Literature DB >> 24937645

Comparative mapping of the wild perennial Glycine latifolia and soybean (G. max) reveals extensive chromosome rearrangements in the genus Glycine.

Sungyul Chang1, Carrie S Thurber1, Patrick J Brown1, Glen L Hartman2, Kris N Lambert1, Leslie L Domier2.   

Abstract

Soybean (Glycine max L. Mer.), like many cultivated crops, has a relatively narrow genetic base and lacks diversity for some economically important traits. Glycine latifolia (Benth.) Newell & Hymowitz, one of the 26 perennial wild Glycine species related to soybean in the subgenus Glycine Willd., shows high levels of resistance to multiple soybean pathogens and pests including Alfalfa mosaic virus, Heterodera glycines Ichinohe and Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Lib.) de Bary. However, limited information is available on the genomes of these perennial Glycine species. To generate molecular resources for gene mapping and identification, high-density linkage maps were constructed for G. latifolia using single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers generated by genotyping by sequencing and evaluated in an F2 population and confirmed in an F5 population. In each population, greater than 2,300 SNP markers were selected for analysis and segregated to form 20 large linkage groups. Marker orders were similar in the F2 and F5 populations. The relationships between G. latifolia linkage groups and G. max and common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) chromosomes were examined by aligning SNP-containing sequences from G. latifolia to the genome sequences of G. max and P. vulgaris. Twelve of the 20 G. latifolia linkage groups were nearly collinear with G. max chromosomes. The remaining eight G. latifolia linkage groups appeared to be products of multiple interchromosomal translocations relative to G. max. Large syntenic blocks also were observed between G. latifolia and P. vulgaris. These experiments are the first to compare genome organizations among annual and perennial Glycine species and common bean. The development of molecular resources for species closely related to G. max provides information into the evolution of genomes within the genus Glycine and tools to identify genes within perennial wild relatives of cultivated soybean that could be beneficial to soybean production.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24937645      PMCID: PMC4061007          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0099427

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


Introduction

Soybean (Glycine max L. Mer.) is a major source of dietary protein and oil in animal production and for human consumption worldwide [1]. With increasing utilization of soybean for animal feed in countries like China, there is added demand for soybean production [2]. Most of the increased demand for soybean products has been met by expanding the land area devoted to soybean production [3]. However, it is not clear if the expansion of soybean production areas alone will be able to keep pace with this growing demand. In addition, the global movement of soybean pathogens and pests and the emergence of new pathogens, as illustrated by the recent identification of soybean aphids (Aphis glycines Matsumura), soybean rust (Phakopsora pachyrhizi Syd. & P. Syd) and Soybean vein necrosis virus in North America [4]–[6], necessitates the identification of novel genes that will enable producers to meet the ever increasing demand for soybean production in the face of changing abiotic and biotic stresses. Because of its narrow genetic base, soybean, like many cultivated crops, lacks diversity found in some of its wild relatives. The genus Glycine consists of 28 species split between two subgenera, Glycine Willd. and Soja (Moench) F. J. Hermann. The subgenus Soja contains two annual species, G. max, the domesticated species in the genus, and G. soja Sieb. & Zucc., both of which are native to Asia. The Glycine subgenus contains 26 species, including G. latifolia (Benth.) Newell & Hymowitz, that are native to Australia and surrounding islands, and have been shown to possess genes for agronomically valuable traits, such as resistance to Heterodera glycines Ichinohe and tolerance to Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Lib.) de Bary. and drought [7]–[13]. To date however, it has not been possible to utilize genes from the perennial Glycine species for soybean improvement even though G. max and the perennial Glycine species share a relatively recent whole genome duplication that occurred between 5 and 13 million years ago [14], [15]. Attempts to hybridize G. max and Glycine perennials have, with the exception of G. tomentella (2n = 78) Hayata, been unsuccessful, even with in vitro embryo rescue [16], [17]. Cytogenetic observations have shown aberrant chromosome paring in F1 hybrids leading to embryo abortion [18]. Sequence data from G. latifolia and G. tomentella suggest that differences in intergenic and pericentromeric sequences, including sequences of widely dispersed retrotransposons, have reduced chromosomal pairing during hybridization [19]–[21]. Advances in molecular biology provide tools to circumvent the genetic barriers to capturing the biological diversity present in the perennial relatives of G. max. In addition to the genome sequence of G. max [15], the genome sequence of the wild annual species G. soja was recently determined [22], and shed light on similarities and differences between the two interfertile species. Using the genomic information, high-throughput sequencing and virus-based gene silencing techniques, multiple genes have been identified in soybean [23]–[26]. Even though gene mapping resources developed for G. max have not been directly useful in perennial Glycine species, the identification of large syntenic blocks between G. max and other legume species [27]–[30] suggests that high levels of synteny will be observed between annual and perennial Glycine species. The development of methods for cost-efficient discovery and mapping of single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers through methods like genotyping by sequencing (GBS) [31], [32] have made it possible to fine map genes in plant species for which genetic resources are lacking, as is the case with the perennial Glycine species. Here, we describe the construction of high-density linkage maps for a perennial relative, G. latifolia, of cultivated soybean and compare the orders of mapped SNP markers to their positions in the genome sequences of G. max and Phaseolus vulgaris L.

Materials and Methods

Plant materials

Reciprocal crosses were performed between G. latifolia plant introduction (PI) 559298 and PI 559300 (obtained from the USDA Soybean Germplasm Collection in Urbana, Illinois; http://www.ars-grin.gov/npgs/urbana.html) as previously described [19]. Populations were advanced by selfing the F2 generation to the F5 generation.

GBS mapping

DNA was extracted from leaf tissue of PI 559298, PI 559300, 146 F2 plants and 89 F5 plants using a DNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen, Valencia, CA). DNA samples were digested with BfaI and PstI-HF restriction enzymes (New England Biolabs, Ipswich, MA) as described by Thurber et al. [33]. For these experiments, BfaI was selected because it did not produce strong banding patterns in preliminary restriction enzyme digestions of G. latifolia DNA and PstI was selected because G. latifolia sequence data [19] contained an intermediate number of PstI recognition sites. For example, the previously determined G. latifolia sequence data were predicted to contain 2.1×104 MluI sites, 8.9×104 PstI sites and 3.1×105 HindIII sites. Up to 96 samples were sequenced per lane of a HiSeq2000 (Illumina Inc., San Diego, CA) at the W. M. Keck Center at the University of Illinois, Urbana, IL, USA to produced 100-nt single-end reads. In both experiments, DNA from each of the parental lines was independently processed twice to serve as a control for SNP identification. The barcode splitter from TASSEL [34] was used to assign sequence reads to individual lines and remove barcode sequences, which produced 90-nucleotide sequence reads that were analyzed for SNPs. The parsed sequence data for the F2 and F5 populations have been deposited in the NCBI Short Read Archive as part of project SRP013346. Next, three Perl scripts were used to analyze the sequence reads for the bi-parental populations. First, sequence reads for each individual/line in the F2 and F5 populations and from the parental lines, PI 559298 and PI 559300, were aligned using Bowtie [35] to a G. latifolia pseudo-reference sequence, which was generated by sequencing 180-bp, 500-bp paired-end and 3-kb, 8-kb, and 15-kb mate-pair libraries prepared from G. latifolia PI 559298 DNA, sequenced on an Illumina HiSeq 2000, and de novo assembled using ALLPATHS-LG [36] (Chang et al., manuscript in preparation). The resulting assembly contained 16,423 scaffolds representing 1,069 Mbp, with an N50 of 235 Kb. Bowtie2 [37], which allows for insertions and deletions (indels), was also evaluated for read mapping, but at the high stringencies for matching employed, few indels were detected and the output from Bowtie was parsed more directly to SNP calls than output from Bowtie2. Second, SNPs were called when at least three reads from both replications of PI 559298 differed from both replications of PI 559300. Finally, Bowtie output files for each individual/line were used to assess allelic frequencies for each SNP using a custom Perl script, which ignored SNPs in low quality sequence reads (average quality scores of 40 or less). Based on allelic frequencies at each locus for each line, the Perl script then created a genotype matrix file for linkage analysis. Markers with less than 30% missing data and whose segregation did not differ significantly (P>0.05) from expected segregation ratios were selected for de novo linkage map construction. Linkage maps were constructed using MSTMap [38] with a P-value  =  1.0−9, and visualized using MapDraw [39]. Consensus linkage maps were constructed for G. latifolia from the F2 and F5 data using MergeMap [40]. A weight of 5.0 was assigned to the F5 linkage maps and a weight of 1.0 to F2 linkage maps to reflect the higher confidence in the quality of the maps because of the reduced potential for errors in calling of heterozygous genotypes in the F5 population relative to the F2 population. To assess the synteny between G. latifolia linkage groups (LGs) and G. max chromosomes, SNP-containing sequences from G. latifolia were aligned to the G. max genome sequence [15] using BLAST [41]. For comparisons with P. vulgaris chromosomes, G. latifolia SNP-containing sequences and G. max gene models [15] were aligned to P. vulgaris chromosomes (http://www.phytozome.net/commonbean.php) using BLAST and visualized with MizBee [42]. When G. latifolia sequences aligned at more than one location, the most syntenic location was chosen for these analyses.

Results

Mapping GBS SNP markers in G. latifolia populations

Genotyping by sequencing of the F2 population produced a total of 4.00×108 100-nt reads, of which 1.70×108 passed all quality controls and uniquely aligned to PI 559300 sequences. After barcodes were removed, 90 nt were used for SNP discovery. In the F2 population, 5,160 markers could be reliably scored between the parental lines PI 559298 and PI 559300. Linkage maps constructed from that initial data set represented over 13,000 centimorgans (cM), which was significantly larger than G. max (2,296 to 2,550 cM) and previous G. latifolia (1972 cM) linkage maps [19], [43]–[46] and likely resulted from errors in calling heterozygous genotypes because of low coverage at some loci. The data set was reprocessed to exclude markers with more than 30% missing data and with segregation ratios that differed significantly from 1∶2∶1 (P>0.05), which resulted in 2,377 markers (Table S1). The average depth of coverage for the selected SNPs was 32 reads per locus and ranged from 0 to 270 reads. The markers formed 20 large LGs (Figure S1), with an average of 119 markers per LG (Table 1), and a total length of 2,305 cM. To confirm marker orders, an F5 population was analyzed by the same procedures. The analysis produced a total of 1.92×108 100-nt reads, of which 1.05×108 passed all quality controls and uniquely aligned to PI 559300 sequences. The data produced 7,081 SNPs between the parental lines, from which 3,110 GBS markers (Table S2) were selected using similar criteria and analyzed in an F5 population. Average depth of coverage for the selected SNPs was 21 reads and ranged from 0 to 264 reads. As with the F2 population, most of the markers formed 20 large LGs (Figure S2), with an average of 155 markers per LG and a total map length of 3,110 cM. A total of 1,777 markers were shared between the two populations with 600 markers unique to the F2 population and 1,333 markers unique to the F5 population. The orders of shared markers were very similar in linkage maps constructed from the F2 and F5 populations (Figure 1). In some cases, markers that appeared to segregate in the F2 population did not segregate in the F5, presumably caused by errors in calling heterozygous loci in the F2 population. The shared markers were used as a framework to construct consensus linkage maps for G. latifolia (Figures 1 & S3). The merged consensus maps contained 3,710 markers (Table 1).
Table 1

Comparison of the numbers of SNP markers in F2, F5, merged and Chang et al. [19] maps.

MarkersLength (cM)
Linkage GroupF2 F5 MergedChang et al. [19] F2 F5 MergedChang et al. [19]
112318520617116.792.2139.8117.44
215219222915142.6162.6220.4196.71
3871271571091.4103.6137.746.96
410713815813121.095.8153.4124.51
51391552028137.594.3180.362.18
615720724013159.5119.4183.1112.52
7801281441585.493.8129.793.96
815017521413129.9141.8175.2151.24
912617520114129.6118.4153.794.25
1010214917411112.7132.0171.798.99
1110612816413114.4104.0132.3103.77
12941031301691.9100.9118.4116.93
131151691931596.994.0130.6156.41
1485751251279.139.595.851.73
1511416418512104.498.3125.9103.64
161191551829102.895.9144.764.38
1713616720211126.990.6147.567.76
1813017719919124.498.8156.190.93
1913117921411121.894.4147.744.11
2012416219111116.3136.5170.373.8
Total2377311037102582305.22106.83014.31972.2
Figure 1

Comparison of F2, F5 and merged linkage maps for GBS SNP markers for Glycine latifolia linkage groups 1 and 20.

Orders of SNP markers were very similar between the F2 and F5 populations. In some cases, markers that segregated in the F2 population co-localized in the F5 population, which may have resulted from errors in calling heterozygous loci in the F2 population. While linkage group 1 showed a high level of collinearity with G. max chromosome 1, linkage group 20 had regions of collinearity with multiple G. max chromosomes. Even so, there was good agreement in marker order between the F2 and F5 populations for linkage group 20. Markers were named for the G. max chromosome and the nucleotide position on the chromosome (×10−6) to which the SNP-containing sequences aligned. Markers that did not align to a G. max chromosome were named for the G. latifolia scaffold containing the SNP.

Comparison of F2, F5 and merged linkage maps for GBS SNP markers for Glycine latifolia linkage groups 1 and 20.

Orders of SNP markers were very similar between the F2 and F5 populations. In some cases, markers that segregated in the F2 population co-localized in the F5 population, which may have resulted from errors in calling heterozygous loci in the F2 population. While linkage group 1 showed a high level of collinearity with G. max chromosome 1, linkage group 20 had regions of collinearity with multiple G. max chromosomes. Even so, there was good agreement in marker order between the F2 and F5 populations for linkage group 20. Markers were named for the G. max chromosome and the nucleotide position on the chromosome (×10−6) to which the SNP-containing sequences aligned. Markers that did not align to a G. max chromosome were named for the G. latifolia scaffold containing the SNP.

Synteny between G. latifolia linkage groups and G. max chromosomes

Because little information is available on G. latifolia chromosomes, or chromosomes of any other perennial Glycine species, G. latifolia LGs were named for the G. max chromosomes to which G. latifolia SNP-containing sequences predominantly aligned. When mapped orders of G. latifolia SNPs were compared to positions of their sequences in the G. max genome, G. latifolia LGs 1, 3, 4, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, and 18 showed a high degree of collinearity with the corresponding G. max chromosomes and no interchromosomal rearrangements (Figure 2). In contrast, the remaining eight chromosomes each had at least one interchromosomal rearrangement relative to G. max (LG 13: one rearrangement; LG16: two rearrangements; LGs 2, 5, and 8: three rearrangements; LGs 7 and 20: four rearrangements and LG 19: five rearrangements). For example, G. latifolia LG 13 contained regions syntenic with G. max chromosomes 13 and 20 and G. latifolia LG 2 contained regions syntenic to G. max chromosomes 1, 2, 8, 13 and 19 (Figure 2). Glycine latifolia chromosome 8 appeared to be the product of two translocations between G. max chromosomes 2 and 8. Similarly, G. latifolia LG 20 appeared to contain a reciprocal translocation between G. max chromosomes 2 and 20. Syntenic blocks in rearranged LGs corresponded to between 0.3 Mb and 30 Mb (between G. latifolia LG 8 and G. max chromosome 8) in the G. max genome with an average of 6.9 Mb. Even though we described the structure of G. latifolia linkage groups as products for rearrangements relative to G. max, the structures of the ancestral chromosomes is not known. Hence, in some cases, G. latifolia linkage groups may have under gone fewer rearrangements than G. max chromosomes. Singleton markers (single G. latifolia SNP markers that aligned to a G. max chromosome without at least a second proximal collinear marker) were ignored for these analyses.
Figure 2

Synteny between Glycine latifolia linkage groups and G. max chromosomes.

Sequences containing mapped G. latifolia SNPs were aligned to the G. max genome sequence. Glycine latifolia linkage groups (top) and physical maps for each G. max chromosome (bottom) are displayed as linear arrays. Vertical and diagonal lines connect genetic and physical locations of SNP markers between the two species.

Synteny between Glycine latifolia linkage groups and G. max chromosomes.

Sequences containing mapped G. latifolia SNPs were aligned to the G. max genome sequence. Glycine latifolia linkage groups (top) and physical maps for each G. max chromosome (bottom) are displayed as linear arrays. Vertical and diagonal lines connect genetic and physical locations of SNP markers between the two species. As with molecular markers in G. max, comparison of the genetic distances between GBS markers in G. latifolia and the physical distances between positions to which the SNP-containing sequences aligned on G. max chromosomes, indicated that there was reduced recombination in regions that corresponded to G. latifolia centromeres (Figure 3). Points deviating from the main line may represent mis-aligned, or mis-mapped sequences or intrachromosomal rearrangements. No G. latifolia markers were identified that aligned to 13.7 Mb and 15.0 Mb in the central regions of G. max chromosomes 5 and 20, respectively, which may have been caused by low GBS marker density (i.e., lack of PstI cutting sites) or low sequence conservation in highly repetitive pericentromeric regions.
Figure 3

Comparison of genetic distances in Glycine latifolia to physical distances in G. max for linkage groups/chromosomes 1 and 18.

Glycine latifolia linkage groups 1 and 18 showed a high degree of collinearity with the corresponding G. max chromosomes. The genetic distances in G. latifolia were plotted against the physical locations of the SNP markers on the G. max chromosomes 1 and 18. As in G. max, the predicted ratios of genetic and physical distances varied along G. latifolia linkage groups. The slopes were steeper near the ends of linkage groups and flatter near the center in regions predicted to correspond to centromeres, where recombination is lower.

Comparison of genetic distances in Glycine latifolia to physical distances in G. max for linkage groups/chromosomes 1 and 18.

Glycine latifolia linkage groups 1 and 18 showed a high degree of collinearity with the corresponding G. max chromosomes. The genetic distances in G. latifolia were plotted against the physical locations of the SNP markers on the G. max chromosomes 1 and 18. As in G. max, the predicted ratios of genetic and physical distances varied along G. latifolia linkage groups. The slopes were steeper near the ends of linkage groups and flatter near the center in regions predicted to correspond to centromeres, where recombination is lower.

Similarities between G. latifolia linkage groups and Phaseolus vulgaris chromosomes

The progenitor of P. vulgaris diverged from the Glycine about 19 million years ago [47], [48]. While 3,664 SNP-containing sequences from G. latifolia aligned to the G. max genome, 2,063 G. latifolia sequences aligned to P. vulgaris chromosomes. For G. max, the sequences of 30,327 gene models aligned to P. vulgaris chromosomes. As reported for comparisons between G. max and P. vulgaris [49], extensive blocks of synteny were observed between G. latifolia LGs and P. vulgaris chromosomes (Figure 4). McClean et al. observed that the pericentromeric regions of G. max chromosomes 10, 12, 14, 17, 18, and 20 had extensive syntenic blocks with P. vulgaris chromosomes. Glycine latifolia LGs 7 and 20 appeared to have larger syntenic blocks with single P. vulgaris chromosomes than with G. max chromosomes. Both G. latifolia LGs 10 and 20 showed large blocks of synteny with P. vulgaris chromosome 7, as did G. max chromosome 10. The results suggest that G. max chromosome 7 and 20 have been reorganized after the whole genome duplication event, but G. max chromosome 10 and G. latifolia LGs 7, 10 and 20 appear to have retained gene orders more similar to shared ancestral chromosomes.
Figure 4

Comparison of synteny of individual Glycine latifolia linkage groups 7, 10 and 20 with G. max and Phaseolus vulgaris chromosomes.

Glycine latifolia linkage groups (A & B) and G. max chromosomes (C) are placed at the top of each circle with colored lines connecting positions of G. latifolia SNP markers (A & B) or G.max gene model (C) sequences to positions in G. max (Gm01 – Gm20) or P. vulgaris (PV01 – PV11) chromosomes, represented by gray boxes. Glycine latifolia linkage groups 7 and 20 appeared to have larger syntenic blocks with single P. vulgaris chromosomes than G. max chromosomes. Both G. latifolia linkage groups 10 and 20 showed large blocks of synteny with P. vulgaris chromosome 7, as did G. max chromosome 10. Synteny maps were constructed using MizBee [42].

Comparison of synteny of individual Glycine latifolia linkage groups 7, 10 and 20 with G. max and Phaseolus vulgaris chromosomes.

Glycine latifolia linkage groups (A & B) and G. max chromosomes (C) are placed at the top of each circle with colored lines connecting positions of G. latifolia SNP markers (A & B) or G.max gene model (C) sequences to positions in G. max (Gm01 – Gm20) or P. vulgaris (PV01 – PV11) chromosomes, represented by gray boxes. Glycine latifolia linkage groups 7 and 20 appeared to have larger syntenic blocks with single P. vulgaris chromosomes than G. max chromosomes. Both G. latifolia linkage groups 10 and 20 showed large blocks of synteny with P. vulgaris chromosome 7, as did G. max chromosome 10. Synteny maps were constructed using MizBee [42].

Discussion

Glycine latifolia is a perennial relative of soybean that is native to eastern Australia with a trailing or twining growth habit [50]. Like G. max, the genome of G. latifolia contains 2n = 40 morphologically similar chromosomes [50]. In this study, we used GBS to construct high-density linkage maps for G. latifolia and showed that eight of the 20 G. latifolia LGs were rearranged relative to G. max chromosomes. Linkage maps were constructed de novo from F2 and F5 populations to confirm marker orders. Genotyping by sequencing has been applied to several plant species with and without reference genome sequences. For example, Sonah et al. [51] reported the application of GBS to a set of eight diverse soybean genotypes and identified from 4,028 to 5,807 SNPs between pairs of soybean lines by aligning sequence reads to the G. max genome sequence. Similar to results reported here, Ward et al. [52] produced genetic maps for raspberry (Rubus idaeus L.) without a reference sequence consisting of 2,391 and 4,521 markers. Russell et al. [53] used 1,901 SNPs identified using GBS without a reference sequence to map quantitative trait loci in blackcurrant (Ribes nigrum L.). Similar to this study, Ma et al. [54] identified 3,745 SNP by GBS in Miscanthus sinensis Anderss, a potential bioenergy crop [55], and used them to compare the genome organization of M. sinensis to those of Brachypodium distachyon L., Oryza sativa L., Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench, and Zea mays L. by aligning the SNP-containing sequences to the heterologous genome sequences. Mahama et al. [56] genetically and cytologically identified seven different chromosomal translocation lines in soybean and reported that crossing a soybean line homozygous for a single translocation with a wild-type soybean line resulted in significant levels of pollen abortion, ovule abortion, and reduction in seed set. Hence, it is not surprising that crosses between G. latifolia and G. max that involve eight chromosomes with multiple translocations do not produce fertile progeny [57]. Following embryo rescue and colchicine treatment to double chromosome numbers [58], it may be possible to recover lines that retain unrearranged G. latifolia chromosomes from wide-hybridization experiments between G. latifolia and G. max, but lines containing chromosomes with multiple translocations would likely not be fertile. Using fluorescence in situ hybridization–based karyotyping of the seven soybean translocation lines, Findley et al. [59] identified reciprocal translocations between G. max chromosomes 1 and 8; 2 and 8; 2 and 11; 4 and 13; and 5 and 13. It is interesting that G. latifolia LGs also showed reciprocal exchanges between chromosomes 2 and 8, which may indicate the presence of recombination hotspots in the rearranged chromosomes. It has been difficult to identify translocations in soybean because of its small and morphologically similar chromosomes [60]. Consequently, it is possible that other recombination hotspots remain to be identified. Based on hybridization success, hybrid seed viability, fertility of F1 plants in intra- and interspecific hybrids and degree of meiotic chromosome pairing, species within the genus Glycine have been assigned genome types [61]. Glycine latifolia, along with G. microphylla Tindale, and G. tabacina (Labill.), Benth (all 2n = 40) contain B genome types. In interspecific crosses, G. latifolia, G. microphylla and G. tabacina produce vigorous F1 plants with normal seed set [61]–[64], which suggests that G. microphylla and G. tabacina, other than paracentric inversions [65], have chromosome structures very similar to those found in G. latifolia. In contrast, F1 plants from crosses between D-genome perennial species (i.e., G. tomentella) show seedling lethality [50], [63]. It has been possible to recover plants from crosses between G. tomentella and G. max, using G. tomentella lines with 78 chromosomes [16], [17]. The 2n = 78 G. tomentella lines may contain a set of 20 chromosomes that have fewer rearrangements than G. latifolia that facilitate chromosome pairing during crossing with G. max. Generally, nuclear genomes of closely related species show high degrees of collinearity that degrade with increasing phylogenetic distance, but the rates at which chromosomes diverge vary widely among taxa [66]. In comparisons of genetic maps between Arabidopsis thaliana (L.) Heynh. and Brassica nigra (L.) W.D.J. Koch, Lagercrantz [67] estimated that there had been about three chromosomal rearrangements per million years since the two species had diverged 11 to 35 million years ago [68]. In contrast, Koch et al. [69] estimated that Arabidopsis lyrata L. and Capsella rubella Reut. had undergone less than 0.09 rearrangements per million years since the two lineages diverged 10 to 14 million years ago. Like G. tomentella, G. latifolia diverged from the progenitors of G. max between 5 and 7 million years ago [20], [70], which would mean that the genomes of G. latifolia and G. max have undergone up to five interchromosomal rearrangements per million years. This number is higher than in the studies mentioned above and may indicate a higher rate of chromosomal instability or simply that a higher density of markers was used which permitted the detection of a larger number of chromosomal rearrangements. In addition to being geographically isolated from the progenitors of G. max, G. latifolia, like other 2n = 40 perennial Glycine species, often produces seed from cleistogamous flowers [60], which reduces its opportunities for outcrossing and possibly removing some of the selection pressure against chromosomal rearrangements. As a consequence, more translocations may have been preserved in Glycine species than in other non-Glycine species examined that outcross more readily. As functions are assigned to G. max genes, the perennial Glycine species become important sources of new alleles that can be isolated and moved into G. max by standard transformation or developing gene replacement technologies [71]–[73]. Jones et al. [74] recently demonstrated the feasibility of this approach by using Agrobacterium-mediated transformation to transfer a functional gene for resistance to late blight (caused by Phytophthora infestans (Mont.) DeBary) from Solanum venturii Hawkes & Hjerting to cultivated potato (Solanum tuberosum L.). Gene identification in perennial Glycines species would be greatly aided by determining the genomic sequences for at least a subset of the species. Because many of the chromosomes of perennial Glycine species are collinear with their G. max homologues, the G. max genome sequence could be used as a reference to assemble genome sequences of perennial Glycine species. Using the heterologous G. max reference sequence will reduce the depth of sequence coverage needed for genome assembly compared to de novo genome sequencing [75], [76]. Even though genetic hybridization may not be possible by standard means, methods for high-throughput gene mapping and identification afforded by next-generation sequencing provide tools to capture the variation present in the wild species. Genetic linkage maps of GBS markers in a Glycine latifolia F2 population. (TIF) Click here for additional data file. Genetic linkage maps of GBS markers in a Glycine latifolia F5 population. (TIF) Click here for additional data file. Consensus genetic linkage maps for Glycine latifolia derived from 3710 GBS markers. (TIF) Click here for additional data file. GBS SNP Genotype data for the F2 mapping population. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file. GBS SNP Genotype data for the F5 mapping population. (DOCX) Click here for additional data file.
  46 in total

1.  [MapDraw: a microsoft excel macro for drawing genetic linkage maps based on given genetic linkage data].

Authors:  Ren-Hu Liu; Jin-Ling Meng
Journal:  Yi Chuan       Date:  2003-05

2.  A soybean transcript map: gene distribution, haplotype and single-nucleotide polymorphism analysis.

Authors:  Ik-Young Choi; David L Hyten; Lakshmi K Matukumalli; Qijian Song; Julian M Chaky; Charles V Quigley; Kevin Chase; K Gordon Lark; Robert S Reiter; Mun-Sup Yoon; Eun-Young Hwang; Seung-In Yi; Nevin D Young; Randy C Shoemaker; Curtis P van Tassell; James E Specht; Perry B Cregan
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2007-03-04       Impact factor: 4.562

3.  TASSEL: software for association mapping of complex traits in diverse samples.

Authors:  Peter J Bradbury; Zhiwu Zhang; Dallas E Kroon; Terry M Casstevens; Yogesh Ramdoss; Edward S Buckler
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2007-06-22       Impact factor: 6.937

4.  High-efficiency transformation by biolistics of soybean, common bean and cotton transgenic plants.

Authors:  Elibio L Rech; Giovanni R Vianna; Francisco J L Aragão
Journal:  Nat Protoc       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 13.491

5.  Reference-guided assembly of four diverse Arabidopsis thaliana genomes.

Authors:  Korbinian Schneeberger; Stephan Ossowski; Felix Ott; Juliane D Klein; Xi Wang; Christa Lanz; Lisa M Smith; Jun Cao; Joffrey Fitz; Norman Warthmann; Stefan R Henz; Daniel H Huson; Detlef Weigel
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-06-06       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  A soybean cyst nematode resistance gene points to a new mechanism of plant resistance to pathogens.

Authors:  Shiming Liu; Pramod K Kandoth; Samantha D Warren; Greg Yeckel; Robert Heinz; John Alden; Chunling Yang; Aziz Jamai; Tarik El-Mellouki; Parijat S Juvale; John Hill; Thomas J Baum; Silvia Cianzio; Steven A Whitham; Dmitry Korkin; Melissa G Mitchum; Khalid Meksem
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2012-10-15       Impact factor: 49.962

7.  Dating the origins of polyploidy events.

Authors:  Jeff J Doyle; Ashley N Egan
Journal:  New Phytol       Date:  2009-12-16       Impact factor: 10.151

Review 8.  Whole-genome sequencing and intensive analysis of the undomesticated soybean (Glycine soja Sieb. and Zucc.) genome.

Authors:  Moon Young Kim; Sunghoon Lee; Kyujung Van; Tae-Hyung Kim; Soon-Chun Jeong; Ik-Young Choi; Dae-Soo Kim; Yong-Seok Lee; Daeui Park; Jianxin Ma; Woo-Yeon Kim; Byoung-Chul Kim; Sungjin Park; Kyung-A Lee; Dong Hyun Kim; Kil Hyun Kim; Jin Hee Shin; Young Eun Jang; Kyung Do Kim; Wei Xian Liu; Tanapon Chaisan; Yang Jae Kang; Yeong-Ho Lee; Kook-Hyung Kim; Jung-Kyung Moon; Jeremy Schmutz; Scott A Jackson; Jong Bhak; Suk-Ha Lee
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2010-12-03       Impact factor: 11.205

9.  Saturated linkage map construction in Rubus idaeus using genotyping by sequencing and genome-independent imputation.

Authors:  Judson A Ward; Jasbir Bhangoo; Felicidad Fernández-Fernández; Patrick Moore; J D Swanson; Roberto Viola; Riccardo Velasco; Nahla Bassil; Courtney A Weber; Daniel J Sargent
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2013-01-16       Impact factor: 3.969

10.  A robust, simple genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS) approach for high diversity species.

Authors:  Robert J Elshire; Jeffrey C Glaubitz; Qi Sun; Jesse A Poland; Ken Kawamoto; Edward S Buckler; Sharon E Mitchell
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-05-04       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  3 in total

1.  Differential expression of recently duplicated PTOX genes in Glycine max during plant development and stress conditions.

Authors:  Rachel Alves Maia; Kátia Daniella da Cruz Saraiva; André Luiz Maia Roque; Karine Leitão Lima Thiers; Clesivan Pereira Dos Santos; João Hermínio Martins da Silva; Daniel Ferreira Feijó; Birgit Arnholdt-Schmitt; José Hélio Costa
Journal:  J Bioenerg Biomembr       Date:  2019-09-11       Impact factor: 2.945

2.  Genetic Analysis of Domestication Parallels in Annual and Perennial Sunflowers (Helianthus spp.): Routes to Crop Development.

Authors:  Sean R Asselin; Anita L Brûlé-Babel; David L Van Tassel; Douglas J Cattani
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2020-06-12       Impact factor: 5.753

3.  Evaluation of perennial Glycine species for response to Meloidogyne incognita, Rotylenchulus reniformis, and Pratylenchus penetrans.

Authors:  Jaeyeong Han; Steven P Locke; Theresa K Herman; Nathan E Schroeder; Glen L Hartman
Journal:  J Nematol       Date:  2022-02-18       Impact factor: 1.402

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.