Search
2023 Volume 2
Article Contents
REVIEW   Open Access    

Genomic landscape of maize domestication and breeding improvement

More Information
  • Maize (Zea mays ssp. mays) is the most productive crop worldwide now, and it is widely used as food, feed and raw materials for various industrial products. The continuous increase of maize yield is a testament of the success of plant breeding and modern agriculture. During domestication and historical breeding, humans has imposed strong selection on its morphological and physiological traits that benefit ecological adaptation, increase in yield and nutritional value, and harvesting. Recent advance in maize functional genomics studies has greatly deepened and expanded our understanding of the molecular and genetic bases of maize domestication and genetic improvement. In this article, we summarize the key traits and regulatory genes that underlie domestication and post-domestication genetic improvement of maize, and provide a forward outlook as to how the knowledge can be harnessed to accelerate future maize breeding.
  • 加载中
  • [1]

    Matsuoka Y, Vigouroux Y, Goodman MM, Jesus SG, Buckler E, et al. 2002. A single domestication for maize shown by multilocus microsatellite genotyping. PNAS 99:6080−84

    doi: 10.1073/pnas.052125199

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [2]

    Buckler ES, Holland JB, Bradbury PJ, Acharya CB, Brown PJ, et al. 2009. The genetic architecture of maize flowering time. Science 325:714−18

    doi: 10.1126/science.1174276

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [3]

    Duvick DN. 2001. Biotechnology in the 1930s: the development of hybrid maize. Nature Reviews Genetics 2:69−74

    doi: 10.1038/35047587

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [4]

    Coe EH Jr., Neuffer MG, Hoisington DA. 1988. The genetics of corn. In Corn and Corn Improvement, eds. Sprague GF, Dudley JW. Madison, WI, USA: American Society of Agronomy. pp. 81−258.

    [5]

    Richardson AE, Hake S. 2022. The power of classic maize mutants: driving forward our fundamental understanding of plants. The Plant cell 4(7):2505−17

    doi: 10.1093/plcell/koac081

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [6]

    Scandalios JG. 1982. Developmental genetics of maize. Annual review of genetics 16:85−112

    doi: 10.1146/annurev.ge.16.120182.000505

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [7]

    Yan J, Tan BC. 2019. Maize biology: From functional genomics to breeding application. Journal of Integrative Plant Biology 61(6):654−57

    doi: 10.1111/jipb.12819

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [8]

    Andorf C, Beavis WD, Hufford M, Smith S, Suza WP, et al. 2019. Technological advances in maize breeding: past, present and future. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 132:817−49

    doi: 10.1007/s00122-019-03306-3

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [9]

    Doebley JF, Gaut BS, Smith BD. 2006. The molecular genetics of crop domestication. Cell 127:1309−21

    doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2006.12.006

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [10]

    Beadle GW. 1939. Teosinte and the origin of maize. Journal of Heredity 30:245−47

    doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.jhered.a104728

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [11]

    Mangelsdorf PC, Reeves RG. 1938. The origin of maize. PNAS 24:303−12

    doi: 10.1073/pnas.24.8.303

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [12]

    Doebley J, Stec A. 1993. Inheritance of the morphological differences between maize and teosinte: comparison of results for two F2 populations. Genetics 134:2559−70

    doi: 10.1093/genetics/134.2.559

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [13]

    Doebley J. 2004. The genetics of maize evolution. Annual Review of Genetics 38:37−59

    doi: 10.1146/annurev.genet.38.072902.092425

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [14]

    Wright SI, Bi IV, Schroeder SG, Yamasaki M, Doebley JF, et al. 2005. The effects of artificial selection on the maize genome. Science 308:1310−14

    doi: 10.1126/science.1107891

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [15]

    Hufford MB, Xu X, van Heerwaarden J, Pyhäjärvi T, Chia JM, et al. 2012. Comparative population genomics of maize domestication and improvement. Nature Genetics 44:808−11

    doi: 10.1038/ng.2309

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [16]

    Xu G, Zhang X, Chen W, Zhang R, Li Z, et al. 2022. Population genomics of Zea species identifies selection signatures during maize domestication and adaptation. BMC Plant Biology 22:72

    doi: 10.1186/s12870-022-03427-w

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [17]

    Stitzer MC, Ross-Ibarra J. 2018. Maize domestication and gene interaction. New Phytologist 220:395−408

    doi: 10.1111/nph.15350

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [18]

    Doebley J, Stec A, Gustus C. 1995. teosinte branched1 and the origin of maize: Evidence for epistasis and the evolution of dominance. Genetics 141:333−46

    doi: 10.1093/genetics/141.1.333

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [19]

    Doebley J, Stec A, Hubbard L. 1997. The evolution of apical dominance in maize. Nature 386:485−88

    doi: 10.1038/386485a0

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [20]

    Clark RM, Linton E, Messing J, Doebley JF. 2004. Pattern of diversity in the genomic region near the maize domestication gene tb1. PNAS 101:700−7

    doi: 10.1073/pnas.2237049100

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [21]

    Studer A, Zhao Q, Ross-Ibarra J, Doebley J. 2011. Identification of a functional transposon insertion in the maize domestication gene tb1. Nature Genetics 43:1160−63

    doi: 10.1038/ng.942

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [22]

    Dong Z, Xiao Y, Govindarajulu R, Feil R, Siddoway ML, et al. 2019. The regulatory landscape of a core maize domestication module controlling bud dormancy and growth repression. Nature Communications 10:3810

    doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-11774-w

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [23]

    Aguilar-Martínez JA, Poza-Carrión C, Cubas P. 2007. Arabidopsis BRANCHED1 acts as an integrator of branching signals within axillary buds. The Plant Cell 19:458−72

    doi: 10.1105/tpc.106.048934

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [24]

    Takeda T, Suwa Y, Suzuki M, Kitano H, Ueguchi-Tanaka M, et al. 2003. The OsTB1 gene negatively regulates lateral branching in rice. The Plant Journal 33:513−20

    doi: 10.1046/j.1365-313X.2003.01648.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [25]

    Wang H, Nussbaum-Wagler T, Li B, Zhao Q, Vigouroux Y, et al. 2005. The origin of the naked grains of maize. Nature 436:714−19

    doi: 10.1038/nature03863

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [26]

    Studer AJ, Wang H, Doebley JF. 2017. Selection during maize domestication targeted a gene network controlling plant and inflorescence architecture. Genetics 207:755−65

    doi: 10.1534/genetics.117.300071

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [27]

    Whipple CJ, Kebrom TH, Weber AL, Yang F, Hall D, et al. 2011. grassy tillers1 promotes apical dominance in maize and responds to shade signals in the grasses. PNAS 108:E506−E512

    doi: 10.1073/pnas.1102819108

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [28]

    Wills DM, Whipple CJ, Takuno S, Kursel LE, Shannon LM, et al. 2013. From many, one: genetic control of prolificacy during maize domestication. PLoS Genetics 9:e1003604

    doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1003604

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [29]

    Wang M, Zhang R, Zhao Y, Yao J, Li W, et al. 2023. Identifying QTL and candidate genes for prolificacy in maize. The Crop Journal 11(2):531−39

    doi: 10.1016/j.cj.2022.08.007

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [30]

    Tian J, Wang C, Xia J, Wu L, Xu G, et al. 2019. Teosinte ligule allele narrows plant architecture and enhances high-density maize yields. Science 365:658−64

    doi: 10.1126/science.aax5482

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [31]

    Strable J, Wallace JG, Unger-Wallace E, Briggs S, Bradbury PJ, et al. 2017. Maize YABBY genes drooping leaf1 and drooping leaf2 regulate plant architecture. The Plant Cell 29:1622−41

    doi: 10.1105/tpc.16.00477

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [32]

    Moreno MA, Harper LC, Krueger RW, Dellaporta SL, Freeling M. 1997. liguleless1 encodes a nuclear-localized protein required for induction of ligules and auricles during maize leaf organogenesis. Genes & Development 11:616−28

    doi: 10.1101/gad.11.5.616

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [33]

    Kong D, Wang B, Wang H. 2020. UPA2 and ZmRAVL1: Promising targets of genetic improvement of maize plant architecture. Journal of Integrative Plant Biology 62:394−97

    doi: 10.1111/jipb.12873

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [34]

    Moose SP, Sisco PH. 1994. Glossy15 controls the epidermal juvenile-to-adult phase transition in maize. The Plant Cell 6:1343−55

    doi: 10.1105/tpc.6.10.1343

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [35]

    Xu DY, Wang XF, Huang C, Xu GH, Liang YM, et al. 2017. Glossy15 plays an important role in the divergence of the vegetative transition between maize and its progenitor, teosinte. Molecular Plant 10:1579−83

    doi: 10.1016/j.molp.2017.09.016

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [36]

    Dong Z, Li W, Unger-Wallace E, Yang J, Vollbrecht E, et al. 2017. Ideal crop plant architecture is mediated bytassels replace upper ears1, a BTB/POZ ankyrin repeat gene directly targeted by TEOSINTE BRANCHED1. PNAS 114:8656−64

    doi: 10.1073/pnas.1714960114

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [37]

    Sigmon B, Vollbrecht E. 2010. Evidence of selection at the ramosa1 locus during maize domestication. Molecular Ecology 19(7):1296−311

    doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2010.04562.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [38]

    Vollbrecht E, Springer PS, Goh L, Buckler ES IV, Martienssen R. 2005. Architecture of floral branch systems in maize and related grasses. Nature 436:1119−26

    doi: 10.1038/nature03892

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [39]

    Wills DM, Fang Z, York AM, Holland JB, Doebley JF. 2018. Defining the role of the MADS-Box gene, Zea Agamous-like1, a target of selection during maize domestication. Journal of Heredity 109:333−38

    doi: 10.1093/jhered/esx073

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [40]

    Bomblies K, Wang RL, Ambrose BA, Schmidt RJ, Meeley RB, et al. 2003. Duplicate FLORICAULA/LEAFY homologs zfl1 and zfl2 control inflorescence architecture and flower patterning in maize. Development 130:2385−95

    doi: 10.1242/dev.00457

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [41]

    Bomblies K, Doebley JF. 2006. Pleiotropic effects of the duplicate maize FLORICAULA/LEAFY genes zfl1 and zfl2 on traits under selection during maize domestication. Genetics 172:519−31

    doi: 10.1534/genetics.105.048595

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [42]

    McSteen P, Malcomber S, Skirpan A, Lunde C, Wu X, et al. 2007. barren inflorescence2 encodes a co-ortholog of the PINOID serine/threonine kinase and is required for organogenesis during inflorescence and vegetative development in maize. Plant Physiology 144(2):1000−11

    doi: 10.1104/pp.107.098558

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [43]

    Xu G, Wang X, Huang C, Xu D, Li D, et al. 2017. Complex genetic architecture underlies maize tassel domestication. New Phytologist 214:852−64

    doi: 10.1111/nph.14400

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [44]

    Chuck GS, Brown PJ, Meeley R, Hake S. 2014. Maize SBP-box transcription factors unbranched2 and unbranched3 affect yield traits by regulating the rate of lateral primordia initiation. PNAS 111:18775−80

    doi: 10.1073/pnas.1407401112

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [45]

    Du Y, Liu L, Li M, Fang S, Shen X, et al. 2017. UNBRANCHED3 regulates branching by modulating cytokinin biosynthesis and signaling in maize and rice. New Phytologist 214:721−33

    doi: 10.1111/nph.14391

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [46]

    Liu L, Du Y, Shen X, Li M, Sun W, et al. 2015. KRN4 controls quantitative variation in maize kernel row number. PLoS Genetics 11(11):e1005670

    doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1005670

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [47]

    Debernardi JM, Lin H, Chuck G, Faris JD, Dubcovsky J. 2017. microRNA172 plays a crucial role in wheat spike morphogenesis and grain threshability. Development 144:1966−75

    doi: 10.1242/dev.146399

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [48]

    Wang J, Lin Z, Zhang X, Liu H, Zhou L, et al. 2019. krn1, a major quantitative trait locus for kernel row number in maize. New Phytologist 223:1634−46

    doi: 10.1111/nph.15890

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [49]

    Simons KJ, Fellers JP, Trick HN, Zhang Z, Tai YS, et al. 2006. Molecular characterization of the major wheat domestication gene Q. Genetics 172:547−55

    doi: 10.1534/genetics.105.044727

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [50]

    Chen W, Chen L, Zhang X, Yang N, Guo J, et al. 2022. Convergent selection of a WD40 protein that enhances grain yield in maize and rice. Science 375(6587):eabg7985

    doi: 10.1126/science.abg7985

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [51]

    Raihan MS, Liu J, Huang J, Guo H, Pan Q, et al. 2016. Multi-environment QTL analysis of grain morphology traits and fine mapping of a kernel-width QTL in Zheng58 × SK maize population. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 129:1465−77

    doi: 10.1007/s00122-016-2717-z

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [52]

    Yang N, Liu J, Gao Q, Gui S, Chen L, et al. 2019. Genome assembly of a tropical maize inbred line provides insights into structural variation and crop improvement. Nature Genetics 51:1052−59

    doi: 10.1038/s41588-019-0427-6

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [53]

    Chen L, Li YX, Li C, Shi Y, Song Y, et al. 2020. The retromer protein ZmVPS29 regulates maize kernel morphology likely through an auxin-dependent process(es). Plant Biotechnology Journal 18:1004−14

    doi: 10.1111/pbi.13267

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [54]

    Sosso D, Luo D, Li QB, Sasse J, Yang J, et al. 2015. Seed filling in domesticated maize and rice depends on SWEET-mediated hexose transport. Nature Genetics 47:1489−93

    doi: 10.1038/ng.3422

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [55]

    Wang Q, Liao Z, Zhu C, Gou X, Liu Y, et al. 2022. Teosinte confers specific alleles and yield potential to maize improvement. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 135:3545−62

    doi: 10.1007/s00122-022-04199-5

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [56]

    Chen Q, Yang CJ, York AM, Xue W, Daskalska LL, et al. 2019. TeoNAM: A nested association mapping population for domestication and agronomic trait analysis in maize. Genetics 213:1065−78

    doi: 10.1534/genetics.119.302594

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [57]

    Lin Z, Li X, Shannon LM, Yeh CT, Wang ML, et al. 2012. Parallel domestication of the Shattering1 genes in cereals. Nature Genetics 44:720−24

    doi: 10.1038/ng.2281

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [58]

    Liu H, Fang X, Zhou L, Li Y, Zhu C, et al. 2022. Transposon insertion drove the loss of natural seed shattering during foxtail millet domestication. Molecular Biology and Evolution 39(6):msac078

    doi: 10.1093/molbev/msac078

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [59]

    Whitt SR, Wilson LM, Tenaillon MI, Gaut BS, Buckler ES IV. 2002. Genetic diversity and selection in the maize starch pathway. PNAS 99:12959−62

    doi: 10.1073/pnas.202476999

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [60]

    Palaisa K, Morgante M, Tingey S, Rafalski A. 2004. Long-range patterns of diversity and linkage disequilibrium surrounding the maize Y1 gene are indicative of an asymmetric selective sweep. PNAS 101:9885−90

    doi: 10.1073/pnas.0307839101

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [61]

    Karn A, Gillman JD, Flint-Garcia SA. 2017. Genetic analysis of teosinte alleles for kernel composition traits in maize. G3 Genes|Genomes|Genetics 7:1157−64

    doi: 10.1534/g3.117.039529

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [62]

    Fan L, Bao J, Wang Y, Yao J, Gui Y, et al. 2009. Post-domestication selection in the maize starch pathway. PLoS One 4:e7612

    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0007612

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [63]

    Huang Y, Wang H, Zhu Y, Huang X, Li S, et al. 2022. THP9 enhances seed protein content and nitrogen-use efficiency in maize. Nature 612:292−300

    doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-05441-2

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [64]

    de Lange ES, Balmer D, Mauch-Mani B, Turlings TCJ. 2014. Insect and pathogen attack and resistance in maize and its wild ancestors, the teosintes. New Phytologist 204:329−41

    doi: 10.1111/nph.13005

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [65]

    Lennon JR, Krakowsky M, Goodman M, Flint-Garcia S, Balint-Kurti PJ. 2016. Identification of alleles conferring resistance to gray leaf spot in maize derived from its wild progenitor species teosinte. Crop Science 56:209−18

    doi: 10.2135/cropsci2014.07.0468

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [66]

    Lennon JR, Krakowsky M, Goodman M, Flint-Garcia S, Balint-Kurti PJ. 2017. Identification of teosinte alleles for resistance to southern leaf blight in near isogenic maize lines. Crop Science 57:1973−83

    doi: 10.2135/cropsci2016.12.0979

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [67]

    Mano Y, Omori F. 2007. Breeding for flooding tolerant maize using "teosinte" as a germplasm resource. Plant Root 1:17−21

    doi: 10.3117/plantroot.1.17

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [68]

    Feng X, Xiong H, Zheng D, Xin X, Zhang X, et al. 2022. Identification of Fusarium verticillioides resistance alleles in three maize populations with teosinte gene introgression. Frontiers in Plant Science 13:942397

    doi: 10.3389/fpls.2022.942397

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [69]

    Wang H, Hou J, Ye P, Hu L, Huang J, et al. 2021. A teosinte-derived allele of a MYB transcription repressor confers multiple disease resistance in maize. Molecular Plant 14:1846−63

    doi: 10.1016/j.molp.2021.07.008

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [70]

    Zhang M, Li Y, Liang X, Lu M, Lai J, et al. 2023. A teosinte-derived allele of an HKT1 family sodium transporter improves salt tolerance in maize. Plant Biotechnology Journal 21(1):97−108

    doi: 10.1111/pbi.13927

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [71]

    Gao H, Cui J, Liu S, Wang S, Lian Y, et al. 2022. Natural variations of ZmSRO1d modulate the trade-off between drought resistance and yield by affecting ZmRBOHC-mediated stomatal ROS production in maize. Molecular Plant 15:1558−74

    doi: 10.1016/j.molp.2022.08.009

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [72]

    Hung HY, Shannon LM, Tian F, Bradbury PJ, Chen C, et al. 2012. ZmCCT and the genetic basis of day-length adaptation underlying the postdomestication spread of maize. PNAS 109:1913−18

    doi: 10.1073/pnas.1117158109

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [73]

    Lazakis CM, Coneva V, Colasanti J. 2011. ZCN8 encodes a potential orthologue of Arabidopsis FT florigen that integrates both endogenous and photoperiod flowering signals in maize. Journal of Experimental Botany 62:4833−42

    doi: 10.1093/jxb/err129

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [74]

    Guo L, Wang X, Zhao M, Huang C, Li C, et al. 2018. Stepwise cis-regulatory changes in ZCN8 contribute to maize flowering-time adaptation. Current Biology 28:3005−3015.E4

    doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2018.07.029

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [75]

    Sun H, Wang C, Chen X, Liu H, Huang Y, et al. 2020. dlf1 promotes floral transition by directly activating ZmMADS4 and ZmMADS67 in the maize shoot apex. New Phytologist 228:1386−400

    doi: 10.1111/nph.16772

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [76]

    Liang Y, Liu Q, Wang X, Huang C, Xu G, et al. 2019. ZmMADS69 functions as a flowering activator through the ZmRap2.7-ZCN8 regulatory module and contributes to maize flowering time adaptation. New Phytologist 221:2335−47

    doi: 10.1111/nph.15512

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [77]

    Salvi S, Sponza G, Morgante M, Tomes D, Niu X, et al. 2007. Conserved noncoding genomic sequences associated with a flowering-time quantitative trait locus in maize. PNAS 104:11376−81

    doi: 10.1073/pnas.0704145104

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [78]

    Ducrocq S, Madur D, Veyrieras JB, Camus-Kulandaivelu L, Kloiber-Maitz M, et al. 2008. Key impact of Vgt1 on flowering time adaptation in maize: evidence from association mapping and ecogeographical information. Genetics 178:2433−37

    doi: 10.1534/genetics.107.084830

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [79]

    Castelletti S, Tuberosa R, Pindo M, Salvi S. 2014. A MITE transposon insertion is associated with differential methylation at the maize flowering time QTL Vgt1. G3 Genes|Genomes|Genetics 4:805−12

    doi: 10.1534/g3.114.010686

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [80]

    Xue W, Xing Y, Weng X, Zhao Y, Tang W, et al. 2008. Natural variation in Ghd7 is an important regulator of heading date and yield potential in rice. Nature Genetics 40:761−67

    doi: 10.1038/ng.143

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [81]

    Yang Q, Li Z, Li W, Ku L, Wang C, et al. 2013. CACTA-like transposable element in ZmCCT attenuated photoperiod sensitivity and accelerated the postdomestication spread of maize. PNAS 110:16969−74

    doi: 10.1073/pnas.1310949110

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [82]

    Huang C, Sun H, Xu D, Chen Q, Liang Y, et al. 2018. ZmCCT9 enhances maize adaptation to higher latitudes. PNAS 115:E334−E341

    doi: 10.1073/pnas.1718058115

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [83]

    Zhao Y, Zhao B, Xie Y, Jia H, Li Y, et al. 2023. The evening complex promotes maize flowering and adaptation to temperate regions. The Plant Cell 35:369−89

    doi: 10.1093/plcell/koac296

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [84]

    Barnes A C, Rodríguez-Zapata F, Juárez-Núñez K A, Gates D J, Janzen G M, Kur A et al. 2022. An adaptive teosinte mexicana introgression modulates phosphatidylcholine levels and is associated with maize flowering time. PNAS 119(27):e2100036119

    doi: 10.1073/pnas.2100036119

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [85]

    Hufford MB, Lubinksy P, Pyhäjärvi T, Devengenzo MT, Ellstrand NC, et al. 2013. The genomic signature of crop-wild introgression in maize. PLoS Genetics 9:e1003477

    doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1003477

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [86]

    Yang N, Xu XW, Wang RR, Peng WL, Cai L, et al. 2017. Contributions of Zea mays subspecies mexicana haplotypes to modern maize. Nature Communications 8:1874

    doi: 10.1038/s41467-017-02063-5

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [87]

    Calfee E, Gates D, Lorant A, Perkins MT, Coop G, et al. 2021. Selective sorting of ancestral introgression in maize and teosinte along an elevational cline. PLoS Genetics 17:e1009810

    doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1009810

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [88]

    Chen L, Luo J, Jin M, Yang N, Liu X, et al. 2022. Genome sequencing reveals evidence of adaptive variation in the genus Zea. Nature Genetics 54:1736−45

    doi: 10.1038/s41588-022-01184-y

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [89]

    Duvick DN. 2005. Genetic progress in yield of United States maize (Zea mays L.). Maydica 50:193−202

    Google Scholar

    [90]

    Mansfield BD, Mumm RH. 2014. Survey of plant density tolerance in U. S. maize germplasm. Crop Science 54:157−73

    doi: 10.2135/cropsci2013.04.0252

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [91]

    Wang B, Lin Z, Li X, Zhao Y, Zhao B, et al. 2020. Genome-wide selection and genetic improvement during modern maize breeding. Nature Genetics 52:565−71

    doi: 10.1038/s41588-020-0616-3

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [92]

    Li P, Wei J, Wang H, Fang Y, Yin S, et al. 2019. Natural variation and domestication selection of ZmPGP1 affects plant architecture and yield-related traits in maize. Genes 10:664

    doi: 10.3390/genes10090664

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [93]

    Wei L, Zhang X, Zhang Z, Liu H, Lin Z. 2018. A new allele of the Brachytic2 gene in maize can efficiently modify plant architecture. Heredity 121:75−86

    doi: 10.1038/s41437-018-0056-3

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [94]

    Smith H, Whitelam GC. 1997. The shade avoidance syndrome: multiple responses mediated by multiple phytochromes. Plant, Cell & Environment 20:840−44

    doi: 10.1046/j.1365-3040.1997.d01-104.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [95]

    Kebrom TH, Brutnell TP. 2007. The molecular analysis of the shade avoidance syndrome in the grasses has begun. Journal of Experimental Botany 58 12:3079−89

    doi: 10.1093/jxb/erm205

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [96]

    Cui H, Camberato JJ, Jin L, Zhang J. 2015. Effects of shading on spike differentiation and grain yield formation of summer maize in the field. International Journal of Biometeorology 59:1189−200

    doi: 10.1007/s00484-014-0930-5

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [97]

    Zhang X, Liu H, Ma X, Zhou G, Ruan H, et al. 2022. Genome-wide association study and metabolic pathway prediction of barrenness in maize as a response to high planting density. Journal of Integrative Agriculture 21(12):3514−23

    doi: 10.1016/j.jia.2022.08.089

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [98]

    Liu Y, Jafari F, Wang H. 2021. Integration of light and hormone signaling pathways in the regulation of plant shade avoidance syndrome. aBIOTECH 2:131−45

    doi: 10.1007/s42994-021-00038-1

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [99]

    Xie Y, Liu Y, Wang H, Ma X, Wang B, et al. 2017. Phytochrome-interacting factors directly suppress MIR156 expression to enhance shade-avoidance syndrome in Arabidopsis. Nature Communications 8:348

    doi: 10.1038/s41467-017-00404-y

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [100]

    Wei H, Zhao Y, Xie Y, Wang H. 2018. Exploiting SPL genes to improve maize plant architecture tailored for high-density planting. Journal of Experimental Botany 69:4675−88

    doi: 10.1093/jxb/ery258

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [101]

    Sheehan MJ, Kennedy LM, Costich DE, Brutnell TP. 2007. Subfunctionalization of PhyB1 and PhyB2 in the control of seedling and mature plant traits in maize. The Plant Journal 49(2):338−53

    doi: 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2006.02962.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [102]

    Wu G, Zhao Y, Shen R, Wang B, Xie Y, et al. 2019. Characterization of maize phytochrome-interacting factors in light signaling and photomorphogenesis. Plant Physiology 181 2:789−803

    doi: 10.1104/pp.19.00239

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [103]

    Li Q, Wu G, Zhao Y, Wang B, Zhao B, et al. 2020. CRISPR/Cas9-mediated knockout and overexpression studies reveal a role of maize phytochrome C in regulating flowering time and plant height. Plant Biotechnology Journal 18:2520−32

    doi: 10.1111/pbi.13429

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [104]

    Du Y, Liu L, Peng Y, Li M, Li Y, et al. 2020. UNBRANCHED3 expression and Inflorescence development is mediated by UNBRANCHED2 and the distal enhancer, KRN4, in maize. PLoS Genetics 16:e1008764

    doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1008764

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [105]

    Zhao X, Liu H, Wei X, Wu L, Cheng F, et al. 2014. Promoter region characterization of ZmPhyB2 associated with the photoperiod-dependent floral transition in maize (Zea mays L.). Molecular Breeding 34:1413−22

    doi: 10.1007/s11032-014-0125-0

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [106]

    Kong D, Li C, Xue W, Wei H, Ding H, et al. 2023. UB2/UB3/TSH4-anchored transcriptional networks regulate early maize inflorescence development in response to simulated shade. The Plant Cell 35(2):717−37

    doi: 10.1093/plcell/koac352

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [107]

    Shull GH. 1908. The composition of a field of maize. Journal of Heredity Volume os-4:296−301

    doi: 10.1093/jhered/os-4.1.296

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [108]

    East EM, Jones DF. 1918. Inbreeding and Outbreeding. J. B. Lippincott Co., Philadelphia, PA. pp 140.

    [109]

    Jones, DF. 1918. The effect of inbreeding and crossbreeding upon development. PNAS 4(8):246−50

    doi: 10.1073/pnas.4.8.246

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [110]

    Melchinger AE, Gumber RK. 1998. Overview of heterosis and heterotic groups in agronomic crops. In Concepts and Breeding of Heterosis in Crop Plants, eds. Larnkey KR, Staub JE. Madison, WI, USA: Crop Science Society of America. pp. 29−44

    [111]

    Reif JC, Hailauer AR, Melchinger AE. 2005. Heterosis and heterotic patterns in maize. Maydica 50:215−23

    Google Scholar

    [112]

    Tracy WF, Chandler MA. 2006. The historical and biological basis of the concept of heterotic patterns in corn belt Dent maize. In Plant Breeding: The Arnel R. Hallauer International Symposium, eds. Lamkey KR, Lee M. pp. 219−33. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470752708.ch16

    [113]

    Li Y, Li Y, Ma X, Liu C, Liu Z, et al. 2014. Contributions of parental inbreds and heterosis to morphology and yield of single-cross maize hybrids in China. Crop Science 54:76−88

    doi: 10.2135/cropsci2013.02.0077

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [114]

    van Heerwaarden J, Hufford MB, Ross-Ibarra J. 2012. Historical genomics of North American maize. PNAS 109:12420−25

    doi: 10.1073/pnas.1209275109

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [115]

    Gage JL, White MR, Edwards JW, Kaeppler S, de Leon N. 2018. Selection signatures underlying dramatic male inflorescence transformation during modern hybrid maize breeding. Genetics 210:1125−38

    doi: 10.1534/genetics.118.301487

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [116]

    Romay MC, Millard MJ, Glaubitz JC, Peiffer JA, Swarts KL, et al. 2013. Comprehensive genotyping of the USA national maize inbred seed bank. Genome Biology 14:R55

    doi: 10.1186/gb-2013-14-6-r55

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [117]

    Reif JC, Melchinger AE, Xia X, Warburton ML, Hoisington DA, et al. 2003. Genetic distance based on simple sequence repeats and heterosis in tropical maize populations. Crop Science 43:1275−82

    doi: 10.2135/cropsci2003.1275

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [118]

    Ho JC, Kresovich S, Lamkey KR. 2005. Extent and distribution of genetic variation in U. S. maize: Historically important lines and their open-pollinated dent and flint progenitors. Crop Science 45:1891−900

    doi: 10.2135/cropsci2003.0494

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [119]

    Feng L, Sebastian S, Smith S, Cooper M. 2006. Temporal trends in SSR allele frequencies associated with long-term selection for yield of maize. Maydica 51:293−300

    Google Scholar

    [120]

    Technow F, Schrag TA, Schipprack W, Bauer E, Simianer H, et al. 2014. Genome properties and prospects of genomic prediction of hybrid performance in a breeding program of maize. Genetics 197:1343−55

    doi: 10.1534/genetics.114.165860

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [121]

    Li C, Guan H, Jing X, Li Y, Wang B, et al. 2022. Genomic insights into historical improvement of heterotic groups during modern hybrid maize breeding. Nature Plants 8:750−63

    doi: 10.1038/s41477-022-01190-2

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [122]

    Wallace JG, Rodgers-Melnick E, Buckler ES. 2018. On the road to breeding 4.0: unraveling the good, the bad, and the boring of crop quantitative genomics. Annual Review of Genetics 52:421−44

    doi: 10.1146/annurev-genet-120116-024846

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [123]

    Jiang S, Cheng Q, Yan J, Fu R, Wang X. 2020. Genome optimization for improvement of maize breeding. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 133:1491−502

    doi: 10.1007/s00122-019-03493-z

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [124]

    Schnable PS, Springer NM. 2013. Progress toward understanding heterosis in crop plants. Annual Review of Plant Biology 64:71−88

    doi: 10.1146/annurev-arplant-042110-103827

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [125]

    Wang B, Hou M, Shi J, Ku L, Song W, et al. 2023. De novo genome assembly and analyses of 12 founder inbred lines provide insights into maize heterosis. Nature Genetics 55(2):312−23

    doi: 10.1038/s41588-022-01283-w

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [126]

    Liu H, Wang Q, Chen M, Ding Y, Yang X, et al. 2020. Genome-wide identification and analysis of heterotic loci in three maize hybrids. Plant Biotechnology Journal 18(1):185−94

    doi: 10.1111/pbi.13186

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [127]

    Bayer. 2022. How smarter corn production could help sustainably weather climate change. www.bayer.com/en/news-stories/how-thinking-short-could-help-sustainably-weather-climate-change

  • Cite this article

    Zhang M, Kong D, Wang H. 2023. Genomic landscape of maize domestication and breeding improvement. Seed Biology 2:9 doi: 10.48130/SeedBio-2023-0009
    Zhang M, Kong D, Wang H. 2023. Genomic landscape of maize domestication and breeding improvement. Seed Biology 2:9 doi: 10.48130/SeedBio-2023-0009

Figures(2)  /  Tables(3)

Article Metrics

Article views(5718) PDF downloads(1012)

Other Articles By Authors

REVIEW   Open Access    

Genomic landscape of maize domestication and breeding improvement

Seed Biology  2 Article number: 9  (2023)  |  Cite this article

Abstract: Maize (Zea mays ssp. mays) is the most productive crop worldwide now, and it is widely used as food, feed and raw materials for various industrial products. The continuous increase of maize yield is a testament of the success of plant breeding and modern agriculture. During domestication and historical breeding, humans has imposed strong selection on its morphological and physiological traits that benefit ecological adaptation, increase in yield and nutritional value, and harvesting. Recent advance in maize functional genomics studies has greatly deepened and expanded our understanding of the molecular and genetic bases of maize domestication and genetic improvement. In this article, we summarize the key traits and regulatory genes that underlie domestication and post-domestication genetic improvement of maize, and provide a forward outlook as to how the knowledge can be harnessed to accelerate future maize breeding.

    • As a major staple crop, today maize accounts for approximately 40% of total worldwide cereal production (http://faostat.fao.org/). Since its domestication ~9,000 years ago from a subgroup of teosinte (Zea mays ssp. parviglumis) in the tropical lowlands of southwest Mexico[1], its cultivating area has greatly expanded, covering most of the world[2]. Human's breeding and utilization of maize have gone through several stages, from landraces, open-pollinated varieties (OPVs), double-cross hybrids (1930s-1950s) and since the middle 1950s, single-cross hybrids. Nowadays, global maize production is mostly provided by single-cross hybrids, which exhibit higher-yielding and better stress tolerance than OPVs and double-cross hybrids[3].

      Besides its agronomic importance, maize has also been used as a model plant species for genetic studies due to its out-crossing habit, large quantities of seeds produced and the availability of diverse germplasm. The abundant mutants of maize facilitated the development of the first genetic and cytogenetic maps of plants, and made it an ideal plant species to identify regulators of developmental processes[46]. Although initially lagging behind other model plant species (such as Arabidopsis and rice) in multi-omics research, the recent rapid development in sequencing and transformation technologies, and various new tools (such as CRISPR technologies, double haploids etc.) are repositioning maize research at the frontiers of plant research, and surely, it will continue to reveal fundamental insights into plant biology, as well as to accelerate molecular breeding for this vitally important crop[7, 8].

    • During domestication from teosinte to maize, a number of distinguishing morphological and physiological changes occurred, including increased apical dominance, reduced glumes, suppression of ear prolificacy, increase in kernel row number, loss of seed shattering, nutritional changes etc.[9] (Fig. 1). At the genomic level, genome-wide genetic diversity was reduced due to a population bottleneck effect, accompanied by directional selection at specific genomic regions underlying agronomically important traits. Over a century ago, Beadle initially proposed that four or five genes or blocks of genes might be responsible for much of the phenotypic changes between maize and teosinte[10,11]. Later studies by Doebley et al. used teosinte–maize F2 populations to dissect several quantitative trait loci (QTL) to the responsible genes (such as tb1 and tga1)[12,13]. On the other hand, based on analysis of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in 774 genes, Wright et al.[14] estimated that 2%−4% of maize genes (~800−1,700 genes genome-wide) were selected during maize domestication and subsequent improvement. Taking advantage of the next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies, Hufford et al.[15] conducted resequencing analysis of a set of wild relatives, landraces and improved maize varieties, and identified ~500 selective genomic regions during maize domestication. In a recent study, Xu et al.[16] conducted a genome-wide survey of 982 maize inbred lines and 190 teosinte accession. They identified 394 domestication sweeps and 360 adaptation sweeps. Collectively, these studies suggest that maize domestication likely involved hundreds of genomic regions. Nevertheless, much fewer domestication genes have been functionally studied so far.

      Figure 1. 

      Main traits of maize involved in domestication and improvement.

    • During maize domestication, a most profound morphological change is an increase in apical dominance, transforming a multi-branched plant architecture in teosinte to a single stalked plant (terminated by a tassel) in maize. The tillers and long branches of teosinte are terminated by tassels and bear many small ears. Similarly, the single maize stalk bears few ears and is terminated by a tassel[9,12,17]. A series of landmark studies by Doebley et al. elegantly demonstrated that tb1, which encodes a TCP transcription factor, is responsible for this transformation[18, 19]. Later studies showed that insertion of a Hopscotch transposon located ~60 kb upstream of tb1 enhances the expression of tb1 in maize, thereby repressing branch outgrowth[20, 21]. Through ChIP-seq and RNA-seq analyses, Dong et al.[22] demonstrated that tb1 acts to regulate multiple phytohormone signaling pathways (gibberellins, abscisic acid and jasmonic acid) and sugar sensing. Moreover, several other domestication loci, including teosinte glume architecture1 (tga1), prol1.1/grassy tillers1, were identified as its putative targets. Elucidating the precise regulatory mechanisms of these loci and signaling pathways will be an interesting and rewarding area of future research. Also worth noting, studies showed that tb1 and its homologous genes in Arabidopsis (Branched1 or BRC1) and rice (FINE CULM1 or FC1) play a conserved role in repressing the outgrowth of axillary branches in both dicotyledon and monocotyledon plants[23, 24].

    • Teosinte ears possess two ranks of fruitcase-enclosed kernels, while maize produces hundreds of naked kernels on the ear[13]. tga1, which encodes a squamosa-promoter binding protein (SBP) transcription factor, underlies this transformation[25]. It has been shown that a de novo mutation occurred during maize domestication, causing a single amino acid substitution (Lys to Asn) in the TGA1 protein, altering its binding activity to its target genes, including a group of MADS-box genes that regulate glume identity[26].

    • Prolificacy, the number of ears per plants, is also a domestication trait. It has been shown that grassy tillers 1 (gt1), which encodes an HD-ZIP I transcription factor, suppresses prolificacy by promoting lateral bud dormancy and suppressing elongation of the later ear branches[27]. The expression of gt1 is induced by shading and requires the activity of tb1, suggesting that gt1 acts downstream of tb1 to mediate the suppressed branching activity in response to shade. Later studies mapped a large effect QTL for prolificacy (prol1.1) to a 2.7 kb 'causative region' upstream of the gt1gene[28]. In addition, a recent study identified a new QTL, qEN7 (for ear number on chromosome 7). Zm00001d020683, which encodes a putative INDETERMINATE DOMAIN (IDD) transcription factor, was identified as the likely candidate gene based on its expression pattern and signature of selection during maize improvement[29]. However, its functionality and regulatory relationship with tb1 and gt1 remain to be elucidated.

    • Smaller leaf angle and thus more compact plant architecture is a desired trait for modern maize varieties. Tian et al.[30] used a maize-teosinte BC2S3 population and cloned two QTLs (Upright Plant Architecture1 and 2 [UPA1 and UPA2]) that regulate leaf angle. Interestingly, the authors showed that the functional variant of UPA2 is a 2-bp InDel located 9.5 kb upstream of ZmRAVL1, which encodes a B3 domain transcription factor. The 2-bp Indel flanks the binding site of the transcription factor Drooping Leaf1 (DRL1)[31], which represses ZmRAVL1 expression through interacting with Liguleless1 (LG1), a SBP-box transcription factor essential for leaf ligule and auricle development[32]. UPA1 encodes brassinosteroid C-6 oxidase1 (brd1), a key enzyme for biosynthesis of active brassinolide (BR). The teosinte-derived allele of UPA2 binds DRL1 more strongly, leading to lower expression of ZmRAVL1 and thus, lower expression of brd1 and BR levels, and ultimately smaller leaf angle. Notably, the authors demonstrated that the teosinte-derived allele of UPA2 confers enhanced yields under high planting densities when introgressed into modern maize varieties[30, 33].

    • Maize plants exhibit salient vegetative phase change, which marks the vegetative transition from the juvenile stage to the adult stage, characterized by several changes in maize leaves produced before and after the transition, such as production of leaf epicuticular wax and epidermal hairs. Previous studies reported that Glossy15 (Gl15), which encodes an AP2-like transcription factor, promotes juvenile leaf identity and suppressing adult leaf identity. Ectopic overexpression of Gl15 causes delayed vegetative phase change and flowering, while loss-of-function gl15 mutant displayed earlier vegetative phase change[34]. In another study, Gl15 was identified as a major QTL (qVT9-1) controlling the difference in the vegetative transition between maize and teosinte. Further, it was shown that a pre-existing low-frequency standing variation, SNP2154-G, was selected during domestication and likely represents the causal variation underlying differential expression of Gl15, and thus the difference in the vegetative transition between maize and teosinte[35].

    • A number of studies documented evidence that tassels replace upper ears1 (tru1) is a key regulator of the conversion of the male terminal lateral inflorescence (tassel) in teosinte to a female terminal inflorescence (ear) in maize. tru1 encodes a BTB/POZ ankyrin repeat domain protein, and it is directly targeted by tb1, suggesting their close regulatory relationship[36]. In addition, a number of regulators of maize inflorescence morphology, were also shown as selective targets during maize domestication, including ramosa1 (ra1)[37, 38], which encodes a putative transcription factor repressing inflorescence (the ear and tassel) branching, Zea Agamous-like1 (zagl1)[39], which encodes a MADS-box transcription factor regulating flowering time and ear size, Zea floricaula leafy2 (zfl2, homologue of Arabidopsis Leafy)[40, 41], which likely regulates ear rank number, and barren inflorescence2 (bif2, ortholog of the Arabidopsis serine/threonine kinase PINOID)[42, 43], which regulates the formation of spikelet pair meristems and branch meristems on the tassel. The detailed regulatory networks of these key regulators of maize inflorescence still remain to be further elucidated.

    • Kernel row number (KRN) and kernel weight are two important determinants of maize yield. A number of domestication genes modulating KRN and kernel weight have been identified and cloned, including KRN1, KRN2, KRN4 and qHKW1. KRN4 was mapped to a 3-kb regulatory region located ~60 kb downstream of Unbranched3 (UB3), which encodes a SBP transcription factor and negatively regulates KRN through imparting on multiple hormone signaling pathways (cytokinin, auxin and CLV-WUS)[44, 45]. Studies have also shown that a harbinger TE in the intergenic region and a SNP (S35) in the third exon of UB3 act in an additive fashion to regulate the expression level of UB3 and thus KRN[46].

      KRN1 encodes an AP2 transcription factor that pleiotropically affects plant height, spike density and grain size of maize[47], and is allelic to ids1/Ts6 (indeterminate spikelet 1/Tassel seed 6)[48]. Noteworthy, KRN1 is homologous to the wheat domestication gene Q, a major regulator of spike/spikelet morphology and grain threshability in wheat[49].

      KRN2 encodes a WD40 domain protein and it negatively regulates kernel row number[50]. Selection in a ~700-bp upstream region (containing the 5’UTR) of KRN2 during domestication resulted in reduced expression and thus increased kernel row number. Interestingly, its orthologous gene in rice, OsKRN2, was shown also a selected gene during rice domestication to negatively regulate secondary panicle branches and thus grain number. These observations suggest convergent selection of yield-related genes occurred during parallel domestication of cereal crops.

      qHKW1 is a major QTL for hundred-kernel weight (HKW)[51]. It encodes a CLAVATA1 (CLV1)/BARELY ANY MERISTEM (BAM)-related receptor kinase-like protein positively regulating HKW. A 8.9 Kb insertion in its promoter region was find to enhance its expression, leading to enhanced HKW[52]. In addition, Chen et al.[53] reported cloning of a major QTL for kernel morphology, qKM4.08, which encodes ZmVPS29, a retromer complex component. Sequencing and association analysis revealed that ZmVPS29 was a selective target during maize domestication. They authors also identified two significant polymorphic sites in its promoter region significantly associated with the kernel morphology. Moreover, a strong selective signature was detected in ZmSWEET4c during maize domestication. ZmSWEET4c encodes a hexose transporter protein functioning in sugar transport across the basal endosperm transfer cell layer (BETL) during seed filling[54]. The favorable alleles of these genes could serve as valuable targets for genetic improvement of maize yield.

      In a recent effort to more systematically analyze teosinte alleles that could contribute to yield potential of maize, Wang et al.[55] constructed four backcrossed maize-teosinte recombinant inbred line (RIL) populations and conducted detailed phenotyping of 26 agronomic traits under five environmental conditions. They identified 71 QTL associated with 24 plant architecture and yield related traits through inclusive composite interval mapping. Interestingly, they identified Zm00001eb352570 and Zm00001eb352580, both encode ethylene-responsive transcription factors, as two key candidate genes regulating ear height and the ratio of ear to plant height. Chen et al.[56] constructed a teosinte nested association mapping (TeoNAM) population, and performed joint-linkage mapping and GWAS analyses of 22 domestication and agronomic traits. They identified the maize homologue of PROSTRATE GROWTH1, a rice domestication gene controlling the switch from prostrate to erect growth, is also a QTL associated with tillering in teosinte and maize. Additionally, they also detected multiple QTL for days-to-anthesis (such as ZCN8 and ZmMADS69) and other traits (such as tassel branch number and tillering) that could be exploited for maize improvement. These lines of work highlight again the value of mining the vast amounts of superior alleles hidden in teosinte for future maize genetic improvement.

    • Loss of seed shattering was also a key trait of maize domestication, like in other cereals. shattering1 (sh1), which encodes a zinc finger and YABBY domain protein regulating seed shattering. Interesting, sh1 was demonstrated to undergo parallel domestication in several cereals, including rice, maize, sorghum, and foxtail millet[57]. Later studies showed that the foxtail millet sh1 gene represses lignin biosynthesis in the abscission layer, and that an 855-bp Harbinger transposable element insertion in sh1 causes loss of seed shattering in foxtail millet[58].

    • In addition to morphological traits, a number of physiological and nutritional related traits have also been selected during maize domestication. Based on survey of the nucleotide diversity, Whitt et al.[59] reported that six genes involved in starch metabolism (ae1, bt2, sh1, sh2, su1 and wx1) are selective targets during maize domestication. Palaisa et al.[60] reported selection of the Y1 gene (encoding a phytoene synthase) for increased nutritional value. Karn et al.[61] identified two, three, and six QTLs for starch, protein and oil respectively and showed that teosinte alleles can be exploited for the improvement of kernel composition traits in modern maize germplasm. Fan et at.[62] reported a strong selection imposed on waxy (wx) in the Chinese waxy maize population. Moreover, a recent exciting study reported the identification of a teosinte-derived allele of teosinte high protein 9 (Thp9) conferring increased protein level and nitrogen utilization efficiency (NUE). It was further shown that Thp9 encodes an asparagine synthetase 4 and that incorrect splicing of Thp9-B73 transcripts in temperate maize varieties is responsible for its diminished expression, and thus reduced NUE and protein content[63].

    • Teosintes is known to confer superior disease resistance and adaptation to extreme environments (such as low phosphorus and high salinity). de Lange et al. and Lennon et al.[6466] reported the identification of teosinte-derived QTLs for resistance to gray leaf spot and southern leaf blight in maize. Mano & Omori reported that teosinte-derived QTLs could confer flooding tolerance[67]. Feng et al.[68] identified four teosinte-derived QTL that could improve resistance to Fusarium ear rot (FER) caused by Fusarium verticillioides. Recently, Wang et al.[69] reported a MYB transcription repressor of teosinte origin (ZmMM1) that confers resistance to northern leaf blight (NLB), southern corn rust (SCR) and gray leaf spot (GLS) in maize, while Zhang et al.[70] reported the identification of an elite allele of SNP947-G ZmHKT1 (encoding a sodium transporter) derived from teosinte can effectively improve salt tolerance via exporting Na+ from the above-ground plant parts. Gao et al.[71] reported that ZmSRO1d-R can regulate the balance between crop yield and drought resistance by increasing the guard cells' ROS level, and it underwent selection during maize domestication and breeding. These studies argue for the need of putting more efforts to tapping into the genetic resources hidden in the maize’s wild relatives. The so far cloned genes involved in maize domestication are summarized in Table 1. Notably, the enrichment of transcription factors in the cloned domestication genes highlights a crucial role of transcriptional re-wiring in maize domestication.

      Table 1.  Key domestication genes cloned in maize.

      GenePhenotypeFunctional annotationSelection typeCausative changeReferences
      tb1Plant architectureTCP transcription factorIncreased expression~60 kb upstream of tb1 enhancing expression[1822]
      tga1Hardened fruitcaseSBP-domain transcription factorProtein functionA SNP in exon (K-N)[25, 26]
      gt1Plant architectureHomeodomain leucine zipperIncreased expressionprol1.1 in 2.7 kb upstream of the promoter region increasing expression[27, 28]
      Zm00001d020683Plant architectureINDETERMINATE DOMAIN transcription factorProtein functionUnknown[29]
      UPA1Leaf angleBrassinosteroid C-6 oxidase1Protein functionUnknown[30]
      UPA2Leaf angleB3 domain transcription factorIncreased expressionA 2 bp indel in 9.5 kb upstream of ZmRALV1[30]
      Gl15Vegetative phase changeAP2-like transcription factorAltered expressionSNP2154: a stop codon (G-A)[34, 35]
      tru1Plant architectureBTB/POZ ankyrin repeat proteinIncreased expressionUnknown[36]
      ra1Inflorescence architectureTranscription factorAltered expressionUnknown[37, 38]
      zflPlant architectureTranscription factorAltered expressionUnknown[40, 41]
      UB3Kernel row numberSBP-box transcription factorAltered expressionA TE in the intergenic region;[4446]
      SNP (S35): third exon of UB3
      (A-G) increasing expression of UB3 and KRN
      KRN1/ids1/Ts6Kernel row numberAP2 Transcription factorIncreased expressionUnknown[47, 48]
      KRN2Kernel row numberWD40 domainDecreased expressionUnknown[50]
      qHKW1Kernel row weightCLV1/BAM-related receptor kinase-like proteinIncreased expression8.9 kb insertion upstream of HKW[51, 52]
      ZmVPS29Kernel morphologyA retromer complex componentProtein functionTwo SNPs (S-1830 and S-1558) in the promoter of ZmVPS29[53]
      ZmSWEET4cSeed fillingHexose transporterProtein functionUnknown[54]
      ZmSh1ShatteringA zinc finger and YABBY transcription factorProtein functionUnknown[57, 58]
      Thp9Nutrition qualityAsparagine synthetase 4 enzymeProtein functionA deletion in 10th intron of Thp9 reducing NUE and protein content[63]
      ZmMM1Biotic stressMYB Transcription repressorProtein functionUnknown[69]
      ZmHKT1Abiotic stressA sodium transporterProtein functionSNP947-G: a nonsynonymous variation increasing salt tolerance[70]
      ZmSRO1d-RDrought resistance and productionPolyADP-ribose polymerase and C-terminal RST domainProtein functionThree non-synonymous variants: SNP131 (A44G), SNP134 (V45A) and InDel433[71]
    • After its domestication from its wild progenitor teosinte in southwestern Mexico in the tropics, maize has now become the mostly cultivated crop worldwide owing to its extensive range expansion and adaptation to diverse environmental conditions (such as temperature and day length). A key prerequisite for the spread of maize from tropical to temperate regions is reduced photoperiod sensitivity[72]. It was recently shown that CENTRORADIALIS 8 (ZCN8), an Flowering Locus T (FT) homologue, underlies a major quantitative trait locus (qDTA8) for flowering time[73]. Interestingly, it has been shown that step-wise cis-regulatory changes occurred in ZCN8 during maize domestication and post-domestication expansion. SNP-1245 is a target of selection during early maize domestication for latitudinal adaptation, and after its fixation, selection of InDel-2339 (most likely introgressed from Zea mays ssp. Mexicana) likely contributed to the spread of maize from tropical to temperate regions[74].

      ZCN8 interacts with the basic leucine zipper transcription factor DLF1 (Delayed flowering 1) to form the florigen activation complex (FAC) in maize. Interestingly, DFL1 was found to underlie qLB7-1, a flowering time QTL identified in a BC2S3 population of maize-teosinte. Moreover, it was shown that DLF1 directly activates ZmMADS4 and ZmMADS67 in the shoot apex to promote floral transition[75]. In addition, ZmMADS69 underlies the flowering time QTL qDTA3-2 and encodes a MADS-box transcription factor. It acts to inhibit the expression of ZmRap2.7, thereby relieving its repression on ZCN8 expression and causing earlier flowering. Population genetic analyses showed that DLF1, ZmMADS67 and ZmMADS69 are all targets of artificial selection and likely contributed to the spread of maize from the tropics to temperate zones[75, 76].

      In addition, a few genes regulating the photoperiod pathway and contributing to the acclimation of maize to higher latitudes in North America have been cloned, including Vgt1, ZmCCT (also named ZmCCT10), ZmCCT9 and ZmELF3.1. Vgt1 was shown to act as a cis-regulatory element of ZmRap2.7, and a MITE TE located ~70 kb upstream of Vgt1 was found to be significantly associated with flowering time and was a major target for selection during the expansion of maize to the temperate and high-latitude regions[7779]. ZmCCT is another major flowering-time QTL and it encodes a CCT-domain protein homologous to rice Ghd7[80]. Its causal variation is a 5122-bp CACTA-like TE inserted ~2.5 kb upstream of ZmCCT10[72, 81]. ZmCCT9 was identified a QTL for days to anthesis (qDTA9). A Harbinger-like TE located ~57 kb upstream of ZmCCT9 showed the most significant association with DTA and thus believed to be the causal variation[82]. Notably, the CATCA-like TE of ZmCCT10 and the Harbinger-like TE of ZmCCT9 are not observed in surveyed teosinte accessions, hinting that they are de novo mutations occurred after the initial domestication of maize[72, 82]. ZmELF3.1 was shown to underlie the flowering time QTL qFT3_218. It was demonstrated that ZmELF3.1 and its homolog ZmELF3.2 can form the maize Evening Complex (EC) through physically interacting with ZmELF4.1/ZmELF4.2, and ZmLUX1/ZmLUX2. Knockout mutants of Zmelf3.1 and Zmelf3.1/3.2 double mutant presented delayed flowering under both long-day and short-day conditions. It was further shown that the maize EC promote flowering through repressing the expression of several known flowering suppressor genes (e.g., ZmCCT9, ZmCCT10, ZmCOL3, ZmPRR37a and ZmPRR73), and consequently alleviating their inhibition on several maize florigen genes (ZCN8, ZCN7 and ZCN12). Insertion of two closely linked retrotransposon elements upstream of the ZmELF3.1 coding region increases the expression of ZmELF3.1, thus promoting flowering[83]. The increase frequencies of the causal TEs in Vgt1, ZmCCT10, ZmCCT9 and ZmELF3.1 in temperate maize compared to tropical maize highlight a critical role of these genes during the spread and adaptation of maize to higher latitudinal temperate regions through promoting flowering under long-day conditions[72,8183].

      In addition, Barnes et al.[84] recently showed that the High Phosphatidyl Choline 1 (HPC1) gene, which encodes a phospholipase A1 enzyme, contributed to the spread of the initially domesticated maize from the warm Mexican southwest to the highlands of Mexico and South America by modulating phosphatidylcholine levels. The Mexicana-derived allele harbors a polymorphism and impaired protein function, leading to accelerated flowering and better fitness in highlands.

      Besides the above characterized QTLs and genes, additional genetic elements likely also contributed to the pre-Columbia spreading of maize. Hufford et al.[85] proposed that incorporation of mexicana alleles into maize may helped the expansion of maize to the highlands of central Mexico based on detection of bi-directional gene flow between maize and Mexicana. This proposal was supported by a recent study showing evidence of introgression for over 10% of the maize genome from the mexicana genome[86]. Consistently, Calfee et al.[87] found that sequences of mexicana ancestry increases in high-elevation maize populations, supporting the notion that introgression from mexicana facilitating adaptation of maize to the highland environment. Moreover, a recent study examined the genome-wide genetic diversity of the Zea genus and showed that dozens of flowering-related genes (such as GI, BAS1 and PRR7) are associated with high-latitude adaptation[88]. These studies together demonstrate unequivocally that introgression of genes from Mexicana and selection of genes in the photoperiod pathway contributed to the spread of maize to the temperate regions.

      The so far cloned genes involved in pre-Columbia spread of maize are summarized in Fig. 2 and Table 2.

      Figure 2. 

      Genes involved in Pre-Columbia spread of maize to higher latitudes and the temperate regions. The production of world maize in 2020 is presented by the green bar in the map from Ritchie et al. (2023). Ritchie H, Rosado P, and Roser M. 2023. "Agricultural Production". Published online at OurWorldInData.org. Retrieved from: 'https:ourowrldindata.org/agricultural-production' [online Resource].

      Table 2.  Flowering time related genes contributing to Pre-Columbia spread of maize.

      GeneFunctional annotationCausative changeReferences
      ZCN8Florigen proteinSNP-1245 and Indel-2339 in promoter[73, 74]
      DLF1Basic leucine zipper transcription factorUnknown[75]
      ZmMADS69MADS-box transcription factorUnknown[76]
      ZmRap2.7AP2-like transcription factorMITE TE inserted ~70 kb upstream[7779]
      ZmCCTCCT-domain protein5122-bp CACTA-like TE inserted ~2.5 kb upstream[72,81]
      ZmCCT9CCT transcription factorA harbinger-like element at 57 kb upstream[82]
      ZmELF3.1Unknownwo retrotransposons in the promote[84]
      HPC1Phospholipase A1 enzymUnknown[83]
      ZmPRR7UnknownUnknown[88]
      ZmCOL9CO-like-transcription factorUnknown[88]
    • Subsequent to domestication ~9,000 years ago, maize has been continuously subject to human selection during the post-domestication breeding process. Through re-sequencing analysis of 35 improved maize lines, 23 traditional landraces and 17 wild relatives, Hufford et al.[15] identified 484 and 695 selective sweeps during maize domestication and improvement, respectively. Moreover, they found that about a quarter (23%) of domestication sweeps (107) were also selected during improvement, indicating that a substantial portion of the domestication loci underwent continuous selection during post-domestication breeding.

      Genetic improvement of maize culminated in the development of high planting density tolerant hybrid maize to increase grain yield per unit land area[89, 90]. To investigate the key morphological traits that have been selected during modern maize breeding, we recently conducted sequencing and phenotypic analyses of 350 elite maize inbred lines widely used in the US and China over the past few decades. We identified four convergently improved morphological traits related to adapting to increased planting density, i.e., reduced leaf angle, reduced tassel branch number (TBN), reduced relative plant height (EH/PH) and accelerated flowering. Genome-wide Association Study (GWAS) identified a total of 166 loci associated with the four selected traits, and found evidence of convergent increases in allele frequency at putatively favorable alleles for the identified loci. Moreover, genome scan using the cross-population composite likelihood ratio approach (XP-CLR) identified a total of 1,888 selective sweeps during modern maize breeding in the US and China. Gene ontology analysis of the 5,356 genes encompassed in the selective sweeps revealed enrichment of genes related to biosynthesis or signaling processes of auxin and other phytohormones, and in responses to light, biotic and abiotic stresses. This study provides a valuable resource for mining genes regulating morphological and physiological traits underlying adaptation to high-density planting[91].

      In another study, Li et al.[92] identified ZmPGP1 (ABCB1 or Br2) as a selected target gene during maize domestication and genetic improvement. ZmPGP1 is involved in auxin polar transport, and has been shown to have a pleiotropic effect on plant height, stalk diameter, leaf length, leaf angle, root development and yield. Sequence and phenotypic analyses of ZmPGP1 identified SNP1473 as the most significant variant for kernel length and ear grain weight and that the SNP1473T allele is selected during both the domestication and improvement processes. Moreover, the authors identified a rare allele of ZmPGP1 carrying a 241-bp deletion in the last exon, which results in significantly reduced plant height and ear height and increased stalk diameter and erected leaves, yet no negative effect on yield[93], highlighting a potential utility in breeding high-density tolerant maize cultivars.

    • Shade avoidance syndrome (SAS) is a set of adaptive responses triggered when plants sense a reduction in the red to far-red light (R:FR) ratio under high planting density conditions, commonly manifested by increased plant height (and thus more prone to lodging), suppressed branching, accelerated flowering and reduced resistance to pathogens and pests[94, 95]. High-density planting could also cause extended anthesis-silking interval (ASI), reduced tassel size and smaller ear, and even barrenness[96, 97]. Thus, breeding of maize cultivars of attenuated SAS is a priority for adaptation to increased planting density.

      Extensive studies have been performed in Arabidopsis to dissect the regulatory mechanism of SAS and this topic has been recently extensively reviewed[98]. We recently showed that a major signaling mechanism regulating SAS in Arabidopsis is the phytochrome-PIFs module regulates the miR156-SPL module-mediated aging pathway[99]. We proposed that in maize there might be a similar phytochrome-PIFs-miR156-SPL regulatory pathway regulating SAS and that the maize SPL genes could be exploited as valuable targets for genetic improvement of plant architecture tailored for high-density planting[100].

      In support of this, it has been shown that the ZmphyBs (ZmphyB1 and ZmphyB2), ZmphyCs (ZmphyC1 and ZmphyC2) and ZmPIFs are involved in regulating SAS in maize[101103]. In addition, earlier studies have shown that as direct targets of miR156s, three homologous SPL transcription factors, UB2, UB3 and TSH4, regulate multiple agronomic traits including vegetative tillering, plant height, tassel branch number and kernel row number[44, 104]. Moreover, it has been shown that ZmphyBs[101, 105] and ZmPIF3.1[91], ZmPIF4.1[102] and TSH4[91] are selective targets during modern maize breeding (Table 3).

      Table 3.  Selective genes underpinning genetic improvement during modern maize breeding.

      GenePhenotypeFunctional annotationSelection typeCausative changeReferences
      ZmPIF3.1Plant heightBasic helix-loop-helix transcription factorIncreased expressionUnknown[91]
      TSH4Tassel branch numberTranscription factorAltered expressionUnknown[91]
      ZmPGP1Plant architectureATP binding cassette transporterAltered expressionA 241 bp deletion in the last exon of ZmPGP1[92, 93]
      PhyB2Light signalPhytochrome BAltered expressionA 10 bp deletion in the translation start site[101]
      ZmPIF4.1Light signalBasic helix-loop-helix transcription factorAltered expressionUnknown[102]
      ZmKOB1Grain yieldGlycotransferase-like proteinProtein functionUnknown[121]

      In a recent study to dissect the signaling process regulating inflorescence development in response to the shade signal, Kong et al.[106] compared the gene expression changes along the male and female inflorescence development under simulated shade treatments and normal light conditions, and identified a large set of genes that are co-regulated by developmental progression and simulated shade treatments. They found that these co-regulated genes are enriched in plant hormone signaling pathways and transcription factors. By network analyses, they found that UB2, UB3 and TSH4 act as a central regulatory node controlling maize inflorescence development in response to shade signal, and their loss-of-function mutants exhibit reduced sensitivity to simulated shade treatments. This study provides a valuable genetic source for mining and manipulating key shading-responsive genes for improved tassel and ear traits under high density planting conditions.

    • Nowadays, global maize production is mostly provided by hybrid maize, which exhibits heterosis (or hybrid vigor) in yields and stress tolerance over open-pollinated varieties[3]. Hybrid maize breeding has gone through several stages, from the 'inbred-hybrid method' stage by Shull[107] and East[108] in the early twentieth century, to the 'double-cross hybrids' stage (1930s−1950s) by Jones[109], and then the 'single-cross hybrids' stage since the 1960s. Since its development, single-cross hybrid was quickly adopted globally due to its superior heterosis and easiness of production[3].

      Single-cross maize hybrids are produced from crossing two unrelated parental inbred lines (female × male) belonging to genetically distinct pools of germplasm, called heterotic groups. Heterotic groups allow better exploitation of heterosis, since inter-group hybrids display a higher level of heterosis than intra-group hybrids. A specific pair of female and male heterotic groups expressing pronounced heterosis is termed as a heterotic pattern[110, 111]. Initially, the parental lines were derived from a limited number of key founder inbred lines and empirically classified into different heterotic groups (such as SSS and NSS)[112]. Over time, they have expanded dramatically, accompanied by formation of new 'heterotic groups' (such as Iodent, PA and PB). Nowadays, Stiff Stalk Synthetics (SSS) and PA are generally used as FHGs (female heterotic groups), while Non Stiff Stalk (NSS), PB and Sipingtou (SPT) are generally used as the MHGs (male heterotic groups) in temperate hybrid maize breeding[113].

      With the development of molecular biology, various molecular markers, ranging from RFLPs, SSRs, and more recently high-density genome-wide SNP data have been utilized to assign newly developed inbred lines into various heterotic groups, and to guide crosses between heterotic pools to produce the most productive hybrids[114116]. Multiple studies with molecular markers have suggested that heterotic groups have diverged genetically over time for better heterosis[117120]. However, there has been a lack of a systematic assessment of the effect and contribution of breeding selection on phenotypic improvement and the underlying genomic changes of FHGs and MHGs for different heterotic patterns on a population scale during modern hybrid maize breeding.

      To systematically assess the phenotypic improvement and the underlying genomic changes of FHGs and MHGs during modern hybrid maize breeding, we recently conducted re-sequencing and phenotypic analyses of 21 agronomic traits for a panel of 1,604 modern elite maize lines[121]. Several interesting observations were made: (1) The MHGs experienced more intensive selection than the FMGs during the progression from era I (before the year 2000) to era II (after the year 2000). Significant changes were observed for 18 out of 21 traits in the MHGs, but only 10 of the 21 traits showed significant changes in the FHGs; (2) The MHGs and FHGs experienced both convergent and divergent selection towards different sets of agronomic traits. Both the MHGs and FHGs experienced a decrease in flowering time and an increase in yield and plant architecture related traits, but three traits potentially related to seed dehydration rate were selected in opposite direction in the MHGs and FHGs. GWAS analysis identified 4,329 genes associated with the 21 traits. Consistent with the observed convergent and divergent changes of different traits, we observed convergent increase for the frequencies of favorable alleles for the convergently selected traits in both the MHGs and FHGs, and anti-directional changes for the frequencies of favorable alleles for the oppositely selected traits. These observations highlight a critical contribution of accumulation of favorable alleles to agronomic trait improvement of the parental lines of both FHGs and MHGs during modern maize breeding.

      Moreover, FST statistics showed increased genetic differentiation between the respective MHGs and FHGs of the US_SS × US_NSS and PA × SPT heterotic patterns from era I to era II. Further, we detected significant positive correlations between the number of accumulated heterozygous superior alleles of the differentiated genes with increased grain yield per plant and better parent heterosis, supporting a role of the differentiated genes in promoting maize heterosis. Further, mutational and overexpressional studies demonstrated a role of ZmKOB1, which encodes a putative glycotransferase, in promoting grain yield[121]. While this study complemented earlier studies on maize domestication and variation maps in maize, a pitfall of this study is that variation is limited to SNP polymorphisms. Further exploitation of more variants (Indels, PAVs, CNVs etc.) in the historical maize panel will greatly deepen our understanding of the impact of artificial selection on the maize genome, and identify valuable new targets for genetic improvement of maize.

    • The ever-increasing worldwide population and anticipated climate deterioration pose a great challenge to global food security and call for more effective and precise breeding methods for crops. To accommodate the projected population increase in the next 30 years, it is estimated that cereal production needs to increase at least 70% by 2050 (FAO). As a staple cereal crop, breeding of maize cultivars that are not only high-yielding and with superior quality, but also resilient to environmental stresses, is essential to meet this demand. The recent advances in genome sequencing, genotyping and phenotyping technologies, generation of multi-omics data (including genomic, phenomic, epigenomic, transcriptomic, proteomic, and metabolomic data), creation of novel superior alleles by genome editing, development of more efficient double haploid technologies, integrating with machine learning and artificial intelligence are ushering the transition of maize breeding from the Breeding 3.0 stage (biological breeding) into the Breeding 4.0 stage (intelligent breeding)[122, 123]. However, several major challenges remain to be effectively tackled before such a transition could be implemented. First, most agronomic traits of maize are controlled by numerous small-effect QTL and complex genotype-environment interactions (G × E). Thus, elucidating the contribution of the abundant genetic variation in the maize population to phenotypic plasticity remains a major challenge in the post-genomic era of maize genetics and breeding. Secondly, most maize cultivars cultivated nowadays are hybrids that exhibit superior heterosis than their parental lines. Hybrid maize breeding involves the development of elite inbred lines with high general combining ability (GCA) and specific combining ability (SCA) that allows maximal exploitation of heterosis. Despite much effort to dissect the mechanisms of maize heterosis, the molecular basis of maize heterosis is still a debated topic[124126]. Thirdly, only limited maize germplasm is amenable to genetic manipulation (genetic transformation, genome editing etc.), which significantly hinders the efficiency of genetic improvement. Development of efficient genotype-independent transformation procedure will greatly boost maize functional genomic research and breeding. Noteworthy, the Smart Corn System recently launched by Bayer is promised to revolutionize global corn production in the coming years. At the heart of the new system is short stature hybrid corn (~30%−40% shorter than traditional hybrids), which offers several advantages: sturdier stems and exceptional lodging resistance under higher planting densities (grow 20%−30% more plants per hectare), higher and more stable yield production per unit land area, easier management and application of plant protection products, better use of solar energy, water and other natural resources, and improved greenhouse gas footprint[127]. Indeed, a new age of maize green revolution is yet to come!

      • This work was supported by grants from the Key Research and Development Program of Guangdong Province (2022B0202060005), National Natural Science Foundation of China (32130077) and Hainan Yazhou Bay Seed Lab (B21HJ8101). We thank Professors Hai Wang (China Agricultural University) and Jinshun Zhong (South China Agricultural University) for valuable comments and helpful discussion on the manuscript. We apologize to authors whose excellent work could not be cited due to space limitations.

      • The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. Haiyang Wang is an Editorial Board member of Seed Biology who was blinded from reviewing or making decisions on the manuscript. The article was subject to the journal's standard procedures, with peer-review handled independently of this Editorial Board member and his research groups.

      • Copyright: © 2023 by the author(s). Published by Maximum Academic Press on behalf of Hainan Yazhou Bay Seed Laboratory. This article is an open access article distributed under Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
    Figure (2)  Table (3) References (127)
  • About this article
    Cite this article
    Zhang M, Kong D, Wang H. 2023. Genomic landscape of maize domestication and breeding improvement. Seed Biology 2:9 doi: 10.48130/SeedBio-2023-0009
    Zhang M, Kong D, Wang H. 2023. Genomic landscape of maize domestication and breeding improvement. Seed Biology 2:9 doi: 10.48130/SeedBio-2023-0009

Catalog

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return