Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-r5zm4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-15T22:06:01.720Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Efficiency of different marker systems for molecular characterization of subtropical carrot germplasm

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 January 2010

T. JHANG ,
M. KAUR ,
P. KALIA  and
T. R. SHARMA
T. JHANG
Affiliation:
National Research Centre on Plant Biotechnology, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi110012, India
M. KAUR
Affiliation:
National Research Centre on Plant Biotechnology, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi110012, India
P. KALIA
Affiliation:
Division of Vegetable Science, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi110012, India
T. R. SHARMA*
Affiliation:
National Research Centre on Plant Biotechnology, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi110012, India
*
*To whom all correspondence should be addressed. Email: trsharma@nrcpb.org
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Genetic variability in carrots is a consequence of allogamy, which leads to a high level of inbreeding depression, affecting the development of new varieties. To understand the extent of genetic variability in 40 elite indigenous breeding lines of subtropical carrots, 48 DNA markers consisting of 16 inter simple sequence repeats (ISSRs), 10 universal rice primers (URPs), 16 random amplification of polymorphic DNA (RAPD) and six simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers were used. These 48 markers amplified a total of 591 bands, of which 569 were polymorphic (0·96). Amplicon size ranged from 200 to 3500 base pairs (bp) in ISSR, RAPD and URPs markers and from 100 to 300 bp in SSR markers. The ISSR marker system was found to be most efficient with (GT)n motifs as the most abundant SSR loci in the carrot genome. The unweighted pair group method with arithmetic mean (UPGMA) analysis of the combined data set of all the DNA markers obtained by four marker systems classified 40 genotypes in two groups with 0·45 genetic similarity with high Mantel matrix correlation (r=0·92). The principal component analysis (PCA) of marker data also explained 0·55 of the variation by first three components. Molecular diversity was very high and non-structured in these open-pollinated genotypes. The study demonstrated for the first time that URPs can be used successfully in genetic diversity analysis of tropical carrots. In addition, an entirely a new set of microsatellite markers, derived from the expressed sequence tags (ESTs) sequences of carrots, has been developed and utilized successfully.

Type
Crops and Soils
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 148 , Issue 2 , April 2010 , pp. 171 - 181
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bhagchandani, P. M. & Choudhary, B. (1970). Heterosis and inbreeding expression in carrot. Progressive Horticulture 2, 65–73.Google Scholar
Bradeen, J. M., Bach, I. C., Briard, M., Le Clerc, V., Grzebelus, D., Senalik, D. A. & Simon, P. W. (2002). Molecular diversity analysis of cultivated carrot (Daucus carota L.) and wild Daucus populations reveals a genetically nonstructured composition. Journal of American Society of Horticultural Sciences 127, 383–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briard, M., Le Clerc, V., Mausset, A. E. & Veret, A. (2001). A comparative study on the use of ISSR, microsatellites and RAPD markers on varietal identification of carrot genotypes. Acta Horticulturae 546, 377–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dikshit, H. K., Jhang, T., Singh, N. K., Koundal, K. R., Bansal, K. C., Chandra, N., Tickoo, J. L. & Sharma, T. R. (2007). Genetic differentiation of Vigna species by RAPD, URP and SSR markers. Biologia Plantarum 51, 451–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dillmann, C., Bar-Hen, A., Guerin, D., Charcosset, A. & Murigneux, A. (1997). Comparison of RFLP and morphological distances between maize Zea mays L. inbred lines: consequences for germplasm protection purposes. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 95, 92–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doyle, J. J. & Doyle, J. L. (1987). A rapid DNA isolation procedure for small quantities of fresh leaf material. Phytochemistry Bulletin 119, 11–15.Google Scholar
FAO (2004). FAO Statistical Yearbook 2004. Rome: FAO.Google Scholar
Grzebelus, D., Baranski, R., Jagosz, B., Michalik, B. & Simon, P. W. (2001). Comparison of RAPD and AFLP techniques used for the evaluation of genetic diversity of carrot breeding materials. Acta Horticulturae 546, 413–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grzebelus, D., Szklarczyk, M. & Michalik, B. (1997). The use of RAPD markers for genotype identification of carrot line and F1 hybrid. Journal of Applied Genetics 38A, 33–41.Google Scholar
IBPGR (1981). Revised Priorities Among Crop and Regions. Rome: IBPGR.Google Scholar
Kang, H. W., Park, D. S., Go, S. J. & Eun, M. Y. (2002). Fingerprinting of diverse genomes using PCR with universal rice primers generated from repetitive sequences of Korean weedy rice. Molecules and Cells 13, 281–287.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lallemand, J. & Briand, F. (1995). Use of electrophoresis for variety testing in carrot. Plant Breeding 114, 372–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Clerc, V., Briard, M. & Peltier, D. (2001). Evaluation of carrot genetic substructure: Comparison of the efficiency of mapped molecular markers with randomly chosen markers. Acta Horticulturae 546, 127–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macko, A. & Grzebelus, D. (2008). DcMaster transposon display markers as a tool for diversity evaluation of carrot breeding materials and for hybrid seed purity testing. Journal of Applied Genetics 49, 33–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mantel, N. (1967). The detection of disease clustering and a generalized regression approach. Cancer Research 27, 209–220.Google Scholar
Murray, M. G. & Thompson, W. F. (1980). Rapid isolation of high molecular weight plant DNA. Nucleic Acids Research 8, 4321–4325.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nakajima, Y., Oeda, K. & Yamamoto, T. (1998). Characterization of genetic diversity of nuclear and mitochondrial genomes in Daucus varieties by RAPD and AFLP. Plant Cell Report 17, 848–853.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nei, M. (1973). Analysis of gene diversity in subdivided populations. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences, USA 70, 3321–3323.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Niemann, M., Westphal, L. & Wricke, G. (1997). Analysis of microsatellite markers in carrot (Daucus carrota L. sativus). Journal of Applied Genetics 38A, 20–27.Google Scholar
Powell, W., Morgante, M., Andre, C., Hanafey, M., Vogel, J., Tingey, S. & Rafalski, A. (1996). The comparison of RFLP, AFLP and SSR (microsatellite) markers for germplasm analysis. Molecular Breeding 2, 225–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prevost, A. & Wilkinson, M. J. (1999). A new system of comparing PCR primer applied to ISSR fingerprinting of potato cultivars. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 98, 107–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rohlf, F. J. (2000). NTSYS-PC: Numerical Taxonomy and Multivariate Analysis System, version 2.11T. Setauket, NY: Exeter Software.Google Scholar
Santos Carlos, A. F. & Simon, P. W. (2002). Some AFLP amplicons are highly conserved DNA sequences mapping to the same linkage groups in two F2 populations of carrot. Genetics and Molecular Biology 25, 195–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schultz, B., Westphal, L. & Wricke, G. (1997). Linkage groups of isozymes, RFLP and RAPD markers in carrot (Daucus carota L. sativus). Euphytica 74, 67–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, P. W. (1996). Inheritance and expression of purple and yellow storage root colour in carrot. Journal of Heredity 87, 63–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, P. W. (2000). Domestication, historical development, and modern breeding of carrot. Plant Breeding Reviews 19, 157–190.Google Scholar
Simon, P. W., Rubatzky, V. E., Bassett, M. J., Strandberg, J. O. & White, J. M. (1997). B7262, purple carrot inbred. Hortscience 32, 146–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
St Pierre, M. D. & Bayer, R. J. (1991). The impact of domestication on the genetic variability in the orange carrots, cultivated Daucus carota ssp. sativus and the genetic homogeneity of various cultivars. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 82, 249–253.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stein, M. & Nothnagel, T. (1995). Some remarks on carrot breeding (Daucus carota sativus Hoffm.). Plant Breeding 114, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uniel, N. & Gabelman, W. H. (1972). Inheritance of root colour and carotenoid synthesis in carrot (Daucus carota L.) orange vs red. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science 97, 453–460.Google Scholar
UPOV (1976). Guidelines for the Conduct of Tests for Distinctness, Homogeneity and Stability. Carrot (Daucus carota). Publication no. TG/49/3. Geneva: UPOV.Google Scholar
Vivek, B. S. & Simon, P. W. (1998). Genetic relationships and diversity in carrot and other Daucus taxa based on nuclear restriction fragment length polymorphism (nRFLPs). Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Sciences 123, 1053–1057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vivek, B. S. & Simon, P. W. (1999). Linkage relationships among molecular markers and storage root traits of carrot (Daucus carota L. ssp. sativus). Theoretical and Applied Genetics 99, 58–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar