4.7 Article

Ploidy variation of hardy kiwifruit (Actinidia arguta) resources and geographic distribution in Japan

Journal

SCIENTIA HORTICULTURAE
Volume 124, Issue 3, Pages 409-414

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scienta.2010.01.016

Keywords

A. arguta; Hardy kiwifruit; Distribution; Flow cytometry; Morphology; Polyploidy; Sarunashi

Categories

Funding

  1. Kagawa University Research Project
  2. JSPS KAKENHI [20580031]
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [20580031] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Survey on the wild genetic resources of hardy kiwifruit (Actinidia arguta) in Japan was conducted to determine the ploidy variation and its geographic distribution. Among the 127 wild plants collected from different geographic locations, 15 plants were diploid, 87 were tetraploid, and 22 were hexaploid. Additionally, 2 plants were heptaploid and one plant was octaploid. The tetraploid plants were distributed all over the country, whereas the diploid and hexaploid plants were geographically localized, in the warm Pacific hill areas of the south western part and in the deep-snow region of the mid-northern part of Honshu, respectively. The diploid plants could be clearly distinguished from other plants with ploidy variation by the morphological characteristics of the leaf and fruit. Hexaploid plants showed a relatively larger L/D ratio of the leaf blade, a greenish petiole, and pubescence on the petiole and lower leaf vein, whereas the tetraploid plants exhibited a reddish petiole and callose hairs on the vein of the lower leaf surface. Fruit shape of the tetraploid plants varied largely, from round to ellipsoidal, whereas that of the hexaploid plants was mostly ellipsoidal. These results indicate that the hexaploid plants of A. arguta as well as the diploid and tetraploid ones, naturally grow in a certain size of population in the restricted region of Japan. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. 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

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available