4.5 Article

Glutelin protein fraction as a tool for clear identification of Amaranth accessions

Journal

JOURNAL OF CEREAL SCIENCE
Volume 53, Issue 2, Pages 198-205

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcs.2010.12.003

Keywords

Wild Amaranth species; Grain amaranth species; Protein fractions; Chip electrophoresis

Funding

  1. European Commission
  2. project AMARANTH: FUTURE-FOOD [032263]
  3. Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic [AV0Z50520514]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In order to simplify the identification of amaranth accessions in gene banks or seed laboratories, a comprehensive method based on band position and relative band intensity data from the glutelin patterns of the chip microfluidic electrophoresis was developed. Chip electrophoresis protein fraction patterns were compared with the patterns obtained by the classical SDS-PAGE method. Fifty-nine Amaranth accessions (Amaranthus australis, Amaranthus cannabinus, Amaranthus deflexus, Amaranthus retroflexus, Amaranthus tuberculatus, Amaranthus wrightii and 53 unknown accessions of the grain species Amaranthus caudatus, Amaranthus cruentus and Amaranthus hypochondriacus) were analysed. Detailed pattern description of each group is provided here in the form of simplified pattern codes in the glutelin polymorphic area, enabling the identification of hybrid accessions and wild species. Inflorescence type and colour, weight of a thousand seeds, and seed colour were tested as additional phenotypic markers. The clustering within the grain amaranths group was related only to the different inflorescence types generally used to discriminate amaranth species. Statistical analysis of pattern similarities resulted in the segregation of the cultivated grain species, the monoecious wild species, and the dioecious wild species into three separate clusters. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available