Summary
The aim of this study was to investigate the efficiency of ISSR, SSR, and SAMPL marker systems in detecting genetic polymorphism among 30 winter rye inbred lines and to compare the results of cluster analysis performed on data from these marker systems using different statistical methods and coefficients. Each marker system was able to discriminate among the materials analyzed with the lowest value of average genetic similarity (GS) obtained with ISSR markers (0.2888) and the highest with SAMPLs (0.5381). EST-derived SSRs turned out to be less efficient in detecting genetic diversity than those from genomic libraries (average GS values 0.3814 and 0.3221, respectively). The average GS value for combined SSR data was 0.3569. The lack of correlations between similarity and cophenetic matrices obtained with various methods systems suggests that different marker systems should be used simultaneously for a genetic diversity study to exploit as many sources of polymorphisms as possible.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Blair, M.W., F. Pedraza, H.F. Buenida, E. Gaitán-Solís, S.E. Beebe, P. Gepts & J. Tohme, 2003. Development of a genome-wide anchored microsatellite map for common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Theor Appl Genet 107: 1362–1374.
Cho, Y.G., S. Temnykh, X. Chen, L. Lipovich, S.R. McCouch, N. Ayres & S. Cartinhour, 2000. Diversity of microsatellites derived from genomic libraries and GenBank sequences in rice. Theor Appl Genet 100: 713–722.
Hackauf, B. & P. Wehling, 2002. Identification of microsatellite polymorphisms in an expressed portion of the rye genome. Plant Breed 121: 17–25.
Jaccard, P., 1908. Nouvelles recherches sur la distribution florale. Bull Soc Vaudoise Sci Nat 44: 223–270.
Khlestkina, E.K., M.H.M. Than, E.G. Pestsova, M.S. Röder, S.V. Malyshev, V. Korzun & A. Börner, 2004. Mapping of 99 new microsatellite-derived loci in rye (Secale cereale L.) including 39 expressed sequence tags. Theor Appl Genet 19: 725–732.
Morgante, M. & J. Vogel, 1994. Compound Microsatellite Primers for the Detection of Genetic Polymorphism, U.S. Patent Appl. 08/326456.
Murray, M.G. & W.F. Thompson, 1980. Rapid isolation of high molecular weight plant DNA. Nucleic Acid Res 8: 4321–4325.
Pillen, K., A. Binder, A.B. Kreuzkam, L. Ramsay, R. Waugh, J. Förster & J. Léon, 2000. Mapping new EMBL-derived barley microsatellites and their use in differentiating German barley cultivars. Theor Appl Genet 101: 652–660.
Powell, W., M. Morgante, C. Andre, M. Hanafey, J. Vogel, S. Tingey & A. Rafalski, 1996. The comparison of RFLP, RAPD, AFLP, and SSR (microsatellite) markers for germplasm analysis. Mol Breed 2: 225–238.
Rakoczy-Trojanowska, M. & H. Bolibok, 2004. Characteristics and comparison of three classes of microsatellite-based markers and their application in plants. Cell Mol Biol Lett 9: 221–238.
Rohlf, F.J., 2001. NTSYS-pc Numerical Taxonomy and Multivariate Analysis System, Version 5.1. Exeter, Setauket, NY.
Roy, J.K., H.S. Balyan, M. Prasad & P.K. Gupta, 2002. Use of SAMPL for a study of DNA polymorphism, genetic diversity, and possible gene tagging in bread wheat. Theor Appl Genet 104: 465–472.
Saal, B. & G. Wricke, 1999. Development of simple sequence repeat markers in rye (Secale cereale L.). Genome 42: 964–972.
Singh, A., A. Chaudhury, P.S. Srivastava & M. Lakshmikumaran, 2002. Comparison of AFLP and SAMPL markers for assessment of intra-population genetic variation in Azadirachta indica A. Juss Plant Sci 162: 17–25.
Tosti, N. & V. Negri, 2002. Efficiency of three PCR-based markers in assessing genetic variation among cowpea (Vigna unguiculata subsp. unguiculata) landraces. Genome 45: 268–275.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bolibok, H., Rakoczy-Trojanowska, M., Hromada, A. et al. Efficiency of different PCR-based marker systems in assessing genetic diversity among winter rye (Secale cereale L.) inbred lines. Euphytica 146, 109–116 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-005-0548-0
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-005-0548-0