Following is a summary of responses to our request for input
("TO MAPS! TO MAPS!"), Feb 16. If you have not responded,
it is never too late. Thanks.
Ed Coe and Chris Carson
1. Do you consider any particular class of phenotypes more
important to map than others? If so, please rank:
1 seedling colors
2 2 seedling development and morphology
3 1 endosperm colors
1 2 2 endosperm development and morphology
1 1 2 embryo development and morphology leaf colors
5 2 leaf development and morphology
4 5 2 plant body development and morphology
3 4 2 male inflorescence development and morphology
3 1 2 androecium and microsporogenesis
3 2 female inflorescence development and morphology
3 2 gynoecium and megasporogenesis
other (specify, please)
> about prioritizing which mutants to map, I might suggest focusing on those
> categories in which you included the words "development and morphology"
> (so, endosperm, seedling, male and female inflorescence--which for my money
> would include the androecium and gynoecium--plant body and leaf, in that
> order). These also strike me as the categories most relevant to
> agriculture AND the ones where maize has a leg up on the other crop species
> in regards to prior work.
> I would NOT suggest a broad sampling among mutant classes (even
> though it looks a bit like I did in that first paragraph...) inasmuch as
> outstandingly fast, and directly applicable progress right now may prove
> the most useful in the long haul.
> in general, I would recommend prioritizing those mutations that are
> easily used as markers in genetic experiments. Ideally, these would
> be a set of mutations that are a) spread relatively evenly throughout
> the genome, covering all chromosomes, and b) easily used and
> recognized (seed and plant color, seedling traits, non-lethal
> morphological traits).
> It would also be nice to have several potential mosaic analysis
> markers (e.g. albinos) mapped on chromosome arms, to assist in
> setting up lines for mosaic analysis (X-ray breakage).
> Personally, I am most interested in genes involving the androecium
> and microsporogenesis.
> Personally, I think it is critical to map as many of the
> morphological mutations as possible. Because seed and seedling
> colors can be handled by a geneticist in large numbers for
> classification, perhaps these have a very slightly higher priority.
2. Alternatively, would you suggest we sample generally
among mutant classes?
> no (1 response)
3. What other prioritization criteria would you recommend?