4.4 Article

Genomic SSR and EST-SSR markers for phylogenetic and pedigree reconstructions-A comparison in sea buckthorn

期刊

PLANT BREEDING
卷 140, 期 1, 页码 167-183

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/pbr.12889

关键词

parentage analysis; phylogenetic analysis; sea buckthorn; species identification; SSR

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study identified SSR markers from expressed sequence tags (EST-SSRs) and whole genome sequences (gSSRs) in the Mongolian sea buckthorn cultivar 'Sunny'. EST-SSRs showed higher transferability to Hippophae species, while gSSRs were more effective in resolving parentage. The comparison between the two types of markers provides insights into the trade-off between differentiation and polymorphism in marker selection for breeding programs.
Simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers play an important role in genetic and molecular breeding programs, especially for non-model species. We identified SSRs from expressed sequence tags (EST-SSRs) and whole genome sequences (gSSRs), by analysing the transcriptome and genome of the Mongolian sea buckthorn (Hippophae rhamnoides subsp. mongolica) cultivar 'Sunny'. Using the same number of loci, EST-SSRs showed higher transferability to Hippophae than gSSRs, and phylogenetic trees based on EST-SSRs demonstrated higher resolution for classifying Hippophae species and subspecies into clades, possibly due to high conservatism and/or existence of adaptive divergence between species/subspecies in coding sequence regions. In contrast, parentage analyses showed that gSSRs were more effective at resolving parentage than EST-SSRs due to higher level of polymorphism in gSSRs. The markers developed in this study can be used in the identification and pedigree reconstruction of species/subspecies of sea buckthorn, while their usage in clarifying phylogenetic relationship among species remains to be discussed. The comparison between EST-SSRs and gSSRs would provide insight into the trade-off between differentiation and polymorphism in marker selection for breeding programs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据