Earliness per se and its dependence upon temperature in diploid wheat lines differing in the major gene Eps-Am1 alleles

Differences in development among wheat cultivars are not only restricted to photoperiod and vernalization responses. When both requirements are fully satisfied differences may still arise due to earliness per se. It is not clear at present to what extent this trait is ‘ intrinsically ’ expressed (a constitutive trait) independently of the environmental conditions so that it might be selected under any thermal condition or if it may be altered to the extent of showing a crossover interaction with temperature in which the ranking of wheat genotypes may be altered. The present study assessed the influence of temperature on the intrinsic earliness for lines of diploid wheat characterized for their differences in a major gene for intrinsic earliness, but also possibly differing in their genetic background for other factors controlling this polygenic trait. To do so the lines were grown individually in two temperature regimes (16 and 23 xC) under long days having previously been fully vernalized. Multiple comparisons analyses were carried out among lines of the same allelic group for the Eps-Am1 gene. Results indicated that within each group there were lines that did not differ in their earliness per se, others differed but without exhibiting any linertemperature interaction and finally different types of interaction were shown, including cases where the ranking of lines was altered depending on the growing temperature. It is thus possible that the selection of a genotype based on its earliness per se in an environment might not represent the same performance in another location where temperature varied significantly.

Differences in phasic development rate amongst wheat cultivars independent of responses to photoperiod and vernalization. A viewpoint of the intrinsic earliness hypothesis

Differences amongst wheat cultivars in the rate of reproductive development are largely dependent on differences in their sensitivity to photoperiod and vernalization. However, when these responses are accounted for, by growing vernalized seedlings under long photoperiods, cultivars can still differ markedly in time to ear emergence. Control of rate of development by this ‘third factor’ has been poorly understood and is variously referred to as intrinsic earliness, earliness in the narrow sense, basic vegetative period, earliness per se, and basic development rate. Certain assumptions are made in the concept of intrinsic earliness. They are that differences in intrinsic earliness (i) are independent of the responses of the cultivars to photoperiod and vernalization, (ii) apply only to the length of the vegetative period up to floral initiation (as suggested by several authors), (iii) are maintained under different temperatures, measured either in days or degree days. As a consequence of this, the ranking of cultivars (from intrinsically early to intrinsically late) must be maintained at different temperatures. This paper, by the re-analysis of published data, examines the extent to which these assumptions can be supported. Although it is shown that intrinsic earliness operates independently of photoperiod and vernalization responses, the other assumptions were not supported. The differences amongst genotypes in time to ear emergence, grown under above-optimum vernalization and photoperiod (that is when the response to these factors is saturated), were not exclusively due to parallel differences in the length of the vegetative phase, and the length of the reproductive phase was independent of that of the vegetative phase. Thus, it would be possible to change the relative allocation of time to vegetative and reproductive periods with no change in the full period to ear emergence. The differences in intrinsic earliness between cultivars were modified by the temperature regime under which they were grown, i.e. the difference between cultivars (both considering the full phase to ear emergence or some sub-phases) was not a constant amount of time or thermal time at different temperatures. In addition, in some instances genotypes changed their ranking for ‘intrinsic earliness’ depending on the temperature regime. This was interpreted to mean that while all genotypes are sensitive to temperature they differ amongst themselves in the extent of that sensitivity. Therefore, ‘intrinsic earliness’ should not be considered as a static genotypic characteristic, but the result of the interaction between the genotype and temperature. Intrinsic earliness is therefore likely to be related to temperature sensitivity. Some implications of these conclusions for plant breeding and crop simulation modelling are discussed.