| Literature DB >> 30123627 |
Hong-Hui Xie1,2, Ji-Guang Wei1, Rong-Shao Huang1, X B Yang3.
Abstract
Genetic diversity of 23 Lasiodiplodia theobromae isolates on Morus alba and 6 isolates on Agave sisalana in Guangxi province, China, was studied by using random amplified polymorphic DNA and inter-simple sequence repeat molecular markers. Results of two molecular markers showed that the average percentage of polymorphic loci of all isolates was more than 93%. Both dendrograms of two molecular markers showed obvious relationship between groups and the geographical locations where those strains were collected, among which, the 23 isolates on M. alba were divided into 4 populations and the 6 isolates on A. sisalana were separated as a independent population. The average genetic identity and genetic distance of 5 populations were 0.7215, 0.3284 and 0.7915, 0.2347, respectively, which indicated that the genetic identity was high and the genetic distance was short in the 5 populations. Average value of the gene diversity index (H) and the Shannon's information index (I) of 29 isolates were significantly higher than 5 populations which showed that genetic diversity of those isolates was richer than the populations and the degree of genetic differentiation of the isolates was higher. The Gst and Nm of 29 isolates were 0.4411, 0.6335 and 0.4756, 0.5513, respectively, which showed that the genetic diversity was rich in those isolates.Entities:
Keywords: ISSR; Lasiodiplodia theobromae; RAPD; genetic diversity; genetic variation
Year: 2016 PMID: 30123627 PMCID: PMC6059066 DOI: 10.1080/21501203.2016.1232762
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mycology ISSN: 2150-1203
Isolates for genetic diversity analysis.
| Number | Isolates code | Host | Geographical location | BLAST search results or GenBank accession number |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | DJ-2 | Heng County, Guangxi | 99% with KM278132 | |
| 2 | DJ-1 | Heng County, Guangxi | 100% with KF697687 | |
| 3 | FCE | Heng County, Guangxi | 99% with KJ381073 | |
| 4 | STSF-3 | Heng County, Guangxi | 99% with KF923857 | |
| 5 | YB-1 | Heng County, Guangxi | HG917932 | |
| 6 | YB-3 | Heng County, Guangxi | 99% with JX275780 | |
| 7 | LP-1 | Heng County, Guangxi | 99% with JX275790 | |
| 8 | LP-2 | Heng County, Guangxi | 99% with JX945583 | |
| 9 | LZ-5 | Luzhai County, Guangxi | 99% with KM357551 | |
| 10 | LZ-9 | Luzhai County, Guangxi | 99% with KR260800 | |
| 11 | LZN-3 | Luzhai County, Guangxi | 99% with JX982240 | |
| 12 | LZ-4 | Luzhai County, Guangxi | 99% with HM346876 | |
| 13 | LZ-1 | Luzhai County, Guangxi | 100% with KC511597 | |
| 14 | LZ-12 | Luzhai County, Guangxi | 99% with KR183781 | |
| 15 | YZ-3 | Yizhou County, Guangxi | 99% with KJ596529 | |
| 16 | YZ-4 | Yizhou County, Guangxi | 99% with KR340470 | |
| 17 | YZ-5 | Yizhou County, Guangxi | 99% with HG917933 | |
| 18 | YZ-6 | Yizhou County, Guangxi | 100% with KR340470 | |
| 19 | XZ-1 | Xiangzhou County, Guangxi | 99% with KJ596523 | |
| 20 | XZ-2 | Xiangzhou County, Guangxi | 99% withEU938326 | |
| 21 | XZ-3 | Xiangzhou County, Guangxi | 99% with KM006436 | |
| 22 | XZ-4 | Xiangzhou County, Guangxi | 99% with KP132362 | |
| 23 | XZ-5 | Xiangzhou County, Guangxi | 99% with GQ469920 | |
| 24 | JD-1 | Wuming County, Guangxi | LN849073 | |
| 25 | JD-2 | Wuming County, Guangxi | LN849072 | |
| 26 | JG | Wuming County, Guangxi | LN849071 | |
| 27 | JF-1 | Wuming County, Guangxi | 99% with LN849071 | |
| 28 | JF-3 | Wuming County, Guangxi | 99% with KR260794 | |
| 29 | JC | Wuming County, Guangxi | 99% with KR001854 |
Figure 1.Phylogenetic tree of the tested isolates.
Primers selected for RAPD and ISSR.
| RAPD primers | ISSR primers* | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primer code | Sequence (5′→3′) | Annealed temperature (°C) | Amplified /Polymorphic stripes | Primer code | Sequence (5′→3′) | Annealed temperature (°C) | Amplified /Polymorphic stripes |
| OPA02 | TGCCGAGCTG | 39 | 11/11 | 810 | (GA)8T | 42 | 10/10 |
| OPA03 | AGTCAGCCAC | 39 | 10/10 | 818 | (CA)8G | 45 | 12/11 |
| OPB07 | GGTGACGCAG | 39 | 11/11 | 840 | (GA)8YT | 42 | 12/12 |
| OPC05 | GATGACCGCC | 39 | 9/8 | 858 | (TG)8RG | 42 | 9/8 |
| OPC08 | TGGACCGGTG | 39 | 13/13 | 868 | (GAA)5 | 42 | 10/8 |
| OPC11 | AAAGCTGCGG | 39 | 9/9 | 878 | (GGTA)4 | 45 | 11/10 |
| R08 | CCCGTTGCCT | 39 | 12/11 | 880 | (GGAGA)3 | 42 | 9/9 |
| R09 | TGAGCACGAG | 39 | 8/8 | 884 | HBH(AG)7 | 42 | 10/9 |
| R02 | CACAGCTGCC | 39 | 10/10 | 885 | BHB(GA)7 | 42 | 13/13 |
| R15 | GGACAACGAG | 39 | 11/11 | 888 | BDB(CA)7 | 48 | 10/9 |
| K20 | ACGGCAAGGA | 39 | 9/8 | 890 | VHV(GT)7 | 45 | 10/10 |
| S110 | CCTACGTCAG | 39 | 12/12 | 895 | AGAGTTGGTACGTCTTGAT | 45 | 9/9 |
| S96 | AGCGTCCTCC | 39 | 9/9 | 899 | CATGGTGTTGGTCATTGTTCCA | 48 | 10/9 |
| S56 | AGGGCGTAAG | 39 | 11/11 | ||||
| S30 | GTGATCGCAG | 39 | 13/12 | ||||
| S2 | TGATCCCTGG | 39 | 10/10 | ||||
| Total | 168/164 | 135/127 | |||||
*B = (C,G,T); D = (A, G, T); H = (A,C,T); V = (A,C,G); R = (A,G); Y = (C,T).
Figure 2.Electrophoresis of RAPD PCR products of 29 L. theobromae isolates obtained by primer OPC08.
Lanes 1–6: Isolates from Luzhai County; lanes 7–11: isolates from Xiangzhou; lanes 12–14 and 18: isolates frome Yizhou; lanes 15–17 and 19–23: isolates from Heng; lanes 24–29: isolates from Agave sisalana; CK: negative control; M: marker.
Figure 3.Electrophoresis of ISSR PCR products of 29 L. theobromae isolates obtained by primer 885.
Lanes 1–5: Isolates from Xiangzhou; lanes 6–13: isolates from Heng; lanes 14–17: isolates from Yizhou; lanes 18–23: isolates from Agave sisalana; lanes 24–29: isolates from Luzhai; CK: negative control; M: marker.
Figure 4.UPGMA dendrogram of 29 L. theobromae isolates based on RAPD analysis.
Figure 5.UPGMA dendrogram of 29 L. theobromae isolates based on ISSR analysis.
Nei’s genetic identity and genetic distance of five populations based on RAPD and ISSR.
| Population | GX | GY | GL | GH | GS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GX | – | 0.7324 | 0.6546 | 0.7632 | 0.6765 |
| – | |||||
| GY | 0.3114 | – | 0.7091 | 0.7867 | 0.6810 |
| – | |||||
| GL | 0.4237 | 0.3438 | – | 0.7183 | 0.6984 |
| – | |||||
| GH | 0.2702 | 0.2399 | 0.3308 | – | 0.7943 |
| – | |||||
| GS | 0.3908 | 0.3841 | 0.3589 | 0.2303 | – |
Genetic distance (below diagonal) and Nei’s genetic identity (above diagonal), upright numbers for RAPD and italic numbers for ISSR.
Genetic diversity of five populations based on RAPD and ISSR.
| Population | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GX | 5 | 89 | 52.98 | 1.5298 | 1.3482 | 0.1977 | 0.2924 |
| GY | 4 | 82 | 48.81 | 1.4881 | 1.3747 | 0.2708 | 0.2999 |
| GL | 6 | 89 | 52.98 | 1.5298 | 1.3588 | 0.2015 | 0.2961 |
| GH | 8 | 130 | 77.38 | 1.7738 | 1.6455 | 0.3479 | 0.4952 |
| GS | 6 | 70 | 41.67 | 1.4167 | 1.2775 | 0.1569 | 0.2313 |
| Average | 92 | 54.76 | 1.5174 | 1.4009 | 0.2224 | 0.3230 | |
n: Sample size; Pl: number of polymorphic loci; Ppl: percentage of polymorphic loci; Na: observed number of alleles; Ne: effective number of alleles; H: Nei’s gene diversity index; I: Shannon’s information index. Upright numbers for RAPD and italic numbers for ISSR.
Genetic diversity of 29 isolates based on RAPD and ISSR.
| n | Na | Ne | H | I | Ht | Hs | Gst | Nm | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | 29 | 1.9821 | 1.7200 | 0.4014 | 0.5830 | 0.3979 | 0.2224 | 0.4411 | 0.6335 |
| St. Dev | 0.1328 | 0.2663 | 0.1140 | 0.1397 | 0.0136 | 0.0100 | |||
n: Sample size; Na: observed number of alleles; Ne: effective number of alleles; H: Nei’s gene diversity index; I: Shannon’s information index; Ht: total heterozygosity; Hs: intraspecific heterozygosity; Gst: coefficient of genetic differentiation; Nm: gene flow. Upright numbers for RAPD and italic numbers for ISSR.