| Literature DB >> 35739190 |
João Vitor Maldonado Dos Santos1, Gustavo Cesar Sant'Ana2, Philip Traldi Wysmierski2, Matheus Henrique Todeschini2, Alexandre Garcia2, Anderson Rotter Meda2.
Abstract
Soybean is one of the most important crops worldwide. Brazil and the United States (US) are the world's two biggest producers of this legume. The increase of publicly available DNA sequencing data as well as high-density genotyping data of multiple soybean germplasms has made it possible to understand the genetic relationships and identify genomics regions that underwent selection pressure during soy domestication and breeding. In this study, we analyzed the genetic relationships between Brazilian (N = 235) and US soybean cultivars (N = 675) released in different decades and screened for genomic signatures between Brazilian and US cultivars. The population structure analysis demonstrated that the Brazilian germplasm has a narrower genetic base than the US germplasm. The US cultivars were grouped according to maturity groups, while Brazilian cultivars were separated according to decade of release. We found 73 SNPs that differentiate Brazilian and US soybean germplasm. Maturity-associated SNPs showed high allelic frequency differences between Brazilian and US accessions. Other important loci were identified separating cultivars released before and after 1996 in Brazil. Our data showed important genomic regions under selection during decades of soybean breeding in Brazil and the US that should be targeted to adapt lines from different origins in these countries.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35739190 PMCID: PMC9226155 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-15022-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.996
Figure 1Population structure analysis between Brazilian and US germplasms. (A) Principal component analysis of Brazilian and US soybean cultivars based on SNPs markers; (B) Delta K as a function of the number of groups (K); (C) assignment coefficients of individual cultivars (bar plots) considering K = 2; and (D) considering K = 4.
Figure 2Population structure analysis of Brazilian and US cultivars according to their maturity groups. Principal component analysis (PCA) within Brazilian (A) and US (B) germplasms for each maturity groups; population structure of the Brazilian (C) and the US (D) genetic basis arranged according to their maturity groups.
Figure 3Mean assignment coefficients of the Brazilian and US cultivars belonging to the different decades of release (1950 to 2010) to STRUCTURE groups (Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4) considering K = 4.
Figure 4Population structure of Brazilian and US cultivars according to their decade of release. Principal component analysis (PCA) within Brazilian (A) and US (B) germplasm for each decade; population structure of the Brazilian (C) and the US (D) genetic bases arranged according to their decade of release.
Summary of the genomic regions with high FST values between Brazilian and US germplasms.
| Chr.a | Start (Mbp)b | End (Mbp)c | SNPd | FST | Tajima’s Dg | π (10E−05)h | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (High)e | (Reg.)f | ALL | BR | US | BR | US | US/BRi | ||||
| 1 | 48.70 | 48.80 | 5 | 0.45 | 0.47 | 4.07 | 2.45 | 2.47 | 1.76 | 1.60 | 0.91 |
| 4 | 50.20 | 50.30 | 7 | 0.44 | 0.19 | 4.12 | 2.12 | 3.93 | 1.89 | 2.86 | 1.51 |
| 6 | 0.60 | 0.70 | 6 | 0.40 | 0.32 | 4.20 | 1.42 | 3.53 | 1.58 | 2.38 | 1.50 |
| 6 | 46.90 | 47.00 | 8 | 0.41 | 0.29 | 4.24 | 1.70 | 3.55 | 2.18 | 2.92 | 1.34 |
| 6 | 47.30 | 47.40 | 4 | 0.40 | 0.42 | 4.19 | − 0.03 | 3.83 | 0.58 | 1.80 | 3.10 |
| 6 | 47.40 | 47.50 | 9 | 0.41 | 0.39 | 5.58 | 0.37 | 5.08 | 1.73 | 4.08 | 2.36 |
| 6 | 47.50 | 47.60 | 4 | 0.49 | 0.35 | 3.35 | 1.16 | 2.84 | 0.81 | 1.47 | 1.82 |
| 6 | 47.70 | 47.80 | 16 | 0.46 | 0.22 | 5.42 | 2.30 | 5.23 | 3.85 | 6.81 | 1.77 |
| 6 | 47.80 | 47.90 | 15 | 0.40 | 0.29 | 5.87 | 2.98 | 4.97 | 5.05 | 6.20 | 1.23 |
| 6 | 48.10 | 48.20 | 20 | 0.44 | 0.17 | 5.82 | 2.64 | 5.61 | 6.10 | 8.63 | 1.42 |
| 6 | 48.40 | 48.50 | 4 | 0.47 | 0.15 | 1.94 | 1.15 | 1.72 | 0.80 | 1.08 | 1.35 |
| 7 | 6.30 | 6.40 | 6 | 0.44 | 0.16 | 1.32 | 2.34 | 0.78 | 1.63 | 0.90 | 0.55 |
| 9 | 41.50 | 41.60 | 7 | 0.40 | 0.17 | 4.34 | 1.82 | 4.55 | 1.52 | 3.13 | 2.06 |
| 10 | 44.20 | 44.30 | 6 | 0.52 | 0.23 | 2.95 | 2.61 | 2.00 | 2.13 | 1.63 | 0.77 |
| 10 | 44.40 | 44.50 | 7 | 0.44 | 0.16 | 3.84 | 3.05 | 2.90 | 2.66 | 2.58 | 0.97 |
| 12 | 6.10 | 6.20 | 9 | 0.46 | 0.10 | 4.99 | 3.92 | 5.22 | 3.83 | 3.83 | 1.00 |
| 16 | 3.00 | 3.10 | 12 | 0.42 | 0.09 | 1.74 | 2.25 | 1.24 | 3.27 | 2.26 | 0.69 |
| 16 | 29.40 | 29.50 | 10 | 0.45 | 0.12 | 4.63 | 3.96 | 4.24 | 3.86 | 4.01 | 1.04 |
| 16 | 30.70 | 30.80 | 6 | 0.41 | 0.30 | 2.21 | 2.96 | 0.97 | 2.30 | 1.03 | 0.45 |
| 16 | 31.10 | 31.20 | 6 | 0.51 | 0.27 | 3.38 | 0.55 | 3.18 | 0.98 | 2.20 | 2.24 |
| 18 | 48.60 | 48.70 | 5 | 0.42 | 0.32 | 2.76 | 4.00 | 1.20 | 2.45 | 1.12 | 0.46 |
| 18 | 57.20 | 57.30 | 9 | 0.46 | 0.17 | 2.76 | 3.42 | 2.03 | 3.21 | 2.13 | 0.66 |
| 19 | 0.90 | 1.00 | 7 | 0.40 | 0.11 | 2.65 | 3.40 | 2.12 | 2.15 | 1.97 | 0.92 |
| 19 | 3.00 | 3.10 | 5 | 0.42 | 0.39 | 2.21 | 4.08 | 0.34 | 2.45 | 0.76 | 0.31 |
| 19 | 3.10 | 3.20 | 4 | 0.40 | 0.42 | 2.84 | 3.23 | 1.25 | 1.78 | 0.94 | 0.53 |
| 19 | 3.40 | 3.50 | 4 | 0.40 | 0.42 | 2.84 | 3.23 | 1.25 | 2.24 | 1.31 | 0.58 |
aSoybean chromosome.
bStart position of the genomic region with high FST values.
cEnd position of the genomic region with high FST values.
dtotal number of SNPs observed in this interval.
eThe highest FST value observed in a SNP of this interval.
fThe genomic region average FST.
gTajima’s D coefficient for all (ALL), Brazilian (BR), and United States (US) germplasms.
hNucleotide diversity values for all (ALL), Brazilian (BR), and United States (US) germplasms.
inucleotide diversity ratio between the populations.
Figure 5The allele frequency distribution for SNPs close to loci (A) E1 (chromosome 6), (B) E2 (chromosome 10), and (C) FT2a (chromosome 16) in Brazilian and US germplasms.
Figure 6Nucleotide diversity (π) between modern and old cultivars of the southern stem canker resistance loci (Rdm).