4.3 Article

Estimation of genetic diversity and population structure inTinospora cordifoliausing SSR markers

Journal

3 BIOTECH
Volume 10, Issue 7, Pages -

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s13205-020-02300-7

Keywords

Tinospora cordifolia; Simple sequence repeat (SSR); Genetic diversity; AMOVA

Funding

  1. CSIR [HCP 010, BSC 107]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Thirty polymorphic SSRs, derived from RNA sequencing ofTinospora cordifolia(willd.), were utilized for genetic diversity and population structure evaluation among 96 accessions collected from ten different geographical regions of India. A total of 7611 SSRs were identified from 268149 transcripts. Of all SSR loci, 69.07% of them were tri-nucleotide repeat motifs, followed by di-nucleotide repeat motifs (12.82%). A total of 230 alleles were generated by 30 SSRs with an average of 7.67 alleles per locus with comparatively higher polymorphic information content (average 0.68). The expected (He) and observed (Ho) heterozygosity means were 0.71 and 0.12, respectively. All the loci showed significant deviation from Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium (HWE). The neighbor joining clustering based on jaccard's coefficient grouped all the 96 accessions into three major cluster which was also in congruence with model-based structure plot. The result of molecular variance (AMOVA) revealed higher genetic variance within populations than among populations. The result reflects an existence of high level of genetic diversity in the collected accessions ofT. cordifolia. The accessions Tc131, Tc31, Tc129, Tc38, Tc16, Tc59, Tc60, Tc17, Tc106 and Tc130 was found to be potential and diverse in nature and the SSRs TCSSR-18, TCSSR-37, TCTSSR-59, TCTSSR-92, TCTSSR-123 and TCTSSR-126 as potential markers. These accessions and newly developed SSR markers provide valuable resource and could be strategically utilized for further genetic improvement ofT. cordifolia.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available