| Literature DB >> 26053338 |
Jian-wen Chen1, Fang-ye Lao1, Xi-wen Chen1, Hai-hua Deng1, Rui Liu1, Hui-yi He1, Cheng Fu1, Yong-sheng Chen1, Fu-Ye Liu1, Qi-wei Li1, Phillip Jackson2, Karen Aitken2.
Abstract
Introgression of Erianthus arundinaceus has been the focus of several sugarcane breeding programs in the world, because the species has desirable traits such as high biomass production, vigour, ratooning ability and good resistance to environmental stresses and disease. In this study four genetic maps were constructed for two intergeneric populations. The first population (BC1) was generated from a cross between an Erianthus/Saccharum hybrid YC96-40 and a commercial sugarcane variety CP84-1198. The second population (BC2) was generated from a cross between YCE01-116, a progeny of the BC1 cross and NJ57-416, a commercial sugarcane cultivar. Markers across both populations were generated using 35 AFLP and 23 SSR primer pairs. A total of 756 and 728 polymorphic markers were scored in the BC1 and BC2 populations, respectively. In the BC1 population, a higher proportion of markers was derived from the Erianthus ancestor than those from the Saccharum ancestor Badila. In the BC2 population, both the number and proportion of markers derived from Erianthus were approximately half of those in the BC1 population. Linkage analysis led to the construction of 38, 57, 36 and 47 linkage groups (LGs) for YC96-40, CP84-1198, YCE01-116, and NJ57-416, encompassing 116, 174, 97 and 159 markers (including single dose, double dose and bi-parental markers), respectively. These LGs could be further placed into four, five, five and six homology groups (HGs), respectively, based on information from multi-allelic SSR markers and repulsion phase linkages detected between LGs. Analysis of repulsion phase linkage indicated that Erianthus behaved like a true autopolyploid.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26053338 PMCID: PMC4459986 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0128865
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Pedigree tree of BC1 and BC2 populations used in this study.
Fig 2Frequency distribution of the markers (derived from AFLP and SSR primer combinations) in the BC1(A) and BC2(B) generations.
Number of markers derived from different ancestors in each of the two populations.
| Source/s of markers | Type of marker | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Non polymorphic | Single dose | Double dose | Higher dosage | ||
| BC1 population | |||||
| Present in YC96-40 but not in CP84-1198 | Only in Badila | 6 | 34 | 21 | 12 |
| Only in HN92-77 | 10 | 85 | 72 | 72 | |
| In both Badila and HN92-77 | 1 | 6 | 9 | 5 | |
| Present in CP84-1198 but not in YC96-40 | 0 | 217 | 81 | 83 | |
| In both parents | Only in | 133 | 20 | 19 | |
| In both | 219 | 11 | 9 | ||
| BC2 population | |||||
| Present in YCE01-116 but not in NJ57-416 | Only in | 130 | 81 | 19 | 20 |
| Only in HN92-77 | 49 | 48 | 41 | ||
| In both | 65 | 8 | 6 | 4 | |
| Present in NJ57-416 but not in YCE01-116 | 5 | 211 | 65 | 77 | |
| In both parents | Only in | 135 | 34 | 44 | |
| In both | 68 | 6 | 15 | ||
Markers are separated into different groups (non polymorphic, and single-, double- and higher dosage markers, based on segregation ratios).
a An additional 28 markers were scored in the BC1 population, but were not scored clearly in either parent.
b An additional 19 markers were scored in the BC2 population, but were not scored clearly in either parent.
c “Saccharum” means from Badila or CP84-1198 or NJ57-416.
Number of markers in the BC1 and the BC2 generations included in the linkage maps.
| Population/parent | Number of single dose makers | Number of double dose markers | Number of bi-parental markers | Total number of markers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
|
| 79 | 31 (30%) | 6 | 116 |
|
| 137 | 31 (18%) | 6 | 174 |
|
| ||||
|
| 67 | 23 (24%) | 7 | 97 |
|
| 129 | 23 (14%) | 7 | 159 |
Markers are separated into different groups (non polymorphic, and single-, double- and higher dosage markers, based on segregation ratios)
Number of linkage groups (LGs) assigned to homology groups (HG’s) and origin of inheritance of these for each linkage map.
| Population/parent | No. LGs | Inheritance | No. of LGs in HGs | No. of Unassigned LGs | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| Recom. | ||||
|
| ||||||
|
| 38 | 26 | 12 | - | 12 | 26 |
|
| 57 | - | - | - | 31 | 26 |
|
| 1 | |||||
|
| ||||||
|
| 36 | 17 | 15 | 4 | 15 | 21 |
|
| 47 | - | - | - | 24 | 23 |
|
| 3 | |||||
Total Map lengths (cM) for each linkage map and proportion of total linkage map length (cM) contributed from each genus.
| Population/parent | Total Map length (cM) |
|
| RecombinantMap Length |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
|
| 1209.7 | 887.6 | 322.1 | |
|
| 2283.5 | 2283.5 | ||
|
| 103.1 | |||
|
| ||||
|
| 973.9 | 484.8 | 329.2 | 159.9 |
|
| 1955.5 | 1955.5 | ||
|
| 96.5 |
Fig 3A combined linkage map of the four parents in this study.
For YC96-40 and YCE01-116 markers inherited from Erianthus have an E at the end of the marker name, markers inherited from the Saccharum parent if they can be identified have an S at the end of the marker name, if the marker origin is unknown then a U is added to the end of the marker name. Double dose markers have a D at the start of the marker name and bi-parental markers have an X. Arrows indicate the same marker inherited from one generation to the next or identified in both Saccharum parents.