Closing Soybean Yield Gap, New Soybean Traits and Breeding ...
Closing Soybean Yield Gap, New Soybean Traits and Breeding Technology Brian Diers University of Illinois
Outline • Yield gains in soybean. • How are the current gains in soybean being achieved. • New traits through GMO technology. • New traits with nonGMO technology. • Contributions of new genetic technology.
Soybean Yield Changes • Yield increases of 2.4% / year needed to meet expected demand increases. • Current increases 1.3% world wide and about 1% / year in the USA.
Ray DK, Mueller ND, West PC, Foley JA (2013) Yield Trends Are Insufficient to Double Global Crop Production by 2050. PLoS ONE 8(6): e66428. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0066428 http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0066428
On-Farm Soybean Yield Gains -1 -1 U S A 0.35 S o y b bu e a n ac Y i e l dyear Linear 50
S e e d Y ie ld (b u /a c )
40 2500
30
2000
1500 20 1000 10 500
1920
1930
1940
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
Y ear
USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service
2000
2010
S e e d Y ie ld (k g /h a )
3000
On-Farm Soybean Yield Gains Pre-breakpoint 0.32 bu ac-1 year-1 Post-breakpoint bui eac U S A S o y b e0.44 an Y l d -1 year-1 50
S e e d Y ie ld (b u /a c )
40 2500
30
2000
1500 20 1000 1983
10
500
1920
1930
1940
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
Y ear
USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service
2000
2010
S e e d Y ie ld (k g /h a )
3000
Genetic Gain Study
• How have soybean plants been altered to achieve greater yields?
3000 40 2500
30
2000
1500 20 1000 1983
10
500
1920
1930
1940
1950
1960
1970
Y ear
1980
1990
2000
2010
S e e d Y ie ld (k g /h a )
– Yield increases are the result of improved genetics, agronomics, environmental changes, and their interactions.
50
S e e d Y ie ld (b u /a c )
• How much of this gain is the result in improved genetics?
U S A S o y b e a n Y ie ld
Genetic Gain Study • Collected sets of MG II, III and IV soybean cultivars from the 1920’s to present day. • Included modern commercial cultivars from Syngenta, Monsanto and Pioneer.
• In 2010-2011 cultivars grown: – 15 MG II locations – 13 MG III locations – 14 MG IV locations
Genetic Gain Study • Collected sets of MG II, III and IV soybean cultivars from the 1920’s to present day. • Included modern commercial cultivars from Syngenta, Monsanto and Pioneer.
• In 2010-2011 cultivars grown: – 15 MG II locations – 13 MG III locations – 14 MG IV locations
Genetic Gain Study • Collected sets of MG II, III and IV soybean cultivars from the 1920’s to present day. • Included modern commercial cultivars from Syngenta, Monsanto and Pioneer.
• In 2010-2011 cultivars grown: – 15 MG II locations – 13 MG III locations – 14 MG IV locations
Genetic Gain Study • Collected sets of MG II, III and IV soybean cultivars from the 1920’s to present day. • Included modern commercial cultivars from Syngenta, Monsanto and Pioneer.
• In 2010-2011 cultivars grown: – 15 MG II locations – 13 MG III locations – 14 MG IV locations
Soybean Genetic Yield Improvement S
Linear 0.34 bu ac-1 year-1 Pre-breakpoint 0.14 bu ac-1 year-1 o y b Post-breakpoint e a n G e n e t i c Y i0.46 e l d bu Im p o vyear e m -1 ent acr -1
70 M G
II
4500
60 3750 50 3000 40
2250 30
1500 20 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Y ear
S e e d Y ie ld (k g /h a )
S e e d Y ie ld (b u /a c )
1968
Soybean Genetic Yield Improvement S
Linear 0.34 bu ac-1 year-1 Pre-breakpoint 0.18 bu ac-1 year-1 o y b Post-breakpoint e a n G e n e t i c Y i0.44 e l d bu Im p o vyear e m -1 ent acr -1
70 M G
III
4500
60 3750 50 3000 40
2250 30
1500 20 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Y ear
S e e d Y ie ld (k g /h a )
S e e d Y ie ld (b u /a c )
1964
Soybean Genetic Yield Improvement S
Linear 0.29 bu ac-1 year-1 Pre-breakpoint 0.19 bu ac-1 year-1 o y b Post-breakpoint e a n G e n e t i c Y i0.34 e l d bu Im p o vyear e m -1 ent acr -1
70 M G
IV
4500
60 3750 50 3000 40
2250 30
1500 20 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Y ear
S e e d Y ie ld (k g /h a )
S e e d Y ie ld (b u /a c )
1971
Soybean Genetic Yield Improvement S o y b e a n G e n e tic Y ie ld Im p r o v e m e n t
60
M G
II
M G
III
M G
IV
1968
4500
1964 1971
3750 50 3000 40
2250 30
1500 20 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Y ear
S e e d Y ie ld (k g /h a )
S e e d Y ie ld (b u /a c )
70
Soybean Genetic Yield Improvement On-farm improvement 0.35 bu ac-1 yr-1 Genetic improvement MG II and MG III 0.34 bu ac-1 yr-1, MG IV 0.29 bu ac-1 yr-1 U S A S o y b e a n Y ie ld
S o y b e a n G e n e tic Y ie ld Im p r o v e m e n t
50
70
30
2000
1500 20 1000
60
M G
II
M G
III
M G
IV
1968
1971
3750 50 3000 40
2250 30
1983
10
1500
500
20 1920
4500
1964
1930
1940
1950
1960
1970
Y ear
1980
1990
2000
2010
1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Y ear
S e e d Y ie ld (k g /h a )
2500
S e e d Y ie ld (b u /a c )
S e e d Y ie ld (b u /a c )
40
S e e d Y ie ld (k g /h a )
3000
On-Farm Soybean Yield Gains MG II & III 0.40 bu ac-1 year-1 / MG II, III & IV 0.37 kg ha-1 year-1 / -1 -1 -1 year-1 USA IVS0.31 S o y 0.35 b e a nbuY ac i e l d year T r e n /dMG s: U A & bu B yacM G ) 3500 50 M G II & III
M G II, III, IV
3000
U SA
M G IV
30
2500
2000
1500 20 1000 10 500 1920
1940
1960
1980
Y ear
2000
2020
Y ie ld (k g /h a )
Y ie ld (b u /a c )
40
Changes in Maturity
D a te o f R 8 M a tu r ity
935
930
M G
II
M G
III
M G
IV
925
920
915
1925
1945
1965
1985
Y e a r o f C u ltiv a r R e le a s e
2005
Changes in Seed Protein and Oil Protein -0.22 g kg-1 yr-1 / Oil 0.14 g kg-1 yr-1
S e e d O il & P r o te in (g k g
-1
)
380
310 M G
II
210
170 1925
1945
1965
1985
Y e a r o f C u ltiv a r R e le a s e
2005
Changes in Seed Protein and Oil Protein -0.22 g kg-1 yr-1 / Oil 0.10 g kg-1 yr-1
S e e d O il & P r o te in (g k g
-1
)
380
310 M G
III
210
170 1925
1945
1965
1985
Y e a r o f C u ltiv a r R e le a s e
2005
Changes in Seed Protein and Oil Protein -0.16 g kg-1 yr-1 / Oil 0.05 g kg-1 yr-1
S e e d O il & P r o te in (g k g
-1
)
380
310 M G
IV
210
170 1925
1945
1965
1985
Y e a r o f C u ltiv a r R e le a s e
2005
Changes in Seed Protein and Oil S e e d O il & P r o te in (g k g
-1
)
380
310 M G
II
M G
III
M G
IV
210
170 1925
1945
1965
1985
Y e a r o f C u ltiv a r R e le a s e
2005
Illinois Rotation Study in 2010 • Is there at an interaction between date of release and cropping history? • Lines in each MG were grown in two locations, with four reps of each rotation treatment. • Rotations are 11 years of continuous corn or cornsoybean rotation. • Rotations from a long term study of Emerson Nafziger.
DeKalb (MG II) Monmouth (MG II) Urbana (MG III) Orr (MG III)
Brownstown (MG IV) Dixon Springs (MG IV)
IL Rotation Study • Hypothesis: Old varieties would perform better relative to new varieties under low pathogen pressure (after continuous corn).
Yield
Continuous Corn
Corn Soybean Rotation
Old
New
Year of Release
Adjusted Yield Gain Across Environments Continuous Corn 21 kg/ha/year Corn-Soybean 19 kg/ha/year
80
Yield Bu/Acre
70 60 MG II corn MG II soy MG III corn MG III soy MG IV corn MG IV soy
50 40 30 20 10 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Year of Release
What is the Contribution of Disease Resistance? • More emphasis on resistance in soybean than corn • Value of resistance evaluated by considering yield trends of Williams (82) over years.
Urbana Brownstown Belleville Dixon Springs Carbondale
Yields of Williams (82) Compared to Test Average in Urbana 70 65
Yield Bu/Acre
60 55 50 45 40 35
Average Williams 82
30 25 20 1972
1977
1982
1987
1992
1997
2002
2007
70
50
40
90
80
30
20
Linear (Williams) Linear (Average)
10
10
Belleville
70
60
Linear (Williams) Linear (Average) 90
80
50 50
40 40
30
20
10 10
0 0
1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009
Dixon Springs
1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009
1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009
20
1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009
80 60
Brownstown
60 50
40
30
30
20
Linear (Williams) Linear (Average)
0 0
Carbondale
70
60
Linear (Williams) Linear (Average)
Conclusions – Genetic Gain Study • Yields are increasing 0.35 bu/acre/year (nationally), 0.44 (Iowa), and 0.39 (Illinois). • Approximately 2/3 of yield gains the result of genetic improvements. • New varieties mature later and have lower protein and greater oil concentration than new varieties. • The rotation gap has not narrowed through breeding. • Disease pressure has increased.
How Can We Achieve Future Yield Gains? • • • •
Continue traditional breeding. GMO. Marker-assisted selection. New genetic tools. – DNA sequencing technology.
Soybean Breeding • Most of the yield improvements of varieties are the result of traditional breeding. Make crosses Select the best lines
Develop experimental lines
Slow and steady wins the race.
Improved Field Breeding Technology • Improvements in combine design have increased the number of plots that can be harvested. • Breeders take greater advantage of winter nurseries. • Improved data analysis methods.
Genetic Markers Are Being Used in Selection • Phenotyping is expensive and inaccurate. • Identify the gene controlling the trait and directly select for this.
Rag1 gene
0.0
Satt540
3
Satt435
7
Rag1
15
Satt463
20
Satt245
25 28
Satt323 Satt220
New Traits – GMO Approaches • Used to create a new trait that is not available in a species. – New gene from another species – Modify express of gene in species.
• Can not make a cross between soybean and bacteria, but can move individual genes.
New Traits – GMO Approaches • Herbicide resistance or tolerance. – Roundup Ready – Glyphosate resistance. – LibertyLink – Glufosinate resistance. – Enlist – 2,4-D resistance, Available 2015. – Extend – Dicamba resistance, Available 2016. – Balance GT/MGI – HPPDinhibiting herbicide resistance, Available 2017?
New Traits – GMO Approaches • High oleic oil – Stable oil, reduced saturated fat, high monounsaturated fat and no need for hydrogenation resulting in trans fats. – Plenish from Pioneer – Vistive Gold from Monsanto
https://www.pioneer.com/home/site/us/products/soybean/enhanced-oil-soybeans/
Monsanto’s Technology Pipeline
Pioneer’s Technology Pipeline
Pioneer’s Technology Pipeline
New Traits – GMO Approaches • GMOs have been most successful for simple traits. • Less successful for yield and other complex traits. • Why so few GMO events released? – Cost of deregulating events >$100 million.
New Non-GMO Traits • New diversity available at the USDA Soybean Germplasm Collection at the U of I. – 20,000 type of soybean collected worldwide.
• Source of many traits. – Resistance to SCN, BSR, SDS, aphids. – Composition traits.
• Less successful for yield. – Likely genes in the collection that can increase yield.
New Non-GMO Traits • New genetic tools will make diversity in the collection more accessible. • Soybean variety Williams 82 was sequenced. – More easily identify locations of important genes.
New Non-GMO Traits • USDA Soybean Germplasm collection tested with 50,000 genetic markers. • DNA sequencing costs plummeting.
Closing the Yield Gap • DNA sequencing and other technology is increasing breeders ability to unlock useful diversity for yield. • Map locations of genes and select at a high efficiency. • This is done on an industrial scale.
Mapping of Genes for Yield
Selection for Yield with Markers • Can we select high yielding experimental lines with genetic markers? • Test our ability to make these selections in a project funded by NCSRP. • Key is the ability to test experimental lines with many genetic markers inexpensively.
Conclusions – Future Yield Increases • Most yield improvements to date are from conventional breeding. • Marker-assisted selection and transgenic technology can potentially increase the rate of yield progress. • New sequencing and marker technology will impact yield progress.
Acknowledgments • Research was supported by: – United Soybean Board. – North Central Soybean Research Program
Outline • Yield gains in soybean. • How are the current gains in soybean being achieved. • New traits through GMO technology. • New traits with nonGMO technology. • Contributions of new genetic technology.
Soybean Yield Changes • Yield increases of 2.4% / year needed to meet expected demand increases. • Current increases 1.3% world wide and about 1% / year in the USA.
Ray DK, Mueller ND, West PC, Foley JA (2013) Yield Trends Are Insufficient to Double Global Crop Production by 2050. PLoS ONE 8(6): e66428. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0066428 http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0066428
On-Farm Soybean Yield Gains -1 -1 U S A 0.35 S o y b bu e a n ac Y i e l dyear Linear 50
S e e d Y ie ld (b u /a c )
40 2500
30
2000
1500 20 1000 10 500
1920
1930
1940
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
Y ear
USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service
2000
2010
S e e d Y ie ld (k g /h a )
3000
On-Farm Soybean Yield Gains Pre-breakpoint 0.32 bu ac-1 year-1 Post-breakpoint bui eac U S A S o y b e0.44 an Y l d -1 year-1 50
S e e d Y ie ld (b u /a c )
40 2500
30
2000
1500 20 1000 1983
10
500
1920
1930
1940
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
Y ear
USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service
2000
2010
S e e d Y ie ld (k g /h a )
3000
Genetic Gain Study
• How have soybean plants been altered to achieve greater yields?
3000 40 2500
30
2000
1500 20 1000 1983
10
500
1920
1930
1940
1950
1960
1970
Y ear
1980
1990
2000
2010
S e e d Y ie ld (k g /h a )
– Yield increases are the result of improved genetics, agronomics, environmental changes, and their interactions.
50
S e e d Y ie ld (b u /a c )
• How much of this gain is the result in improved genetics?
U S A S o y b e a n Y ie ld
Genetic Gain Study • Collected sets of MG II, III and IV soybean cultivars from the 1920’s to present day. • Included modern commercial cultivars from Syngenta, Monsanto and Pioneer.
• In 2010-2011 cultivars grown: – 15 MG II locations – 13 MG III locations – 14 MG IV locations
Genetic Gain Study • Collected sets of MG II, III and IV soybean cultivars from the 1920’s to present day. • Included modern commercial cultivars from Syngenta, Monsanto and Pioneer.
• In 2010-2011 cultivars grown: – 15 MG II locations – 13 MG III locations – 14 MG IV locations
Genetic Gain Study • Collected sets of MG II, III and IV soybean cultivars from the 1920’s to present day. • Included modern commercial cultivars from Syngenta, Monsanto and Pioneer.
• In 2010-2011 cultivars grown: – 15 MG II locations – 13 MG III locations – 14 MG IV locations
Genetic Gain Study • Collected sets of MG II, III and IV soybean cultivars from the 1920’s to present day. • Included modern commercial cultivars from Syngenta, Monsanto and Pioneer.
• In 2010-2011 cultivars grown: – 15 MG II locations – 13 MG III locations – 14 MG IV locations
Soybean Genetic Yield Improvement S
Linear 0.34 bu ac-1 year-1 Pre-breakpoint 0.14 bu ac-1 year-1 o y b Post-breakpoint e a n G e n e t i c Y i0.46 e l d bu Im p o vyear e m -1 ent acr -1
70 M G
II
4500
60 3750 50 3000 40
2250 30
1500 20 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Y ear
S e e d Y ie ld (k g /h a )
S e e d Y ie ld (b u /a c )
1968
Soybean Genetic Yield Improvement S
Linear 0.34 bu ac-1 year-1 Pre-breakpoint 0.18 bu ac-1 year-1 o y b Post-breakpoint e a n G e n e t i c Y i0.44 e l d bu Im p o vyear e m -1 ent acr -1
70 M G
III
4500
60 3750 50 3000 40
2250 30
1500 20 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Y ear
S e e d Y ie ld (k g /h a )
S e e d Y ie ld (b u /a c )
1964
Soybean Genetic Yield Improvement S
Linear 0.29 bu ac-1 year-1 Pre-breakpoint 0.19 bu ac-1 year-1 o y b Post-breakpoint e a n G e n e t i c Y i0.34 e l d bu Im p o vyear e m -1 ent acr -1
70 M G
IV
4500
60 3750 50 3000 40
2250 30
1500 20 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Y ear
S e e d Y ie ld (k g /h a )
S e e d Y ie ld (b u /a c )
1971
Soybean Genetic Yield Improvement S o y b e a n G e n e tic Y ie ld Im p r o v e m e n t
60
M G
II
M G
III
M G
IV
1968
4500
1964 1971
3750 50 3000 40
2250 30
1500 20 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Y ear
S e e d Y ie ld (k g /h a )
S e e d Y ie ld (b u /a c )
70
Soybean Genetic Yield Improvement On-farm improvement 0.35 bu ac-1 yr-1 Genetic improvement MG II and MG III 0.34 bu ac-1 yr-1, MG IV 0.29 bu ac-1 yr-1 U S A S o y b e a n Y ie ld
S o y b e a n G e n e tic Y ie ld Im p r o v e m e n t
50
70
30
2000
1500 20 1000
60
M G
II
M G
III
M G
IV
1968
1971
3750 50 3000 40
2250 30
1983
10
1500
500
20 1920
4500
1964
1930
1940
1950
1960
1970
Y ear
1980
1990
2000
2010
1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Y ear
S e e d Y ie ld (k g /h a )
2500
S e e d Y ie ld (b u /a c )
S e e d Y ie ld (b u /a c )
40
S e e d Y ie ld (k g /h a )
3000
On-Farm Soybean Yield Gains MG II & III 0.40 bu ac-1 year-1 / MG II, III & IV 0.37 kg ha-1 year-1 / -1 -1 -1 year-1 USA IVS0.31 S o y 0.35 b e a nbuY ac i e l d year T r e n /dMG s: U A & bu B yacM G ) 3500 50 M G II & III
M G II, III, IV
3000
U SA
M G IV
30
2500
2000
1500 20 1000 10 500 1920
1940
1960
1980
Y ear
2000
2020
Y ie ld (k g /h a )
Y ie ld (b u /a c )
40
Changes in Maturity
D a te o f R 8 M a tu r ity
935
930
M G
II
M G
III
M G
IV
925
920
915
1925
1945
1965
1985
Y e a r o f C u ltiv a r R e le a s e
2005
Changes in Seed Protein and Oil Protein -0.22 g kg-1 yr-1 / Oil 0.14 g kg-1 yr-1
S e e d O il & P r o te in (g k g
-1
)
380
310 M G
II
210
170 1925
1945
1965
1985
Y e a r o f C u ltiv a r R e le a s e
2005
Changes in Seed Protein and Oil Protein -0.22 g kg-1 yr-1 / Oil 0.10 g kg-1 yr-1
S e e d O il & P r o te in (g k g
-1
)
380
310 M G
III
210
170 1925
1945
1965
1985
Y e a r o f C u ltiv a r R e le a s e
2005
Changes in Seed Protein and Oil Protein -0.16 g kg-1 yr-1 / Oil 0.05 g kg-1 yr-1
S e e d O il & P r o te in (g k g
-1
)
380
310 M G
IV
210
170 1925
1945
1965
1985
Y e a r o f C u ltiv a r R e le a s e
2005
Changes in Seed Protein and Oil S e e d O il & P r o te in (g k g
-1
)
380
310 M G
II
M G
III
M G
IV
210
170 1925
1945
1965
1985
Y e a r o f C u ltiv a r R e le a s e
2005
Illinois Rotation Study in 2010 • Is there at an interaction between date of release and cropping history? • Lines in each MG were grown in two locations, with four reps of each rotation treatment. • Rotations are 11 years of continuous corn or cornsoybean rotation. • Rotations from a long term study of Emerson Nafziger.
DeKalb (MG II) Monmouth (MG II) Urbana (MG III) Orr (MG III)
Brownstown (MG IV) Dixon Springs (MG IV)
IL Rotation Study • Hypothesis: Old varieties would perform better relative to new varieties under low pathogen pressure (after continuous corn).
Yield
Continuous Corn
Corn Soybean Rotation
Old
New
Year of Release
Adjusted Yield Gain Across Environments Continuous Corn 21 kg/ha/year Corn-Soybean 19 kg/ha/year
80
Yield Bu/Acre
70 60 MG II corn MG II soy MG III corn MG III soy MG IV corn MG IV soy
50 40 30 20 10 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Year of Release
What is the Contribution of Disease Resistance? • More emphasis on resistance in soybean than corn • Value of resistance evaluated by considering yield trends of Williams (82) over years.
Urbana Brownstown Belleville Dixon Springs Carbondale
Yields of Williams (82) Compared to Test Average in Urbana 70 65
Yield Bu/Acre
60 55 50 45 40 35
Average Williams 82
30 25 20 1972
1977
1982
1987
1992
1997
2002
2007
70
50
40
90
80
30
20
Linear (Williams) Linear (Average)
10
10
Belleville
70
60
Linear (Williams) Linear (Average) 90
80
50 50
40 40
30
20
10 10
0 0
1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009
Dixon Springs
1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009
1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009
20
1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009
80 60
Brownstown
60 50
40
30
30
20
Linear (Williams) Linear (Average)
0 0
Carbondale
70
60
Linear (Williams) Linear (Average)
Conclusions – Genetic Gain Study • Yields are increasing 0.35 bu/acre/year (nationally), 0.44 (Iowa), and 0.39 (Illinois). • Approximately 2/3 of yield gains the result of genetic improvements. • New varieties mature later and have lower protein and greater oil concentration than new varieties. • The rotation gap has not narrowed through breeding. • Disease pressure has increased.
How Can We Achieve Future Yield Gains? • • • •
Continue traditional breeding. GMO. Marker-assisted selection. New genetic tools. – DNA sequencing technology.
Soybean Breeding • Most of the yield improvements of varieties are the result of traditional breeding. Make crosses Select the best lines
Develop experimental lines
Slow and steady wins the race.
Improved Field Breeding Technology • Improvements in combine design have increased the number of plots that can be harvested. • Breeders take greater advantage of winter nurseries. • Improved data analysis methods.
Genetic Markers Are Being Used in Selection • Phenotyping is expensive and inaccurate. • Identify the gene controlling the trait and directly select for this.
Rag1 gene
0.0
Satt540
3
Satt435
7
Rag1
15
Satt463
20
Satt245
25 28
Satt323 Satt220
New Traits – GMO Approaches • Used to create a new trait that is not available in a species. – New gene from another species – Modify express of gene in species.
• Can not make a cross between soybean and bacteria, but can move individual genes.
New Traits – GMO Approaches • Herbicide resistance or tolerance. – Roundup Ready – Glyphosate resistance. – LibertyLink – Glufosinate resistance. – Enlist – 2,4-D resistance, Available 2015. – Extend – Dicamba resistance, Available 2016. – Balance GT/MGI – HPPDinhibiting herbicide resistance, Available 2017?
New Traits – GMO Approaches • High oleic oil – Stable oil, reduced saturated fat, high monounsaturated fat and no need for hydrogenation resulting in trans fats. – Plenish from Pioneer – Vistive Gold from Monsanto
https://www.pioneer.com/home/site/us/products/soybean/enhanced-oil-soybeans/
Monsanto’s Technology Pipeline
Pioneer’s Technology Pipeline
Pioneer’s Technology Pipeline
New Traits – GMO Approaches • GMOs have been most successful for simple traits. • Less successful for yield and other complex traits. • Why so few GMO events released? – Cost of deregulating events >$100 million.
New Non-GMO Traits • New diversity available at the USDA Soybean Germplasm Collection at the U of I. – 20,000 type of soybean collected worldwide.
• Source of many traits. – Resistance to SCN, BSR, SDS, aphids. – Composition traits.
• Less successful for yield. – Likely genes in the collection that can increase yield.
New Non-GMO Traits • New genetic tools will make diversity in the collection more accessible. • Soybean variety Williams 82 was sequenced. – More easily identify locations of important genes.
New Non-GMO Traits • USDA Soybean Germplasm collection tested with 50,000 genetic markers. • DNA sequencing costs plummeting.
Closing the Yield Gap • DNA sequencing and other technology is increasing breeders ability to unlock useful diversity for yield. • Map locations of genes and select at a high efficiency. • This is done on an industrial scale.
Mapping of Genes for Yield
Selection for Yield with Markers • Can we select high yielding experimental lines with genetic markers? • Test our ability to make these selections in a project funded by NCSRP. • Key is the ability to test experimental lines with many genetic markers inexpensively.
Conclusions – Future Yield Increases • Most yield improvements to date are from conventional breeding. • Marker-assisted selection and transgenic technology can potentially increase the rate of yield progress. • New sequencing and marker technology will impact yield progress.
Acknowledgments • Research was supported by: – United Soybean Board. – North Central Soybean Research Program
