| Literature DB >> 19662204 |
Appukuttannair R Pradeep1, Anuradha H Jingade, Raje S Urs.
Abstract
Improvement of high yielding, disease resistant silkworm strains became imminent to increase production of silk, which is a major revenue earner for sericulturists. Since environment interacts with phenotype, conventional breeding did not result in commendable yield improvement in synthetic strains of silkworm, Bombyx mori. Identification of DNA markers associated with different economically important biomass traits and its introgression could assist molecular breeding and expression of stabilized high yielding characters, but genetic basis of most quantitative traits in silkworm is poorly understood due to its polygenic control. Correlation analysis (R = 0.9) revealed significant interrelation among biomass traits viz., larval duration (TLD), larval weight (LWT), cocoon weight (CWT), shell weight (SWT), shell ratio (SR) and floss content. PCR using inter simple sequence repeat (ISSR) primers revealed 92% polymorphism among 14 tropical and temperate strains of B. mori, with average diversity index of 0.747. Stepwise multiple regression analysis (MRA) selected 35 ISSR markers positively or negatively correlated with different biomass traits, illustrated polygenic control. ISSR marker 830.8(1050bp) was significantly associated with LWT, CWT, SWT, SR and floss content, indicated its pleiotropic role. Two ISSR markers, 835.5(1950bp) and 825.9(710bp) showed significant association with floss content and TLD. These markers were segregated in F(2) generation and Chi-square test confirmed (chi(2) = ~45; P < 0.05) its genetic contribution to the associated biomass traits. Strains, with both positively and negatively correlated markers, had intermediate mean value for biomass traits (eg. SWT = 0.17 +/- 0.014 g in GNM and Moria) indicated interaction of loci in natural populations. Low yielding Indian strains grouped together by Hierarchical clustering. Chinese and Japanese strains were distributed in the periphery of ALSCAL matrix indicated convergence of genetic characters in Indian strains. Average genetic distance between Chinese strains and Indian strains (0.193) significantly (P < 0.01) varied from that between Chinese and Japanese strains. Interaction of loci and allelic substitutions induced phenotypic plasticity in temperate B. mori populations on tropic adaptation in India. These outcomes show possibility to combine favorable alleles at different QTL to increase larval, cocoon and shell weight.Entities:
Keywords: Biomass traits; Bombyx mori; ISSR marker-trait association; genetic distance; interaction; plasticity
Year: 2007 PMID: 19662204 PMCID: PMC2717847
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomark Insights ISSN: 1177-2719
Molecular markers associated with different biomass traits of B. mori.
| Trait | Number of markers positively associated | Number of markers negatively associated | Marker system | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total larval duration | 06 | 09 | RFLP | |
| 01 | 02 | ISSR | ||
| 02 | 01 | RAPD | ||
| 01 | -- | RFLP-STS | Mohandas et al. 2004 | |
| 03 | 01 | ISSR | ||
| Total Maximum larval weight | 13 | 13 | -- | -- |
| 10 | 20 | RFLP | ||
| -- | 03 | ISSR | ||
| 02 | 01 | RAPD | ||
| -- | 01 | RFLP-STS | Mohandas et al. 2004 | |
| 01 | 03 | ISSR | Present study | |
| Total Cocoon weight | 13 | 28 | -- | -- |
| 15 | 17 | RFLP | ||
| 00 | 04 | ISSR | ||
| 01 | 01 | RAPD | ||
| 01 | -- | RFLP-STS | Mohandas et al. 2004 | |
| 05 | -- | AFLP | ||
| -- | 01 | ISSR | Present study | |
| Total Shell weight | 22 | 23 | -- | -- |
| 15 | 18 | RFLP | ||
| 00 | 03 | ISSR | ||
| 01 | 02 | RAPD | ||
| 01 | -- | RFLP-STS | Mohandas et al. 2004 | |
| -- | 01 | ISSR | Present study | |
| 05 | -- | AFLP | ||
| Total Shell ratio | 22 | 24 | -- | -- |
| 11 | 12 | RFLP | ||
| 01 | 02 | ISSR | ||
| 01 | 02 | RAPD | ||
| 01 | -- | RFLP-STS | Mohandas et al. 2004 | |
| -- | 02 | ISSR | Present study | |
| Total | 14 | 18 | -- | -- |
Type of association (+ or −) not mentioned.
Origin, diapause behavior and quantitative traits (mean values) of different strains of silkworm B. mori used in the study
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strains | Nistari | C’nichi | Pure Mysore | GNM | Moria | KA | NB1 | NB4D2 | NB7 | NB18 | Hu204 | Chinese Golden- 70 | Jam-23 | Jam -124 |
| Origin | India | Japan | India | China | India | India | Japan | India | India | India | China | China | India | India |
| Diapause behavior | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | D | D | D | D | D | D | D | D | D |
| TLD (h) | 557. | 539 | 626 | 557 | 564 | 602 | 621 | 646 | 599 | 600 | 631. | 572 | 594 | 616 |
| LWT (g) | 2.091 | 2.096 | 1.817 | 2.635 | 2.685 | 3.518 | 4.095 | 3.535 | 3.4.32 | 3.611 | 3.878 | 3.614 | 3.835 | 3.521 |
| CWT (g) | 1.020 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.190 | 1.130 | 1.500 | 1.710 | 1.820 | 1.560 | 1.570 | 1.570 | 1.530 | 1.700 | 1.520 |
| SWT (g) | 0.130 | 0.120 | 0.140 | 0.180 | 0.160 | 0.250 | 0.370 | 0.360 | 0.280 | 0.270 | 0.320 | 0.240 | 0.280 | 0.270 |
| SR (%) | 13.00 | 11.99 | 14.07 | 15.21 | 14.69 | 16.74 | 21.43 | 19.56 | 18.01 | 17.23 | 20.41 | 15.61 | 16.60 | 17.560 |
| Floss (%) | 6.800 | 7.090 | 11.870 | 8.320 | 9.170 | 4.100 | 5.100 | 3.464 | 3.899 | 4.391 | 4.121 | 2.668 | 3.893 | 7.438 |
| Silk waste (%) | 32.00 | 43.30 | 32.50 | 14.32 | 31.65 | 30.38 | 17.85 | 11.50 | 26.00 | 25.00 | 22.98 | 17.88 | 36.64 | 22.90 |
ND- non-diapausing; D- diapausing.
Correlation matrix showing interaction among different quantitative traits of B. mori strains.
| LWT | TLD | CWT | SWT | SR | FLOSS | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TLD | Pearson correlation | 0.524 | |||||
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.055 | ||||||
| Covariance | 12.684 | ||||||
| CWT | Pearson correlation | 0.945** | 0.648* | ||||
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.012 | |||||
| Covariance | 0.203 | 5.993 | |||||
| SWT | Pearson correlation | 0.915** | 0.744** | 0.961** | |||
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.002 | 0.000 | ||||
| Covariance | 0.057 | 1.993 | 0.023 | ||||
| SR | Pearson correlation | 0.855** | 0.779** | 0.861** | 0.962** | ||
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.0001 | 0.001 | 0.000 | 0.000 | |||
| Covariance | 1.751 | 68.834 | 0.674 | 0.218 | |||
| FLOSS | Pearson correlation | −0.783** | −0.215 | −0.790** | −0.690** | −0.540* | |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.001 | 0.461 | 0.001 | 0.006 | 0.046 | ||
| Covariance | −1.549 | −18.293 | −0.597 | −0.151 | −3.896 | ||
| S.WASTE | Pearson correlation | −0.480 | −0.439 | −0.540* | −0.605* | −0.633* | 0.313 |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.082 | 0.116 | 0.046 | 0.022 | 0.015 | 0.276 | |
| Covariance | −3.219 | −126.897 | −1.383 | −0.449 | −15.468 | 7.383 |
Correlation is significant at 0.01 level (**) or at 0.05 level (*) (2-tailed)
Key to primer details, polymorphism, genetic informativeness and markers exclusive to different strains of B. mori.
| ISSR Primer (UBC) | Sequence | No. of products | Size (bp) (range) | Number of polymorphic products (% polymorphism) | Mean diversity index (DI) | Mean effective multiplex ratio (EMR) | Maker index (MI) | Products exclusive to: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strains | Size (bp) | ||||||||
| 807 | (AG)8T | 07 | 600–1600 | 06 (85.71) | 0.913 | 5.143 | 4.695 | -- | |
| 809 | (AG)8G | 12 | 950–2200 | 12 (100) | 0.737 | 12.00 | 8.848 | NB7 | 2000 |
| 810 | (GA)8T | 06 | 1100–1400 | 05 (83.33) | 0.918 | 4.167 | 3.826 | -- | |
| 811 | (GA)8C | 07 | 900–2400 | 07 (100) | 0.759 | 7.000 | 5.319 | -- | |
| 812 | (GA)8A | 14 | 780–2500 | 14 (100) | 0.893 | 14.00 | 12.506 | C’Nichi | 2700 |
| NB1 | 2500 | ||||||||
| KA | 1100 | ||||||||
| NB4D2 | 950 | ||||||||
| 813 | (CT)8T | 08 | 950–2700 | 07 (87.50) | 0.873 | 6.125 | 5.350 | C’Nichi | 1800 |
| 818 | (CA)8G | 06 | 900–2100 | 05 (83.33) | 0.764 | 4.167 | 3.183 | -- | |
| 825 | (AC)8T | 09 | 700–3000 | 07 (77.77) | 0.886 | 5.444 | 4.825 | -- | |
| 826 | (AC)8C | 12 | 820–2600 | 12 (100) | 0.629 | 12.00 | 7.559 | -- | |
| 827 | (AC)8G | 09 | 1100–2200 | 07 (77.77) | 0.800 | 5.444 | 4.355 | -- | |
| 830 | (TG)8G | 11 | 780–2000 | 11 (100) | 0.774 | 11.000 | 8.523 | C’Nichi | 1450 |
| 834 | (AG)8YT | 13 | 600–3000 | 12 (92.31) | 0.791 | 11.077 | 8.764 | C’Nichi | 1400 |
| 835 | (AG)8YC | 15 | 600–3500 | 15 (100) | 0.900 | 15.000 | 13.500 | Hu204 | 1500 |
| C’Nichi | 1100 | ||||||||
| 836 | (AG)8YA | 15 | 800–3000 | 15 (100) | 0.895 | 15.000 | 13.419 | -- | |
| 841 | (GA)8YC | 10 | 500–2600 | 09 (90) | 0.943 | 8.100 | 7.638 | C’Nichi | 1100;1400 |
| 844 | (CT)8RC | 05 | 1100–2250 | 05 (100) | 0.104 | 5.000 | 0.520 | C’Nichi | 1100 |
| 851 | (GT)8YG | 07 | 620–1700 | 05 (71.43) | 0.817 | 3.571 | 2.917 | -- | |
| 857 | (AC)8YG | 09 | 700–1700 | 06 (66.67) | 0.748 | 4.000 | 2.993 | -- | |
| 862 | (AGC)6 | 08 | 500–1900 | 08 (100) | 0.103 | 8.000 | 0.826 | -- | |
| 864 | (ATG)6 | 10 | 1100–2700 | 08 (80.00) | 0.750 | 6.400 | 4.800 | -- | |
| 873 | (GACA)4 | 08 | 800–1550 | 07 (87.50) | 0.351 | 6.125 | 2.153 | -- | |
| 881 | (GGGTG)3 | 12 | 910–2700 | 12 (100) | 0.842 | 12.000 | 10.103 | -- | |
| 884 | HBH(AG)7 | 11 | 600–2000 | 11 (100) | 0.769 | 11.000 | 8.456 | -- | |
| 885 | BHB(GA)7 | 13 | 700–2100 | 13 (100) | 0.886 | 13.000 | 11.512 | KA | 2000 |
| 886 | VDV(CT)7 | 15 | 600–3000 | 14 (93.33) | 0.829 | 13.067 | 10.839 | Hu204 | 3000 |
| Total | 252 | -- | 233 (92.46) | 0.747 | 8.713 | 6.697 | -- | -- | |
Y = (C,T); R = (A,G); H = (A,C,T); B = (C,G,T); V = (A,C,G); D = (A,G,T);
mean values.
DI = 1−∑pi2, where pi is the allele frequency of the ith allele
EMR = n(n/n), where n is the number of polymorphic loci and n is the total number of loci.
MI = DI × EMR.
Figure 1ISSR profile generated from genomic DNA of 14 strains of B. mori using the primer UBC 830. Arrow shows the presence of marker (830.81050bp) in low yielding strains. 1–14 represents strains as listed in Table 2. M- molecular marker (Massruler, Fermentas).
Analysis of test of significance of association of markers with biomass related traits in B. mori on the basis of markers selected by MRA.
| Trait | Marker selected | Strains | Phenotype estimate (Mean ± SD) of strains with marker | Significance | Type of relation | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| present | absent | present | absent | ||||
| TLD (h) | 825.9710bp | 1,2,4,5, 11 | 3,6,7,8,9, 10,12,13, 14 | 594.723 ± 35.549 | 608.444 ± 21.425 | 0.07 | − |
| 835.111050bp | 6,7,10, 11. | 1, 2, 3,4,5,8, 9, 12, 13, 14 | 613.50 ± 15.022 | 587.00 ± 34.791 | 0.071 | + | |
| LWT (g) | 830.81050bp | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. | 6,7,8,9,10, 11,12, 13, 14 | 2.265 ± 0.378 | 3.671 ± 0.217 | 0.00039 | − |
| 851.11700bp | 1, 2, 3 | 4,5,6,7,8, 9,10, 11,12, 13, 14 | 2.001 ± 0.160 | 3.487 ± 0.453 | 3.08 × 10−6 | − | |
| 836.42300bp | 7,11 | 1, 2, 3,4,5,6,8, 9,10, 12, 13, 14 | 3.987 ± 0.153 | 3.033 ± 0.721 | 0.0024 | + | |
| 886.61800bp | 1,3,4,9 | 2,5,6,7,8, 10,11, 12, 13, 14 | 2.494 ± 0.712 | 3.439 ± 0.599 | 0.068 | − | |
| CWT (g) | 830.81050bp | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. | 6,7,8,9,10, 11, 12, 13, 14. | 1.068 ± 0.087 | 1.609 ± 0.108 | 1.22 × 10−5 | − |
| SWT (g) | 830.81050bp | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. | 6,7,8,9,10, 11,12, 13, 14 | 0.146 ± 0.024 | 0.293 ± 0.046 | 4.74 × 10−5 | − |
| SR (%) | 830.81050bp | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. | 6,7,8,9,10, 11,12, 13, 14 | 13.792 ± 1.300 | 18.127 ± 1.93 | 0.00037 | − |
| 811.41800bp | 1, 2, 5, 14 | 3,4,6,7,8, 9, 10, 11,12, 13 | 14.310 ± 2.436 | 17.487 ± 2.368 | 0.073 | − | |
| Silk waste (%) | 881.42000bp | 2,4,7,8, 9,13,14 | 1,3,5,6,10,11,12 | 18.408 ± 5.345 | 31.800 ± 6.350 | 0.0011 | − |
| 836.15800bp | 1,3,4,5, 6,7,8,9, 10,11, 12,14 | 2,13 | 23.747 ± 7.181 | 39.97 ± 4.709 | 0.059 | − | |
| Floss (%) | 830.81050bp | 1,2,3,4,5 | 6,7,8,9,10, 11, 12,13, 14 | 8.65 ± 2.037 | 4.342 ± 1.334 | 0.0055 | + |
| 835.51950bp | 2,3,5,14 | 1,4,6,7,8,9, 10,11,12,13 | 8.892 ± 2.184 | 4.676 ± 1.680 | 0.021 | + | |
| 811.32100bp | 1,2,6,8,9,10, 11,12,13,14 | 3,4,5,7 | 4.786 ± 1.676 | 8.615 ± 2.789 | 0.064 | − | |
| 851.31500bp | 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,9, 11,12,13,14 | 8,10 | 6.206 ± 2.716 | 3.927 ± 0.655 | 0.0351 | − | |
Serial number of strains (1–14) as mentioned in Table 2;
−or + correlation with the estimates as derived by MRA.
Single factor ANOVA shows association of ISSR marker 830.81050bp with different traits of B.mori strains.
| Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F | Sig. | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LWT | Between groups | 6.356 | 1 | 6.356 | 80.223 | 0.000 |
| Within groups | 0.951 | 12 | 0.079 | |||
| CWT | Between groups | 0.940 | 1 | 0.940 | 90.443 | 0.000 |
| Within groups | 0.125 | 12 | 0.010 | |||
| SWT | Between groups | 0.070 | 1 | 0.070 | 42.893 | 0.000 |
| Within groups | 0.020 | 12 | 0.002 | |||
| SR | Between groups | 60.425 | 1 | 60.425 | 19.771 | 0.001 |
| Within groups | 36.675 | 12 | 3.056 | |||
| FLOSS | Between groups | 59.666 | 1 | 59.666 | 23.213 | 0.000 |
| Within groups | 30.844 | 12 | 2.570 | |||
| S.WASTE | Between groups | 171.060 | 1 | 171.060 | 2.361 | 0.150 |
| Within groups | 869.498 | 12 | 7.458 |
Single marker analysis and Chi-square test of different ISSR markers on F2 populations developed from divergent strains of B. mori.
| Cross | Trait | Marker | Phenotype estimate (Mean ± SD) of F2 individuals where the marker showed: | P value | χ2 (Goodness-of-fit) | Significance | Skewed ness towards parent | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Presence | Absence | |||||||
| PM × NB1 F2 | LWT | 830.81050bp | 2.044 ± 0.342 | 3.129 ± 0.140 | 1.65 × 10−13 | 44.004 | 0.095 | PM |
| 836.42300bp | 2.905 ± 0.378 | 2.489 ± 0.513 | 0.010 | 46.750 | 0.057 | NB1 | ||
| CWT | 830.81050bp | 0.985 ± 0.250 | 1.367 ± 0.226 | 0.0001 | 47.092 | 0.042 | PM | |
| SWT | 830.81050bp | 0.139 ± 0.025 | 0.220 ± 0.023 | 7.92 × 10−11 | 36.542 | 0.104 ns* | -- | |
| SR | 830.81050bp | 15.224 ± 2.282 | 16.274 ± 2.693 | 0.306 ns | 46.909 | 0.055 | PM | |
| FLOSS | 830.81050bp | 11.020 ± 2.282 | 06.385 ± 1.351 | 1.23 × 10−8 | 46.909 | 0.998 ns * | PM | |
| 835.51950bp | 9.482 ± 2.871 | 6.296 ± 2.527 | 0.0029 | 27.484 | 0.384 ns* | -- | ||
| C’NICHI × NB1 F2 | TLD | 825.9710bp | 533.714 ± 11.586 | 600.375 ± 19.522 | 3.899 × 10−6 | 20.728 | 0.109 ns* | -- |
Inheritance of all markers was at 1:1 ratio except 835.51950bp was at 3:1; ns: not significant
Effects of interaction of markers on estimates of biomass traits in B. mori.
| Traits | Marker combination | Strains in which the marker is present | Mean (± SD) Each strain | phenotype estimate of: Group | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CWT | 830.81050bp | Nistari | 1.02 | ||
| PM | 1.0 | ||||
| Moria | 1.13 | 1.05 ± 0.070 | 0.074 | ||
| 830.81050bp + 810.21350bp | GNM | 1.19 | 1.19 | 0.059 | |
| 810.21350bp | NB1 | 1.71 | |||
| Chinese golden 70 | 1.53 | 1.62 ± 0.127 | 0.131 | ||
| SWT | 830.81050bp | Nistari | 0.13 | ||
| C’nichi | 0.12 | ||||
| PM | 0.14 | 0.130 ± 0.01 | 0.094 | ||
| 830.81050bp + 886.52000bp | GNM | 0.18 | |||
| Moria | 0.16 | 0.17 ± 0.014 | 1.6 × 10−5 | ||
| 886.52000bp | KA | 0.25 | |||
| NB1 | 0.37 | ||||
| NB4D2 | 0.36 | ||||
| NB7 | 0.28 | ||||
| NB18 | 0.27 | ||||
| Chinese Golden-70 | 0.24 | ||||
| Jam23 | 0.28 | ||||
| Jam124 | 0.27 | 0.290 ± 0.048 | 0.0053 | ||
| Silk waste (%) | 881.42000bp | GNM | 14.32 | 14.32 | 0.042 |
| 881.42000bp + 885.71200bp | NB1 | 17.85 | |||
| NB7 | 26.00 | ||||
| Chinese golden 70 | 17.88 | ||||
| Jam124 | 22.90 | 21.575 ± 4.007 | 0.0055 | ||
| 885.71200bp | Jam 23 | 36.64 | |||
| C’nichi | 43.30 | ||||
| Moria | 31.65 | ||||
| KA | 30.38 | 35.493 ± 5.864 | 0.009 | ||
| Floss (%) | 830.81050bp | Nistari | 6.80 | ||
| PM | 11.87 | ||||
| GNM | 8.32 | ||||
| Moria | 9.17 | 9.04 ± 2.126 | 0.164 | ||
| 830.81050bp + 830.11780bp | C’Nichi | 7.09 | 7.09 | 0.0078 | |
| 830.11780bp | NB4D2 | 3.464 | |||
| Chinese golden 70 | 2.668 | 3.066 ± 0.563 | 0.063 | ||
| TLD | 825.9710bp | Nistari | 557 | ||
| C’nichi | 539 | ||||
| GNM | 557 | ||||
| Moria | 564 | 554.25 ± 10.689 | 0.0007 | ||
| 825.9710bp + 835.111050bp | Hu204 | 631 | 631 | 0.0028 | |
| 835.111050bp | KA | 602 | |||
| NB1 | 621 | ||||
| NB18 | 600 | 607.667 ± 11.590 | 0.072 | ||
| LWT | 830.81050bp | Nistari | 2.091 | ||
| C’Nichi | 2.096 | ||||
| PM | 1.817 | ||||
| GNM | 2.635 | ||||
| Moria | 2.685 | 2.265 ± 0.378 | |||
| 830.81050bp + 836.42300bp | Nil | -- | -- | ||
| 836.42300bp | NB1 | 4.095 | |||
| Hu204 | 3.878 | 3.987 ± 0.153 | 0.0046 |
Significance of difference between low and intermediate estimates.
Significance of difference between low and high estimates.
Significance of difference between intermediate and high estimates.
No strain had both markers together; ns- not significant;
single strain.
Figure 2Dendrograms realized from the similarity coefficient calculated using (2.A) Jaccard measure, Dice measure and (2.B) Sokal and Sneath measure based on ISSR profile generated from genomic DNA of 14 strains of B. mori.
Figure 3Distribution of 14 strains of B. mori on a two dimensional plot generated from Euclidean distances based on ISSR profile using ALSCAL multidimensional scaling. ▲Original Indian strains; ◆evolved from Japanese parents; ★Chinese strains; Japanese strains; ■Indian strains but parentage not known.
ISSR markers selected by MRA for different quantitative traits related with biomass in B. mori.
| Trait | Marker | Beta | t-value | Adjusted R2 | Significance (P) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TLD | 825.9 | −0.874 | 5.404 | 0.738 | 0.000 |
| +835.11 | 0.361 | 3.032 | 0.863 | 0.016 | |
| +825.2 | 0.270 | 3.725 | 0.947 | 0.007 | |
| +811.3 | −0.165 | 3.041 | 0.976 | 0.023 | |
| +807.4 | −0.124 | 4.658 | 0.995 | 0.006 | |
| LWT | 830.8 | −0.933 | 8.957 | 0.859 | 0.000 |
| +851.1 | −0.374 | 3.649 | 0.930 | 0.004 | |
| +836.4 | 0.196 | 3.834 | 0.969 | 0.003 | |
| +886.13 | −0.127 | 3.528 | 0.986 | 0.006 | |
| +886.6 | −0.097 | 3.943 | 0.994 | 0.004 | |
| CWT | 830.8 | −0.943 | 8.529 | 0.878 | 0.000 |
| +810.2 | 0.268 | 3.640 | 0.948 | 0.007 | |
| +844.5 | −0.206 | 4.332 | 0.984 | 0.003 | |
| +830.7 | −0.191 | 3.996 | 0.995 | 0.007 | |
| +864.7 | 0.074 | 6.087 | 0.999 | 0.002 | |
| SWT | 830.8 | −0.909 | 6.559 | 0.808 | 0.000 |
| +834.11 | 0.359 | 3.870 | 0.925 | 0.005 | |
| +886.5 | 0.263 | 4.040 | 0.974 | 0.005 | |
| +885.13 | −0.146 | 3.947 | 0.992 | 0.008 | |
| +818.1 | 0.081 | 3.199 | 0.997 | 0.024 | |
| SR | 830.8 | −0.823 | 4.344 | 0.641 | 0.002 |
| +834.11 | 0.459 | 3.255 | 0.826 | 0.012 | |
| +884.9 | −0.313 | 3.482 | 0.927 | 0.010 | |
| +826.5 | −0.200 | 3.014 | 0.966 | 0.024 | |
| +811.4 | −0.141 | 4.842 | 0.993 | 0.005 | |
| +827.2 | 0.063 | 4.456 | 0.999 | 0.011 | |
| Floss | 830.8 | 0.812 | 4.818 | 0.631 | 0.000 |
| +835.5 | 0.449 | 2.893 | 0.771 | 0.015 | |
| +884.1 | −0.471 | 3.861 | 0.899 | 0.003 | |
| +811.3 | −0.276 | 4.515 | 0.966 | 0.001 | |
| +830.11 | −0.150 | 4.545 | 0.989 | 0.002 | |
| +851.3 | −0.074 | 3.772 | 0.996 | 0.007 | |
| +886.4 | 0.049 | 4.282 | 0.999 | 0.005 | |
| Silk waste | 881.4 | −0.769 | 4.168 | 0.557 | 0.001 |
| +885.7 | 0.443 | 3.108 | 0.743 | 0.010 | |
| +825.6 | −0.403 | 5.359 | 0.927 | 0.000 | |
| +836.15 | −0.245 | 5.033 | 0.979 | 0.001 | |
| +886.6 | 0.147 | 4.578 | 0.993 | 0.002 | |
| +826.3 | 0.068 | 4.185 | 0.998 | 0.004 |
+ indicate stepwise addition of each marker.
− indicate negative correlation with the estimate of trait.
Single factor ANOVA shows association of ISSR markers with different traits of F2 individuals#
| Markers | Trait | Sum of Squares | df | Mean square | F | Sig. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 830.81050bp | LWT | Between groups | 0.722 | 1 | 0.722 | 3.034 | 0.091 |
| Within groups | 7.847 | 33 | 0.238 | ||||
| CWT | Between groups | 1.064 | 1 | 1.064 | 37.751 | 0.000 | |
| Within groups | 0.930 | 33 | 0.028 | ||||
| SWT | Between groups | 0.021 | 1 | 0.021 | 22.185 | 0.000 | |
| Within groups | 0.031 | 33 | 0.001 | ||||
| SR | Between groups | 0.483 | 1 | 0.483 | 0.070 | 0.793 | |
| Within groups | 228.222 | 33 | 6.916 | ||||
| FLOSS | Between groups | 223.663 | 1 | 223.663 | 77.652 | 0.000 | |
| Within groups | 95.050 | 33 | 2.880 | ||||
| 836.42300bp | LWT | Between groups | 0.260 | 1 | 0.260 | 1.304 | 0.317 |
| Within groups | 8.308 | 33 | 8.308 | ||||
| 835.51950bp | FLOSS | Between groups | 29.143 | I | 29.143 | 3.321 | 0.077 |
| Within groups | 289.570 | 33 | 8.775 | ||||
| 825.9710bp | TLD | Between groups | 16589.630 | 1 | 16589.630 | 62.092 | 0.000 |
| Within groups | 3473.304 | 13 | 267.177 |
Traits of F2 developed from PM × NB1 cross in all cases except for TLD which is from F2 of C’nichi × NB1.
not significant.
Genetic distance between different strains of B. mori of different geographical origin based on ISSR profile derived using three different measures.
| Jaccard measure | Dice measure | Sokal and Sneath measure | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strain | Genetic distance | Strain | Genetic distance | Strain | Genetic distance | |
| Most genetically similar pair | Nistari- Pure Mysore | 0.108 | Nistari- Pure Mysore | 0.216 | Nistari- Pure Mysore | 0.108 |
| Most genetically distanced pair | C’Nichi- Jam23 | 0.667 | C’Nichi- Jam23 | 0.500 | C’Nichi- NB1 | 0.292 |
| Mean (range in parenthesis) genetic distance between Chinese and Indian strains | -- | 0.539 (0.411–0.632) | -- | 0.371 (0.259–0.462) | -- | 0.193 |
| Mean (range in parenthesis) genetic distance between Chinese and Japanese strains | -- | 0.556 (0.513–0.617) | -- | 0.386 (0.345–0.446) | -- | 0.220 (0.180–0.263) |
| Mean (range in parenthesis) genetic distance between Japanese and Indian strains | -- | 0.559 (0.440–0.667) | -- | 0.390 (0.282–0.500) | -- | 0.225 (0.108–0.292) |
calculated from similarity matrix;
Significant at p < 0.01 level when compared with genetic distances within Chinese-Japanese and Japanese-Indian Strains.