| Literature DB >> 28090266 |
Hong-Kyu Choi1, Ryan W Kim2, Chaeyoung Lee3, Dongwoon Yu1,4.
Abstract
The Fabaceae (legume family) is the third largest and the second of agricultural importance among flowering plant groups. In this study, we report the reconstruction of a composite comparative map composed of ten legume genomes, including seven species from the galegoid clade (Medicago truncatula, Medicago sativa, Lens culinaris, Pisum sativum, Lotus japonicus, Cicer arietinum, Vicia faba) and three species from the phaseoloid clade (Vigna radiata, Phaseolus vulgaris, Glycine max). To accomplish this comparison, a total of 209 cross-species gene-derived markers were employed. The comparative analysis resulted in a single extensive genetic/genomic network composed of 93 chromosomes or linkage groups, from which 110 synteny blocks and other evolutionary events (e.g., 13 inversions) were identified. This comparative map also allowed us to deduce several large scale evolutionary events, such as chromosome fusion/fission, with which might explain differences in chromosome numbers among compared species or between the two clades. As a result, useful properties of cross-species genic markers were re-verified as an efficient tool for cross-species translation of genomic information, and similar approaches, combined with a high throughput bioinformatic marker design program, should be effective for applying the knowledge of trait-associated genes to other important crop species for breeding purposes. Here, we provide a basic comparative framework for the ten legume species, and expect to be usefully applied towards the crop improvement in legume breeding.Entities:
Keywords: Comparative genomics; Gene-specific marker; Legumes; Synteny
Year: 2016 PMID: 28090266 PMCID: PMC5196017 DOI: 10.1007/s13258-016-0481-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genes Genomics ISSN: 1976-9571 Impact factor: 1.839
Fig. 1Taxonomic relationships of ten legume species used in this study. These species prevalently occur in five tribes within two major clades, hologalegina and phaseoloid clades. Of these, six species whose draft genome sequences have been reported are highlighted in bold character. X basic chromosome numbers; MYA million years ago
Genomic information of ten legume species used in this study
| Species name | Common name | Genome size (Mbp) | Chr. No. | Gene number | Remark | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Barrel medic | 470 | 2n = 2x = 16 | 50,894 | WGS | Young et al. |
|
| Alfafa | 830–860 | 2n = 4x = 32 | NA | – | Bauchan and Hossain |
|
| Pea | 4300 | 2n = 2x = 14 | NA | – | Franssen et al. |
|
| Broad bean | ~13,000 | 2n = 2x = 12 | NA | – | Ellwood et al. |
|
| Lentil | ~4000 | 2n = 2x = 14 | NA | – | Arumuganathan and Earle |
|
| Chickpea | 864 | 2n = 2x = 16 | 28,269 | WGS | Varshney et al. |
|
| Bird’s-foot trefoil | 471 | 2n = 2x = 12 | 39,735 | WGS | Sato et al. |
|
| Mung bean | 333 | 2n = 2x = 22 | 22,368 | WGS | Kang et al. |
|
| Soybean | 1115 | 2n = 2x = 40 | 56,044 | WGS | Schmutz et al. |
|
| Common bean | 625 | 2n = 2x = 22 | 38,482 | WGS | Schmutz et al. |
NA Not available, WGS Whole genome sequencing completed
Fig. 2Macrosyntenic composite comparative map with reference to M. truncatula chromosomes 1, 5 and 6 (for remaining part of the comparative map, see Fig. S1). Cross-species translated markers are denoted by bold lettering. Predicted marker positions, but unmapped in genetic map, are extrapolated only when the collinearity is conserved in neighboring regions, and denoted by dotted semicircle line. Species names are as follows: Mt, M. truncatula; Ms, M. sativa; Gm, G. max, Lj, L. japonicus. Ps, P. sativum; Vf, V. faba; Lc, L. culinaris; Ca, C. arietinum; Vr, V. radiata; Pv, P. vulgaris. Chr chromosome, LG linkage group
Fig. 3A simplified macrosyntenic relationships among ten legume species. Abbreviations for species names are the same as in Fig. 2. Sizes of chromosome/linkage group and synteny blocks are drawn to scale for each species, but not across species. Lines and arrows denote as follows: solid lines postulated rearrangement; double headed arrow postulated inversions
Conserved chromosome/LG information of syntenic regions
| Speciesa | Conserved chromosome/linkage blocksb | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mt | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
| Ms | 1L | 2L | 3L | 4L, 8S | 5L | 6L | 7L | 4S, 8L |
| Ps | IIL | IIIS, VIM | IIIL | IVM, VIIL | IL | VIM, VIIS | VL | IVL, VIIS |
| Vf | 6S, 2L: | NA | 5L, 9L | 1S, 3S | 4L | NA | 7L | 1L, 3S |
| Lc | IIIM | IVM | VIM, VIIL | IM | VM | NA | IM | IIM |
| Ca | 4S | 1L | 5L | 6M | 2S, 8L | NA | 3M | 6M, 7L |
| Lj | 5L | 3M, 6L | 1M | 4M | 2M | 2M | 1M | 4S |
| Vr | 4M | 5M, 10M | 5M, 10M | 2M, 4S, 7S | 6M, 11L | NA | 3M, 4M | 7L, 9L |
| Pv | 7M | 5L, 6L, 9S | 9M | 11M | 2M | NA | 1M, 8S | 2S, 3L, 10L |
| Gm | 14S, 17S, 20S | 8S, 15M | 4L, 9S | 1M, 11S, 12S | 1S, 2S, 11S | 9L | 3S,11S,19S | 13S, 16M |
aSpecies names are the same as in Fig. 2
bConserved block sizes: L large; M moderate; S small