| Literature DB >> 32050895 |
Admas Alemu1,2, Tileye Feyissa3, Tesfaye Letta4, Bekele Abeyo5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ethiopia has been considered as a center of diversity and the second possible center of domestication of durum wheat. Genetic diversity and population structure analysis in the existing Ethiopian durum wheat germplasm have enormous importance in enhancing breeding effort and for sustainable conservation. Hence, 192 Ethiopian durum wheat accessions comprising 167 landraces collected from major wheat-growing areas of the country and 25 improved varieties released from Debre Zeit and Sinana Agricultural Research Centers, Ethiopia in different years (1994-2010) were assembled for the current study.Entities:
Keywords: Ethiopian durum wheat; Genetic diversity; Improved varieties; Landraces; Population structure; SNPs
Year: 2020 PMID: 32050895 PMCID: PMC7017545 DOI: 10.1186/s12863-020-0825-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Genet ISSN: 1471-2156 Impact factor: 2.797
Fig. 1Distribution of SNPs generated from the 90 K Illumina iSelect SNPs array across chromosomes (A) and genomes (B) in 192 Ethiopian durum wheat accessions
Fig. 2Frequency distribution of Nei’s gene diversity (A), polymorphic information content (PIC) (B) and minor allelic frequency (MAF) (C) of 15,338 polymorphic SNPs generated from Ethiopian durum wheat accessions
Mean values of diversity indices and minor allelic frequency distribution of SNP markers across chromosomes in 192 Ethiopian durum wheat accessions
| Chromosome | Nei’s Gene diversity | Polymorphic information content (PIC) | Minor allelic frequency (MAF) |
|---|---|---|---|
| A-Genome | |||
| 1A | 0.282 | 0.229 | 0.208 |
| 2A | 0.221 | 0.185 | 0.150 |
| 3A | 0.246 | 0.202 | 0.175 |
| 4A | 0.248 | 0.204 | 0.176 |
| 5A | 0.272 | 0.221 | 0.200 |
| 6A | 0.265 | 0.215 | 0.194 |
| 7A | 0.217 | 0.181 | 0.150 |
| B-Genome | |||
| 1B | 0.254 | 0.208 | 0.185 |
| 2B | 0.229 | 0.190 | 0.158 |
| 3B | 0.233 | 0.194 | 0.159 |
| 4B | 0.279 | 0.226 | 0.209 |
| 5B | 0.265 | 0.217 | 0.191 |
| 6B | 0.246 | 0.203 | 0.172 |
| 7B | 0.235 | 0.193 | 0.164 |
| Homoeologous | |||
| 1 | 0.259 | 0.211 | 0.188 |
| 2 | 0.226 | 0.188 | 0.155 |
| 3 | 0.238 | 0.197 | 0.166 |
| 4 | 0.264 | 0.215 | 0.193 |
| 5 | 0.268 | 0.218 | 0.194 |
| 6 | 0.255 | 0.209 | 0.182 |
| 7 | 0.226 | 0.187 | 0.157 |
| A-Genome | 0.2448 | 0.2015 | 0.1744 |
| B-Genome | 0.2471 | 0.2035 | 0.1750 |
| Whole Genome | 0.2462 | 0.2027 | 0.1748 |
Inference of the optimal numbers of clusters existed in Ethiopian durum wheat panel using Delta K Statistics
| K | L(K) | stdev | L’(K) | L”(K) | |L”(K)| | Delta K |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | −157,376 | 3.369 | – | – | – | – |
| 2 | −138,930 | 1370.013 | 18,446.93 | − 3224.75 | 3224.75 | 2.35 |
| 3 | − 123,708 | 543.0884 | 15,222.19 | − 5458.76 | 5458.76 | 10.05 |
| 4 | −113,944 | 1149.967 | 9763.425 | − 1419.46 | 1419.46 | 1.23 |
| 5 | − 105,600 | 708.175 | 8343.965 | − 3511.28 | 3511.28 | 4.96 |
| 6 | −100,768 | 677.594 | 4832.685 | − 1326.03 | 1326.025 | 1.96 |
| 7 | −97,261 | 1353.421 | 3506.66 | 580.6019 | 580.6019 | 0.43 |
| 8 | −93,173 | 1398.676 | 4087.262 | − 1491.05 | 1491.054 | 1.07 |
| 9 | −90,577 | 1708.376 | 2596.208 | 635.7119 | 635.7119 | 0.37 |
| 10 | −87,345 | 2170.333 | 3231.92 |
Where;
K = Subpopulations;
Ln (PD) = The log likelihood for each K;
L (K) = An average of 20 values of Ln P(D);
stdev = Standard deviation for 20 values of Ln P(D);
L’(K) = L(K) n – L(K) n-1;
L”(K) = L′(K) n+ 1 − L′(K);
∆K = |L”(K)|/Stdev;
The gray color of the third line designates the optimal sub-populations of the panel based on the highest delta K value
Fig. 3Inference of the optimal numbers of sub-populations (clusters) in Ethiopian durum wheat panel with the Bayesian clustering model in STRUCTURE (A) and by the discriminant analysis of principal components (DAPC) using adegenet package (B)
Fig. 4Neighbor-joining tree generated based on simple matching dissimilarity coefficients using SNP markers from 192 Ethiopian durum wheat accessions. Colors of accessions are clusters inferred from STRUCTURE-based analysis
Fig. 5Principal component analysis (PCA) using 15,338 polymorphic SNP markers generated from 192 Ethiopian durum wheat accessions. (A) Varieties cluster (green, K-2) showing a clear separation from the other two landrace clusters (K1 & K2) using PC1 and PC2. (B) Clustering got disrupted when considering other PCs
Mean of diversity indices and minor allelic frequency distribution of SNPs in landraces and varieties of Ethiopian durum wheat
| Accession Type | Sample size | No. of polymorphic SNPs | Nei’s Gene diversity | Polymorphic information content (PIC) | Minor allelic frequency (MAF) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Landrace | 167 | 13,466 | 0.213 | 0.173 | 0.154 |
| Cultivar | 25 | 13,725 | 0.297 | 0.240 | 0.218 |
Analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA) for Ethiopian durum wheat accessions with and without grouping according to STRUCTURE clustering result
| Source of variation | DF | Sum of squares | Variance components | Percentage of variation | Fixation indices | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Among populations | 2 | 166,172.20 | 700.94 Va | 52.41 | FST = 0.52 | Va and FST = 0.000 |
| Among individuals Within populations | 189 | 240,563.25 | 636.41 Vb | 47.59 | FIS = 1.00 | Vb and FIS = 0.000 |
| Total | 191 | 406,735.45 | 1337.35 |
Analysis of molecular variance) between landraces and varieties
| Source of variation | DF | Sum of squares | Variance components | Percentage of variation | Fixation indices | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Among populations | 1 | 108,435.72 | 1228.63 Va | 61.02 | FST = 0.61 | Va and FST = 0.000 |
| Among individuals Within populations | 190 | 298,299.73 | 784.99 Vb | 38.98 | FIS = 1.00 | Vb and FIS = 0.000 |
| Total | 191 | 406,735.45 | 2013.62 |