| Literature DB >> 31354768 |
Donia Abdallah1, Ghada Baraket1, Veronica Perez2, Sana Ben Mustapha1, Amel Salhi-Hannachi1, Jose I Hormaza3.
Abstract
During the last decade, S-genotyping has been extensively investigated in fruit tree crops such as those belonging to the Prunus genus, including plums. In plums, S-allele typing has been largely studied in diploid species but works are scarcer in polyploid species due to the complexity of the polyploid genome. This study was conducted in order to analyze the S-genotypes of 30 diploid P. salicina, 17 of them reported here for the first time, and 29 hexaploid plums (24 of P. domestica and 5 of P. insititia). PCR analysis allowed identifying nine S-alleles in the P. salicina samples allocating the 30 accessions in 16 incompatibility groups, two of them identified here for the first time. In addition, pollen tube growth was studied in self-pollinated flowers of 17 Tunisian P. salicina under the microscope. In 16 samples, including one carrying the Se allele, which has been correlated with self-compatibility, the pollen tubes were arrested in the style. Only in one cultivar ("Bedri"), the pollen tubes reached the base of the style. Twelve S-alleles were identified in the 24 P. domestica and 5 P. insititia accessions, assigning accessions in 16 S-genotypes. S-genotyping results were combined with nine SSR loci to analyze genetic diversity. Results showed a close genetic relationship between P. domestica and P. salicina and between P. domestica and P. insititia corroborating that S-locus genotyping is suitable for molecular fingerprinting in diploid and polyploid Prunus species.Entities:
Keywords: S-genotyping; plums; pollen tube; pollination; polyploidy; self-(in)compatibility
Year: 2019 PMID: 31354768 PMCID: PMC6640205 DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2019.00896
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Plant Sci ISSN: 1664-462X Impact factor: 5.753
Names and origin of plum accessions analyzed in this work.
| Species | Accession | Abbreviation | Origin | Species | Accession | Abbreviation | Origin |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alcor–1 | ALC1 | Germplasm collection CITA-Aragon- Zaragoza-Spain | Ain Bagra1 | ANB1 | Growers orchards- Tunisia | ||
| Alcor–2 | ALC2 | Ain Bagra2 | ANB2 | ||||
| Arenal | ARE | Ain Dhib | AND | ||||
| Domingo | DOM | Ain Torkia | ANT | ||||
| F–4 A–4 | F4A4 | AouinaHamra | ANH | ||||
| F–9 A–10 | F9A10 | Aouina Hamra2 | ANH2 | ||||
| Fraila | FRA | AouinaSafra | ANS | ||||
| President | PRE | Aouina Safra2 | ANS2 | ||||
| Puente Ave | PnAVE | Aouina Safra3 | ANS3 | ||||
| R Claudia Conde | RCC | Bedri | BED | ||||
| RC Aniñon | RC A | Cidre | CID | ||||
| RC Dorada | RC D | Cidre1 | CID1 | ||||
| RC Verde | RCver | Sauvage | SAU | ||||
| Río Ribazo 1 | Rio R1 | Tasstour Hamra précoce | THP | ||||
| Río Ribazo 2 | Rio R2 | Tasstour Hamra Tardive | THT | ||||
| Ruth Gestteter | R Ges | Tasstour Safra | TSS | ||||
| Tobed | TOB | Zaghwenia | ZAG | ||||
| Verde | VER | 606 | 606 | Germplasm collections- Tunisia | |||
| Agustina | AGU | La Palma Island-Spain | Angeleno | ANG | |||
| HuevoChivato | H Chi | Angeleno2 | ANG2 | ||||
| Mulata | MUL | Beauty | BEA | ||||
| Mulata1 | MUL1 | Black Diamant | BLD | ||||
| Negra del paíspequeña | NPP | Black Gold | BLG | ||||
| Negra | NEG | Black Star | BLS | ||||
| Chaaraouia | CHA | Spontaneous populations-Tunisia | Fortune | FOR | |||
| MeskiKbiraHamra | MKH | Marie | MAR | ||||
| MeskiKbiraKahla | MKK | Methley | MET | ||||
| MeskiSghiraHamra | MSH | Santa Rosa | SNR | ||||
| Zenou | ZEN | Sungold Sungold2 | SNG | ||||
| SNG2 |
FIGURE 1Example of S-allele identification in (A) six P. salicina samples and (B) six hexaploid plums amplified with PruC2-PCER. L: 1KB ladder. C1, C2, and C3: Varieties used as control with previously known S-genotypes. C1, Fortune; C2, Santa Rosa, C3, Beauty; 1, Bedri 1; 2, Aouina Hamra; 3, Tasstour Hamra précoce; 4, Sungold; 5, Ain Dhib; 6, Zaghwenia; 7, Mulata; 8, Negra; 9, Fraila; 10, Verde.
Identified S-genotypes and incompatibility groups for diploid Prunus salicina.
| Variety | Detected | IG | IG∗ | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tasstour Safra | SfSh | A | VI | |
| Aouina Safra | ||||
| Tasstour Hamra Tardive | SfSk | B | XVI | |
| Ain Bagra1 | SfSc | C | 0 | |
| Ain Bagra2 | ||||
| Zaghwenia | ||||
| Sauvage | ||||
| Aouina Safra2 | ||||
| Aouina Safra3 | ||||
| Cidre | SaSe | D | 0 | |
| Cidre1 | ||||
| Cidre2 | ||||
| Tasstour Hamra précoce | SfSg | E | IX | |
| Aouina Hamra | SqSg | F | ∗ | This work |
| Black Diamant Black Gold Bedri1 | SeSh | G | VIII | |
| Ain Dhib | SfSq | H | ∗ | This work |
| Angeleno | ScSh | I | VII | |
| Angeleno2 | ||||
| Aouina Hamra2 | ||||
| Sungold | ShSk | J | X | |
| Sungold2 | ||||
| Black Star | SeSf | K | XIII | |
| Marie | ||||
| Methley | SbSg | L | 0 | |
| Santa Rosa | ScSe | M | XI | |
| Beauty | SbSh | N | IV | |
| 606 | SaSb | O | I | |
| Fortune | SbSc | P | II |
FIGURE 2Pollen germination and pollen tube growth in flowers of Tunisian Japanese plums. (A) Flowers. (a) Balloon stage. (b) Full bloom. (c) Reproductive organs. (d) The pistil. (B) Pollen germination. (a) Germination at the stigma surface. (b) Pollen tube arrested in the style in an incompatible reaction. (c) The pollen tube tip. (d) Pollen tube growing in the base of the style in a compatible reaction. Scale bars = 50 μm. Sta, stamens; Stg, stigma; Sty, style; B.Sty, the base of the style; Ova, ovary; P, Pollen tube.
Self-(in)compatibility results in 17 Tunisian plums analyzed in this work.
| Cultivar | Detected | Number of examined pistils | % of pistils with successful pollen germination | % of pistils with pollen tubes reaching the ovary | SI/SC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tasstour Safra | SfSh | 45 | 85 | 0 | SI |
| Aouina Safra | SfSh | 25 | 100 | 0 | SI |
| Tasstour Hamra Tardive | SfSk | 27 | 95 | 0 | SI |
| Ain Bagra1 | SfSc | 27 | 95 | 0 | SI |
| Ain Bagra2 | SfSc | 30 | 92 | 0 | SI |
| Zaghwenia | SfSc | 28 | 100 | 0 | SI |
| Sauvage | SfSc | 25 | 100 | 0 | SI |
| Aouina Safra2 | SfSc | 25 | 100 | 0 | SI |
| Aouina Safra3 | SfSc | 27 | 96 | 0 | SI |
| Cidre | SaSe | 28 | 100 | 0 | SI |
| Cidre1 | SaSe | 30 | 96 | 0 | SI |
| Cidre2 | SaSe | 30 | 99 | 0 | SI |
| Tasstour Hamra précoce | SfSg | 26 | 98 | 0 | SI |
| Aouina Hamra | SqSg | 26 | 99 | 0 | SI |
| Bedri1 | SeSh | 45 | 88 | 75 | SC |
| Ain Dhib | SfSq | 30 | 95 | 0 | SI |
| Aouina Hamra2 | ScSh | 29 | 90 | 0 | SI |
| Fortune (C1) | SbSc | 27 | 98 | 0 | SI |
| Santa Rosa (C2) | ScSe | 25 | 100 | 85 | SC |
Sizes of S-alleles amplified in hexaploid P. domestica and P. insititia with three primers pairs.
| PRUC2–PCER | PaCons1F/PaCons1R2 | Fbox5’F/Fbox–IntronR | |
|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | 470 | 374 | 192 |
| S2 | 650 | 394 | |
| S3 | 580 | 385 | 189 |
| S4 | 600 | 178 | |
| S5 | 700 | 377 | 182 |
| S6 | 800 | 405 | 192 |
| S7 | 900 | 384 | 177 |
| S8 | 350 | 228 | |
| S9 | 1090 | 326 | 176 |
| S10 | 312 | 350 | |
| S11 | 1000 | 413 | 196 |
| S12 | 1580 | 368 | 185 |
Identified S-genotypes and incompatibility groups for hexaploid Prunus domestica and Prunus insititia.
| Variety | Detected |
|---|---|
| Mulata | S2/S5/S6/S7/S12 |
| Mulata2 | |
| Negra | S4/S6/S8/S9 |
| HuevoChivato | S2/S5/S7/S10/S8/S12 |
| Agustina | |
| Verde | S3/S5/S6/S9 |
| RC Verde | |
| Negra del país pequeña | S4/S6/S11/S9 |
| President | S1/S5/S7/S9 |
| Ruth Gestteter | S1/S3/S5/S6/S12 |
| RC Dorada | S1/S3/S2/S11/S9 |
| Fraila | S2/S8/S10/S6/S12 |
| Alcor–1 | S1/S3/S6/S9 |
| Alcor–2 | |
| Arenal | |
| Domingo | |
| F–9 A–10 | |
| Puente Ave | |
| R Claudia Conde | |
| RC Aniñon | |
| Río Ribazo 1 | |
| Río Ribazo 2 | |
| Tobed | |
| F–4 A–4 | S1/S3/S5/S11/S9 |
| Meski Kbira Kahla | S6/S7/S8/S10 |
| Meski Sghira Hamra | S6/S7/S10/S11 |
| Chaaraouia | S7/S8/S10/S11 |
| Meski Kbira Hamra | S6/S5/S8/S10 |
| Zenou | S1/S2/S10/S11 |
Diversity parameters of tested Prunus species based on S-locus markers.
| Group | n | Genetic diversity | Heterozygosity | FST | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | MAF | Gn | Gd | |||||||||
| 30 | 9 | 0.22 | 0.3 | 16 | 0.77 | 0.87 | 0.74 | −0.18 | – | 0.18∗ | 0.23 | |
| 24 | 12 | 0.19 | 0.42 | 11 | 0.86 | 0.86 | 0.75 | −0.15 | 0.18∗ | – | 0.16∗ | |
| 5 | 8 | 0.21 | 0.44 | 5 | 1 | 0.86 | 0.75 | −0.15 | 0.23 | 0.16∗ | – | |
| Average | 59 | 9.66 | 0.2 | 0.39 | 10.6 | 0.88 | 0.86 | 0.75 | −0.15 | 0.19 | ||
Diversity parameters of tested Prunus species based on SSR loci.
| Species | n | Genetic diversity | Heterozygosity | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gn | |||||||||
| 30 | 94 | 10.5 | 33.1 | 0.78 | 24 | 0.71 | 0.67 | −0.06 | |
| 24 | 195 | 21.6 | 50.4 | 0.82 | 20 | 0.73 | 0.69 | −0.06 | |
| 5 | 73 | 8.1 | 29.3 | 0.74 | 5 | 0.74 | 0.7 | −0.06 | |
FIGURE 3Genetic relationships between the 59 tested plums based on (A) S-locus data and (B) SSR data. (a) UPGMA tree. Numbers on major branches represent bootstrap support from 2000 replicates. (b) Non-metric multidimensional scaling MDS plots: (1) using dimensions 2–3. (2) using dimensions 1–2.