| Literature DB >> 29543756 |
Sunirmal Sheet1, Kuntal Ghosh2, Satabdi Acharya3, Kwang-Pyo Kim4, Yang Soo Lee5.
Abstract
Apart from being fed to silkworms in sericulture, the ecologically important Mulberry plant has been used for traditional medicine in Asian countries as well as in manufacturing wine, food, and beverages. Germplasm analysis among Mulberry cultivars originating from South Korea is crucial in the plant breeding program for cultivar development. Hence, the genetic deviations and relations among 8 Morus alba plants, and one Morus lhou plant, of different cultivars collected from South Korea were investigated using 10 random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) and 10 inter-simple sequence repeat (ISSR) markers in the present study. The ISSR markers exhibited a higher polymorphism (63.42%) among mulberry genotypes in comparison to RAPD markers. Furthermore, the similarity coefficient was estimated for both markers and found to be varying between 0.183 and 0.814 for combined pooled data of ISSR and RAPD. The phenogram drawn using the UPGMA cluster method based on combined pooled data of RAPD and ISSR markers divided the nine mulberry genotypes into two divergent major groups and the two individual independent accessions. The distant relationship between Dae-Saug (SM1) and SangchonJo Sang Saeng (SM5) offers a possibility of utilizing them in mulberry cultivar improvement of Morus species of South Korea.Entities:
Keywords: ISSR; RAPD; cluster analysis; genetic assortment; molecular markers; mulberry cultivar; polymorphic index
Year: 2018 PMID: 29543756 PMCID: PMC5874610 DOI: 10.3390/plants7010021
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
The selected mulberry cultivars used in the present study along with their morphological characters and region of origin. Leaf sizes are represented as (mean ± SD) of 10 representative samples.
| Sample No | Species | Morphological Characters | Leaf Size (cm) | Cultivar | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Width | Length | ||||
| SM1 | Leaf bluntly tipped, cros-venulate, margin serrate, rough surface, unlobed. | 9.63 ± 3.12 | 12.04± 1.20 | Dae-Saug | |
| SM2 | Leaf ovate with serrate, often lobed, small smooth base. | 10.33 ± 1.97 | 13.3 ± 0.57 | Chung IL | |
| SM3 | Leaf slightly cordate, margin serrate, lobed, comparatively smooth base, cros-venulate. | 12.85 ± 0.27 | 15.3 ± 1.87 | Hong-ol | |
| SM4 | Leaf ovate with often lobed and serrate, cros-venulate, rough surface. | 8.50 ± 2.42 | 10.3 ± 1.33 | Gae-ryang | |
| SM5 | Leaf bluntly tipped with small point, comparatively big rough surface, cros-venulate, unlobed, margin serrate. | 16.20 ± 0.57 | 18.3 ± 1.22 | SangchonJo Sang Saeng | |
| SM6 | Elliptical leaf, unlobed, margin serrate, less rough surface, comparatively deep green, cros-venulate. | 11.85 ± 2.27 | 12.87 ± 1.1 | Soo hyang | |
| SM7 | Elliptical leaf, unlobed, margin serrate, less rough surface, cros-venulate. | 12.34 ± 1.46 | 15.3 ± 0.37 | Gwasang II | |
| SM8 | Leaf ovate with lobed and serrate, cros-venulate, rough surface. | 9.42 ± 0.79 | 13.5 ± 2.04 | Soosang | |
| SM9 | Leaf slightly ovate with unlobed and serrate, cros-venulate, rough surface. | 11.78 ± 1.70 | 13.4 ± 0.50 | Hong-Saug | |
Nucleotide sequences, the exhibited polymorphism percentage, and the polymorphic information content (PIC) of random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) markers.
| Primer Name | Sequence (5ʹ–3ʹ) | Polymorphic Band | Polymorphism (%) | PIC |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OPA-02 | TGCCGAGCTG | 4 | 63.7 | 0.211 |
| OPA-06 | GGTCCCTGAC | 10 | 90 | 0.335 |
| OPA-07 | GAAACGGGTG | 7 | 71.82 | 0.415 |
| OPA-14 | TCTGTGCTGG | 3 | 62.5 | 0.337 |
| OPA-15 | TTCCGAACCC | 4 | 67.76 | 0.352 |
| OPA-17 | GACCGCTTGT | 8 | 100 | 0.601 |
| OPA-18 | AGGTGACCGT | 3 | 44.7 | 0.173 |
| OPY-07 | AGAGCCGTCA | 9 | 100 | 0.792 |
| OPY-15 | AGTCGCCCTT | 7 | 91.3 | 0.577 |
| OPY-20 | AGCCGTGGAA | 7 | 100 | 0.775 |
Nucleotide sequences, exhibited polymorphism percentage and PIC of inter-simple sequence repeat (ISSR) markers.
| Primer Name | Sequence 5ʹ–3ʹ | Polymorphic Band | Polymorphism (%) | PIC |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UBC-807 | AGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGT | 3 | 60 | 0.411 |
| UBC-808 | AGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGC | 5 | 50 | 0.335 |
| UBC-809 | AGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGG | 2 | 72.12 | 0.615 |
| UBC-810 | GAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAT | 5 | 62.5 | 0.567 |
| UBC-814 | CTCTCTCTCTCTCTCTA | 7 | 77.15 | 0.652 |
| UBC-815 | CTCTCTCTCTCTCTCTG | 9 | 45.2 | 0.287 |
| UBC-817 | CACACACACACACACAA | 6 | 70 | 0.603 |
| UBC-820 | GTGTGTGTGTGTGTGTC | 3 | 100 | 0.753 |
| UBC-824 | TCTCTCTCTCTCTCTCG | 5 | 80.2 | 0.632 |
| UBC-825 | ACACACACACACACACT | 7 | 81.3 | 0.645 |
Figure 1PCR amplification of DNA from nine mulberry genotypes with RAPD OPA-07 primer. The polymorphic bands are shown by an arrow symbol.
Figure 2PCR amplification of DNA from nine mulberry genotypes with ISSR UBC-814 primer. The polymorphic bands are shown by an arrow symbol.
Genetic similarity coefficient among nine mulberry cultivars obtained from RAPD markers.
| Genotypes | SM1 | SM2 | SM3 | SM4 | SM5 | SM6 | SM7 | SM8 | SM9 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM1 | 0 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| SM2 | 0.733 | 0 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| SM3 | 0.780 | 0.714 | 0 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| SM4 | 0.620 | 0.647 | 0.685 | 0 | - | - | - | - | - |
| SM5 | 0.650 | 0.669 | 0.714 | 0.566 | 0 | - | - | - | - |
| SM6 | 0.714 | 0.658 | 0.833 | 0.700 | 0.727 | 0 | - | - | - |
| SM7 | 0.685 | 0.633 | 0.738 | 0.737 | 0.633 | 0.790 | 0 | - | - |
| SM8 | 0.766 | 0.620 | 0.662 | 0.592 | 0.620 | 0.678 | 0.727 | 0 | - |
| SM9 | 0.452 | 0.460 | 0.592 | 0.361 | 0.564 | 0.614 | 0.589 | 0.483 | 0 |
Genetic similarity coefficient among nine mulberry cultivars obtained from ISSR markers.
| Genotypes | SM1 | SM2 | SM3 | SM4 | SM5 | SM6 | SM7 | SM8 | SM9 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM1 | 0 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| SM2 | 0.153 | 0 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| SM3 | 0.222 | 0.588 | 0 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| SM4 | 0.526 | 0.444 | 0.521 | 0 | - | - | - | - | - |
| SM5 | 0.470 | 0.500 | 0.571 | 0.727 | 0 | - | - | - | - |
| SM6 | 0.235 | 0.625 | 0.381 | 0.545 | 0.601 | 0 | - | - | - |
| SM7 | 0.285 | 0.600 | 0.480 | 0.535 | 0.583 | 0.750 | 0 | - | - |
| SM8 | 0.526 | 0.556 | 0.527 | 0.665 | 0.636 | 0.545 | 0.615 | 0 | - |
| SM9 | 0.434 | 0.545 | 0.667 | 0.642 | 0.615 | 0.538 | 0.666 | 0.714 | 0 |
Genetic similarity coefficient among nine mulberry cultivars obtained from pooled markers from RAPD and ISSR markers.
| Genotypes | SM1 | SM2 | SM3 | SM4 | SM5 | SM6 | SM7 | SM8 | SM9 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM1 | 0 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| SM2 | 0.253 | 0 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| SM3 | 0.230 | 0.310 | 0 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| SM4 | 0.226 | 0.244 | 0.221 | 0 | - | - | - | - | - |
| SM5 | 0.183 | 0.270 | 0.271 | 0.747 | 0 | - | - | - | - |
| SM6 | 0.195 | 0.425 | 0.312 | 0.635 | 0.621 | 0 | - | - | - |
| SM7 | 0.315 | 0.678 | 0.327 | 0.535 | 0.583 | 0.650 | 0 | - | - |
| SM8 | 0.422 | 0.556 | 0.527 | 0.465 | 0.436 | 0.345 | 0.315 | 0 | - |
| SM9 | 0.434 | 0.545 | 0.567 | 0.442 | 0.415 | 0.338 | 0.366 | 0.814 | 0 |
Figure 3Dendrogram derived from UPGMA (unweighted pair group method using arithmetic average) clustering analysis of ISSR markers showing the genetic relationship among nine cultivars of mulberry. Genetic distances were labeled.