| Literature DB >> 25202584 |
John F Gaskin1, Ruth A Hufbauer2, Steven M Bogdanowicz3.
Abstract
PREMISE OF THE STUDY: Microsatellite markers were developed for the plant species Elaeagnus angustifolia to assist in future investigations of genetic variability in its native and invasive ranges and the precise origins of the United States/Canada invasion. • METHODS ANDEntities:
Keywords: Elaeagnaceae; Elaeagnus angustifolia; population genetics; simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers
Year: 2013 PMID: 25202584 PMCID: PMC4103145 DOI: 10.3732/apps.1300013
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Appl Plant Sci ISSN: 2168-0450 Impact factor: 1.936
Characteristics of 11 microsatellite loci of Elaeagnus angustifolia.
| Locus | Primer sequences (5′–3′) | Repeat motif | Size range (bp) | GenBank accession no. | |
| Ro20 | F: TCCCATACCCAGCACAAGG | (AAG)6 | 233–272 | 56 | KC516766 |
| R: | |||||
| Ro97 | F: | (ACC)6 | 160–199 | 53 | KC516767 |
| R: AAGCCACTCAGCCTATCTAC | |||||
| Ro218 | F: | (AAAG)12 | 358–390 | 56 | KC516768 |
| R: AACCCAAGTCCAAATGCCC | |||||
| Ro236 | F: GTGCCTTATTCCTCGCCAC | (AGCCTC)4 | 269–299 | 56 | KC516769 |
| R: | |||||
| Ro325 | F: | (ACC)4 | 198–210 | 54 | KC516770 |
| R: ACTGGCCGGTGACAAGG | |||||
| Ro367 | F: | (AG)13 | 330–360 | 55 | KC516771 |
| R: GTTGGAATTGCCGGTTGGG | |||||
| Ro721 | F: | (ACC)7 | 271–286 | 55 | KC516772 |
| R: TGCGCTCTGTATGGAATGC | |||||
| Ro749 | F: | (AAGAAT)5 | 195–225 | 55 | KC516773 |
| R: CACCAAACGGGCATTCTCC | |||||
| Ro833 | F: GGGAGCTTACCAACCTTGC | (AAG)7 | 264–300 | 54 | KC516774 |
| R: | |||||
| Ro851 | F: GGTCTAAGAGCTTCAAGTGGC | (AAAAT)4 | 244–254 | 52 | KC516775 |
| R: | |||||
| Ro887 | F: CAATCGCGAGTAGGGAACC | (AAG)5 | 355–373 | 53 | KC516776 |
| R: |
Note: Ta = annealing temperature.
The forward and reverse primer sequences are shown with added tails set in boldface.
Results of initial primer screening for populations from the native and invasive ranges of Elaeagnus angustifolia.
| Native range | Invasive range | ||||||||
| Locus | Total | ||||||||
| Ro20 | 20 | 5 | 0.650 | 0.672 | 30 | 4 | 0.533 | 0.552 | 6 |
| Ro97 | 20 | 6 | 0.700 | 0.691 | 30 | 4 | 0.267 | 0.395 | 7 |
| Ro218 | 20 | 7 | 0.700 | 0.799 | 30 | 6 | 0.467 | 0.678 | 8 |
| Ro236 | 20 | 5 | 0.500 | 0.527 | 30 | 4 | 0.500 | 0.620 | 6 |
| Ro325 | 20 | 1 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 30 | 3 | 0.267 | 0.269 | 3 |
| Ro367 | 20 | 7 | 0.500 | 0.503 | 30 | 6 | 0.567 | 0.704 | 11 |
| Ro721 | 20 | 5 | 0.800 | 0.647 | 30 | 4 | 0.433 | 0.453 | 6 |
| Ro749 | 20 | 2 | 0.100 | 0.097 | 30 | 5 | 0.767 | 0.795 | 6 |
| Ro833 | 20 | 4 | 0.200 | 0.599 | 30 | 6 | 0.367 | 0.614 | 7 |
| Ro851 | 20 | 3 | 0.600 | 0.497 | 30 | 2 | 0.300 | 0.463 | 3 |
| Ro887 | 20 | 5 | 0.250 | 0.760 | 30 | 5 | 0.767 | 0.721 | 7 |
| Average | 4.545 | 0.455 | 0.527 | 4.455 | 0.476 | 0.569 | 6.364 | ||
Note: A = number of alleles; He = expected heterozygosity; Ho = observed heterozygosity; n = number of samples genotyped.