Abstract Photoperiod-thermo-sensitive genic male sterility (P/TGMS) has been widely used in the two-line hybrid rice breeding system. HengnongS-1 is one of the oldest TGMS lines and is often used in indica two-line breeding programs in China. In this study, our genetic analysis showed that the TGMS gene in HengnongS-1 was controlled by a single recessive gene that was non-allelic with the other TGMS loci identified, including C815S, Zhu1S
and Y58S. Using SSR markers and bulked segregant analysis, we located the TGMS locus on chromosome 9 and named the gene tms9-1. Fine mapping further narrowed the tms9-1 loci to a 162 kb interval between two dCAPS markers. Sequence analysis revealed that a T to C substitution results in an amino acid change in the tms9-1 candidate gene (Os09g27620) find more in HengnongS-1 selleck chemicals as compared to Minghui63. Sequencing of other rice accessions, including six P/TGMS lines, seven indica varieties and nine japonica varieties, showed that this SNP was exclusive to HengnongS-1. With multiple sequence alignment and expression pattern analyses, the rice MALE STERILITY1
homolog OsMS1 gene was identified as the candidate gene for tms9-1. Therefore, our study identified a novel TGMS locus and will facilitate the functional identification of the tms9-1 gene. Moreover, the markers linked to the tms9-1 gene will provide useful tools for the development of new TGMS lines by marker-assisted selection in two-line hybrid rice breeding programs.”
“Systemic targeted molecular therapy, in the form of a selleck compound selective
BRAF inhibitor with or without a MEK inhibitor, is a standard treatment for patients with BRAF V600 mutation-positive melanoma with unresectable stage III and IV disease. Patients with BRAF mutation-negative primary tumors may manifest BRAF mutation-positive metastatic disease. It is unclear whether all metastatic lesions carry the same BRAF mutation status found in the primary tumor and if discordancy exists, in what frequency it occurs. Primary and matched metastatic lesions in 25 melanoma patients were tested for the BRAF V600E/Ec, V600K, V600D, and V600R mutations using a BRAF RGQ PCR kit (Qiagen). Four patients (16%) had discrepancies between their primary and metastatic melanoma BRAF status. Of these patients, 2 (8%) had BRAF mutation-positive primary melanomas with BRAF mutation-negative metastatic lesions and 2 (8%) patient had BRAF mutation-negative melanoma with a BRAF mutation-positive metastatic lesion. In summary, discordancy of BRAF mutation status is not an infrequent finding between primary and metastatic melanoma. It may be prudent in previously negative patients to determine BRAF mutation status of new metastatic tumors for proper allocation of BRAF inhibitor therapy. Discordant BRAF status may have a role in the varying patterns of response and inevitable resistance seen with BRAF inhibitor therapies.