Open access peer-reviewed chapter

Advances in Developing Multigene Abiotic and Biotic Stress-Tolerant Rice Varieties

Written By

Nitika Sandhu, Shailesh Yadav and Arvind Kumar

Submitted: June 3rd, 2020 Reviewed: August 26th, 2020 Published: October 30th, 2020

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.93751

From the Edited Volume

Abiotic Stress in Plants

Edited by Shah Fahad, Shah Saud, Yajun Chen, Chao Wu and Depeng Wang

Chapter metrics overview

683 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics


Increasing incidences of multiple abiotic stresses together with increasing population are the major constraints to attain the global food security. Rice, the major staple food crop is very much prone to various abiotic and biotic stresses, which can occur one at a time or two or more together in a single crop growing season and adversely affects the rice production and productivity. The devastating effect of multiple stresses on rice crop is much more erratic and complex leading to higher losses in the crop grain yield. The concurrent occurrence of multiple streeses can destroy rice production in many of the rainfed areas of South and Southeast-Asia. Genomics-assisted breeding strategies have been instrumental in introgression of various major effect QTLs/genes into rice mega varieties and have proven successful in achieving the desired level of tolerance/resistance to various abiotic stresses in diffferent crop species. Keeping the present scenario of changing climate in mind, the chapter discusses the recent past success in combining tolerance to two or more abiotic stresses in mega rice varieties applying genomics-assisted breeding and development of high-yielding climate resilient rice through stacking of multiple genes/QTLs, which can withstand in a cascade of multiple stresses occurring regularly in rainfed environments.


  • abiotic stress
  • biotic stress
  • genomic-assisted breeding
  • pyramiding
  • QTLs
  • rice
  • yield

1. Introduction

Global warming and the changing climatic conditions lead to the concurrence of multiple abiotic and biotic stresses individually/or in combination [1, 2] thus adversely affecting the rice crop growth and yield [3]. The changing climate, more and more extreme weather events are increasing the probability of simultaneous multiple abiotic stresses, including extra pressure from biotic stresses. Abiotic and biotic stresses reported to have significant negative impact on rice crop survival, growth, development and yield in most parts of the world, especially the Asia and Africa [4, 5]. The abiotic stresses such as drought, salinity, cold, high temperature and heavy metals are known to influence the occurrence of biotic stresses [6, 7, 8]. The combined effect of multiple stresses may resulted the minor pests to become the potential threats in the coming future [1, 9, 10].

The rice farming is practiced in various diverse ecological zones. The rice cultivation system in diiferent growing areas are mainly depends upon various factors such as available water, soil type, and the prevailing monsoon. Rice production faces various constraints in various ecology of rice cultivation (Table 1). Rice crop faces multiple stresses during different stages of its growth and development and around 70% reduction in yield was reported due to the occurance of abiotic stresses at different stages of growth and development [5]. Similarly, the major biotic stresses such as bacterial leaf blight, blast, brown plant hopper, brown spot, sheath blight and gall midge reported to impart severe crop yield losses or even complete crop failure during infestation [4]. The growth of rice yield has deteriorated from 2.3% per year during 1970s–1980s to about 1.5% during 1990s, and to <1% in the first decads of this present century [11]. Although the rice production has improved considerably over time but it is not sufficient to cope with the increasing demand globally [12]. The annual shortage of rice is expected to rise from 400,000 tons in 2016 to around 800,000 tons by 2030 [13].

EcosystemSource of waterConstraints
UplandRainfallDrought, blast, weeds, low soil fertility, Fe toxicity, soil nematode problem, lodging
Rainfed shallow lowlandRainfall, water tableLack of assurred irrigation, frequent drought, blast, bacterial leaf blight
Rainfed medium lowlandRainfall, water tableLack of assurred irrigation, drought, flood, drought and flood in same or different season, bacterial leaf blight, brown plant hopper, gall midge
Rainfed deep lowlandRainfall, water table, flood waterLack of assured irrigation, fragile and low productivity, Prevailing abiotic stresses such as flood, salinity, Biotic stresses such as bacterial leaf blight, gall midge, brown plant hopper
IrrigatedIrrigationSalinity, bacterial leaf blight, brown plant hopper

Table 1.

Rice production constraints in various ecologies of rice cultivation.

As crop plants are immobile, they have to respond to the different abiotic and biotic stresses in the field itself. Breeding efforts in developing tolerance for single stress such as drought, heat, salinity, cold, insect and pathogen or a single stress type viz. abiotic or biotic may be tricky because plants may respond differentially to different or simultaneous occurance of stresses. The increase in resistance/tolerance to one type of stress may be at the cost of resistance/tolerance to another stress [14]. Breeding of high yielding multiple stress tolerant/resistant rice varieties with better grain quality is the urgent need of the hour since many decades [15]. Improvement of germplasm involving improved donors free from undersirable linkage, identification and introgression of genomic regions after validation involving recent advances in genomics-assisted breeding has provided opportunity to combat the challenges arising due the occurance of multiple stresses [16]. An integrated genomics-assisted breeding approach to introgress desirable genes/QTLs conferring tolerance/resistance to major abiotic and biotic stresses in addition to improved yield and quality will help to combat the present situation [16, 17, 18, 19, 20]. The commercial use of QTLs/genes-conferred multiple stress tolerant/resistant rice varieties provides an effective, economical and environment friendly approach to protect the crop yield and productivity. In past few years, the identification of genomic regions associated with drought, submergence and heat tolerance and introgression and pyramiding of these regions applying markers assisted selection/backcross approach have successfully led to the development of drought or flood tolerant version of some of the mega varieties such as Swarna, IR64 and Sambha Mahsuri. Some of these developed genomics-assisted derived breeding lines have been released as varieties in various countries of South Asia and South East Asia for cultivation.


2. Biotic stresses

2.1 Bacterial blight

Rice crop is most vulnerable to bacterial blight (BLB) caused by Xanthomonas oryzae pv. Oryzae (Xoo). The incidences of BLB reported yield losses of 20–30% and as high 80–100% in moderate and severe infection conditions, respectively [21, 22]. This might be due to the partial grain filling resulted from low photosynthetic activity [23]. Out of already identified 45 BLB resistant (R) genes, 11 genes have been fine mapped and cloned till date applying modern biotechnological [24, 25, 26, 27]. The marker-assisted pyramiding approach was applied to pyramid four BLB resistant genes; Xa4, xa5, xa13 and Xa21 in background of high yielding rice varieties to achieve wider and durable resistance [28, 29, 30, 31]. The combination of these four BLB genes reported as most stable and showed resistance to most of the pathogen isolates [32, 33].

2.2 Blast

Rice blast (Magnaporthe oryzae) is another crucial threat to the rice production caused by fungus Pyricularia oryzae. It is affecting leaves, collar, nodes, panicles and panicle neck during vegetative to reproductive stage causing 10–30% under mild infestation [34, 35, 36] to 70–80% [37] to 100% [38] yield losses under severe infestation conditions. Till now, more than 100 blast resistant genes have been identified, however only 30 of them has been cloned and functionally characterized [17, 39]. The identified linked markers can be used effectively to provide resistance against this devastating fungal disease. The broad-spectrum blast resistant genes viz. Pi9 which encodes the NBS–LRR gene clusters and Pita2 which was mapped on the short arm of chromosome 12 confer resistant to many of the blast races in different countries [40, 41]. Transgenic rice lines carrying Pi-d2 blast resistance gene transformed involving vectors pCB6.3 kb, pZH01–2.72 kb, and pCB5.3 kb showed various levels of resistance (~92%) against 39 strains of rice blast [42]. The durability of rice blast resistance can be further improved by the hybridization of rice varieties carrying complementary genes to attain multi-genic resistance against broad spectrum pathogen races [43], thereby reducing the selection pressure on a single isolate.

2.3 Brown plant hopper

Brown plant hopper (Nilaparvata lugens) is one of the most notorious insect-pest of rice causing large scale destructions across Asia amounting to around 60% crop loss [44]. In addition, it is responsible for the transmission of the virus diseases such as rice grassy stunt virus and rice ragged stunt (RRSV) viruses [45, 46]. To date, 37 BPH resistant genes on six of the total twelve rice chromosomes have been reported from cultivated rice and wild Oryza species [17, 47, 48]. Out of these 34 genes, 20 genes were fine mapped and only 8 genes (Bph3, Bph14, Bph9, Bph17, Bph26, Bph18, Bph29 and Bph32) have been cloned and functionally characterized [49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56]. These resistance genes encode NBS-LRR protein family that are being widely used in marker-assisted breeding programs to develop rice varieties resistance to BPH. However, notable achievements have been made in identification and introgression of BPH resistance genes, rapid evolution of the virulent populations of BPH poses a prime concern. The Srilankan rice cultivar Rathu Heenati was first reported as the potential donor providing resistance against four BPH biotypes [57]. Even after 30 years of deployment in the Philippines, Rathu Heenati still reported to provide resistance to BPH [58]. The cloning and functional characterization of BPH resistant genes provides unique opportunity to effectively use these genes in marker-assisted gene introgression program [53].

2.4 Gall midge

The Asian rice gall midge (Orseolia oryzae) is another serious insect pest of rice prevailing mainly in wet season in the South-East Asia, China, and India, while Orseolia oryzivora, a closely related species is prevalent in the Africa. The infestation of gall midge (GM) amounting an annual yield loss of $550 million in different countries in Asia [59]. Till date, various genetic studies have identified 11 major resistance (R) genes providing resistance to 7 biotypes of the gall midge of rice which are prevailing mostly in South Asian countries [60, 61, 62, 63]. Out of 11, eight of GM resistance genes (Gm1, Gm2, Gm4, gm3, Gm6, Gm8, Gm7, and Gm11) have been mapped successfully [64, 65]. Interestingly, none of the identified GM resistant genes confers resistance to all the biotypes of gall midge, while none of the GM biotype is virulent against all the identified resistance genes. Four gall midge resistance genes designated as Gm1, gm3(NB-ARC), Gm2(NB-ARC), and Gm4(NB-LRR) have been functionally validated and linked markers can be used for the marker-assisted introgression program [63, 66, 67, 68]. Marker-assisted introgression/pyramiding of gall midge resistant genes (Gm1 + Gm4) and (Gm4 + Gm8) in background of improved Samba Mahsuri and an elite rice hybrid DRRH3 respectively was attempted by Divya et al. [62] and Kumar et al. [69]. Further, marker assisted pyramiding of multi-genes conferring to bacterial blight, gall midge, blast along with Saltol QTLs for salinity tolerance was reported [18, 33].


3. Abiotic stresses

3.1 Drought

Among the abiotic stresses, drought is one of the most disruptive, and risky events of the ongoing climate change that affect millions of people every year across the world. Depending upon the intensity and pattern of rainfall, drought can occur from few days to few months or even to years [70]. The development of high yielding drought-tolerant rice varieties is the final goal of rice breeders to reduce the yield losses due to drought and to ensure the projected world food production. However, the development of drought-tolerant rice varieties is immensely tough due to the complex quantitative nature of trait [71, 72]. The selection of lines under differential level of drought and due to the occurrence of drought at different stages [73, 74, 75] is again not an easy task. In addition, the strong GxE interactions and low heritability of traits such as grain yield also add to the difficulty of the task [76]. Cost-effective modified breeding strategy involving combined phenotyping and genotyping selection approaches in the development and screening of large segregating populations covering high genetic variation have led to the successful identification of 12 major effect QTLs (qDTY1.1 on chromosome 1; qDTY2.1, qDTY2.2 and qDTY2.3 on chromosome 2; qDTY3.1 and qDTY3.2 on chromosome 3, qDTY4.1 on chromosome 4; qDTY6.1 and qDTY6.2 on chromosome 6, qDTY9.1 on chromosome 9, qDTY10.1 on chromosome 10, and qDTY12.1 on chromosome 12) with consistent effects in background of widely cultivated, popular, high-yielding but drought-susceptible rice varieties, such as IR64, Swarna, Sabitri, MTU1010, Vandana and TDK1 [77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85].

3.2 Salinity

Salinization of soil is an another important crises the world is facing nowadays. Salty soil which is widely distributed across the world is major factor of rice yield reduction. The salt affected land in India accounts for 6.73 mha (million heactare) which is predicted to increase to 16.2 mha by 2050 [86, 87]. The complexity of salt tolerance mechanisms limits the development of high yielding salt tolerance rice varieties [88]. Salinity stress reported to affect rice grain yield from 20 to 100% depends on the severity of the stress and the duration of stress exposed to the rice crop [89]. Fortunately, the exiting wide genetic variability in rice germplasm in response to soil salinity stress makes possible to develop salt tolerant rice varieties [90, 91, 92]. The identification and introgression of the trait (s)/genomic regions of interest are the well-known approaches for the development of salinity tolerant varieties [93, 94]. Marker assisted breeding approaches have been proven successful in developing new improved, high yielding salt tolerance rice varieties [95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100].

3.3 High and low temperature

Global changes in the climate conditions and increasing greenhouse gas emission led to a rise in earth’s surface temperature in some past decades, and the temperature is predicted to rise by 2 to 4°C by 2050 [101]. The high temperature duration of 3–5 days, 5–7 days and above 8 days is generally considered as mild, moderate and severe heat injury, respectively [102] while low temperature ranged from 0 to 15°C and <0°C categorized as chilling and freezing stress, respectively. Over the past few decades, extensive efforts have been made in identification of genes/QTLs improving heat [103, 104, 105] and cold tolerance [106, 107] in rice, which are very complex trait.


4. Marker-assisted pyramiding of multiple QTLs/genes for abiotic/biotic stresses

The challenges from the climate change scenario require the development of climate-adapted rice varieties that combine the tolerance of various abiotic and biotic stresses to better sustain yield losses from unpredicted climate-related events. Recent developments in the identification of major QTLs/genes for drought, submergence, salinity, bacterial blight, brown plant hopper, gall midge, and blast and the successful introgression of identified QTLs to develop improved varieties tolerant of different individual stresses indicate that, with the advent of new marker technology, the development of varieties that combine tolerance of the various abiotic and biotic stresses prevalent in any region is feasible. Such varieties once developed can help farmers overcome yield losses and better farm income under the changed climatic conditions.

The identification of major effect QTLs for the grain yield under drought qDTY12.1 [77], qDTY3.1 [80], and qDTY1.1 [78]; Sub1, the gene for submergence [108, 109]; and Saltol, the QTL for salinity [110, 111] using modern breeding tools has provided novel opportunities to the breeders to develop the rice varieties tolerant of abiotic stresses. Marker-assisted backcrossing of Sub1 to improve popular variety Swarna had been successfully demonstrated to provide a yield advantage under submerged conditions for up to 18 days [112]. Similarly, the development of drought-tolerant versions of IR64 and Vandna [84, 113] at IRRI that are shown to possess a 1.0 and 0.5 t/ha yield advantage under drought over IR64 and Vandna, respectively, and successful introgression of Saltol into BR28 [114] are some of the recent successes using marker-assisted introgression.

Marker assisted gene pyramiding is an effective breeding strategy to transfer more than one tolerance/resistance genes into a single rice line in order to achieve durable and broader resistance level which can prevent the breakdown of tolerance/resistance against specific races/pathogens [115]. Pyramiding of BLB resistant genes such as xa5 + xa13 + Xa21 [30, 31], Xa4 + xa5 + Xa21 [29] and Xa4 + xa5 + xa13 + Xa21 [70] had been reported to provide durable resistance in rice against bacterial blight disease. Pyramiding of blast resistance genes Pi9 and Pita has proven effective to combat the blast incidence and increase the durability of blast resistance genes [116].

Rice lines pyramided with multiple disease resistance genes (Xa4, Xa21, xa5, Bph18 and Pi40,) has conferred resistance against BLB, blast, and BPH disease [29]. Among abiotic stresses, recently, drought and flood tolerance were combined using marker assisted pyramiding of the drought QTLs (qDTY1.1 + qDTY2.1 + qDTY3.1) and submergence gene (Sub1) together in a popular rice variety, Swarna [19]. The marker-assisted derived rice varieties have been released in different countries (Table 2).

VarietyQTLs/gene combinationsTargeted traitTargeted countryYear of release
DRR dhan-42qDTY2.2 + qDTY4.1DroughtIndia2014
Yaenelo 4qDTY2.2 + qDTY4.1DroughtMyanmar2015
Yaenelo 5qDTY2.2 + qDTY4.1DroughtMyanmar2016
Yaenelo 7qDTY2.2 + qDTY4.1DroughtMyanmar2016
CR dhan-801qDTY1.1 + qDTY2.1 + qDTY3.1 + Sub 1Drought + floodIndia2017
Bahuguni dhan-2qDTY3.1 + Sub 1Drought + floodNepal2017
Bahuguni dhan-1qDTY1.1 + qDTY3.1 + Sub 1Drought + floodNepal2017

Table 2.

Marker-assisted derived variety released in various countries of South Asia for tolerance to drought and flood in rice.


5. QTLs/gene pyramiding through multiple parents crossing

To tackle the multiple problems of rice cultivation under ongoing climate change, a high yielding climate smart new rice lines with superior grain quality is the urgent need to intensify the sustainable rice production. Genomics-assisted breeding (GAB) was attempted to introgress and assemble multiple QTL/genes-qDTY1.1, qDTY2.1, qDTY3.1, qDTY12.1, Sub1, Gm4, Pi9, Pita2, Bph3, Bph17, Xa4, xa5, xa13, Xa21 and Xa23 into the background of a high yielding breeding line suited for lowland ecosystem of rice under Stress Tolerant Rice for Africa and South Asia(STRASA) project at IRRI. Developed climate resilient rice lines carrying 6–10 QTLs/genes combinations for tolerance to multiple biotic (BLB-Xa4, xa5, Xa21, xa13 and Xa23; Blast-Pita2, Pi9; BPH-Bph3 & Bph17 and gall midge-Gm4) and abiotic stresses (yield under drought stress- qDTY1.1, qDTY2.1, qDTY3.1, qDTY12.1 and submergence- Sub1) as well as superior grain quality traits are free from undesirable linkage drags and can be released as varieties on different countries after evaluation in the national system or can be used as an elite parental lines for making diverse crosses targeted to achieve high genetic gain [117]. Recently, introgression lines with 7 to 10 QTLs/genes for multiple-biotic stresses (blast, BLB, BPH and GM) with drought QTLs in background of Swarna has been reported [14]. A MAGIC (multi-parent advanced generation intercross) population developmental strategy has also been proposed to examine the effect of multiple alleles to provide high grain yield, better grain quality, and tolerance to a wide range of multiple biotic and abiotic stresses [118].

An increase in rice productivity through introgression of multiple traits which can improve rice adaptability under dry direct seeded (DSR) and additionally carrying traits for abiotic/biotic stresses looks a promising breeding strategy to adapt with changing climate, limited water and labor resources and increase rice yield under mechanized DSR conditions. QTLs for traits that increase adaptability to direct seeded rice conditions such as root traits [nodal root number (qNR4.1, qNR5.1) and root hair density (qRHD1.1, qRHD5.1, qRHD8.1)], early vegetative vigor (qEVV9.1), early uniform emergence (qEUE1.1, qEUE11.1), grain yield under DSR conditions (qGY1.1, qGY8.1, qGY10.1), and lodging resistance (qLDG4.1) had been pyramided with abiotic stresses (drought QTLs-qDTY1.1, qDTY2.1, qDTY3.1 and qDTY12.1) as well as biotic resistance (gall midge-Gm4, blast- Pi9, Pita 2, bacterial leaf blight- Xa4, Xa21, xa5, xa13, and brown plant hoppers-Bph3 and Bph17) using MAS approach [119, 120].

5.1 Steps in multiple-trait breeding

Three steps involved in multiple traits introgression scheme, (a) assemble first (b) line fixation and (c) line evaluation. In assemble first step, a complex crossing scheme utilized in transferring the desirable alleles/traits from all the targeted parents aimed to accumulate one copy of all targeted genes/QTLs in a single genotype. In line fixation step, gene based/SSRs/linked markers were utilized in each generation from F2 to F6 generation for tracking the presence of desirable alleles of targeted QTLs/in order to find homozygous plants carrying all the targeted QTLs/genes. Phenotyping of the homozygous lines for the targeted traits were performed in line evaluation step and proceed further for multilocation testing of promising lines in the targeted environments. The detailed description on traits, donors, QTLs/genes and markers associated that were used in genomic-assisted breeding program for the development of climate resilient lines at IRRI, Philippines (Table 3).

TraitDonorQTLs/genesMarkers (SNPs/Indels/SSRs/gene based markers)Reference
Biotic stress
BlastWHD-1S-75-1-127, Tadukan, IRBL9Pi9, Pita2Pi9: Pi9STS2, Pi9-659T, Pi9-1477G, MSU7_6_10381500 (M492 + M493), M891 (C), Pi9-659T, Pi9-1477G
Pita2: MSU7_12_9177624 (M535 + M536), SnpOS00488(G), YL155/YL87, YL153/YL154
[40, 117, 121]
Bacterial leaf blightIRBB60,Xa4, xa5, xa13, Xa21, Xa23Xa4: snpOS0054 (AG), RM224, MP1 + MP2
xa5: xa5S, xa5R, xa5DRR
xa13: xa13-promoter (M478Lm + M479Lm + M480Lm), xa13F_130-147/xa13 R_1678-1662
Xa21: Xa21s_exon (M769 + M770), snpOS0061 (C), U1/I1, M1207 (T), pTA248
[117, 122]
Brown plant hopperRathu HeenatiBph3, Bph17RM589,RM586,RM190, RM8213, RM16556, RM586, RM589, RM190, RM7639, RM19311(linked markers)[14, 117, 123]
Gall midgeAbhayaGm4GM4_LRR-del_F, GM4_LRR-del_R[49, 117, 124]
Abiotic stress
Drought + submergenceIR96322-34-223-BqDTY1.1 + qDTY2.1 + qDTY3.1 + Sub1qDTY1.1: RM431, RM11943, RM12233(linked markers), snpOS0071 (A), snpOS0074 (G)
qDTY2.1: RM324, RM3549, RM12868, RM12987, RM12995(linked markers), snpOS0078 (A), snpOS0079 (A)
qDTY3.1: RM520, RM16030, RM416(linked markers), snpOS0085 (G), snpOS0089 (C)
Sub1: ART5, snpOS0040 (T)
[19, 117]
DroughtIR74371-46-1-1qDTY12.1RM28099, RM28166, Indel 8, SnpOS00483(G), SnpOS00484(A)[77, 117]
ColdIR 83222-8-1-1-1-1-1-1-1, IR 66160-121-4-4-2, HGKNqCTS4a, qCTS11.1qCTS4a: RM349, RM17604, RM17623, RM3648, RM2799
qCTS11: RM26889, RM21, RM206
[125, 126]
HeatN22/IR64qHTSF4.1, qHTSF4.2,id4005120, id4011562[104]
SalinityPokkali/IR29SaltolG11A, AP3206, RM3412, RM493[110, 127]

Table 3.

List of traits, donors, QTLs/genes, and markers associated used in crossing program for the development of climate resilient lines at IRRI, Philippines.

5.2 Challenges in multiple-trait breeding

The complex breeding program that targets combining tolerance of various abiotic and biotic stresses together in the various genetic backgrounds is unpredictable and more research is needed as such, little is known about the effect that each gene/QTL on the others. However, it is highly assumed that most of the QTLs/genes should work in an additive manner, as far as the targeted QTLs/genes are either located on different chromosomes or in different regions of the same chromosomes. Genomic interactions play a significant role in deciding the performance of introgression lines pyramided with various drought grain yield QTLs in rice [128, 129, 130, 131]. In some cases, epistatic interactions between different loci can enhance or reduce the effect of some of the genes/QTLs. Under such a situation, as an alternative strategy of identifying and advancing lines with different combinations of genes/QTLs- six, seven, or eight for different stresses and showing higher grain yield under nonstress conditions will also be selected and the best combinations that will show tolerance of a maximum number of abiotic and biotic stresses and the highest yield advantage will be advanced for testing. Plants carrying maximum number QTLs/gene but having negative interaction with grain yield and showing inferior plant type can be rejected for further advancement.

Maintenance of larger population size could also be a feasible strategy which can allow to select rare recombinants having maximum number of targeted QTLs/genes and also free from undesirable linkages. In previous studies, drought tolerant rice lines were developed through successful breakage of the linkages between loci for tolerance to drought and undesirable traits by fine mapping and maintain huge population size [132].


6. Role of genomic selection in multiple-trait breeding

Genomic selection (GS) in crop plants facilitates the rapid selection of superior accessions/genotypes and accelerate the breeding cycle targeted for higher genetic gain. It aims to use the genome-wide markers to predict the effects of all associated loci. The developed best prediction model is applied to the tested breeding material which has been charactized only genotypically but not phenotypically. The breeding estimated value called as GEBV (genomic estimated breeding value). The parental lines with higher GEBV can be selected as the candidate lines for future breeding programs. Most of the previous studied in cereal crops has shown great potential for GS to enhance the selection for grain yield and yield related traits [133, 134]. Multi trait genomic selection can be also implemented on phenotypic data of multiple traits viz. grain quality traits, grain yield and yield components, and reaction to the biotic and abiotic stresses, however it is important that a favorable genetic correlation exists between traits to implement genomic prediction model effectively [135, 136].


7. Conclusions

To solve the global issue of food security in the era of changing climate, novel approaches involving successful stacking of multiple genes/QTLs in a single rice line utilizing strategic phenotypic-genotypic selection could provide opportunity targeting genetic gain in rice. New advances in hybridization stratgies, genomics, marker development, and sequencing permitted the opportunity to create muti-gene carrying high-yielding rice varieties to combat multiple stresses. The development of rice varieties carrying multiple QTLs/genes in homozygous conditions can address the production constraints faced due to both biotic and abiotic stresses simultaneously. These stress-tolerant rice varieties with desired grain quality can greatly help farmers in improving productivity under multiple stress conditions.


Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1. Prasad PV, Pisipati SR, Momčilović I, Ristic Z. Independent and combined effects of high temperature and drought stress during grain filling on plant yield and chloroplast EF-Tu expression in spring wheat. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science. 2011;197(6):430-441. DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-037X.2011.00477.x
  2. 2. Pandey P, Ramegowda V, Senthil-Kumar M. Shared and unique responses of plants to multiple individual stresses and stress combinations: Physiological and molecular mechanisms. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2015;6:723. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2015.00723
  3. 3. Narsai R, Wang C, Chen J, Wu J, Shou H, Whelan J. Antagonistic, overlapping and distinct responses to biotic stress in rice (Oryza sativa) and interactions with abiotic stress. BMC Genomics. 2013;14(1):93. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2164-14-93
  4. 4. Hasan MM, Rafii MY, Ismail MR, Mahmood M, Rahim HA, Alam MA, et al. Marker-assisted backcrossing: A useful method for rice improvement. Biotechnology and Biotechnological Equipment. 2015;29(2):237-254. DOI: 10.1080/13102818.2014.995920
  5. 5. Akram R, Fahad S, Masood N, Rasool A, Ijaz M, Ihsan MZ, et al. Plant growth and morphological changes in rice under abiotic stress. In: Advances in Rice Research for Abiotic Stress Tolerance. Utah, UT: Woodhead Publishing, Elsevier Inc; 2019. pp. 69-85
  6. 6. Ziska LH, Tomecek MB, Gealy DR. Competitive interactions between cultivated and red rice as a function of recent and projected increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide. Agronomy Journal. 2010;102(1):118-123. DOI: 10.2134/agronj2009.0205
  7. 7. Peters K, Breitsameter L, Gerowitt B. Impact of climate change on weeds in agriculture: A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development. 2014;34:707-721. DOI: 10.1007/s13593-014-0245-2
  8. 8. McDonald A, Riha S, DiTommaso A, DeGaetano A. Climate change and the geography of weed damage: Analysis of US maize systems suggests the potential for significant range transformations. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment. 2009;130(3-4):131-140. DOI: 10.1016/j.agee.2008.12.007
  9. 9. Jedmowski C, Ashoub A, Momtaz O, Brüggemann W. Impact of drought, heat, and their combination on chlorophyll fluorescence and yield of wild barley (Hordeum spontaneum). Journal of Botany. 2015;9:120868. DOI: 10.1155/2015/120868
  10. 10. Duveiller E, Singh RP, Nicol JM. The challenges of maintaining wheat productivity: Pests, diseases, and potential epidemics. Euphytica. 2007;157(3):417-430. DOI: 10.1007/s10681-007-9380-z
  11. 11. Khush GS. Strategies for increasing the yield potential of cereals: Case of rice as an example. Plant Breeding. 2013;132(5):433-436. DOI: 10.1111/pbr.1991
  12. 12. Sasaki T, Burr B. International Rice genome sequencing project: The effort to completely sequence the rice genome. Current Opinion in Plant Biology. 2000;3(2):138-142. DOI: 10.1016/S1369-5266(99)00047-3
  13. 13. Thirze H. Modelling grain surplus and deficit in Cameroon for 2030 [Master’s thesis]. Lund, Sweden: Lund University; 2016. p. 59
  14. 14. Dixit S, Singh UM, Singh AK, Alam S, Venkateshwarlu C, Nachimuthu VV, et al. Marker assisted forward breeding to combine multiple biotic-abiotic stress resistance/tolerance in Rice. Rice. 2020;13(1):1-15. DOI: 10.1186/s12284-020-00391-7
  15. 15. Khush GS. What it will take to feed 5.0 billion rice consumers in 2030. Plant Molecular Biology. 2005;59:1-6. DOI: 10.1007/s11103-005-2159-5
  16. 16. Kumar A, Sandhu N, Dixit S, Yadav S, Swamy BPM, Shamsudin NAA. Marker-assisted selection strategy to pyramid two or more QTLs for quantitative trait-grain yield under drought. Rice. 2018;11:35. DOI: 10.1186/s12284-018-0227-0
  17. 17. Wang Y, Jiang W, Liu H, Zeng Y, Du B, Zhu L, et al. Marker assisted pyramiding of Bph6 and Bph9 into elite restorer line 93-11 and development of functional marker for Bph9. Rice. 2017;10:51. DOI: 10.1186/s12284-017-0194-x
  18. 18. Das G, Rao GJ, Varier M, Prakash A, Prasad D. Improved Tapaswini having four BB resistance genes pyramided with six genes/QTLs, resistance/tolerance to biotic and abiotic stresses in rice. Scientific Reports. 2018;8:2413. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-20495-x
  19. 19. Sandhu N, Dixit S, Swamy BP, Raman A, Kumar S, Singh SP, et al. Marker assisted breeding to develop multiple stress tolerant varieties for flood and drought prone areas. Rice. 2019;12:8. DOI: 10.1186/s12284-019-0269-y
  20. 20. Muthu V, Abbai R, Nallathambi J, Rahman H, Ramasamy S, Kambale R, et al. Pyramiding QTLs controlling tolerance against drought, salinity, and submergence in rice through marker assisted breeding. PLoS One. 2020;15:1-18. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0227421
  21. 21. Mew TW, Vera Cruz CM, Medalla ES. Changes in race frequency of Xanthomonas oryzae pv. Oryzae in response to rice cultivars planted in the Philippines. Plant Disease. 1992;76(10):1029-1032
  22. 22. Noh TH, Lee DK, Park JC, Shim HK, Choi MY, Kang MH, et al. Effects of bacterial leaf blight occurrence on rice yield and grain quality in different rice growth stage. Research in Plant Disease. 2007;13(1):20-23
  23. 23. Ou SH. Rice Diseases. 2nd ed. Kew, Surrey (GB): Commonwealth Mycological Institute; 1985
  24. 24. Neelam K, Mahajan R, Gupta V, Bhatia D, Gill BK, Komal R, et al. High-resolution genetic mapping of a novel bacterial blight resistance gene xa-45 (t) identified from Oryza glaberrima and transferred to Oryza sativa. Theoretical and Applied Genetics. 2020;133(3):689-705. DOI: 10.1007/s00122-019-03501-2
  25. 25. Cheema KK, Grewal NK, Vikal Y, Sharma R, Lore JS, Das A, et al. A novel bacterial blight resistance gene from Oryza nivara mapped to 38 kb region on chromosome 4L and transferred to Oryza sativa L. Genetics Research. 2008;90(5):397-407. DOI: 10.1017/S0016672308009786
  26. 26. Sun X, Yang Z, Wang S, Zhang Q . Identification of a 47-kb DNA fragment containing Xa4, a locus for bacterial blight resistance in rice. Theoretical and Applied Genetics. 2003;106(4):683-687. DOI: 10.1007/s00122-002-1117-8
  27. 27. Gu K, Yang B, Tian D, Wu L, Wang D, Sreekala C, et al. R gene expression induced by a type-III effector triggers disease resistance in rice. Nature. 2005;435(7045):1122-1125. DOI: 10.1038/nature03630
  28. 28. Sundaram RM, Vishnupriya MR, Biradar SK, Laha GS, Reddy GA, Rani NS, et al. Marker assisted introgression of bacterial blight resistance in samba Mahsuri, an elite indica rice variety. Euphytica. 2008;160(3):411-422. DOI: 10.1007/s10681-007-9564-6
  29. 29. Suh JP, Jeung JU, Noh TH, Cho YC, Park SH, Park HS, et al. Development of breeding lines with three pyramided resistance genes that confer broad-spectrum bacterial blight resistance and their molecular analysis in rice. Rice. 2013;6(1):5. DOI: 10.1186/1939-8433-6-5
  30. 30. Dokku P, Das KM, Rao GJ. Pyramiding of four resistance genes of bacterial blight in Tapaswini, an elite rice cultivar, through marker-assisted selection. Euphytica. 2013;192(1):87-96. DOI: 10.1007/s10681-013-0878-2
  31. 31. Pradhan SK, Nayak DK, Mohanty S, Behera L, Barik SR, Pandit E, et al. Pyramiding of three bacterial blight resistance genes for broad-spectrum resistance in Deepwater rice variety. Jalmagna. Rice. 2015;8(1):19. DOI: 10.1186/s12284-015-0051-8
  32. 32. Shanti ML, Shenoy VV. Evaluation of resistance genes and their pyramids against rice bacterial leaf blight pathogen Xanthomonas oryzae pv. Oryzae. Oryza. 2005;42(3):169-173
  33. 33. Das G, Rao GJ. Molecular marker assisted gene stacking for biotic and abiotic stress resistance genes in an elite rice cultivar. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2015;6:698. DOI: 10.3389/s00698
  34. 34. Wilson RA, Talbot NJ. Under pressure: Investigating the biology of plant infection by Magnaporthe oryzae. Nature Reviews. Microbiology. 2009;7(3):185-195. DOI: 10.1038/nrmicro2032
  35. 35. Ashkani S, Yusop MR, Shabanimofrad M, Harun AR, Sahebi M, Latif MA. Genetic analysis of resistance to rice blast: A study on the inheritance of resistance to the blast disease pathogen in an F3 population of rice. Journal of Phytopathology. 2015;163(4):300-309. DOI: 10.1111/jph.12323
  36. 36. Sakulkoo W, Osés-Ruiz M, Garcia EO, Soanes DM, Littlejohn GR, Hacker C, et al. A single fungal MAP kinase controls plant cell-to-cell invasion by the rice blast fungus. Science. 2018;359(6382):1399-1403. DOI: 10.1126/science.aaq0892
  37. 37. Zhu YY, Fang H, Wang YY, Fan JX, Yang SS, Mew TW, et al. Panicle blast and canopy moisture in rice cultivar mixtures. Phytopathology. 2005;95(4):433-438. DOI: 10.1094/PHYTO-95-0433
  38. 38. Musiime O, Tenywa MM, Majaliwa MJ, Lufafa A, Nanfumba D, Wasige JE, et al. Constraints to rice production in Bugiri district. African Crop Science Conference Proceedings. 2005;7(03):1495-1499
  39. 39. Zhao H, Wang X, Jia Y, Minkenberg B, Wheatley M, Fan J, et al. The rice blast resistance gene Ptr encodes an atypical protein required for broad-spectrum disease resistance. Nature Communications. 2018;9(1):1-2. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-04369-4
  40. 40. Qu S, Liu G, Zhou B, Bellizzi M, Zeng L, Dai L, et al. The broad-spectrum blast resistance gene Pi9 encodes a nucleotide-binding site–leucine-rich repeat protein and is a member of a multigene family in rice. Genetics. 2006;172(3):1901-1914. DOI: 10.1534/genetics.105.044891
  41. 41. Meng X, Xiao G, Telebanco-Yanoria MJ, Siazon PM, 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):1-5. DOI: 10.1186/s12284-020-00377-5
  42. 42. Chen DX, Chen XW, Wang YP, Zhu LH, Li SG. Genetic transformation of rice with Pi-d2 gene enhances resistance to rice blast fungus Magnaporthe Oryzae. 2010;17(1):19-27. DOI: 10.1016/S1672-6308(08)60100-6
  43. 43. Hittalmani S, Parco A, Mew TV, Zeigler RS, Huang N. Fine mapping and DNA marker-assisted pyramiding of the three major genes for blast resistance in rice. Theoretical and Applied Genetics. 2000;100(7):1121-1128
  44. 44. Srivastava C, Chander S, Sinha SR, Palta RK. Toxicity of various insecticides against Delhi and Palla populations of brown planthopper (Nilaparvata lugens). Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 2009;79:1003-1006
  45. 45. Normile D. Reinventing rice to feed the world. Science. 2008;321(5887):330-333. DOI: 10.1126/science.321.5887.330
  46. 46. Cabauatan PQ , Cabunagan RC, Choi IR. Rice viruses transmitted by the brown planthopper Nilaparvata lugens Stål. In: Heong KL, Hardy B, editors. Planthoppers: New Threats to the Sustainability of Intensive Rice Production Systems in Asia. Los Baños: International Rice Research Institute; 2009. pp. 357-368
  47. 47. Li Z, Xue Y, Zhou H, Li Y, Usman B, Jiao X, et al. High-resolution mapping and breeding application of a novel brown planthopper resistance gene derived from wild rice (Oryza. rufipogon Griff). Rice. 2019;12(1):41. DOI: 10.1186/s12284-019-0289-7
  48. 48. Yang M, Cheng L, Yan L, Shu W, Wang X, Qiu Y. Mapping and characterization of a quantitative trait locus resistance to the brown planthopper in the rice variety IR64. Hereditas. 2019;156(1):22. DOI: 10.1186/s41065-019-0098-4
  49. 49. Sun L, Su C, Wang C, Zhai H, Wan J. Mapping of a major resistance gene to the brown planthopper in the rice cultivar Rathu Heenati. Breeding Science. 2005;55(4):391-396
  50. 50. Qiu Y, Guo J, Jing S, Zhu L, He G. Development and characterization of japonica rice lines carrying the brown planthopper-resistance genes BPH12 and BPH6. Theoretical and Applied Genetics. 2012;124(3):485-494. DOI: 10.1007/s00122-011-1722-5
  51. 51. Lv W, Du B, Shangguan X, Zhao Y, Pan Y, Zhu L, et al. BAC and RNA sequencing reveal the brown planthopper resistance gene BPH15 in a recombination cold spot that mediates a unique defense mechanism. BMC Genomics. 2014;15(1):674. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2164-15-674
  52. 52. Wang Y, Cao L, Zhang Y, Cao C, Liu F, Huang F, et al. Map-based cloning and characterization of BPH29, a B3 domain-containing recessive gene conferring brown planthopper resistance in rice. Journal of Experimental Botany. 2015;66(19):6035-6045. DOI: 10.1093/jxb/erv318
  53. 53. Liu Y, Wu H, Chen H, Liu Y, He J, Kang H, et al. A gene cluster encoding lectin receptor kinases confers broad-spectrum and durable insect resistance in rice. Nature Biotechnology. 2015;33(3):301-305. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.3069
  54. 54. Ren J, Gao F, Wu X, Lu X, Zeng L, Lv J, et al. Bph32, a novel gene encoding an unknown SCR domain-containing protein, confers resistance against the brown planthopper in rice. Scientific Reports. 2016;6:1-14. DOI: 10.1038/srep37645
  55. 55. Zhao Y, Huang J, Wang Z, Jing S, Wang Y, Ouyang Y, et al. Allelic diversity in an NLR gene BPH9 enables rice to combat planthopper variation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2016;113(45):12850-12855. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1614862113
  56. 56. Guo J, Xu C, Wu D, Zhao Y, Qiu Y, Wang X, et al. Bph6 encodes an exocyst-localized protein and confers broad resistance to planthoppers in rice. Nature Genetics. 2018;50(2):297-306. DOI: 10.1038/s41588-018-0039-6
  57. 57. Lakshminarayana A, Khush GS. New genes for resistance to the brown planthopper in rice. Crop Science. 1977;17(1):96-100
  58. 58. Cruz PA, Arida A, Heong KL, Horgan FG. Aspects of brown planthopper adaptation to resistant rice varieties with the Bph3 gene. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata. 2011;141(3):245-257. DOI: 10.1111/j.1570-7458.2011.01193.x
  59. 59. Biradar SK, Sundaram RM, Thirumurugan T, Bentur JS, Amudhan S, Shenoy VV, et al. Identification of flanking SSR markers for a major rice gall midge resistance gene Gm1 and their validation. Theoretical and Applied Genetics. 2004;109(7):1468-1473. DOI: 10.1007/s00122-004-1763-0
  60. 60. Kumar A, Jain A, Sahu RK, Shrivastava MN, Nair S, Mohan M. Genetic analysis of resistance genes for the rice gall midge in two rice genotypes. Crop Science. 2005;45(4):1631-1635. DOI: 10.2135/cropsci2004.0406
  61. 61. Himabindu K, Suneetha K, Sama VS, Bentur JS. A new rice gall midge resistance gene in the breeding line CR57-MR1523, mapping with flanking markers and development of NILs. Euphytica. 2010;174(2):179-187. DOI: 10.1007/s10681-009-0106-2
  62. 62. Divya D, Himabindu K, Nair S, Bentur JS. Cloning of a gene encoding LRR protein and its validation as candidate gall midge resistance gene, Gm4, in rice. Euphytica. 2015;203(1):185-195. DOI: 10.1007/s10681-014-1302-2
  63. 63. Bentur JS, Rawat N, Divya D, Sinha DK, Agarrwal R, Atray I, et al. Rice–gall midge interactions: Battle for survival. Journal of Insect Physiology. 2016;84:40-49. DOI: 10.1016/j.jinsphys.2015.09.008
  64. 64. Yasala AK, Rawat N, Sama VK, Himabindu K, Sundaram RM, Bentur JS. In silico analysis for gene content in rice genomic regions mapped for the gall midge resistance genes. Plant Omics. 2012;5(4):405-413
  65. 65. Sama VS, Rawat N, Sundaram RM, Himabindu K, Naik BS, Viraktamath BC, et al. A putative candidate for the recessive gall midge resistance gene gm3 in rice identified and validated. Theoretical and Applied Genetics. 2014;127(1):113-124. DOI: 10.1007/s00122-013-2205-7
  66. 66. Sundaram RM. Fine Mapping of Rice Gall Midge Resistance Genes Gm1 and Gm2 and Validation of the Linked Markers Dissertation. Hyderabad: University of Hyderabad; 2007
  67. 67. Suvendhu DS, Divya D, Rani CV, Reddy TD, Visalakshmi V, Cheralu C, et al. Characterization of gall midge resistant rice genotypes using resistance gene specific markers. Journal of Experimental Biology and Agricultural Sciences. 2014;2(4):439-446
  68. 68. Venkanna V, Hari Y, Rukminidevi K, Chandra BS, Raju J, Malathi S, et al. Markers assisted selection for pyramiding of gallmidge resistance genes in Kavya, a popular rice variety. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 2018;7(4):745-753. DOI: 10.20546/ijcmas.2018.704.083
  69. 69. Kumar VA, Balachiranjeevi CH, Naik SB, Rekha G, Rambabu R, Harika G, et al. Marker-assisted pyramiding of bacterial blight and gall midge resistance genes into RPHR-1005, the restorer line of the popular rice hybrid DRRH-3. Molecular Breeding. 2017;37(7):86. DOI: 10.1007/s11032-017-0687-8
  70. 70. Stahle DW, Cook ER, Burnette DJ, Villanueva J, Cerano J, Burns JN, et al. The Mexican drought atlas: Tree-ring reconstructions of the soil moisture balance during the late pre-Hispanic, colonial, and modern eras. Quaternary Science Reviews. 2016;149:34-60
  71. 71. Reynolds M, Tuberosa R. Translational research impacting on crop productivity in drought-prone environments. Current Opinion in Plant Biology. 2008;11(2):171-179. DOI: 10.1016/j.pbi.2008.02.005
  72. 72. Anami S, De Block M, Machuka J, Van Lijsebettens M. Molecular improvement of tropical maize for drought stress tolerance in sub-Saharan Africa. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences. 2009;28(1-2):16-35. DOI: 10.1080/07352680802665305
  73. 73. Kumar A, Verulkar S, Dixit S, Chauhan B, Bernier J, Venuprasad R, et al. Yield and yield-attributing traits of rice (Oryza sativa L.) under lowland drought and suitability of early vigor as a selection criterion. Field Crops Research. 2009;114(1):99-107. DOI: 10.1016/j.fcr.2009.07.010
  74. 74. Sabetfar S, Ashouri M, Amiri E, Babazadeh S. Effect of drought stress at different growth stages on yield and yield component of rice plant. Persian Gulf Crop Protection. 2013;2(2):14-18
  75. 75. Farooq M, Gogoi N, Barthakur S, Baroowa B, Bharadwaj N, Alghamdi SS, et al. Drought stress in grain legumes during reproduction and grain filling. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science. 2017;203(2):81-102. DOI: 10.1111/jac.12169
  76. 76. Fleury D, Jefferies S, Kuchel H, Langridge P. Genetic and genomic tools to improve drought tolerance in wheat. Journal of Experimental Botany. 2010;61(12):3211-3222. DOI: 10.1093/jxb/erq152
  77. 77. Bernier J, Kumar A, Ramaiah V, Spaner D, Atlin G. A large-effect QTL for grain yield under reproductive-stage drought stress in upland rice. Crop Science. 2007;47(2):507-516. DOI: 10.2135/cropsci2006.07.0495
  78. 78. Vikram P, Swamy BM, Dixit S, Ahmed HU, Cruz MT, Singh AK, et al. qDTY1.1, a major QTL for rice grain yield under reproductive-stage drought stress with a consistent effect in multiple elite genetic backgrounds. BMC Genetics. 2011;12(1):89. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2156-12-89
  79. 79. Ghimire KH, Quiatchon LA, Vikram P, Swamy BM, Dixit S, Ahmed H, et al. Identification and mapping of a QTL (qDTY1. 1) with a consistent effect on grain yield under drought. Field Crops Research. 2012;131:88-96. DOI: 10.1016/j.fcr.2012.02.028
  80. 80. Venuprasad R, Dalid CO, Del Valle M, Zhao D, Espiritu M, Cruz MS, et al. Identification and characterization of large-effect quantitative trait loci for grain yield under lowland drought stress in rice using bulk-segregant analysis. Theoretical and Applied Genetics. 2009;120(1):177-190. DOI: 10.1007/s00122-009-1168-1
  81. 81. Yadaw RB, Dixit S, Raman A, Mishra KK, Vikram P, Swamy BPM, et al. A QTL for high grain yield under lowland drought in the background of popular rice variety Sabitri from Nepal. Field Crops Research. 2013;144:281-287. DOI: 10.1016/j.fcr.2013.01.019
  82. 82. Mishra KK, Vikram P, Yadaw RB, Swamy BM, Dixit S, Cruz MT, et al. qDTY12.1: A locus with a consistent effect on grain yield under drought in rice. BMC Genetics. 2013;14(1):12. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2156-14-12
  83. 83. Dixit S, Singh A, Cruz MT, Maturan PT, Amante M, Kumar A. Multiple major QTL lead to stable yield performance of rice cultivars across varying drought intensities. BMC Genetics. 2014;15(1):16. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2156-15-16
  84. 84. Swamy BPM, Ahmed HU, Henry A, Mauleon R, Dixit S, Vikram P, et al. Genetic, physiological, and gene expression analyses reveal that multiple QTL enhance yield of rice mega-variety IR64 under drought. PLoS One. 2013;8(5):e62795. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0062795
  85. 85. Sandhu N, Singh A, Dixit S, Cruz MT, Maturan PC, Jain RK, et al. Identification and mapping of stable QTL with main and epistasis effect on rice grain yield under upland drought stress. BMC Genetics. 2014;15(1):63. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2156-15-63
  86. 86. CSSRI Vision 2050. Director. Karnal, Haryana, India: ICAR-Central Soil Salinity Research Institute; 2015
  87. 87. Singh G. Climate change and sustainable management of salinity in agriculture. Research in Medical & Engineering Sciences. 2018;6(2):1-7. DOI: 10.31031/RMES.2018.06.000635
  88. 88. Yeo AR, Flowers TJ. Salinity resistance in rice (Oryza sativa L.) and a pyramiding approach to breeding varieties for saline soils. Functional Plant Biology. 1986;13(1):161-173. DOI: 10.1071/PP9860161
  89. 89. Krishnamurthy SL, Sharma SK, Kumar V, Tiwari S, Singh NK. Analysis of genomic region spanning Saltol using SSR markers in rice genotypes showing differential seedlings stage salt tolerance. Journal of Plant Biochemistry and Biotechnology. 2016;25(3):331-336. DOI: 10.1007/s13562-015-0335-5
  90. 90. Krishnamurthy SL, Sharma PC, Sharma DK, Ravikiran KT, Singh YP, Mishra VK, et al. Identification of mega-environments and rice genotypes for general and specific adaptation to saline and alkaline stresses in India. Scientific Reports. 2017;7(1):1-14. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-08532-7
  91. 91. Krishnamurthy SL, Sharma PC, Gautam RK, Singh RK, Singh YP, Mishra VK, et al. Notification of crop varieties and registration of Germplasm: Variety CSR60. Indian Journal of Genetics and Plant Breeding. 2019;79(2):513-514
  92. 92. Krishnamurthy SL, Sharma PC, Gautam RK, Singh RK, Singh YP, Mishra VK, et al. Notification of crop varieties and registration of Germplasm: Variety CSR56 (IET 24537). Indian Journal of Genetics and Plant Breeding. 2019;79(2):512-513
  93. 93. Im CH, Kim MK, Kim KH, Cho SJ, Lee JJ, Joung WK, et al. Breeding of Pleurotus eryngii with a high temperature tolerance trait. Journal of Mushroom. 2014;12(3):187-192. DOI: 10.4489/KJM.2013.41.2.91
  94. 94. Kumar M, Kim SR, Sharma PC, Pareek A. Simple and efficient way to detect small polymorphic bands in plants. Genomics Data. 2015;5:218-222. DOI: 10.1016/j.gdata.2015.06.006
  95. 95. Luu TNH, Luu MC, Abdelbagi MI, Le HH. Introgression the salinity tolerance QTLs Saltol into AS996, the elite rice variety of Vietnam. American Journal of Plant Sciences. 2012;2012(3):981-987. DOI: 10.4236/ajps.2012.37116
  96. 96. Usatov AV, Alabushev AV, Kostylev PI, Azarin KV, Makarenko MS, Usatova OA. Introgression the saltol QTL into the elite rice variety of Russia by marker-assisted selection. American Journal of Agricultural and Biological Sciences. 2015;10(4):165-169. DOI: 10.3844/ajabssp.2015.165.169
  97. 97. Singh R, Singh Y, Xalaxo S, Verulkar S, Yadav N, Singh S, et al. From QTL to variety-harnessing the benefits of QTLs for drought, flood and salt tolerance in mega rice varieties of India through a multi-institutional network. Plant Science. 2016;242:278-287. DOI: 10.1016/j.plantsci.2015.08.008
  98. 98. Singh VK, Singh BD, Kumar A, Maurya S, Krishnan SG, Vinod KK, et al. Marker-assisted introgression of Saltol QTL enhances seedling stage salt tolerance in the rice variety “Pusa Basmati 1”. International Journal of Genomics. 2018;2018:1-12. DOI: 10.1155/2018/8319879
  99. 99. Babu NN, Vinod KK, Krishnamurthy SL, Krishnan SG, Yadav A, Bhowmick PK, et al. Microsatellite based linkage disequilibrium analyses reveal Saltol haplotype fragmentation and identify novel QTLs for seedling stage salinity tolerance in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Journal of Plant Biochemistry and Biotechnology. 2017;26(3):310-320. DOI: 10.1007/s13562-016-0393-3
  100. 100. Bhandari A, Jayaswal P, Yadav N, Singh R, Singh Y, Singh B, et al. Genomics-assisted backcross breeding for infusing climate resilience in high-yielding green revolution varieties of rice. Indian Journal of Genetics and Plant Breeding. 2019;79(1):160-170. DOI: 10.31742/IJGPB.79S.1.5
  101. 101. Stocker TF, Qin D, Plattner GK, Tignor M, Allen SK, Boschung J, et al. Climate change 2013: The physical science basis. In: Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2013. p. 1535
  102. 102. Wei Y, Yang TM, Chen JH. Analysis on law of high temperature in summer and its influence on single-season rice planting in Anhui Province. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences. 2008;36:15811-15813
  103. 103. Ye C, Argayoso MA, Redoña ED, Sierra SN, Laza MA, Dilla CJ, et al. Mapping QTL for heat tolerance at flowering stage in rice using SNP markers. Plant Breeding. 2012;131(1):33-41. DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-0523.2011.01924.x
  104. 104. Ye C, Tenorio FA, Redoña ED, Morales-Cortezano PS, Cabrega GA, Jagadish KS, et al. Fine-mapping and validating qHTSF4. 1 to increase spikelet fertility under heat stress at flowering in rice. Theoretical and Applied Genetics. 2015;128(8):1507-1517. DOI: 10.1007/s00122-015-2526-9
  105. 105. Shanmugavadivel PS, Sv AM, Prakash C, Ramkumar MK, Tiwari R, Mohapatra T, et al. High resolution mapping of QTLs for heat tolerance in rice using a 5K SNP array. Rice. 2017;10(1):28. DOI: 10.1186/s12284-017-0167-0
  106. 106. Andaya VC, Tai TH. Fine mapping of the qCTS12 locus, a major QTL for seedling cold tolerance in rice. Theoretical and Applied Genetics. 2006;113(3):467-475. DOI: 10.1007/s00122-006-0311-5
  107. 107. Andaya VC, Tai TH. Fine mapping of the qCTS4 locus associated with seedling cold tolerance in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Molecular Breeding. 2007;20(4):349-358. DOI: 10.1007/s11032-007-9096-8
  108. 108. Xu K, Mackill DJ. A major locus for submergence tolerance mapped on rice chromosome 9. Molecular Breeding. 1996;2(3):219-224. DOI: 10.1007/BF00564199
  109. 109. Neeraja CN, Maghirang-Rodriguez R, Pamplona A, Heuer S, Collard BC, Septiningsih EM, et al. A marker-assisted backcross approach for developing submergence-tolerant rice cultivars. Theoretical and Applied Genetics. 2007;115(6):767-776. DOI: 10.1007/s00122-007-0607-0
  110. 110. Bonilla P, Dvorak J, Mackill D, Deal K, Gregorio G. RLFP and SSLP mapping of salinity tolerance genes in chromosome 1 of rice (Oryza sativa L.) using recombinant inbred lines. Philippine Agricultural Scientist. 2002;85:68-76
  111. 111. Gregorio GB, Senadhira D, Mendoza RD, Manigbas NL, Roxas JP, Guerta CQ . Progress in breeding for salinity tolerance and associated abiotic stresses in rice. Field Crops Research. 2002;76(2-3):91-101. DOI: 10.1016/S0378-4290(02)00031-X
  112. 112. Septiningsih EM, Pamplona AM, Sanchez DL, Neeraja CN, Vergara GV, Heuer S, et al. Development of submergence-tolerant rice cultivars: The Sub1 locus and beyond. Annals of Botany. 2009;103(2):151-160. DOI: 10.1093/aob/mcn206
  113. 113. Kumar A, Dixit S, Ram T, Yadaw RB, Mishra KK, Mandal NP. Breeding high yielding drought-tolerant rice: Genetic variations and conventional and molecular approaches. Journal of Experimental Botany. 2014;65(21):6265-6278. DOI: 10.1093/jxb/eru363
  114. 114. Thomson MJ, Ocampo D, Egdane J, Katimbang M, Singh R, Gregorio G, et al. QTL mapping and marker-assisted backcrossing for improved salinity tolerance in rice. BioAsia. 2007;(Supplement Papers):6-12
  115. 115. Collard BCY, Mackill DJ. Marker-assisted selection: An approach for precision plant breeding in the 21st century. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, B: Biological Sciences. 2008;363(1491):557-572. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2007.2170
  116. 116. Khanna A, Sharma V, Ellur RK, Shikari AB, Krishnan SG, Singh UD, et al. Development and evaluation of near-isogenic lines for major blast resistance gene (s) in basmati rice. Theoretical and Applied Genetics. 2015;128(7):1243-1259. DOI: 10.1007/s00122-015-2502-4
  117. 117. Yadav S, Sandhu N, Dixit S, Singh VK, Catolos M, Mazumder RR, Rahman MA, Kumar A. 2020. Genomics-Assisted Breeding Enables Successful Development of Multiple Stress Tolerant Climate Smart Rice for South and South East Asia. Communicated
  118. 118. Bandillo N, Raghavan C, Muyco PA, Sevilla MA, Lobina IT, Dilla-Ermita CJ, et al. Multi-parent advanced generation inter-cross (MAGIC) populations in rice: Progress and potential for genetics research and breeding. Rice. 2013;6(1):11. DOI: 10.1186/1939-8433-6-11
  119. 119. Sandhu N, Yadav S, Catolos M, Cruz MTS, Kumar A. Developing Climate-Resilient, Direct-Seeded Adapted Multiple-Stress Tolerant Rice Applying Genomic Assisted Breeding. 2020
  120. 120. Sagare DB, Abbai R, Jain A, Kj P, Dixit S, Singh AK, et al. More and more of less and less: Is genomics based-breeding of dry direct seeded rice (DDSR) varieties the need of hour? Plant Biotechnology Journal. 2020;18:2173-2186. DOI: 10.1111/pbi.13454
  121. 121. Koide Y, Kobayashi N, Xu D, Fukuta Y. Resistance genes and selection DNA markers for blast disease in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Japan Agricultural Research Quarterly. 2009;43(4):255-280
  122. 122. Song WY, Pi LY, Wang GL, Gardner J, Holsten T, Ronald PC. Evolution of the rice Xa21 disease resistance gene family. The Plant Cell. 1997;9(8):1279-1287
  123. 123. Jairin J, Phengrat K, Teangdeerith S, Vanavichit A, Toojinda T. Mapping of a broad-spectrum brown planthopper resistance gene, Bph3, on rice chromosome 6. Molecular Breeding. 2007;19(1):35-44
  124. 124. Nair S, Kumar A, Srivastava MN, Mohan M. PCR-based DNA markers linked to a gall midge resistance gene, Gm4t, has potential for marker-aided selection in rice. Theoretical and Applied Genetics. 1996;92(6):660-665
  125. 125. Suh JP, Lee CK, Lee JH, Kim JJ, Kim SM, Cho YC, et al. Identification of quantitative trait loci for seedling cold tolerance using RILs derived from a cross between japonica and tropical japonica rice cultivars. Euphytica. 2012;184(1):101-108
  126. 126. Ranawake AL, Manangkil OE, Yoshida S, Ishii T, Mori N, Nakamura C. Mapping QTLs for cold tolerance at germination and the early seedling stage in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Biotechnology and Biotechnological Equipment. 2014;28(6):989-998
  127. 127. Krishnamurthy SL, Pundir P, Warraich AS, Rathor S, Lokeshkumar BM, Singh NK, et al. Introgressed saltol QTL lines improves the salinity tolerance in rice at seedling stage. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2020;11:833
  128. 128. Dixit S, Swamy BPM, Vikram P, Bernier J, Sta Cruz MT, Amante M, et al. Increased drought tolerance and wider adaptability of qDTY12.1 conferred by its interaction with qDTY2.3 and qDTY3.2. Molecular Breeding. 2012;30:1767-1779. DOI: 10.1007/s11032-012-9760-5
  129. 129. Shamsudin NAA, Swamy BPM, Ratnam W, Cruz MTS, Sandhu N, Raman AK, et al. Pyramiding of drought yield QTLs into a high-quality Malaysian rice cultivar MRQ74 improves yield under reproductive stage drought. Rice. 2016;9(1):21. DOI: 10.1186/s12284-016-0093-6
  130. 130. Sandhu N, Dixit S, Swamy BM, Vikram P, Venkateshwarlu C, Catolos M, et al. Positive interactions of major-effect QTLs with genetic background that enhances rice yield under drought. Scientific Reports. 2018;8:1626. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-20116-7
  131. 131. Yadav S, Sandhu N, Majumder RR, Dixit S, Kumar S, Singh SP, et al. Epistatic interactions of major effect drought QTLs with genetic background loci determine grain yield of rice under drought stress. Scientific Reports. 2019;9(1):1-3. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-39084-7
  132. 132. Vikram P, Swamy BM, Dixit S, Singh R, Singh BP, Miro B, et al. Drought susceptibility of modern rice varieties: An effect of linkage of drought tolerance with undesirable traits. Scientific Reports. 2015;5:14799. DOI: 10.1038/srep14799
  133. 133. He S, Schulthess AW, Mirdita V, Zhao Y, Korzun V, Bothe R, et al. Genomic selection in a commercial winter wheat population. Theoretical and Applied Genetics. 2016;129(3):641-651. DOI: 10.1007/s00122-015-2655-1
  134. 134. Michel S, Ametz C, Gungor H, Epure D, Grausgruber H, Löschenberger F, et al. Genomic selection across multiple breeding cycles in applied bread wheat breeding. Theoretical and Applied Genetics. 2016;129(6):1179-1189. DOI: 10.1007/s00122-016-2694-2
  135. 135. Calus MP, Veerkamp RF. Accuracy of multi-trait genomic selection using different methods. Genetics Selection Evolution. 2011;43(1):26-32. DOI: 10.1186/1297-9686-43-26
  136. 136. Schulthess AW, Wang Y, Miedaner T, Wilde P, Reif JC, Zhao Y. Multiple-trait-and selection indices-genomic predictions for grain yield and protein content in rye for feeding purposes. Theoretical and Applied Genetics. 2016;129(2):273-287. DOI: 10.1007/s00122-015-2626-6

Written By

Nitika Sandhu, Shailesh Yadav and Arvind Kumar

Submitted: June 3rd, 2020 Reviewed: August 26th, 2020 Published: October 30th, 2020