| Literature DB >> 29684082 |
João Ricardo Vieira Manechini1,2, Juliana Borges da Costa2, Bruna Turcatto Pereira2, Luciana Aparecida Carlini-Garcia3, Mauro Alexandre Xavier2, Marcos Guimarães de Andrade Landell2, Luciana Rossini Pinto1,2.
Abstract
The Brazilian sugarcane industry plays an important role in the worldwide supply of sugar and ethanol. Investigation into the genetic structure of current commercial cultivars and comparisons to the main ancestor species allow sugarcane breeding programs to better manage crosses and germplasm banks as well as to promote its rational use. In the present study, the genetic structure of a group of Brazilian cultivars currently grown by commercial producers was assessed through microsatellite markers and contrasted with a group of basic germplasm mainly composed of Saccharum officinarum and S. spontaneum accessions. A total of 285 alleles was obtained by a set of 12 SSRs primer pairs that taken together were able to efficiently distinguish and capture the genetic variability of sugarcane commercial cultivars and basic germplasm accessions allowing its application in a fast and cost-effective way for routine cultivar identification and management of sugarcane germplasm banks. Allelic distribution revealed that 97.6% of the cultivar alleles were found in the basic germplasm while 42% of the basic germplasm alleles were absent in cultivars. Of the absent alleles, 3% was exclusive to S. officinarum, 33% to S. spontaneum and 19% to other species/exotic hybrids. We found strong genetic differentiation between the Brazilian commercial cultivars and the two main species (S. officinarum: [Formula: see text] = 0.211 and S. spontaneum: [Formula: see text] = 0.216, P<0.001), and significant contribution of the latter in the genetic variability of commercial cultivars. Average dissimilarity within cultivars was 1.2 and 1.4 times lower than that within S. officinarum and S. spontaneum. Genetic divergence found between cultivars and S. spontaneum accessions has practical applications for energy cane breeding programs as the choice of more divergent parents will maximize the frequency of transgressive individuals in the progeny.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29684082 PMCID: PMC5912765 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0195623
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Relation of SSR primer pairs.
| SSR | Annealing Temp. | Repeat Motif | Forward Sequence (5´- 3´) | Size range (bp) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reverse Sequence (5´- 3´) | ||||
| 60.0°C | (ATCT)14 | 82–170 | ||
| 60.0°C | (TTTC)15 | 106–177 | ||
| 60.0°C | (CTTTT)18 | 96–210 | ||
| 60.0°C | (CTCTCC)5 | 158–194 | ||
| 60.0°C | (CTATAT)11(TATAGA)6 | 131–231 | ||
| 60.0°C | (AAAAAG)5(CGT)5 | 182–234 | ||
| 60.0°C | (GGC)8 | 78–162 | ||
| 62.0°C | (TCC)6 | 247–337 | ||
| 64.7°C | (TCC)7 | 190–278 | ||
| 60.0°C | (TAC)8 | 190–257 | ||
| 60.0°C | (GAG)5 | 158–274 | ||
| AVAILABLE UNDER REQUEST | ||||
Annealing temperatures, repeat motifs, forward and reverse primers (5’ to 3’), and size range of amplified products (in base pairs).
a According to Maccheroni et al. (2009) [28]
b Marconi et al. (2011) [22].
SSR Primer pair efficiency.
| SSR | N | Identified profiles (%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All / C | All / C | All / C | All / C | |||
| 23 | 0.906 / 0.913 | 7.387 / 8.272 | 6.800 / 7.552 | 10.478 / 8.938 | 131 (95.6%) | |
| 20 | 0.879 / 0.878 | 5.234 / 6.012 | 4.692 / 5.278 | 7.119 / 6.074 | 125 (91.2%) | |
| 27 | 0.934 / 0.903 | 6.693 / 7.037 | 6.218 / 6.357 | 10.94 / 7.654 | 134 (97.8%) | |
| 10 | 0.788 / 0.720 | 2.956 / 2.938 | 2.262 / 2.115 | 3.149 / 2.568 | 41 (29.9%) | |
| 27 | 0.901 / 0.874 | 5.949 / 5.951 | 5.358 / 5.203 | 7.448 / 5.877 | 125 (91.2%) | |
| 14 | 0.776 / 0.734 | 3.781 / 3.605 | 3.185 / 2.646 | 4.896 / 1.778 | 52 (38.0%) | |
| 14 | 0.809 / 0.848 | 4.175 / 4.519 | 3.616 / 3.831 | 6.746 / 5.605 | 88 (64.2%) | |
| 30 | 0.919 / 0.883 | 5.569 / 4.728 | 5.148 / 4.175 | 9.746 / 7.284 | 131 (95.6%) | |
| 29 | 0.906 / 0.922 | 7.044 / 7.531 | 6.565 / 6.946 | 11.746 / 10.642 | 133 (97.1%) | |
| 24 | 0.894 / 0.916 | 7.255 / 8.457 | 6.668 / 7.743 | 9.761 / 8.543 | 128 (93.4%) | |
| 24 | 0.818 / 0.850 | 4.628 / 5.235 | 3.973 / 4.448 | 4.955 / 2.889 | 82 (59.9%) | |
| 43 | 0.925 / 0.906 | 6.285 / 5.765 | 5.854 / 5.222 | 11.000 / 8.198 | 133 (97.1%) | |
| 285 | ||||||
| 23.75 | 0.871 / 0.862 | 5.580 / 5.837 | 5.028 / 5.126 | 6.914 / 6.337 |
Total number of alleles (N), estimates of Polymorphism Information Content (PIC), Effective Multiplex Ratio (E), Marker Index (MI), Resolving Power (Rp) and number of identified profiles among 137 individuals (“All” stands for the results for all 137 accessions; “C” stands for the results considering only the group of cultivars).
Fig 1Allelic distribution for each primer pair.
Analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA) for predefined groups.
| Groups | Source of Variation | d.f. | Sum of squares | Variance components | Percentage of variation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Among population | 1 | 437.195 | 6.175 | 17.91 | |
| Within populations | 135 | 3821.972 | 28.311 | 82.09 | |
| Total | 136 | 4259.168 | 34.486 | ||
| Fixation Index ( | |||||
| Among population | 1 | 278.349 | 7.259 | 21.09 | |
| Within populations | 101 | 2742.699 | 27.155 | 78.91 | |
| Total | 102 | 2021.049 | 34.415 | ||
| Fixation Index ( | |||||
| Among population | 1 | 412.637 | 8.515 | 21.64 | |
| Within populations | 110 | 3392.113 | 30.837 | 78.36 | |
| Total | 111 | 3804.750 | 39.352 | ||
| Fixation Index ( | |||||
| Among population | 1 | 187.674 | 5.755 | 12.70 | |
| Within populations | 51 | 2017.232 | 39.554 | 87.30 | |
| Total | 52 | 2204.906 | 45.309 | ||
| Fixation Index ( | |||||
d.f.: degrees of freedom.
*P<0.001.
Fig 2Clustering analysis.
(a) Best k analysis showing k values from 2 to 9 (10 suppressed); (b) Membership proportion (Q) of each genotype: two distinct and almost homogeneous groups distinguishing individuals from 1 to 81 (cultivars, grey color) and 82 to 137 (basic germplasm, blue color) for k = 2; (c) three distinct groups, the first composed by 81 cultivars (grey color) and the remaining genotypes differing into two other groups comprised of the main species S. officinarum (green color) and S. spontaneum (blue color) for k = 3.
Average dissimilarities between predefined groups according to DARwin extreme values function.
| Cultivars | Other species/ | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.176 | - | - | - | |
| 0.247 | 0.206 | - | - | |
| 0.277 | 0.279 | 0.248 | - | |
| 0.272 | 0.282 | 0.278 | 0.285 |
Fig 3Phylogenetic tree analysis.
Two distinct major clusters: on the bottom of the image the cultivars grouped in one well defined cluster; on the top of the image, accessions are grouped according to its main species. Other species/exotic hybrids are spread within this second group according to their parenthood (Method: Unweighted Neighbor-Joining).
Fig 4Principal Coordinate Analysis of sugarcane accessions based on dissimilarity matrix (1-Jaccard), between pairs of genotypes.