scieee Science in your language
[es] (orig)

Cross-compatibility of the parents as the main factor for successful olive breeding crosses

Abstract

Previous analyses of olive (Olea europaea L.) crosses have revealed an important degree of pollen contamination. For this reason, the authors tested the paternity of a set of progenies coming from crosses among different cultivars within the olive breeding program of Cordoba, Spain, using four polymorphic microsatellites. They found that the expected pollen sired 141 (83.4%) of the 169 samples analyzed. The contamination rate was either almost total or almost null within each particular cross considered, not being comparable between different crosses. In a second experiment the authors evaluated the influence of several factors on the success of olive crosses, the type of isolation bag, the timing and number of pollinations, and the cross-compatibility of the parents in a multifactorial assay in 2003. They observed no differences in the type of pollination bag used or the number and timing of pollen additions when they analyzed 145 seeds. The main factor affecting the success of the crosses seems to be the intercompatibility among cultivars, because it had a significant influence on the rate of contamination. In the failed crosses, the authors clearly detected the contribution of more than one cultivar to the paternity. The results obtained here indicate that some knowledge of cross-compatibility relationships in olive is required to design crosses in olive breeding programs effectively. To achieve this objective, the progeny parentage analysis could be of great help because of the high level of pollen contamination found among those studied here.

Read accessible full text

Cross-compatibility of the parents as the main factor for successful olive breeding crosses

Author: Díaz Bermúdez, Aurora; Martín, Antonio; Rallo Morillo, Pilar; Rosa Navarro, Raul José de la
Publisher: American Society for Horticultural Science
Year: 2007
Source: https://idus.us.es/bitstreams/55c09ba1-9db3-4a71-9991-158c2c17bc03/download
J. AMER.SOC.HORT.SCI. 132(6):830–835. 2007.
C oss-compa ibili y o he Pa en s as he Main
Fac o o Success ul Oli e B eeding C osses
Au o a Dı
´az
1,2
and An onio Ma ı
´n
Ins i u o de Ag icul u a Sos enible-CSIC, Alameda del Obispo s/n, 14080, C ´
o doba, Spain
Pila Rallo
Depa amen o de Ciencias Ag o o es ales, Uni e si y o Se illa-EUITA, C a U e a km 1,
41013 Se illa, Spain
Rau
´l De la Rosa
IFAPA, CICE, Jun a de Andalucı
´
a. A da Men´
endez Pidal s/n, 14080 C ´
o doba, Spain
ADDITIONAL INDEX WORDS.C oss-pollina ion, in e compa ibili y, mic osa elli es, Olea eu opaea, pa e ni y analysis
ABSTRACT. P e ious analyses o oli e (Olea eu opaea L.) c osses ha e e ealed an impo an deg ee o pollen
con amina ion. Fo his eason, he au ho s es ed he pa e ni y o a se o p ogenies coming om c osses among
di e en cul i a s wi hin he oli e b eeding p og am o C´
o doba, Spain, using ou polymo phic mic osa elli es. They
ound ha he expec ed pollen si ed 141 (83.4%) o he 169 samples analyzed. The con amina ion a e was ei he
almos o al o almos null wi hin each pa icula c oss conside ed, no being compa able be ween di e en c osses.
In a second expe imen he au ho s e alua ed he in luence o se e al ac o s on he success o oli e c osses, he ype
o isola ion bag, he iming and numbe o pollina ions, and he c oss-compa ibili y o he pa en s in a mul i ac o ial
assay in 2003. They obse ed no di e ences in he ype o pollina ion bag used o he numbe and iming o pollen
addi ions when hey analyzed 145 seeds. The main ac o a ec ing he success o he c osses seems o be he
in e compa ibili y among cul i a s, because i had a signi ican in luence on he a e o con amina ion. In he ailed
c osses, he au ho s clea ly de ec ed he con ibu ion o mo e han one cul i a o he pa e ni y. The esul s ob ained
he e indica e ha some knowledge o c oss-compa ibili y ela ionships in oli e is equi ed o design c osses in oli e
b eeding p og ams e ec i ely. To achie e his objec i e, he p ogeny pa en age analysis could be o g ea help
because o he high le el o pollen con amina ion ound among hose s udied he e.
G owe s ha e ob ained mos o he cu en oli e cul i a s
by empi ic selec ion o e cen u ies (Le´on e al., 2005). Se e al
b eeding p og ams a e now de o ed o eleasing new cul i a s
be e adap ed o he ac ual ends in oli e g owing in di -
e en Medi e anean coun ies, such as Is ael (La ee, 1990),
I aly (Bellini, 1993; Fon anazza and Baldoni, 1990), o Spain
(Rallo, 1995).
Ha ing a eliable c oss me hod is one o he i s essen ial
s eps o he p og ess o any b eeding p og am. In his sense,
hose c osses whose p ogeny ha e been ac ually e ilized
by he expec ed pollen dono ( he cul i a used as he a he
du ing he c osses) a e success ul. Oli e is a wind-pollina ed
species in which adding pollen o bagged b anches o he
ma e nal pa en has been he usual c oss p o ocol in b eeding
p og ams (Bellini, 1993; Fon anazza and Baldoni, 1990;
La ee, 1990; Rallo, 1995). Se e al au ho s ha e ied clo h
and pape bags in p e ious expe imen s, ob aining highe ui
se in hose b anches isola ed wi h he la e (G iggs e al.,
1975). Howe e , in all cases, hey ha e only measu ed he
pollina ion e ec i eness o he b eeding c osses by he ui
se ob ained, wi hou conside ing ha his can be he esul o
e iliza ion by di e en cul i a s. So, we conside necessa y
he use o molecula ma ke s in pa e ni y es s o e alua e he
success o he pollina ions pe o med.
Di e en esea che s ha e unde aken simila me hodolo-
gies based on he measu e o he ui se o de e mine adequa e
pollen dono s o ce ain oli e cul i a s (Mo e ini e al., 1972;
Mou ie , 2002), and in some cases hey ha e complemen ed
he s udies wi h pollen ube g ow h es s (Cue as and
Poli o, 1997; Wu e al., 2002). Ne e heless, he esul s we e
no always consis en (La ee e al., 2002), because he da a
coming om di e en yea s allow one o classi y he same pai
o cul i a s as c oss-compa ible and c oss-incompa ible.
Simple sequence epea s (SSRs), o mic osa elli es, a e
inc easingly becoming he ma ke s o choice o pa e ni y
analysis in plan s, because hey now o e an easy and eliable
way o es he pa e ni y o seeds and seedlings by checking
he p esence o pa en al alleles in he descendan s (Mo and-
P ieu e al., 2003; Nishizawa e al., 2005). Thei codominan
inhe i ance and high polymo phism make i possible o ob ain
high combined pa en age exclusion p obabili y alues wi h
a ela i ely low numbe o hype a iable loci (Dı´az e al.,
2006; Isagi e al., 2004). Se e al au ho s ha e used his ech-
nique in oli e o examine he pa e ni y o seedlings (De la
Rosa e al., 2004) and e en o unge mina ed seeds (Dı´az e al.,
2006; Mooke jee e al., 2005). In ac , some o hese s udies
ha e e ealed a high occu ence o con amina ion wi h undesi -
able pollen among he p ogeny o bo h con olled sel - and
c oss-pollina ions in oli e (De la Rosa e al., 2004; Dı´az e al.,
Recei ed o publica ion 11 Ma . 2007. Accep ed o publica ion 12 July 2007.
We a e g a e ul o Jun a de Andalucı´a and he CAO00-018-C7-1 p ojec o he
Spanish Minis y o Ag icul u e, Food and Fishe ies o he unding o his
esea ch.
We hank he Wo ld Oli e Ge mplasm Bank o IFAPA ‘‘Alameda del Obispo’’
(C´o doba) and he Cul i a Collec ion o IFAPA ‘‘Ven a del Llano’’ (Ja´en), bo h
in Spain, o he acili ies p o ided. We hank D . Ha a Rapopo o he help ul
sugges ions and c i ical e ision o he manusc ip .
1
P esen add ess: Di e si y Genomics G oup, NIAB, Hun ingdon Road,
Camb idge CB3 0LE (UK).
2
Co esponding au ho . E-mail: [email p o ec ed].
830 J. AMER.SOC.HORT.SCI. 132(6):830–835. 2007.
2006). Fu he mo e, hose indings ha e a oided coming o
w ong conclusions abou he male pa en e ec on he leng h
o he ju enile pe iod (San os-An unes e al., 2005) and on
se e al ag onomic cha ac e is ics (Le´on e al., 2004a, b) in
s udies pe o med in he oli e b eeding p og am o C´o doba,
Spain, because hey ha e e ealed ha in some cases he eal
pa e ni y is no he expec ed one.
The pu pose o his esea ch was o de e mine he impac
o he ype o pollina ion bag, he numbe and iming o pollen
applica ions, and he cul i a s used as pa en s on e iliza ion
success in oli e. Fo his, we es ed he pa e ni y o oli e seeds
using mic osa elli e ma ke s.
Ma e ials and Me hods
PATERNITY TESTING IN THE ROUTINE BREEDING PROGRAM OF
C´
oRDOBA.We es ed he pa e ni y o he o sp ing o eigh
oli e c osses made using six di e en cul i a s om he b eed-
ing p og am o C´o doba (Table 1). We made he c osses in
wo di e en loca ions in sou he n Spain: a he Wo ld Oli e
Ge mplasm Bank o he Ins i u o Andaluz de In es igaci´on y
Fo maci´on Ag a ia, Pesque a, Alimen a ia y de la P oducci´on
Ecol´ogica (IFAPA) ‘‘Alameda del Obispo’’ (C´o doba) du ing
2000 and 2002, and a he cul i a collec ion o IFAPA ‘‘Ven a
del Llano’’ (Mengı´ba , Ja´en) in 2001.
We ca ied ou he c osses using he wo ypes o bags
desc ibed la e . We collec ed he pollen om pa e nal ees
loca ed in he Wo ld Oli e Ge mplasm Bank and s o ed i a
–20 C un il i s u iliza ion. We de e mined pollen iabili y
be o e use by op ical mic oscopy, using ace ic ca mine and also
by obse ing he pollen ube leng h a e i s ge mina ion du ing
24 o 48 h a 25 C in a solu ion consis ing o 10% suc ose, 0.01%
bo ic acid, and 10 mgL
–1
e acycline (Fe na´ndez-Escoba e al.,
1983). We mixed he pollen wi h six pa s o alc o inc ease i s
olume and hen we sp ayed i h ee imes e e y2don o he
ma e nal bagged b anches, as done in p e ious expe imen s (De
la Rosa e al., 2004; Dı´az, 2005). In all cases, we pe o med wo
eplica es, choosing wo ma e nal ees pe cul i a in each c oss.
STUDY OF FACTORS AFFECTING CROSS-POLLINATION SUCCESS.
To es he in luence o di e en ac o s on he success o
oli e c osses, we pe o med a pollina ion assay in he Wo ld
Oli e Ge mplasm Bank du ing 2003. We bag isola ed he
lowe ing b anches o he ma e nal ee well be o e an hesis
[wi h buds in DII phenological s age: he co olla size becoming
la ge han he calyx size (Tous and Rome o, 1993)] o a oid
any con ac wi h ai bo ne pollen. The bagged shoo s bo e 144
in lo escences on a e age. We de ised a mul i ac o ial design
o s udying he e ec o he ollowing h ee ac o s on he
same bagged shoo (Table 2) and, as done p e iously, wo
eplica es (in wo di e en mo he ees o he same cul i a )
we e made:
1. Pollina ion bag ma e ial. We in es iga ed he in luence o
wo ypes o b anch isola ion bagging ma e ial: double-
plas ic pe o a ed (1-mm-diame e holes) and Ty ek (DuPon ,
Wilming on, DE) (Del Rı´o and Caballe o, 1999; Smi h and
Mehlenbache , 1994). Resea che s ha e p e iously used bo h o
hem in oli e con olled pollina ions wi hin he a o emen ioned
b eeding p og am in C´o doba.
2. Numbe and iming o pollen addi ions. We ca ied ou h ee
di e en pollina ion me hodologies: a single pollina ion jus
be o e an hesis (P1); h ee pollina ions, one e e y 2 d, s a ing
Table 1. Pollen con amina ion de ec ed in oli e c osses ca ied ou om 2000 o 2002 in C´o doba and Ja´en (Andalusia, Spain).
Yea Loca ion C oss
z
Analyzed
seeds (n)
Con amina ed
seeds (n)
Pu a i e a he
(no. o seeds)
z,y
Pa e nal alleles (n)
ss OeUA-DCA3 ss OeUA-DCA9 ss OeUA-DCA18 EMO3
2000 C´o doba P ·LS 11 0 LS (11) 2 2 2 2
LS ·P 18 0 P (18) 2 2 2 2
P·A 15 0 A (15) 2 2 2 1
x
2001 Ja´en P ·A 20 0 A (20) 2 2 2 1
x
MS ·A 45 0 A (45) 2 2 2 1
x
A·Me 20 20 P (10), H (1), U (9) 5 6 5 4
2002 C´o doba A ·K 10 8 P (4–6), LS (1–3)
w
,
K (2), U (1)
34 34
A·MS 10 1 MS (9), P (1) 3 3 3 2
MS ·K 10 0 K (10) 1
21
2
MS ·A 10 0 A (10) 2 2 2 1
x
z
A, ‘A bequina’; H, ‘Hojiblanca’; K, ‘Ko oneiki’; LS, ‘Lechı´n de Se illa’; Me, ‘Memecxik’; P, ‘Picual’; MS, ‘Manzanilla de Se illa’; U = unknown.
y
No sel ing p oduc s ound, sugges ing he possible sel -incompa ibili y o some o hese cul i a s, as p e iously epo ed in he case o ‘A bequina’ (Dı´az e al., 2006) and ‘Picual’ (De la Rosa
e al., 2004; Dı´az e al., 2006).
x
‘A bequina’ is homozygous o he mic osa elli e EMO3.
w
‘Lechı´n de Se illa’ and ‘Picual’ sha e a common allele a h ee o he ou simple sequence epea loci ampli ied, and one allele o he emaining locus ma ches in bo h o hem wi h he
ma e nal ones, making i impossible o assign a single a he o wo o he seeds analyzed.
‘Ko oneiki’ oli e is homozygous o he mic osa elli es ss OeUA-DCA3 and ss OeUA-DCA18.
The o al numbe o seeds analyzed, he numbe o con amina ed seeds, he mos p obable a he o e e y seed, and he numbe o pa e nal alleles iden i ied pe c oss a e indica ed.
J. AMER.SOC.HORT.SCI. 132(6):830–835. 2007. 831
jus be o e an hesis (P2); and h ee pollina ions, one e e y 2 d,
s a ing 3 d a e an hesis (P3).
3. C oss-compa ibili y be ween cul i a s. We ca ied ou i e di -
e en c oss combina ions o ‘A bequina’, ‘F an oio’, ‘Ko oneiki’,
and ‘Manzanilla de Se illa’ oli e. We we e in e es ed in es ing
one c oss ha had p e iously wo ked well (‘A bequina’ ·
‘Manzanilla de Se illa’), and ano he in which we had de ec ed
a high pollen con amina ion a e (‘A bequina’ ·‘Ko oneiki’).
Addi ionally, all hese cul i a s show e y in e es ing cha ac e -
is ics om a b eeding poin o iew.
We selec ed a o al o 30 seeds pe c oss o he pa e ni y
es s, 10 pe ea men , i e om e e y one o he wo ypes o
bags (Table 2), when a ailable.
DNA ISOLATION FROM OLIVE OFFSPRING AND MICROSATELLITE
AMPLIFICATION.We used wo di e en DNA ex ac ion
app oaches. Fo he p ogenies om he C´o doba ou ine
b eeding p og am, we ge mina ed he seeds and isola ed he
DNA om lea es o he oli e seedlings acco ding o Mu ay
and Thompson (1980) wi h sligh modi ica ions (De la Rosa
e al., 2002). In he pollina ion expe imen , we ex ac ed he
DNA di ec ly om uncoa ed seeds as desc ibed by Dı´az
e al. (2006). We pe o med he DNA ex ac ions using he
DNeasy Plan Mini ki (Qiagen, Valencia, CA) and ollowed
he supplie ’s ins uc ions. We collec ed a o al o 314 samples
(one seed pe ui ) o DNA isola ion and ampli ica ion
(Tables 1 and 2).
We chose a se o ou oli e mic osa elli es wi h g ea
in o ma i e po en ial (high polymo phism) and p o ed ampli-
ica ion e iciency (De la Rosa e al., 2004; Dı´az e al.,
2006)—ss OeUA-DCA3, ss OeUA-DCA9, ss OeUA-DCA18
(Se c e al., 2000), and EMO3 (De la Rosa e al., 2002)— o
he pa e ni y analyses.
We ampli ied he DNA by polyme ase chain eac ion
(PCR) in 15-mL olume solu ions wi h 15 mMT is-HCl (pH
8.0), 50 mMKCl, 2.5 mMMgCl
2
, 0.25 mMo each deoxy ibo-
nucleo ide iphospha e (dNTP), 0.2 mM o o wa d ( luo es-
cen ly labeled) and e e se p ime s, 1 U AmpliTaq-Gold
polyme ase (Applied Biosys ems, Fos e Ci y, CA), and
15 ng genomic DNA empla e. We pe o med all he eac ions
in a Gene Amp PCR sys em 9600 (Applied Biosys ems) unde
he ollowing p o ile: 11-min ini ial dena u a ion s ep a 94 C,
35 cycles o 30 s a 94 C, 45 s a he annealing empe a u e
epo ed by he p e ious au ho s (De la Rosa e al., 2002; Se c
e al., 2000), 2 min a 72 C, wi h a inal ex ension s ep o 7 min
a 72 C. We dilu ed he amplicons 5- o 20- old be o e analysis
on an ABI 310 (Applied Biosys ems) au oma ic sequence
unning GeneScan so wa e ( e sion 3.7; Applied Biosys ems).
We always con i med he ma e nal allelic con ibu ion
and, when pollen con amina ion was de ec ed, we in e ed he
pu a i e male pa en o each p ogeny by emo ing he ma e nal
alleles om he comple e geno ype a he ou mic osa elli es
used, hanks o he a ailabili y o p e ious geno yping da a
(De la Rosa e al., 2004; Dı´az, 2005; Rallo, 2001). The pa e ni y
assignmen was made by eye and only when all pa e nal alleles
o he ou ma ke s ma ched he pu a i e a he .
Resul s and Discussion
CONTROLLED CROSS-POLLINATION WITHIN A ROUTINE
BREEDING PROGRAM.We we e able o disc imina e be ween
seeds p oduced by he hand pollina ion pe o med and hose
coming om he e iliza ion by undesi able pollen hanks
Table 2. Pollen con amina ion o oli e c osses, ca ied ou in 2003, as in luenced by he c oss ( emale ·male pa en ), bagging ma e ial (plas ic o Ty ek), and pollina ion ea men [only one
pollina ion jus be o e an hesis (P1); h ee pollina ions, one e e y 2 d, s a ing jus be o e an hesis (P2); h ee pollina ions, one e e y 2 d, s a ing 3 d a e an hesis (P3)].
C oss
z
Analyzed seeds
(n)
Pu a i e a he (no. o seeds)
z,y
P1 P2 P3
Pe c oss (N)
Plas ic Ty ek To al Plas ic Ty ek To al Plas ic Ty ek To al
A·K 10 (10) — 10 (10) 7 (7) 3 (3) 10 (10) 5 (4) 5 (5) 10 (9) 30 (29) P (3), GS (2), LS (2), K (1), MS (1), U (21)
A·MS 5 (2) 5 (0) 10 (2) 4 (0) 6 (0) 10 (0) 5 (0) 5 (0) 10 (0) 30 (2) MS (26), GS (2), md (2)
K·A 5 (4) 5 (5) 10 (9) 6 (5) 4 (4) 10 (9) 5 (4) 5 (5) 10 (9) 30 (27) H (9), A (3), P (3), MS (1), U (14)
K·MS 6 (0) 4 (1) 10 (1) 5 (0) 5 (0) 10 (0) 5 (0) 5 (0) 10 (0) 30 (1) MS (29), U (1)
F·K 5 (4) — 5 (4) 10 (10) — 10 (10) 5 (5) 5 (3) 10 (8) 25 (22) P (7), H (2), K (2), A (1), LS (1), MS (1), U (10), md (1)
z
A, ‘A bequina’; F, ‘F an oio’; GS, ‘Go dal Se illana’; H, ‘Hojiblanca’; K, ‘Ko oneiki’; LS, ‘Lechı´n de Se illa’; md, missing da a; MS, ‘Manzanilla de Se illa’; P, ‘Picual’; U, unknown.
y
No sel ing p oduc s ound, sugges ing he possible sel -incompa ibili y o some o hese cul i a s, as p e iously epo ed in he case o ‘A bequina’ oli e (Dı´az e al., 2006).
Fo each case, he o al numbe o seeds analyzed and he numbe o con amina ed seeds (in pa en heses) a e gi en. The o al numbe o analyzed seeds and he con amina ed ones ound
(in pa en heses) pe c oss, as well as he mos p obable a he o e e y seed a e also indica ed.
832 J. AMER.SOC.HORT.SCI. 132(6):830–835. 2007.
o he high combined pa en age exclusion p obabili y alue
(0.92) p o ided by he ou mic osa elli es used he e and in a
p e ious s udy (Dı´az e al., 2006). We analyzed he pa e ni y o
169 seedlings coming om eigh di e en c osses pe o med
in 3 di e en yea s wi hin he C´o doba b eeding p o-
g am (Table 1). We ound ha he expec ed pollen si ed
141 (83.4%) o he 169 samples analyzed. The con amina ion
a e was no compa able be ween all c osses. Qui e he
opposi e, he con amina ion was ei he almos o al o almos
null wi hin e e y c oss (Table 1). We con i med he expec ed
pa en s o seedlings coming om he c osses ‘Manzanilla de
Se illa’ ·‘A bequina’, ‘Picual’ ·‘Lechı´n de Se illa’ and hei
ecip ocal ones, and ‘Picual’ ·‘A bequina’ and ‘Manzanilla de
Se illa’ ·‘Ko oneiki’. In he case o he c osses ‘A bequina’ ·
‘Ko oneiki’ and ‘A bequina’ ·‘Memecxik’, he le el o con-
amina ion wi h o eign pollen was nea ly o al. We could
iden i y ‘Picual’ oli e as being he p ima y pollen dono in
hese con amina ed c osses, he e o e con i ming p e iously
epo ed esul s (De la Rosa e al., 2004; Dı´az e al., 2006). We
could no de e mine he pollen dono in some cases (5.9%).
This is no unusual because he geno ypic p o ile o he ou
SSRs used he e was no a ailable o many cul i a s g own in
he wo p e iously men ioned ge mplasm collec ions. In ligh
o hese esul s, we designed an expe imen aimed a igu ing
ou he de e mining ac o s o ob aining pu e o sp ing om
oli e c osses.
STUDY OF FACTORS AFFECTING CROSS-POLLINATION SUCCESS.
Pollen om a di e en sou ce o ha added o he bagged
shoo s si ed a o al o 81 (55.9%) o 145 seeds analyzed in
his expe imen (Table 2). As no ed p e iously, we could no
de e mine he pollen dono in some cases (22.1%), al hough
he pa e nal alleles iden i ied in hose seeds (mo e han wo pe
ma ke ) clea ly sugges he con ibu ion o mo e han one
cul i a o hei pa e ni y. The dis ibu ion o hose con ami-
na ed seeds among c osses is indica i e o he main ac o
a ec ing he success o he e iliza ions, as shown he e:
1. Pollina ion bag ma e ial. Al hough we expec ed he amoun o
pollen able o gain access o bagged lowe s o be highe when
we used pe o a ed plas ic bags, nei he he con amina ion a io
wi h undesi able pollen wi hin each c oss (Table 2) no he ui
se measu ed inside bo h ypes o bags (da a no shown) we e
ela ed o he ype o bag used in pollina ion es s. So, he
pa e ni y analyses ha e demons a ed he pe meabili y o bo h
ma e ials o ai bo ne pollen. In e es ingly, his lack o isola ion
did no hampe success ul e iliza ions in ce ain cul i a
combina ions. T anspa en plas ic bags o e he possibili y o
moni o ing lo al and ui de elopmen and, he e o e, should be
selec ed i his in o ma ion is conside ed o in e es .
2. Numbe and iming o he pollen addi ions. We obse ed no
di e ences in he con amina ion a e be ween he ui
ob ained in he h ee ea men s ca ied ou du ing 2003
(Table 2), al hough in he i s wo (P1 and P2) we s a ed
pollina ion jus be o e an hesis, and in he las one (P3) we
s a ed pollina ion 3 d a e an hesis. Simila ly, we ha e no
de ec ed any possible in luence o he numbe o pollina ions,
one in ea men P1 and h ee in he emaining ea men s P2 and
P3, on he e ec i eness o c oss me hods. This indica es ha
only one pollina ion jus be o e an hesis could be su icien o
ha e a pu e p ogeny. Because pollen is qui e labo ious o collec
and i is ob ained in small quan i ies, p o ocol P1 could ep esen
impo an ime and e o sa ings.
3. C oss-compa ibili y be ween cul i a s. We obse ed no iceable
di e ences in e iliza ion success by he pollen supplied. The
high deg ee o con amina ion o some c osses and he pu i y o
o he s indica e a s ong in luence o he cul i a combina ion on
he e ec i eness o he pollina ions independen o he pollina-
ion bag ma e ial used o he numbe and iming o he pollen
addi ions (Table 2). In e es ingly, wo o he combina ions wi h
he highes le els o con amina ion wi h undesi able pollen a e
ecip ocal (‘A bequina’ ·‘Ko oneiki’ and ice e sa). De la
Rosa e al. (2004) ob ained simila esul s o he cul i a
combina ion ‘A bequina’–‘Zai y’ in p e ious expe imen s.
These esul s a e consis en wi h hose ob ained in he p e-
limina y assays (Table 1). As in ha case, we iden i ied p e-
dominan pollen dono s when we used pa icula cul i a s as he
ma e nal pa en .
A mul i ac o ial analysis o a iance e ealed ha c oss-
compa ibili y be ween cul i a s was he only ac o showing
a signi ican in luence on he a e o con amina ion (F = 67.58,
P< 0.001). Acco ding o hese esul s, in e compa ibili y be-
ween cul i a s ac ing as pa en s seems o be he mos impo an
ac o among hose s udied o achie e success in ob aining
desi ed p ogeny. The ype o bag, and he iming and numbe
o pollina ions do no seem o be c ucial ac o s. Fu he mo e,
we did no obse e spon aneous sel -pollina ions, e en when
we ca ied ou he pollen addi ions a e an hesis, which is
in ag eemen wi h a p e ious s udy abou sel -incompa ibili y
in oli e (Dı´az e al., 2006).
CROSS-COMPATIBILITY RELATIONSHIPS.The cul i a s con-
side ed he e seem o exhibi ecip ocal in e compa ibili y ela-
ionships; ha is, a ce ain cul i a pai beha es in he same
way independen ly o which cul i a ac s as he male o he
emale pa en (Table 3). This sugges s ha a game ophy ic
incompa ibili y sys em migh be ac ing in oli e (Mooke jee
e al., 2005; Sedgley, 1994). In ac , oli e lowe s ha e a we
s igma (Ciampolini e al., 1983) and gene ally binuclea e pollen
(B adley and G iggs, 1963), which a e conside ed o be wo
signs o game ophy ic sel -incompa ibili y (Sedgley, 1994).
Table 3. Compa ibili y ela ionships [c oss-compa ible (c), c oss-incompa ible (i)] be ween he oli e cul i a s used in he p esen wo k,
as e ealed by pa e ni y analysis.
Female
Male
A bequina F an oio Ko oneiki Lechı´n de Se illa Manzanilla de Se illa Memecxik Picual
A bequina i c i
F an oio i
Ko oneiki i c
Lechı´n de Se illa c
Manzanilla de Se illa c c
Memecxik
Picual c c
J. AMER.SOC.HORT.SCI. 132(6):830–835. 2007. 833
In his sense, we always ob ained pu e p ogenies om c osses
‘Picual’ ·‘Lechı´n de Se illa’, ‘Manzanilla de Se illa’ ·
‘A bequina’ and ‘Manzanilla de Se illa’ ·‘Ko oneiki’, and
he ecip ocal ones. On he con a y, we ound ha he con-
amina ion was almos o al when we es ed he p ogeny om
he c oss ‘A bequina’ ·‘Ko oneiki’ and he ecip ocal
one. Addi ionally, we can classi y he pai ‘Picual’ ·‘A be-
quina’ oli e as c oss-compa ible, whe eas ‘A bequina’ ·
‘Memecxik’ and ‘F an oio’ ·‘Ko oneiki’ oli e a e c oss-
incompa ible (da a co esponding o he ecip ocal c osses a e
no a ailable).
The cul i a associa ions ob ained (Table 3) a e in acco -
dance wi h p e ious sel - and c oss-pollina ion esul s (De la
Rosa e al., 2004; Dı´az, 2005; Dı´az e al., 2006) and wi h he
p edominan pollen dono s iden i ied in con amina ed c osses
he e and in p e ious s udies. As an example, ‘Manzanilla de
Se illa’ was one o he main sou ces o con aminan pollen
when ‘A bequina’ was used as he mo he in sel -pollina ion
es s. So, he good esul s de i ed om he c oss ‘A bequina’ ·
‘Manzanilla de Se illa’ a e no su p ising (Tables 1 and 2).
This con adic s a p e ious epo made when es ing only he
ui se , in which he au ho conside ed ‘A bequina’ oli e as
a bad pollina o o ‘Manzanilla de Se illa’ oli e (Mou ie ,
2002). Simila ly, ‘A bequina’ oli e appea s as one o he
mos equen pollen dono s in ‘Picual’ ee sel -pollina ions
in he p e ious s udies (De la Rosa e al., 2004; Dı´az e al.,
2006) and, consequen ly, he c oss ‘Picual’ ·‘A bequina’ also
wo ked co ec ly (Table 1).
The c oss-compa ibili y in o ma ion (Table 3) could also be
use ul in hose cases in which g owe s equi e he p esence o
pollen dono s (Moo ke jee e al., 2005), such as in a eas whe e
hey a e eplacing he exis ing di e si y o cul i a s by an
inc easing homogenei y o high p oduc i e ones (Jun a de
Andalucı´a, 2002) o in coun ies whe e oli e is no a na i e
ee and hey ha e impo ed a ew cul i a s om adi ional
oli e-g owing a eas. Howe e , in he cu en s udy, we es ab-
lished he c oss-compa ibili y ela ionships be ween cul i a s
unde a i icial condi ions (con olled pollina ions), so b eede s
and g owe s mus e i y he o e lapping o bo h pa en al
cul i a bloom pe iods in pa icula loca ions and en i onmen s
o gua an ee c oss-compa ibili y in si u. Acco ding o he
bloom pe iods epo ed by Ba anco and Rallo (2005) in
esea ch ca ied ou du ing 6 yea s in C´o doba (Spain), he
cul i a combina ions ‘A bequina’–‘Manzanilla de Se illa’ and
‘Picual’–‘Lechı´n de Se illa’ (in bo h ecip ocal c osses) and
‘Picual’ ·‘A bequina’ should also be compa ible in ield
condi ions because hei blooms occu simul aneously (da a
on ‘Ko oneiki’ oli e bloom pe iod a e no a ailable).
The a e age empe a u e and ela i e humidi y du ing
he blooming pe iod (Ap il and May) in he loca ions in which
we ca ied ou he c osses we e 17.5 C and 67.3% in 2000,
17.0 C and 60.1% in 2001, 16.7 C and 64.2% in 2002, and
18.6 C and 59.5% in 2003 espec i ely. E en hough he
clima ic condi ions a e supposed o a ec he compa ibili y
beha io o he oli e cul i a s (B adley and G iggs, 1963), we
ha e ob ained consis en esul s in all he c osses made in
wo di e en yea s (‘Picual’ ·‘A bequina’, ‘Manzanilla de
Se illa’ ·‘A bequina’, ‘A bequina’ ·‘Ko oneiki’, and ‘A be-
quina’ ·‘Manzanilla de Se illa’; Tables 1 and 2). These esul s
ag ee wi h hose ob ained in a p e ious s udy in which he sel -
incompa ibili y o ‘A bequina’ and ‘Picual’ oli e e ealed
in a iable in di e en en i onmen s (Dı´az e al., 2006).
In sho , c oss-compa ibili y ela ionships a e e ealed as
being a i al ac o in he success o oli e c osses and, he e o e,
o b eeding p og ams. This in o ma ion is also o g ea in e es
in he design o new plan a ions. Mic osa elli e ma ke s could
be e y use ul o con i m u u e esul s abou he gene ic con ol
o he compa ibili y sys em ac ing in oli e, which is s ill
unknown.
Li e a u e Ci ed
Ba anco,D.andL.Rallo.2005.E
´pocas de lo aci´on y madu aci´on,
p. 281–292. In: L. Rallo, D. Ba anco, J.M. Caballe o, C. Del Rı´o,
A. Ma ı´n, J. Tous, and I. T ujillo (eds.). Va iedades de oli o en
Espan
˜a, Vol. II. Va iabilidad y selecci´on. Jun a de Andalucı´a,
MAPA, and Ediciones Mundi-P ensa, Mad id, Spain.
Bellini, E. 1993. Va iabilidad gen´e ica y he edabilidad de algunos
ca ac e es en las plan as de semillas de oli o ob enidas po
c uzamien o. Oli ae 49:21–34.
B adley, M.V. and W.H. G iggs. 1963. Mo phological e idence o
incompa ibili y in Olea eu opaea L. Phy omo phology 13:141–156.
Ciampolini, F., M. C es i, and R.N. Kapil. 1983. Fine ul as uc u al
and cy ochemical cha ac e is ics o s yle and s igma in oli e.
Ca yologia 36:211–230.
Cue as, J. and V. Poli o. 1997. Compa ibili y ela ionships in
‘Manzanillo’ oli e. Ho Science 32:1056–1058.
De la Rosa, R., C.M. James, and K.R. Tobu . 2002. Isola ion and
cha ac e iza ion o polymo phic mic osa elli es in oli e (Olea eu o-
paea L.) and hei ans e abili y o o he gene a in he Oleaceae.
Mol. Ecol. No es 2:265–267.
De la Rosa, R., C.M. James, and K.R. Tobu . 2004. Using mic o-
sa elli es o pa e ni y es ing in oli e p ogenies. Ho Science
39:351–354.
Del Rı´o, C. and J. Caballe o. 1999. A new bag o oli e pollina ion
s udies. Ac a Ho . 474:233–235.
Dı´az, A. 2005. Desa ollo y ca ac e izaci´on de nue os mic osa ´eli es y
SNPs y aplicaci´on en la mejo a gen´e ica del oli o (Olea eu opaea
L.), C´o doba Uni , C´o doba, Spain. PhD Diss.
Dı´az, A., A. Ma ı´n, P. Rallo, D. Ba anco, and R. De la Rosa. 2006.
Sel -incompa ibili y o ‘A bequina’ and ‘Picual’ oli e assessed by
SSR ma ke s. J. Ame . Soc. Ho . Sci. 131:250–255.
Fe na´ndez-Escoba , R., G. G´omez-Valledo , and L. Rallo. 1983.
In luence o pis il ex ac and empe a u e on in i o pollen
ge mina ion and pollen ube g ow h o oli e cul i a s. J. Ho . Sci.
58:219–227.
Fon anazza, G. and L. Baldoni. 1990. P opues a de un p og ama de
mejo a gen´e ica del oli o. Oli ae 34:32–40.
G iggs, W.H., H.T. Ha mann, M.V. B adley, B.T. Iwaki i, and J.E.
Whisle . 1975. Oli e pollina ion in Cali o nia. Cali o nia Ag . Exp .
S a. Bul. 869:1–50.
Isagi, Y., T. Kanazashi, W. Suzuki, H. Tanaka, and T. Abe. 2004.
Pollina ion pa e ns in Magnolia obo a a e ealed by mic osa elli e
pa e ni y analysis. In . J. Plan Sci. 165:1047–1053.
Jun a de Andalucı´a. 2002. El oli a andaluz. Jun a de Andalucı´a,
Se ille, Spain.
La ee, S. 1990. Aims, me hods, and ad ances in b eeding o new oli e
(Olea eu opaea L.) cul i a s. Ac a Ho . 286:23–36.
La ee, S., J. Ta yan, J. Le in, and A. Haskal. 2002. Impo ancia de la
polinizaci´on c uzada en dis in as a iedades de oli o cul i adas en
oli a es in ensi os de egadı´o. Oli ae 91:25–36.
Le´on, L., L.M. Ma ı´n, and L. Rallo. 2004a. Pheno ypic co ela ions
among ag onomic ai s in oli e p ogenies. J. Ame . Soc. Ho . Sci.
129:271–276.
Le´on, L., L.M. Ma ı´n, and L. Rallo. 2004b. Repea abili y and
minimum selec ion ime o a y acid composi ion in oli e p oge-
nies. Ho Science 39:477–480.
Le´on, L., A. San os-An unes, L.M. Ma ı´n, A. Ga ido, and L. Rallo.
2005. Ob enci´on de nue as a iedades po c uzamien os, p. 407–420.
In: L. Rallo, D. Ba anco, J. Caballe o, A. Ma ı´n, C. Del Rı´o, J. Tous,
834 J. AMER.SOC.HORT.SCI. 132(6):830–835. 2007.

and I. T ujillo (eds.). Va iedades de oli o en Espan
˜a, Vol. III. Mejo a
gen´e ica y bio ecnologı´a. Jun a de Andalucı´a, MAPA, and Ediciones
Mundi-P ensa, Mad id, Spain.
Mooke jee, S., J. Gue in, G. Collins, C. Fo d, and M. Sedgley. 2005.
Pa e ni y analysis using mic osa elli e ma ke s o iden i y pollen
dono s in an oli e g o e. Theo . Appl. Gene . 111:1174–1182.
Mo and-P ieu , M.E., C. Raquin, J.A. Shyko , and N. F asca ia-
Lacos e. 2003. Males ou compe e he maph odi es o seed si ing
success in con olled c osses in he polygamous F axinus excelsio
(Oleaceae). Ame . J. Bo . 90:949–953.
Mo e ini, A., G. Bini, and E. Bellini. 1972. The pe o mance o se e al
F ench and Spanish able oli e cul i a s in he Ma emma dis ic o
Tuscany. Ri is a della O o lo o u icol u a I aliana 56:3–19.
Mou ie , N. 2002. Sel - e ili y and in e -compa ibili ies o six een
oli e a ie ies. Ac a Ho . 586:209–212.
Mu ay, M.G. and W.F. Thompson. 1980. Rapid isola ion o high-
molecula -weigh DNA. Nucl. Acids Res. 8:4321–4325.
Nishizawa, T., Y. Wa ano, E. Kinoshi a, T. Waha a, and K. Ueda.
2005. Pollen mo emen in a na u al popula ion o A isaema se a um
(A aceae), a plan wi h a pi all- ap lowe pollina ion sys em. Ame .
J. Bo . 92:1114–1123.
Rallo, L. 1995. Selecci´on y mejo a gen´e ica del oli o en Espan
˜a.
Oli ae 59:46–53.
Rallo, P. 2001. Desa ollo y aplicaci´on de mic osa ´eli es en oli o (Olea
eu opaea L.), C´o doba Uni , C´o doba, Spain. PhD Diss.
San os-An unes, A., L. Le´on, R. De la Rosa, J. Al a ado, A. Mohedo,
I. T ujillo, and L. Rallo. 2005. The leng h o he ju enile pe iod in
oli e as in luenced by igo o he seedlings and he p ecoci y o he
pa en s. Ho Science 40:1213–1215.
Sedgley, M. 1994. Sel -incompa ibili y in woody ho icul u al species,
p. 141–163. In: E.G. Williams, A.E. Cla ke, and B.R. Knowx (eds.).
Gene ic con ol o sel -incompa ibili y and ep oduc i e de elop-
men in lowe ing plan s. Kluwe , Do d ech , The Ne he lands.
Se c, K.M., M.S. Lopes, D. Mendoncxa, M. Rod igues Dos San os, M.
Laime Da Caˆma a Machado, and A. Da Caˆma a Machado. 2000.
Iden i ica ion o SSR loci in oli e (Olea eu opaea)and hei
cha ac e iza ion in I alian and Ibe ian oli e ees. Mol. Ecol. No es
9:1171–1173.
Smi h, D.C. and A. Mehlenbache . 1994. Use o Ty ek housew ap o
pollina ion bags in b eeding hazelnu (Co ylus a ellana L.). Ho -
Science 29:918.
Tous, J. and A. Rome o. 1993. Va iedades del oli o. Fundaci´on ‘‘La
Caixa,’’, Ba celona, Spain.
Wu, S.B., G. Collins, and M. Sedgley. 2002. Sexual compa ibili y
wi hin and be ween oli e cul i a s. J. Ho . Sci. Bio echnol. 77:
665–673.
J. AMER.SOC.HORT.SCI. 132(6):830–835. 2007. 835