traditional rice varieties VLK 39 and Someshwar
Susceptible checks PB-1 and Bala

Table 2. List of rice genotypes along with their pedigree.

Sl. No. Entry name Pedigree Sl. No. Entry name Pedigree
1 VL 8083 VL 6394/VL 6446 27 VL 31817 Vivek Dhan 82/BL122
2 VL 8214 VL Dhan 81/VR539-2 28 VL 31851 VL 30424/IR78
3 VL 8394 VL6394/VL6446 29 VL 31870 BL 122/IR 785–36
4 VL 8549 VL 3861/VL 6394 30 VL 31916 VL Dhan 85/BL 245
5 VL 8654 RCPL 1-45/Vivek Dhan 154 31 VL 31997 Vivek Dhan 62/MAS-52
6 VL Dhan 158 RCPL 1-45/VL 3861 32 VL 32092 VL Dhan 85/VOHP 3102
7 VL 20231 VL Dhan 81/Vandana 33 VL 32131 VL 10689/UPRI2005-15
8 VL 20279 VL 20240/Sawdhan 34 VL 32132 VL 10689/UPRI2005-15
9 VL 20287 VHC 1462/VL 10499 35 VL 32168 VL Dhan 65/VL30919
10 VL 20298 Annada/C101-A51 36 A-57 -
11 VL 20299 Annada/C101-A51 37 BL-122 -
12 VL 20302 VL Dhan 221/ VL 30927 38 BL-245 -
13 VL 20289 VHC 1462/VL 10499 39 VL Dhan 221 IR 2053-521-1-1-1/Ch 1039
14 VL 31430 Pant Dhan 6/VL 3288 40 VLK 39 China 1039/IR580-19-2-3-1
15 VL 31451 IR 72979/PSB RC 2 (IR 32809-26-3-3) 41 GSR-102 -
16 VL 31598 VL 3861/IR57257-34-1-2-1 42 GSR-106 -
17 VL Dhan 68 VL 3861/SR 1818BF-4B-1-2-1-2 43 GSR-124 -
18 VL 31615 VL 3861/SR 1818BF-4B-1-2-1-2 44 GSR-125 -
19 VL 31616 VL 3861/SR 1818BF-4-B1-2-1-2 45 GSR-132 -
20 VL 31619 VL 3861/SR 1818BF-4-B1-2-1-2 46 GSR-142 -
21 VL 31674 C101-A51/O. minuta 47 VOHP-3102 Local collection
22 VL 31679 O. minuta/Vivek Dhan 82 48 VL Dhan 206 Pure line selection from Bamni (local variety)
23 VL 31694 Vivek Dhan 82/IR57257-34 49 VL 32197 VL Dhan 81/Vandana
24 VL 31716 O. minuta/IR57257-34 50 Someshwar Local collection
25 VL 31743 VL 30424/IR32809 51 Bala N 22/T(N)1
26 VL 31802 VL 66/VL30424 52 PB-1 Pusa 167/Karnal Local

Phenotyping of rice germplasm lines for blast disease resistance

A set of 50 rice hill germplasm collections were evaluated under the natural conditions at the rice blast hotspot area, ICAR-VPKAS, experimental farm, Hawalbagh (29o56’N, 79o40’E, and 1250m MSL), Almora, for their reactivity against leaf and neck blast. The evaluations were carried out in three replications over three years, from 2018 to 2020, during the rainy (Kharif) seasons. Sowings were done in two sets, one for leaf blast evaluations and the other for neck blast evaluations. Each rice entry (30 plants/test entry) was raised in 50 cm long rows on nursery beds with a 10 cm row spacing in a uniform blast nursery for leaf blast (UBN). One line of PB-1 (susceptible check) was sown after every 5 entries of test accessions, as well as along the boundaries, to ensure adequate disease transmission. From 25 days after sowing until the susceptibility check showed 85% of the blast disease symptom, the disease spectrum of all the test entries was recorded. A 0–9 scale devised by IRRI, Philippines [39], was used to visually record the disease reaction on each test entry.

Similarly, the other set was also tested for neck blast disease, but Bala was used as a susceptible control. The severity of the disease was graded on a 0–9 scale (IRRI, 2002), with 0 = no lesion or one or two tiny lesions on the panicles; 1 = symptom on several pedicels or secondary branches; 3 = lesions on a few primary branches or the middle part of panicle axis; 5 = moderate infection with lesions covering half of the node or the uppermost internode or the lower part of panicle axis; 7 = heavy infection, lesions abundant on the panicle base or uppermost internode or panicle axis near the base with more than 30% of filled grains; 9 = very heavy infection, around the panicle base or uppermost internode or the panicle axis near the base with less than 30% of filled grains. At physiological maturity, the disease reaction was recorded, and the affected plants were evaluated on a disease scale, Highly resistant (HR) (0–3 score), moderately resistant (MR) (4–5), and susceptible (S) (6–9) were assigned to the test entries, respectively. Whenever differences in the disease spectrum were recorded, the higher disease was taken into account.

DNA isolation and genotyping

Genomic DNA was extracted from the young leaves of 50 rice germplasm lines and two susceptible controls using the CTAB technique [40]. The quality and quantity of isolated genomic DNA were determined using a Thermo Fisher Scientific NanoDropTM 1000 Spectrophotometer. After that, the isolated DNA samples were diluted to a concentration of 25 ng/μl in nuclease-free water for PCR amplification. Molecular profiling of 52 rice lines for the presence of major blast resistance genes was carried out using 25 linked or functional molecular markers. The detailed information on blast resistance genes and their corresponding primer pairs used in this investigation is listed in Table 2. About 25 ng of template DNA, 10 pmol of each forward and reverse primers, 25 mM MgCl2, 2 mM of each dNTPs, 1X Taq buffer, 1U Taq DNA polymerase, and nuclease-free water were used in the PCR amplification. The PCR conditions were set as follows: initial denaturation at 94°C for 5 minutes was followed by 35 cycles of denaturation for 40 seconds at 94°C, primer annealing for 40 seconds at varied temperatures (Table 3), and extension for 2 minutes at 72°C were performed, followed by a final 10-minute extension at 72°C. To double-check the results, PCR amplification was done twice for each marker. The amplified PCR products were resolved in ethidium bromide-stained 3% agarose gels and the scoring were done for the PCR analysis as presence (1) or absence (0).

Table 3. Details of markers used for molecular screening of blast resistance genes in 52 rice accessions.

Genes Markers Forward (5’ - 3’) Reverse (5’ - 3’) Type of Marker* Annealing Temperature (°C) References
Pit tk59-1 ATGATAACCTCATCCTCAATAAGT GTTGGAGCTACGGTTGTTCAG FM 54 [48]
Pid1(t) RM262 CATTCCGTCTCGGCTCAACT CAGAGCAAGGTGGCTTGC LM 55 [63]
Pish RM6648 GATCGATCATGGCCAGAGAG ACAGCAGGTTGATGAGGACC LM 55 [34]
Pb1 RM26998 ACGCACGCACATCCTCTTCC CGGTTCTCCATCTGAAATCCCTAGC LM 55 [21]
Pi33 RM72 CCGGCGATAAAACAATGAG GCATCGGTCCTAACTAAGGG LM 55 [64]
Pikhahe-1(t) RM17496 TAAACGGTGTGCAGCTTCTG TATTATGGGCGGTCGCTAAC LM 54 [65]
pi21 pi21-79-3 GATCCTCATCGTCGACGTCTGGC AGGGTACGGCACCAGCTTG InDel 55 [27]
Pi56 CRG4-2 CCTGTCAGTCTTTCCGAGAG GAATCCGGTAGCTCAAGGTG Gene-specific 55 [66]
Pi65 SNP_3 TGCCACCAGCCATCTTCAACAT ACCACATCACTCATCGCCATCC InDel 54 [71]
Pi36 RM5647 ACTCCGACTGCAGTTTTTGC AACTTGGTCGTGGACAGTGC LM 55 [72]
Pi49 RM6094 TGCTTGATCTGTGTTCGTCC TAGCAGCACCAGCATGAAAG LM 55 [67]
Pi48 RM5364 GTATTACGCTCGATAGCGGC GTATCCTTTCTCGCAATCGC LM 55 [68]
Pib Pb28 GACTCGGTCGACCAATTCGCC ATCAGGCCAGGCCAGATTTG SNP 60 [48]
Piz Z56592 GGACCCGCGTTTTCCACGTGTAA AGGAATCTATTGCTAAGCATGAC SNP 60 [48]
Piz-t Zt56591 TTGCTGAGCCATTGTTAAACA ATCTCTTCATATATATGAAGGCCAC SNP 60 [48]
Pik K39512 GCCACATCAATGGCTACAACGTT CCAGAATTTACAGGCTCTGG SNP 60 [48]
Pik-p K3957 ATAGTTGAATGTATGGAATGGAAT CTGCGCCAAGCAATAAAGTC SNP 60 [48]
Pik-h Candidate gene marker CATGAGTTCCATTTACTATTCCTC ACATTGGTAGTAGTGCAATGTCA Gene-based marker 55 [69]
Pi9 Pi9-i GCTGTGCTCCAAATGAGGAT GCGATCTCACATCCTTTGCT FNP 54 [52]
Pi2 Pi2-i CAGCGATGGTATGAGCACAA CGTTCCTATACTGCCACATCG FNP 52 [52]
Pita/Pita2 Pita3 AGTCGTGCGATGCGAGGACAGAAAC GCATTCTCCAACCCTTTTGCATGCAT SNP 59 [48]
Pi1 RM1233 GTGTAAATCATGGGCACGTG AGATTGGCTCCTGAAGAAGG SSR 55 [40]
Pi5 40N23R TGTGAGGCAACAATGCCTATTGCG CTATGAGTTCACTATGTGGAGGCT InDel 55 [40]
Pikm k2167 CGTGCTGTCGCCTGAATCTG CACGAACAAGAGTGTGTCGG InDel 55 [40]
Pi25 CAP1 TGAAATGGGTGAAAGATGAG GCCACATCATAATTCCTTGA CAPS 55 [70]

* FM, functional marker; LM, linked marker; InDel, insertion-deletion marker; FNP, functional nucleotide polymorphism; SNP, single nucleotide polymorphism; CAPS, Cleaved Amplified Polymorphism Sequences

Allele scoring and genetic diversity analysis

The presence or absence of an allele was indicated as 1 and 0, respectively, in the amplified PCR products of 25 markers, which were scored as a binary matrix. Using a binary data matrix of 25 markers, the genetic distance and similarity coefficients for 52 rice accessions were calculated. Using the Cervus 3.0 programme (Field Genetics Ltd., London, England) and POPGENE 32 software, different parameters such as the number of different alleles per locus (Na), number of effective alleles per locus (Ne), Shannon’s Information Index (I), and Expected Heterozygosity (HE) for each marker were calculated [41]. Subsequently, a heatmap of all the rice accessions was constructed using the pheatmap package with complete linkage clustering method and euclidean distance measure by R version 4.0.3 statistical software for the presence or absence of 25 markers for both leaf and neck blast.

Association analysis

To study the genetic relationship between blast resistance genes and the disease spectrum, we used TASSEL version 5.0 software with a general linear model (GLM) function [42]. Only the P-value was seen in 5% of the permutations for the most significant polymorphism in a region when the GLM model of TASSEL (v 5.0) software was performed with 1000 permutations of data. Using genotypic data collected with 25 molecular markers and pheatmap-based clustering with complete linkage clustering method and Euclidean distance measure, the genetic distance between the 52 rice accessions was estimated using R version 4.0.3 statistical programme.

Population structure analysis

Based on genotyping data from 25 markers, the STRUCTURE software v 2.3.4 [43] was used to evaluate the population structure of 52 rice accessions. Using the admixture and correlated allele frequencies model, each subpopulation (K) was estimated at different K values ranging from one to ten, with five runs per K value. A total of 200000 burn-in periods and 200,000 Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) iterations were used in the STRUCTURE runs. Using the STRUCTURE HARVESTER software, the highest delta K (ΔK) value was estimated to determine the most likely K-value [44]. The pairwise fixation index (FST) was calculated using principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) based on a binary data matrix of 25 markers, and analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA) was performed using the GenAlEx version 6.502 software [45].

Results

Phenotyping of hill germplasm lines

Initially, the responsiveness of 277 rice accessions to rice blast disease was assessed. From these 277 accessions, we chose 52 genotypes based on their reaction to rice blast disease. i.e., resistant, moderately resistant, and susceptible (Tables 1 & 2).

Of 52 rice genotypes, 29 (58%) and 22 (42%) rice genotypes were found to be highly resistant, 18 (36%) and 29 (57%) were moderately resistant, while 05 (6%) and 01 (1%) were highly susceptible to leaf and neck blast, respectively. Incidentally, sixteen genotypes showed high resistance to both leaf and neck blasts (Fig 1).

Fig 1. A clustered analysis based on the 25 molecular markers and Heatmap representing the summary of phenotypic and genotypic data of 52 rice genotypes analyzed in this study.

Fig 1

Genetic diversity of blast-resistant R genes

The present study used a set of twenty-five markers (functional/linked markers) that corresponded to the twenty-five R genes (Table 3). The gene frequency of the twenty-five blast R genes ranged from 32 to 60%, with the number of positive R-gene alleles ranging from 0 to 100%. Using a tk59-1 marker to visualize a 733 bp amplicon, the rice blast R-gene Pit was discovered in 17 rice genotypes. Pish on chromosome 1 was amplified with marker RM6648, resulting in a 207-bp band that was detected in 23 genotypes.

A 137-bp amplicon corresponding to the RM26998 marker was used to find the Pb1 gene on chromosome 11 in 19 genotypes. In 29 rice germplasm lines, the marker RM17496 was able to amplify the Pikhahe-1(t) gene with a fragment size of 84 bp. For the recessive blast-resistant gene pi21, only four genotypes were determined to be positive. The existence of the blast resistance gene Pi56 on chromosome 9 was detected using the gene-specific marker CRG4-2, which was found in 23 genotypes. Using the linked marker RM5647, the blast resistance genes Pi36 (chromosome 8) were discovered in 12 genotypes. The Pi49 gene, which is located on chromosome 11, was found in 12 genotypes after 182 bp were seen with the RM6094 marker. Using the RM5364 primer, the Pi48 gene was discovered in five genotypes.

The R genes, Piz, and Piz-t on chromosome 6 were amplified using SNP markers Z56592 and Zt56591, which revealed their presence in nine and twelve entries, respectively. Visualization of 112 bp, 148 bp, and 1500 bp amplicons corresponding to the K39512, K3957, and a gene-based marker, respectively, revealed the Pik, Pik-p, and Pik-h genes on chromosome 11. The genes Pik, Pik-p, and Pik-h were found in 46, 47, and 17 accessions, respectively. The Pi2 gene was discovered using the Pi2-i primer in twenty-one entries, resulting in positive bands. The major blast resistance gene Pita/Pita2, which was scored by visualization of an 861 bp amplicon utilizing the Pita3 marker, was found in 22 genotypes. The Pi5 gene was discovered in 35 genotypes, which was confirmed using the marker 40N23R. The Pikm gene was found in twenty-seven genotypes after PCR amplification. Pi25 was found in twelve genotypes using the CAP1 primer, which produced a 406-bp amplicon. The R genes Pi33, Pib, Pi9, and Pi1 were detected in all genotypes; however, the Pid1(t) and Pi65 genes were not discovered in any of the fifty-two genotypes examined in this study. The phenotypic and genotypic data of the 52 rice accessions studied in this investigation are summarized in Fig 1.

Cluster analysis

R-software was used to do the cluster analysis, which separated the 52 rice accessions into two primary clusters. Cluster I had 14 genotypes, seven and four of which were found to be highly resistant to leaf and neck blast, respectively, and three of which, VL31598, VL31679, and VL31674, were shown to be resistant to both leaf and neck blast. Cluster II was divided into three subgroups, the first of which contained a large number of genotypes (19), including nine genotypes resistant to both leaf and neck blast. On the other hand, two susceptible checks (Bala and PB-1) were also clustered together. Subgroup II is made up of four genotypes: VL 31802, VL 31817, VL 31997, and VL Dhan 221. Except for VL Dhan 221, all three genotypes are resistant to neck blast. Subgroup III has fifteen genotypes, eight and five genotypes showed high resistance to leaf and neck blast, respectively, and three of which were common for both leaf and neck blast resistance, including VL Dhan 158, GSR-132, and VL31916. Except for VL Dhan 206, the majority of the genotypes exhibited moderate resistance to either leaf or neck blast (Fig 1).

The genotypic data from the 25 markers was used to calculate genetic diversity measures including the number of distinct alleles per locus (Na), the number of effective alleles per locus (Ne), Shannon’s Information Index (I), and Expected Heterozygosity (HE). A total of 44 alleles were generated from 25 loci or markers (Table 4). The average number of alleles per locus (Na) was 1.76, with a range of 1 to 2. The number of effective alleles per locus (Ne) ranged from 1 to 1.99, with an average of 1.49. Shannon’s Information Index (I) ranged from 0 to 0.692 (Pikm), with an average of 0.42. The Expected Heterozygosity (HE) ranged from 0 (Pid1(t), Pi33, Pi65, Pib, Pi9(Pi9-i), and Pi1) to 0.499 (Pikm) with an average of 0.285.

Table 4. Analysis of the number of alleles, Shannon’s Information Index, observed and expected Heterozygosity.

Locus Na Ne I He
Pit 2.000 1.786 0.632 0.440
Pid1(t) 1.000 1.000 0.000 0.000
Pish 2.000 1.974 0.686 0.493
Pb1 2.000 1.865 0.656 0.464
Pi33 1.000 1.000 0.000 0.000
Pikhahe-1(t) 2.000 1.974 0.686 0.493
pi21 2.000 1.166 0.271 0.142
Pi56 2.000 1.974 0.686 0.493
Pi65 1.000 1.000 0.000 0.000
Pi36 2.000 1.550 0.540 0.355
Pi49 2.000 1.550 0.540 0.355
Pi48 2.000 1.210 0.317 0.174
Pib 1.000 1.000 0.000 0.000
Piz 2.000 1.401 0.461 0.286
Piz-t 2.000 1.550 0.540 0.355
Pik 2.000 1.257 0.358 0.204
Pik-p 2.000 1.210 0.317 0.174
Pik-h 2.000 1.786 0.632 0.440
Pi9 (Pi9-i) 1.000 1.000 0.000 0.000
Pi2 (Pi2-i) 2.000 1.929 0.675 0.482
Pita (Pita3) 2.000 1.954 0.681 0.488
Pi1 1.000 1.000 0.000 0.000
Pi5 2.000 1.786 0.632 0.440
Pikm 2.000 1.997 0.692 0.499
Pi25 2.000 1.550 0.540 0.355

Association analysis

The genetic association of markers with leaf and neck blast disease was examined using the general linear model (GLM) function to see if there was any evidence of a significant link between gene-specific markers and the disease reaction. Only two markers (RM5647 and K39512), which correspond to the blast-resistant genes Pi36 and Pik, respectively, showed a significant association with the neck blast disease, while only three markers (Pi2-i, Pita3, and k2167), which correspond to the blast-resistant genes Pi2, Pita/Pita2, and Pikm, respectively, showed a significant association with the leaf blast disease (Table 5). For leaf blast, the associated markers showed a phenotypic variance of 7.2% to 12.2%. The marker k2167, which is linked to the Pikm gene, was shown to have the maximum phenotypic variance. The markers K39512 and RM5647, corresponding to the blast-resistant genes Pik and Pi36, respectively, showed a phenotypic variance of 4.7 and 5.2% for neck blast. The remaining twenty markers, on the other hand, showed no significant association with blast disease (p≤0.1).

Table 5. Genetic association of blast resistant genes with rice neck and leaf blast disease in 52 genotypes.

Marker Neck blast Leaf blast
P value marker_R2 P value marker_R2
Pit 0.31011 0.0206 0.94482 9.68E-05
Pid1(t) NaN 0 NaN 0
Pish 0.97709 1.67E-05 0.76334 0.00183
Pb1 0.7654 0.0018 0.97428 2.10E-05
Pi33 NaN 0 NaN 0
Pikhahe-1(t) 0.26063 0.02524 0.77591 0.00164
pi21 0.23418 0.02818 0.98122 1.12E-05
Pi56 0.85031 7.19E-04 0.40692 0.0138
Pi65 NaN 0 NaN 0
Pi36 0.1001 0.05253 * 0.46899 0.01054
Pi49 0.74584 0.00212 0.16333 0.03849
Pi48 0.66804 0.00371 0.18689 0.03458
Pib NaN 0 NaN 0
Piz 0.62943 0.00469 0.31383 0.02028
Piz-t 0.93256 1.45E-04 0.16943 0.03742
Pik 0.10002 0.0479 * 0.1949 0.03337
Pik-p 0.84113 8.11E-04 0.46584 0.01069
Pik-h 0.78264 0.00154 0.90339 2.98E-04
Pi9 (Pi9-i) NaN 0 NaN 0
Pi2 (Pi2-i) 0.43981 0.01198 0.01374 0.1154 **
Pita (Pita3) 0.62468 0.00482 0.05363 0.07247 **
Pi1 NaN 0 NaN 0
Pi5 0.77264 0.00168 0.33685 0.01846
Pikm 0.1383 0.04341 0.01114 0.12202 **
Pi25 0.64389 0.00431 0.6185 0.005

* & ** Significant at P value <0.1 and <0.05 respectively

Population structure analysis

Using STRUCTURE software, all 52 rice genotypes were examined for population structure estimation for leaf and neck blast disease based on 25 markers. The Adhoc Measure K peak plateau was discovered to be K = 2 (Fig 2), indicating that the complete 52 rice genotypes were divided into two subgroups (SG1 and SG2).

Fig 2.

Fig 2

Population structure analysis of 52 rice genotypes (a) The maximum of ad hoc measure ΔK was observed to be K = 3 (b) Estimated population structure graph separated the whole population into two subgroups.

All populations were divided into two major subgroups with eight admixture levels based on an ancestry threshold of >60% (Table 6). SG1 was made up of the most genotypes identified to be highly resistant to neck blast. The majority of genotypes identified to be highly resistant to leaf blast, on the other hand, were concentrated in SG2. Genotypes with moderate resistance to both leaf and neck blast were clustered together in SG2, while genotypes with high susceptibility to both leaf and neck blast were grouped together in SG1.

Table 6. Population structure group of 52 genotypes based on inferred ancestry values.

Genotypes Inferred Ancestry Structure group
Q1 Q2
VL 8083 0.560 0.44 AD
VL 8214 0.291 0.709 SG2
VL 8394 0.419 0.581 AD
VL 8549 0.076 0.924 SG2
VL 8654 0.582 0.418 AD
VL Dhan 158 0.302 0.698 SG2
VL 20231 0.398 0.602 SG2
VL 20279 0.527 0.473 AD
VL 20287 0.913 0.087 SG1
VL 20298 0.403 0.601 SG2
VL 20299 0.237 0.763 SG2
VL 20302 0.186 0.814 SG2
VL 20289 0.484 0.516 AD
VL 31430 0.047 0.953 SG2
VL 31451 0.151 0.849 SG2
VL 31598 0.045 0.955 SG2
VL Dhan 68 0.039 0.961 SG2
VL 31615 0.048 0.952 SG2
VL 31616 0.05 0.95 SG2
VL 31619 0.055 0.945 SG2
VL 31674 0.04 0.96 SG2
VL 31679 0.145 0.855 SG2
VL 31694 0.657 0.343 SG1
VL 31716 0.123 0.877 SG2
VL 31743 0.495 0.505 AD
VL 31802 0.313 0.687 SG2
VL 31817 0.453 0.547 AD
VL 31851 0.388 0.612 SG2
VL 31870 0.806 0.194 SG1
VL 31916 0.201 0.799 SG2
VL 31997 0.647 0.353 SG1
VL 32092 0.807 0.193 SG1
VL 32131 0.044 0.956 SG2
VL 32132 0.24 0.76 SG2
VL 32168 0.296 0.704 SG2
A-57 0.933 0.067 SG1
BL-122 0.626 0.374 SG1
BL-245 0.832 0.168 SG1
VL Dhan 221 0.503 0.497 AD
VLK 39 0.79 0.21 SG1
GSR-102 0.933 0.067 SG1
GSR-106 0.875 0.125 SG1
GSR-124 0.915 0.085 SG1
GSR-125 0.968 0.032 SG1
GSR-132 0.658 0.342 SG1
GSR-142 0.954 0.046 SG1
VOHP-3102 0.965 0.035 SG1
VL Dhan 206 0.878 0.122 SG1
VL 32197 0.964 0.036 SG1
Someshwar 0.944 0.056 SG1
Bala 0.904 0.096 SG1
PB-1 0.92 0.08 SG1

PCoA analysis has been carried out to establish the genetic relationship among the rice genotypes. PCoA analysis revealed that the first two axes explained 17.18% and 12.29% of the total variance (Table 7 and Fig 3). In PCoA, leaf blast-resistant genotypes were largely distributed among 1st and 2nd quadrants; on the other hand, most genotypes showed neck blast-resistant were concentrated in the 2nd quadrant. The genotypes found moderately resistant to both leaf and neck blast resistance were mostly distributed among the 1st, 3rd, and 4th quadrants, whereas susceptible genotypes were concentrated in the 2nd quadrant.

Table 7. Percentage of variation explained by the first 3 axes using blast resistance gene in PCoA.

Axis 1 2 3
Variation of the individual axis (%) 17.18 12.29 9.21
Cumulative variation (%) 17.18 29.47 38.67

Fig 3. PCoA of 25 molecular markers linked to blast resistance in 52 rice genotypes.

Fig 3

AMOVA analysis

The genetic variations within and between the populations were assessed using AMOVA analysis. The leaf blast score was used to separate 52 rice genotypes into three populations: 29 (HR), 18 (MR), and 05 (S). Similarly, based on neck blast score, 22(HR), 29(MR), and 01(S) were separated. Furthermore, the maximum variance (91%) and (89%) was found within the population, while the least (9%) and (11%), respectively, were found between the populations for leaf and neck blast scores (Fig 4).

Fig 4.

Fig 4

AMOVA analysis based on populations separated with leaf blast scores (a) and neck blast scores (b).

Discussion

Rice genetic diversity has been reduced as a result of large-scale cultivation of high-yielding rice varieties, which have replaced landraces and traditional cultivars, limiting varietal improvement possibilities with existing resources [12, 46]. As a result of the widespread cultivation of genetically similar cultivars across a large area, the pathogen population is subjected to selection pressure, causing it to establish new races. Rice production has become a global threat as a result of the emergence of these new harmful races. However, the problem can be avoided by finding possible donors for unique functional genes or alleles that will help to overcome the disease and ensure future rice harvests [12, 37]. The present experiment investigated the genetic diversity of released varieties, advanced breeding materials, and traditional rice varieties for blast resistance genes using 25 molecular markers.

In this study, we used functional/gene-based molecular markers to genotype fifty-two rice hill germplasm collections for 25 major blast-resistant genes, in addition to field evaluations. We examined 52 rice accessions for leaf blast disease resistance in the uniform blast nursery and found that 29 (58%) and 22 (42%) genotypes were highly resistant to leaf and neck blast disease, respectively. Surprisingly, 16 accessions were found to be common for both leaf and neck blast resistance among the highly resistant rice accessions. With one released variety, VL Dhan 158, the vast majority of these accessions are advanced breeding materials.

Identification of the individual resistance based on phenotype is typically challenging because it is heavily influenced by developmental stage and environmental factors. However, using a linked marker associated with the R genes is the easiest and most reliable way for identifying individual/multiple gene(s) [47, 48]. The frequency of R-gene positive alleles ranged from 0% to 100%, with the genetic frequency of 25 major blast resistance genes ranging from 32% to 60%. The most positive alleles for the fifteen resistance genes are found in only two accessions (VL 8394 and VL Dhan 158) [4951]. Our findings are similar to those of Yadav et al. [40] and Susan et al. [47], who reported gene frequencies ranging from 0% to 100% in 80 rice varieties released by National Rice Research Institute (NRRI), Cuttack, 9.4% to 100% in 32 Chinese rice germplasm, and 6% to 27% in 288 Indian landraces, respectively. The R-genes Pib, Pi9, Pi1, and Pi33 appeared to be present in all rice accessions. Our findings match those of Yadav et al. [40], who discovered the Pib gene in all eighty rice accessions studied. Similarly, the Pi9 gene was discovered in 51 Indian landraces [40] and 40 Chinese rice varieties [52]. However, just a few studies have documented the Pi9 gene’s rare prevalence [53, 40]. This could be owing to the Pi9 gene’s origin in the wild species O. minuta and its subsequent introduction into Indica rice [53]. The Pi1 gene was detected in 39 landraces with a frequency of 46.98%, according to Ingole et al. [50]. The presence of the Pi33 gene was discovered in 77 accessions in another investigation [5].

The genes Pit, Pish, and Pikhahe-1(t) were found in 17, 23, and 29 accessions, respectively [12, 40]. They are also found in the majority of accessions, according to earlier studies [12, 40]. In twenty-three accessions, the Pi56 gene was found. Although it has previously been detected in 27 landraces from northeastern India [40] and 26 NRRI Cuttack, released varieties, the gene Pi5 was found in 35 accessions [40]. Nine and twelve accessions, respectively, have the R genes Piz and Piz-t. However, there was no significant correlation was found between these two R genes and observed phenotypes. Similarly, they show partial resistance to the genotypes examined by Yadav et al. [40] and Susan et al. [47]. The Pi2 and Pita/Pita2 genes were detected in the majority of the rice accessions with high resistance to leaf blast [53]; however, a few genotypes without either of these genes were also resistant to leaf blast and may contain other unique R-genes/alleles. Except for VL 20287, which tested positive for the Pita/Pita2 gene, the genotypes that rated highly vulnerable to leaf blast did not include either of these two genes [53]. A blast resistance (BR) gene Pik-l was delineated in the region ~168.05 kb of the telomeric end of long of chromosome 11 of Japonica rice cv. Nipponbare. Based on its genomic position and distinct resistance spectra and also compared to previously identified Pik alleles, the new BR gene Pik-l was inferred to be a new allele of Pik locus [54]. Others earlier findings found that genes Pi2 and Pita/Pita2 express an NBS-LRR type R protein which are responsible to increase the resistant ability rice against leaf blast disease across a broad spectrum of pathogenic races [55,56].

In 19 accessions, the panicle blast resistance gene Pb1 was found. Only 9 accessions were found to have high resistance to neck blast, while the other ten showed moderate resistance. The Pb1 gene is a quantitative resistance gene that confers broad-spectrum resistance to all races. Despite having the Pb1 gene, 10 accessions were found to have only moderate resistance to neck blast. This could be owing to the involvement of at least four QTLs in neck blast resistance, three of which, Chr7, Chr9, and Chr11, have a negative impact on Pb1-mediated resistance, while Chr8, on the other hand, has a positive impact. These four QTLs are expected to influence the Pb1-mediated resistance either individually or in combination with others [57]. As of today, a few R genes, Pi25, Pb1, Pi64, Pi-jnw1, and Pi68(t) [2024] and QTLs like, qNBL-9, qNBL-10, qNBL-5 [58], qNB11-1, qNB11-3, qNB1-1, qNB1-2, qNB1-3 [59], qPbh11-1 and qPbh7-1, [60] were found to confer resistance to neck blast. Among them, Pi64, and Pi68(t) were identified for the leaf as well as neck blast resistance. The pi21 gene was discovered in just four accessions. Surprisingly, all four accessions had high resistance to neck blast, while only the two genotypes had high and moderate resistance to leaf blast disease. The pi21 gene is a quantitative resistance gene for rice blast disease that offers broad-spectrum resistance [61].

The distance-based clustering was evaluated using genotype data, which divided the 52 germplasm into two primary groupings. Cluster I genotypes was moderately resistant to leaf and neck blast, whereas Cluster II genotypes are highly resistant to both leaf and neck blast. Similarly, the population structure analysis separated the 52 rice accessions into two subpopulations (SG1 and SG2), each with eight admixtures.

The leaf and neck blast-resistant genotypes are found in the first and second quadrants of the PCoA analysis, whereas moderately resistant genotypes were found in the first, third, and fourth quadrants. Previous research has also divided resistant and susceptible germplasm into distinct categories [40, 47]. A statistical approach for estimating molecular variance in a single species is the analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA). The AMOVA analysis revealed that there is the highest diversity within the population and minimal diversity between populations.

As a result of association mapping investigations, several genes influencing significant features have been uncovered, and it is now being utilized to deconstruct the genetic basis of many new qualities [62]. Two markers related to blast resistant genes Pi36 and Pik were found to be strongly associated with neck blast resistance, whereas three markers related to blast resistant genes Pi2, Pita/Pita2, and Pikm were found to be significantly associated with leaf blast resistance. Previous research on association mapping and blast disease resistance has shown its effectiveness in identifying markers associated with QTLs and/or resistance genes giving blast resistance [12, 33, 40]. The identified resistant rice accessions could be used as donors in future breeding projects because they come from a variety of genetic origins. These resistant accessions might then be studied for the existence of novel functional genes/alleles, allowing them to be exploited in rice improvement programs tailored to the needs of agricultural systems.

Conclusions

The identification of resistant germplasm for both leaf and neck blast will be facilitated by phenotyping along with the molecular characterization of blast resistance genes. Our current research on leaf and neck blast screening provided significant germplasm for breeders to employ as parent material for blast resistance transfer, particularly neck blast resistance, in the production of resistant breeding lines. Further identified resistant lines could be a valuable resource for blast resistance gene mapping, particularly in the case of neck blast disease.

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to the ICAR-Vivekananda Parvatiya Krishi Anusandhan Sansthan, Almora, Uttarakhand, India and the Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia for providing all facilities and support during conducting the study.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the paper.

Funding Statement

This research was funded by ICAR-Vivekananda Parvatiya Krishi Anusandhan Sansthan, Almora, Uttarakhand, India. This research was also partially funded by the Taif University Researchers for funding this research with Supporting Project number (TURSP-2020/39), Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Pennisi E. Armed and dangerous. Science 2010, 327, 804–805. doi: 10.1126/science.327.5967.804 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Fernandez J.1; Orth K Rise of a Cereal Killer: The Biology of Magnaporthe oryzae Biotrophic Growth. Trends Microbiol. 2018, 26, 582–597. doi: 10.1016/j.tim.2017.12.007 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Le M.T.; Arie T.; Teraoka T. Population dynamics and pathogenic races of rice blast fungus, Magnaporthe oryzae in the Mekong Delta in Vietnam. J. Gen. Plant Pathol. 2010, 76, 177–182. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.He X.; Liu X.; Wang L.; Lin F.; Cheng Y.; Chen Z.; et al. Identification of the novel recessive gene pi55(t) conferring resistance to Magnaporthe oryzae. Sci. China Life Sci. 2012, 55, 141–149. doi: 10.1007/s11427-012-4282-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Singh A.K.; Singh P.K.; Arya M.; Singh N.K.; Singh U.S. Molecular screening of blast resistance genes in rice using SSR markers. Plant Pathol. J. 2015, 31, 12–24. doi: 10.5423/PPJ.OA.06.2014.0054 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Ou S.H. Rice Diseases, 2nd ed.; Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux International: Wallingford, UK, 1985; p. 380. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Choi J.; Park S.Y.; Kim B.R.; Roh J.H.; Oh I.S.; Han S.S.; et al. Comparative Analysis of Pathogenicity and Phylogenetic Relationship in Magnaporthe grisea Species Complex. PLoS ONE, 2013, 8, 1–8. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0057196 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Jeevan B.; Rajashekara H.; Mishra K.K.; Subbanna A.R.N.S.; Singh A.K.; Sharma D. Nayaka S C, Hosahatti R., Prakash G, Satyavathi C T, Sharma R Nayaka S C, Hosahatti R, Prakash G, Satyavathi C T, Sharma R.Finger millet blast disease: Potential threat to global nutrition security. In Blast Disease of Cereal Crops. Fungal Biology. Springer, Cham. 2021, pp 51–57. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Yashaswini C.; Reddy N.P.; Pushpavati B.; Rao S.C.; Madhav S.M. Prevalence of Rice blast (Magnaporthe oryzae) incidence in South India. Bulletin of Environment, Pharmacology and Life Sci. 2017, 6, 370–373. [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Ariya-anandech K.; Chaipanya C.; Teerasan W.; Kate-Ngam S.; Jantasuriyarat C. Detection and allele identification of rice blast resistance gene, Pik, in Thai rice germplasm. Agric. Nat. Resour. 2018, 52, 525–535. [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Sharma T.R.; Rai A.K.; Gupta S.K.; Vijayan J.; Devanna B.N.; Ray S. Rice blast management through host–plant resistance: retrospect and prospects. Agric. Res. 2012, 1:37–52. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Yadav M.K.; Aravindan S.; Ngangkham U.; Raghu S.; Prabhukarthikeyan S.R.; Keerthana U.; et al. Blast resistance in Indian rice landraces: Genetic dissection by gene-specific markers. PLoS ONE, 2019, 14(1), 1–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Panda G.; Sahu C.; Yadav M.K.; Aravindan S.; Umakanta N.; Raghu S.; et al. Morphological and molecular characterization of Magnaporthe oryzae from Chhattisgarh. ORYZA-An International Journal on Rice. 2017, 54, 330–336. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Sahu C.; Yadav M.K.; Panda G.; Aravindan S.; Umakanta N.; Raghu S.; et al. Morphological and molecular characterization of Magnaporthe oryzae causing rice blast disease in Odisha. ORYZA-An International Journal on Rice. 2018, 55, 467–472. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Jeevan B.; Gogoi R.; Sharma D.; Manjunatha C.; Rajashekara H.; Ram D.; et al. Genetic analysis of maydis leaf blight resistance in subtropical maize (Zea mays L.) germplasm. J. Genet. 2020, 99, 1–9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Yamaguchi I. Overview on the chemical control of rice blast disease. Kluwer Academic Publishers. 2004, pp 1–13. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Wang G.L.; Valent B. Durable resistance to rice blast. Science. 2017, 355, 906–907. doi: 10.1126/science.aam9517 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Kalia S.; Rathour R. Current status on mapping of genes for resistance to leaf- and neck-blast disease in rice. 3 Biotech, 2019, 9, 1–14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Ning X.; Yunyu W.; Aihong L. Strategy for use of rice blast resistance genes in rice molecular breeding, Rice Sci. 2020, 27, 263–277 [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Zhuang J.Y.; Ma W.B.; Wu J.L.; Chai R.Y.; Lu J.; Fan Y.Y.; et al. Mapping of leaf and neck blast resistance genes with resistance gene analog, RAPD and RFLP in rice. Euphytica, 2002, 128, 363–370. [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Hayashi N.; Inoue H.; Kato T.; Funao T.; Shirota M.; Shimizu T.; et al. Durable panicle blast-resistance gene Pb1 encodes an atypical CC-NBS-LRR protein and was generated by acquiring a promoter through local genome duplication. Plant J. 2010, 64, 498–510. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Ma J.; Lei C.; Xu X.; Hao K.; Wang J.; Cheng Z.; et al. Pi64, encoding a novel CC-NBS-LRR protein, confers resistance to leaf and neck blast in rice. Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 2015, 28, 558–568. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Wang R.; Fang W.; Guan C.; He W.; Bao Y.; Zhang H. Characterization and fine mapping of a blast resistant gene Pi-jnw1 from the japonica rice landrace Jiangnanwan. PLoS One, 2016, 11, 1–12. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169417 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Devi S.J.S.R.; Singh K.; Umakanth B.; Vishalakshi B.; Rao K.V.S.; Suneel B.; et al. Identification and characterization of a Large Effect QTL from Oryza glumaepatula revealed Pi68(t) as putative candidate gene for rice blast resistance. Rice, 2020, 13, 1–13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Skamnioti P.; Gurr S.J. Against the grain: safeguarding rice from rice blast disease. Trends Biotechnol. 2009, 27:141–150. doi: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2008.12.002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Liu J.; Wang X.; Mitchell T.; Hu Y.; Liu X.; Dai L.; et al. Recent progress and understanding of the molecular mechanisms of the rice- Magnaporthe oryzae interaction. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2010, 11:419–427. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Fukuoka S.; Saka N.; Koga H.; Ono K.; Shimizu T.; Ebana K.; et al. Loss of function of a proline containing protein confers durable disease resistance in rice. Science, 2009, 325, 998–1001. doi: 10.1126/science.1175550 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Dean R.A.; Talbot N.J.; Ebbole D.J.; Farman M.L.; Mitchell T.K.; Orbach M.J.; et al. The genome sequence of the rice blast fungus Magnaporthe grisea. Nature. 2005, 434, 980–986. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Kang S.; Lebrun M.H.; Farrall L.; Valent B. Gain of virulence caused by insertion of a Pot3 transposon in a Magnaporthe grisea avirulence gene. Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 2001, 14, 671–674. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Farman M.L.; Eto Y.; Nakao T.; Tosa Y.; Nakayashiki H.; Mayama S.; et al. Analysis of the structure of the AVR1-CO39 avirulence locus in virulent rice-infecting isolates of Magnaporthe grisea. Mol. Plant Microbe Interact, 2002, 15, 6–16. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Bohnert H.; Fudal I.; Dioh W.; Tharreau D.; Notteghem J.; Lebrun M. A putative polyketide synthase/peptide synthetase from Magnaporthe grisea signals pathogen attack to resistant rice. Plant Cell, 2004, 16, 2499–2513. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Hittalmani S.; Parco A.; Mew T.V.; Zeigler R.S.; Huang N. Fine mapping and DNA marker-assisted pyramiding of the three major genes for blast resistance in rice. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2000, 100, 1121–1128. [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Wang C.; Yang Y.; Yuan X.; Xu Q.; Feng Y.; Yu H.; et al. Genome–wide association study of blast resistance in indica rice. BMC Plant Biol. 2014, 14, 1–11. doi: 10.1186/s12870-014-0311-6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Koide Y.; Kawasaki A.; Telebanco-Yanoria M.J.; Hairmansis A.; Nguyet N.T.; Bigirimana J.; et al. Development of pyramided lines with two resistance genes, Pish and Pib, for blast disease (Magnaporthe oryzae B. Couch) in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Plant Breed., 2010, 129, 670–675. [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Zhang P.; Liu X.; Tong H.; Lu Y.; Li J. Association mapping for important agronomic traits in core collection of rice (Oryza sativa L.) with SSR markers. PLoS One. 2014, 9, 1–16. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0111508 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Kumbhar S.D.; Kulwal P.L.; Patil J.V.; Sarawate C.D.; Gaikwad A.P.; Jadhav A.S. Genetic diversity and population structure in landraces and improved rice varieties from India. Rice Sci. 2015, 22, 99–107. [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Vasudevan K.; Vera Cruz C.M.; Gruissem W.; Bhullar N.K. Large-scale germplasm screening for identification of novel rice blast resistance sources. Front. Plant Sci. 2014, 5, 1–9. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2014.00505 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Singh N.; Choudhury D.R.; Tiwari G.; Singh A.K.; Kumar S.; Srinivasan K.; et al. Singh, R. Genetic diversity trend in Indian rice varieties: an analysis using SSR markers. BMC Genet. 2016, 17, 1–13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.International Rice Research Institute (IRRI). Standard Evaluation System for Rice (SES). 2002. Available online: http://www.knowledgebank.irri.org/images/docs/rice‐standard‐evaluation‐system.pdf
  • 40.Yadav M.K.; Aravindan S.; Umakanta N.; Shubudhi H.N.; Bag M.K.; Adak T.; et al. Use of molecular markers in identification and characterization of resistance to rice blast in India. PLoS One, 2017, 12, 1–19. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Yeh F.C. Population genetic analysis of co-dominant and dominant marker and quantitative traits. Belg. J. Bot. 1997, 130:129–157. [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Bradbury P.J.; Zhang Z.; Kroon D.E.; Casstevens T.M.; Ramdoss Y.; Bucker E.S. TASSEL: software for association mapping of complex traits in diverse samples. Bioinformatics, 2007, 23, 2633–2635. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btm308 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Pritchard J.K.; Stephens M.; Donnelly P. Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics, 2000, 155, 945–959. doi: 10.1093/genetics/155.2.945 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Earl D.A. STRUCTURE HARVESTER: a website and program for visualizing STRUCTURE output and implementing the Evanno method. Conservation Genetics Resources, 2012, 4, 359–361. [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Peakall R.O.; Smouse P.E. GENALEX 6.5: genetic analysis in EXCEL. Population genetic software for teaching and research. Bioinformatics, 2012, 28, 2537–2539. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Tanksley S.D.; Mc Couch S.R. Seed banks and molecular maps: unlocking genetic potential from the wild. Science, 1997, 277, 1063–1066. doi: 10.1126/science.277.5329.1063 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Susan A.; Yadav M.K.; Kar S.; Aravindan S.; Ngangkham U.; Raghu S.; et al. Molecular identification of blast resistance genes in rice landraces from northeastern India. Plant Pathol. 2019, 68, 537–546. [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Hayashi K.; Yoshida H.; Ashikawa I. Development of PCR-based allele-specific and InDel marker sets for nine rice blast resistance genes. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2006, 113, 251–260. doi: 10.1007/s00122-006-0290-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Jia Y.; Wang Z.; Fjellstrom R.G.; Moldenhauer K.A.K.; Azam M.D.A.; Correll J.; et al. Rice Pi–ta gene confers resistance to the major pathotypes of the rice blast fungus in the United States. Phytopathology, 2004, 94, 296–301. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Ingole K.D.; Prashanthi S.K.; Krishnaraj P.U. Mining for major blast resistance genes in rice landraces of Karnataka. Indian J Genet Plant Breed. 2014, 74, 378–83. [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Yan L.; Yan B.Y.; Peng Y.L.; Ji Z.J.; Zeng Y.X.; Wu H.L.; et al. Molecular screening of blast resistance genes in rice germplasms resistant to Magnaporthe oryzae. Rice Sci. 2017, 24, 41–47. [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Yang Y.; Zhang H.; Xuan N.; Chen G.; Liu X.; Yao F.; et al. Identification of blast resistance genes in 358 rice germplasms (Oryza sativa L.) using functional molecular markers. Eur. J. Plant Pathol. 2017, 148, 567–576. [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Imam J.; Alam S.; Mandal N.P.; Variar M.; Shukla P. Molecular screening for identification of blast resistance genes in North East and Eastern Indian rice germplasm (Oryza sativa L.) with PCR based makers. Euphytica, 2014, 196, 199–211. [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Singh W.; Kapila R.; Sharma T.; Rathour R. Genetic and physical mapping of a new allele of Pik locus from japonica rice ‘Lijiangxintuanheigu’. Euphytica, 2015, 889–901. [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Deng Y.; Zhu X.; Shen Y.; He Z. Genetic characterization and fine mapping of the blast resistance locus Pigm(t) tightly linked to Pi2 and Pi9 in a broad-spectrum resistant Chinese variety. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2006, 113, 705–713. doi: 10.1007/s00122-006-0338-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Meng X.; Xiao G.; Telebanco-Yanoria M.J.; Siazon P.M.; Padilla J.; Opulencia R.; et al. The broad-spectrum rice blast resistance (R) gene Pita2 encodes a novel R protein unique from Pita. Rice, 2020, 13, 1–15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Inoue H.; Nakamura M.; Mizubayashi T; Takahashi A.; Sugano S; Fukuoka S; et al. Panicle blast 1 (Pb1) resistance is dependent on at least four QTLs in the rice genome. Rice, 2017, 10, 1–10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Hittalmani S.; Srinivasachary B.P.; Shashidhar H.E. Identifying major genes and QTLs for field resistance to neck blast in rice. In: Khush GS et al. (eds) Advances in rice genetics. Rice Genetics Collection, Los Banos, 2003, pp 248–250. [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Noenplab A.; Vanavichit A.; Toojinda T.; Sirithunyad P.; Tragoonrung S.; Sriprakhon S.; et al. QTL mapping for leaf and neck blast resistance in Khao Dawk Mali 105 and Jao Hom Nin recombinant inbred lines. Sci. Asia, 2006, 32, 133–142. [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Fang N.; Wang R.; He W.; Yin C.; Guan C.; Chen H.; et al. QTL mapping of panicle blast resistance in japonica landrace Heikezijing and its application in rice breeding. Mol. Breed. 2016, 36, 171–179. [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Angeles-Shim R.B.; Reyes V.P.; del Valle M.M.; Lapis R.S.; Shim J.; Sunohara H.; et al. Marker-assisted introgression of quantitative resistance gene pi21 confers broad spectrum resistance to rice blast. Rice Sci. 2020, 27, 113–123. [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Hall D.; Tegström C.; Ingvarsson Pär K. Using association mapping to dissect the genetic basis of complex traits in plants. Brief. Funct. Genom. 2010, 9, 157–165. doi: 10.1093/bfgp/elp048 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Chen X.W.; Li S.G.; Xu J.C.; Zhai W.X.; Ling Z.Z. Ma, B.T.; Wang, Y.P.; et al. Identification of two blast resistance genes in a rice variety, Digu. J Phytopathol, 2004, 152, 77–85. [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Berruyer R.; Adreit H.; Milazzo J.; Gaillard S.; Berger A.; Dioh W.; et al. Identification and fine mapping of Pi33, the rice resistance gene corresponding to the Magnaporthe grisea avirulence gene ACE1. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2003, 107, 1139–1147. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Xu X.; Chen H.; Fujimura T.; Kawasaki S. Fine mapping of a strong QTL of field resistance against rice blast, Pikahei– 1(t), from upland rice Kahei, utilizing a novel resistance evaluation system in the greenhouse. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2008, 117, 997–1008. doi: 10.1007/s00122-008-0839-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Liu Y.; Liu B.; Zhu X.; Yang J.; Bordeos A.; Wang G.; et al. Fine–mapping and molecular marker development for Pi56(t), a NBS–LRR gene conferring broad–spectrum resistance to Magnaporthe oryzae in rice. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2013, 126, 985–998. doi: 10.1007/s00122-012-2031-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Sun P.; Liu J.; Wang Y.; Jiang N.; Wang S.; Dai Y.; et al. Molecular mapping of the blast resistance gene Pi49 in the durably resistant rice cultivar Mowanggu. Euphytica. 2013, 192, 45–54. [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Huang H.; Huang L.; Feng G.; Wang S.; Wang Y.; Liu J.; et al. Molecular mapping of the new blast resistance genes Pi47 and Pi48 in the durably resistant local rice cultivar Xiangzi–3150. Phytopathology, 2011, 101, 620–626. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Sharma T.R.; Madhav M.S.; Singh B.K.; Shanker P.; Jana T.K.; Dalal V.; et al. High-resolution mapping, cloning and molecular characterization of the Pi-kh gene of rice, which confers resistance to Magnaporthe grisea. Mol. Genet. Genom. 2005, 274, 569–578. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Wang Y.; Wang D.; Deng X.; Liu J.; Sun P.; Liu Y.; et al. Molecular mapping of the blast resistance genes Pi2–1 and Pi51(t) in the durably resistant rice ‘Tianjingyeshengdao’. Phytopathology, 2012, 102, 779–786. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Zheng W.; Wang Y.; Wang L.; Ma Z.; Zhao J.; Wang P.; et al. Genetic mapping and molecular marker development for Pi65(t), a novel broad–spectrum resistance gene to rice blast using next-generation sequencing. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2016, 129 1035–1044. doi: 10.1007/s00122-016-2681-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Liu Q.X.; Wang L.; Chen S.; Lin F.; Pan Q.H. Genetic and physical mapping of Pi36(t), a novel rice blast resistance gene located on rice chromosome 8. Mol. Genet. Genom. 2005, 274, 394–401. doi: 10.1007/s00438-005-0032-5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Sundaram R M

21 Sep 2022

PONE-D-22-18593Phenotypic and Genotypic screening of fifty-two rice (Oryza sativa L.) germplasms for desirable cultivars against blast diseasePLOS ONE

Dear Dr.Hossain,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Nov 05 2022 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Sundaram R. M., Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. We note that the grant information you provided in the ‘Funding Information’ and ‘Financial Disclosure’ sections do not match. 

When you resubmit, please ensure that you provide the correct grant numbers for the awards you received for your study in the ‘Funding Information’ section.

3. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript: 

    "We gratefully acknowledge the support of ICAR-Vivekananda Parvatiya Krishi Anusandhan Sansthan, Almora, Uttarakhand, India for financial support and facilities. We also thank Mr. Omkar Pratap, technical officer for his assistance in lab experiments. Also, the authors appreciated Taif University Researchers for funding this research with Supporting Project number (TURSP428 2020/39), Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia for providing financial support for the publication of this research.

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form. 

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows: 

 "The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript."

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

Additional Editor Comments:

In view of the comments of the reviewers and based on my own assessment, I recommend the manuscript for a major revision

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The article is well written but I have few observations: (i) the natural screening is ok for testing the field resistance but to know the proper resistant line it is essential to go for artificial screening. Why the authors did not go for that? (ii) Neck blast is highly dependent on favorable weather condition coinciding with the flowering time. You have taken different breeding lines which must have different durations so, there is a chance that the lines which are showing resistance may be disease escape. (iii) Can we report breeding lines which we don't have IET numbers?

Reviewer #2: The paper is written in a detail way and is useful to identify the potential donors for leaf and neck blast. MAS utilization with the genes for neck and leaf blast will be helpful to develop blast resistant genotypes. The authors explained the research paper in a detail way and understandable for the researchers involved in rice breeding.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Dr. S V Sai Prasad

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Attachment

Submitted filename: PONE-D-22-18593 (1).pdf

PLoS One. 2023 Mar 10;18(3):e0280762. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0280762.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


30 Sep 2022

Response to reviewers' comments

We are thankful to both the reviewers and editor for their positive feedback and valuable suggestions to improve our manuscript.

We have addressed all the queries raised by the reviewers. Our responses to the reviewer’s queries are listed below.

Reviewer #1

1. The natural screening is ok for testing the field resistance but to know the proper resistant line it is essential to go for artificial screening. Why the authors did not go for that?

Author's response: We agree with the reviewer's observation. We used two isolates of M. oryzae to conduct artificial screening for leaf blast against entries that demonstrated high resistance in the field conditions and found resistance even at greenhouse experiments in order to confirm the field results. However, till date, full proof artificial screening method for the neck blast disease is not available (therefore, field screening under high disease pressure is more reliable technique so far). The susceptible check in our study recorded the highest disease score, indicating the high disease pressure in the field and the result obtained doesn’t require any further confirmation through artificial screening. Moreover, the field evaluations were conducted at Almora, India, which has been designated as a hotspot location for the rice blast disease. Therefore, the data obtained in the filed screening is reliable and consistent over three years of repeated screening.

2. Neck blast is highly dependent on favorable weather condition coinciding with the flowering time. You have taken different breeding lines which must have different durations so, there is a chance that the lines which are showing resistance may be disease escape.

Author's response: Reviewer raised a valid question. Except for a few lines that flowered in 105–107 days, the majority of the rice lines used in this research flowered between 95 and 100 days. The days to flowering were therefore not significantly different across the lines employed in this investigation. In all three years of the experiment (2018 to 2020), the sowing was carried out during the first week of June. Over the course of the study period, we observed maximum mean temperatures of 31 ⁰C and minimum mean temperatures of 19 ⁰C, with an average mean temperature of ~23 ⁰C and a mean relative humidity of >75%, which is extremely favourable for the rice blast disease. Therefore, no question of disease escapes due to weather parameters.

3. Can we report breeding lines which we don't have IET numbers?

Author's response: Yes, we are willing to report the breeding lines without an IET number. Since entries participating in AICRP trials are the only ones to which IET numbers can be assigned. Therefore, no issue with reporting without IET numbers.

Additional Comments from the reviewer:

1. L.42 - In order to explore the rice blast-resistant sources, we initially performed a large-scale screening of 277 rice accessions → In order to explore the rice blast-resistant sources, initially performed a large-scale screening of 277 rice accessions.

Authors: Agreed and included the suggestion

2. L.328 to 331 - Susan et al. [52] examined 288 landraces for rice blast disease resistance and discovered that 75 were highly resistant, 127 were moderately resistant, and 86 were found susceptible. Another study looked at 358 rice accessions for resistance to neck blast and found that 124 cultivars were resistant and 234 cultivars were susceptible, respectively [52]. → delete

Authors: Agreed and deleted as per suggestions.

3. L.335 to 336 - The identification of blast R genes in various germplasms can be done with the use of linked molecular markers [49,50]. → delete

Authors: Agreed and deleted as per suggestions.

4. L.381 to 383 - Surprisingly, the population structure may be able to distinguish between resistant, moderately resistant, and susceptible germplasm. Similarly, the population structure was able to differentiate the 80 NRVs and 288 germplasm into resistant and susceptible [12,47]. → delete

Authors: Agreed and deleted as per suggestions.

Reviewer #2

Authors’ response: Reviewer-2 comments in the PDF file have been incorporated in the text of the manuscript. Please check all edits in track change mode.

Attachment

Submitted filename: 1. Response to Reviewers(1).docx

Decision Letter 1

Muhammad Abdul Rehman Rashid

8 Jan 2023

Phenotypic and Genotypic screening of fifty-two rice (Oryza sativa L.) germplasms for desirable cultivars against blast disease

PONE-D-22-18593R1

Dear Dr. Hossain,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Muhammad Abdul Rehman Rashid, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #2: The author has incorporated all the minor suggestions made and able to answer the issues raised by both the reviewers. The information generated properly and was written in a detail way and is useful to identify the potential donors for leaf and neck blast. MAS utilization with the genes for neck and leaf blast will be helpful to develop blast resistant genotypes. The authors explained the research paper in a detail way and understandable for the researchers involved in rice breeding.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #2: No

**********

Acceptance letter

Muhammad Abdul Rehman Rashid

26 Jan 2023

PONE-D-22-18593R1

Phenotypic and Genotypic screening of fifty-two rice (Oryza sativa L.) genotypes for desirable cultivars against blast disease

Dear Dr. Hossain:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Muhammad Abdul Rehman Rashid

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: PONE-D-22-18593 (1).pdf

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: 1. Response to Reviewers(1).docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the paper.


    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES