4.4 Article

New insights on the genetic basis of Portuguese grapevine and on grapevine domestication

期刊

GENOME
卷 52, 期 9, 页码 790-800

出版社

CANADIAN SCIENCE PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1139/G09-048

关键词

Vitis vinifera subsp sylvestris; Vitis vinifera subsp sativa; genetic diversity; microsatellites; germplasm management

资金

  1. Assessoria para a Ciencia e Tecnologia da Presidencia do Governo Regional da Regiao Autonoma dos Acores
  2. Fundacao para a Ciencia c a Tecnologia (Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology
  3. FCT)
  4. European Regional Development Fund [POCI/AGR/60974/2004]
  5. Direccao Regional da Ciencia e Tecnologia (Regional Directorate of Science and Technology
  6. DRCT) [M3 1.1/I/017A/2005, 1.2/I/006B/2005]
  7. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [POCI/AGR/60974/2004] Funding Source: FCT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

As the ancestor of cultivated grape, Vitis vinifera subsp. sylvestris represents a unique, invaluable genetic resource for the improvement of cultivated grapevines. Recently, five populations of wild grapevines were identified in Portugal. Sixty vines were characterized with 11 nuclear SSR markers and further compared with 70 genotypes of Portuguese Vitis vinifera subsp. sativa. The obtained data demonstrate moderate genetic differentiation between wild grapevine populations and moderate to high genetic differentiation between wild and cultivated grapevines. However, the identification of high degrees of similarity between wild and cultivated grapes (up to 87%) and a putative parent-progeny relationship between wild and cultivated grapes with 17 additional SSR markers is indicative of gene flow between local wild grapevine populations and Portuguese domesticated vines Also, the ancestry of some Azorean cultivars was ascertained. The obtained data further support the hypothesis of several domestication centres. with Portugal, Spain, and Italy playing a particular role after the last glaciation, giving rise to many of the Western European cultivars.

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