| Literature DB >> 28789702 |
Monica Harmon1, Thomas Lane2, Margaret Staton2, Mark V Coggeshall3, Teodora Best4, Chien-Chih Chen5,6, Haiying Liang5, Nicole Zembower4, Daniela I Drautz-Moses7, Yap Zhei Hwee7, Stephan C Schuster7, Scott E Schlarbaum8, John E Carlson4, Oliver Gailing9,10.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sugar maple (Acer saccharum Marsh.) is a hardwood tree species native to northeastern North America and economically valued for its wood and sap. Yet, few molecular genetic resources have been developed for this species to date. Microsatellite markers have been a useful tool in population genetics, e.g., to monitor genetic variation and to analyze gene flow patterns. The objective of this study is to develop a reference transcriptome and microsatellite markers in sugar maple.Entities:
Keywords: Acer saccharum; EST-SSRs; Next-generation sequencing; Transferability
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28789702 PMCID: PMC5549316 DOI: 10.1186/s13104-017-2653-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Res Notes ISSN: 1756-0500
Primer sequences and descriptions of 22 microsatellite markers developed in Acer saccharum
| Locus | Primer sequences (5′–3′) | Repeat EdEdmotif | Size range (bp) | **Expected fragment size | Na | Ho | He | F |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As_di1 | F: TCCCAGGCATGAACAAGGTT | (AC)9 | 251–273 | 230 | 9 | 0.581 | 0.658 | 0.117 | 0.0034 |
| As_di7 | F: GGGTCTGTCTCTGTTTCTGCA | (AC)9 | 151–161 | 134 | 6 | 0.651 | 0.602 | 0.081 | 0.2578 |
| As_di9a | F: TGCTGGAAAGTGGAACCTGT | (TA)8 | 121–147 | 100 | 12 | 0.375 | 0.835 | 0.551 | <0.0001** |
| mAs_di11 | F: AGAGAACCACCAAGGATGCA | (GA)8 | 187 | 167 | 1 | 0 | 0 | – | – |
| As_di12 | F: AAGACATCTTGAGGGCGGTG | (TC)9 | 447–458 | 425 | 4 | 0.194 | 0.271 | 0.283 | 0.0014* |
| mAs_di13 | F: TCAAGAAATACTGGCTCAGGTCA | (TC)8 | 264 | 238 | 1 | 0 | 0 | – | – |
| As_di15 | F: GGGCAGAGAGGGAATTCGAG | (TC)8 | 259–265 | 235 | 4 | 0.375 | 0.429 | 0.126 | 0.0236 |
| As_di16 | F: AATTGCCTGTGGTGGGAACT | (GT)8 | 211–218 | 190 | 4 | 0.675 | 0.680 | 0.007 | 0.8696 |
| mAs_di19 | F: GACCTGACCACCTCCTCCTA | (CT)9 | 228 | 205 | 1 | 0 | 0 | – | – |
| As_di21 | F: TGTCAGCAGCCCTACAGTTG | (GT)8 | 135–142 | 113 | 4 | 0.450 | 0.609 | 0.261 | 0.0455 |
| mAs_di27 | F: TCATGACCATGACCCAACACT | (TC)8 | 386 | 363 | 1 | 0 | 0 | – | – |
| mAs_di30 | F: GATCCCCTTCGTTGCTGACA | (TG)9 | 457 | 432 | 1 | 0 | 0 | – | – |
| mAs_di31 | F: CTCCACCACCATCCAACCAA | (AC)8 | 187–189 | 167 | 1 | 0 | 0 | – | – |
| As_di34a | F: AACGGATGGCAAGCTAGCTT | (AC)8 | 225–240 | 218 | 4 | 0.217 | 0.726 | 0.701 | <0.0001** |
| As_di35 | F: TGTTAGTCTCCTCCACACGT | (TC)8 | 151–153 | 129 | 2 | 0.143 | 0.224 | 0.362 | 0.0751 |
| As_di36 | F: ATGTGAGTCCGTGAGTCCGT | (TG)8 | 237–245 | 212 | 5 | 0.475 | 0.606 | 0.216 | 0.0322 |
| As_di37 | F: TGGTGGGTAGCAGCAAAAGA | (TG)11 | 167–184 | 151 | 8 | 0.722 | 0.704 | −0.025 | 0.9324 |
| As_di38 | F: ACAGAGAGAGAGAGAGCTTGT | (AC)8 | 175–179 | 154 | 3 | 0.184 | 0.362 | 0.491 | 0.0012* |
| As_di41 | F: AAGCTGAGAAACCCAAAGCA | (TA)8 | 259–271 | 236 | 6 | 0.526 | 0.625 | 0.157 | 0.2675 |
| As_di48 | F: AGGTTCGGGTTTTGAATCTTCA | (TA)8 | 173–179 | 155 | 4 | 0.200 | 0.678 | 0.705 | <0.0001** |
| As_di49 | F: TGCAACTGTTGAGTGGTGGA | (TG)10 | 159–183 | 133 | 10 | 0.625 | 0.636 | 0.017 | 0.0528 |
| As_tetra1 | F: TTGACGGAGAGCTTGGTTCC | (TGCT)6 | 257–273 | 241 | 5 | 0.341 | 0.337 | −0.012 | 0.4674 |
| +Mean | 6 | 0.424 | 0.543 | 0.222 | |||||
| Mean | 4 | 0.308 | 0.395 | 0.222 |
N number of alleles per locus, H observed heterozygosity, H expected heterozygosity, F inbreeding coefficient
* Significantly different from Hardy–Weinberg proportions (α = 0.05) after Bonferroni corrections
** Significantly different from Hardy–Weinberg proportions (α = 0.01) after Bonferroni corrections m: these markers amplified monomorphic loci and were not tested on the whole population. **: expected fragment size based on EST contigs. Actual fragments were longer as tailed primers were used for amplification. +Mean variation was calculated for polymorphic markers only to allow for comparisons with other related studies on sugar maple [4]
a Markers As_di34 and As_di9 did not amplify in nearly half of the samples and should not be used for population level analyses
Transferability of Acer saccharum microsatellite loci to other Acer species
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| As_di1 | – | – | As_di1 | As_di1* |
| As_di7 | As_di7 | As_di7* | – | – |
| As_di9 | – | – | As_di9 | As_di9* |
| As_di12 | – | As_di12 | – | – |
| As_di15 | – | – | As_di15 | As_di15* |
| As_di16 | – | – | – | As_di16 |
| As_di21 | – | As_di21* | As_di21 | – |
| As_di35 | As_di35 | As_di35* | As_di35* | – |
| As_di36 | – | – | As_di36* | – |
| As_di37 | – | As_di37* | As_di37* | – |
| As_di38 | – | As_di38 | – | – |
| As_di41 | As_di41 | As_di41 | As_di41 | As_di41 |
| As_di48 | As_di48 | As_di48* | As_di48* | As_di48* |
| As_di49 | – | – | As_di49 | As_di49* |
| As_tetra1 | – | – | As_tetra1 | As_tetra1 |
All of these markers amplified single polymorphic loci in A. saccharum
* Monomorphic in species as indicated by column. Only markers that are transferable to at least one of the four maple species are shown
– No amplification