Identification of genetic diversity among mutant lemon and mandarin varieties using different molecular markers

The results clearly showed that SSCP, SSR and ISSR markers are important tools to distinguish mutant genotypes andconfirmed their usefulness for phylogenetic studies.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯

Objective & Hypothesis:Mandarin (Citrus reticulate Blanco) and lemon (C. limon L.) are among the most cultivated Citrus species in the world.Among different approaches, gamma radiation is widely used to induce mutations in citrus breeding studies.

📊

Key Findings & Data:Out of 82 primers (22 SSCP, 30 ISSR and 30 SSR) tested, 55 primers (9 SSCP, 24 ISSR and 22 SSR primers) successfully amplified a total number of 363 amplicons.A single band with an approximate size of 500 nucleotides was determined using the primer ISSR 868 as differentiating between seedy parent and irradiated seedless mandarin genotypes.

💡

Conclusion & Impact:The results clearly showed that SSCP, SSR and ISSR markers are important tools to distinguish mutant genotypes andconfirmed their usefulness for phylogenetic studies.

🔬Design:Research Article

📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample

⚙️Variables:Citrus · genetic differences · mutation breeding

Abstract

Mandarin (Citrus reticulate Blanco) and lemon (C. limon L.) are among the most cultivated Citrus species in the world.Among different approaches, gamma radiation is widely used to induce mutations in citrus breeding studies. Gamma radiation causes DNA damage, randomly inducing several mutations in the genome. Molecular techniquesarewidely used to detect such induced mutations and genetic diversity in plants.In this study, simple sequence repeats (SSR), inter-simple sequence repeat (ISSR) and single-strand conformation polymorphism (SSCP) markers were used to detectthe induced mutations andgenetic diversityin someirradiated mandarin and lemon genotypes in comparison with standard citrus varieties. The irradiated genotypes used in this study derived from populationsthat had been originally obtained with gamma radiation with different gray doses applied on Yerli Mandarin and Antalya YerliYuvarlak lemon varieties. Out of 82 primers (22 SSCP, 30 ISSR and 30 SSR) tested, 55 primers (9 SSCP, 24 ISSR and 22 SSR primers) successfully amplified a total number of 363 amplicons.A single band with an approximate size of 500 nucleotides was determined using the primer ISSR 868 as differentiating between seedy parent and irradiated seedless mandarin genotypes. The polymorphism information content (PIC) values of SSCP, ISSR, and SSR markers ranged from 0.61-0.99, 0.31-0.96, and 0.33-0.96, respectively. Cluster analysis classified lemons and mandarins into 2 subgroups as mutant and commercial lemon genotypes. ISSR markers were found to be more effective to determine the genetic differences among the varieties in comparison to SSCP and SSR markers. The results clearly showed that SSCP, SSR and ISSR markers are important tools to distinguish mutant genotypes andconfirmed their usefulness for phylogenetic studies.

Keywords

Citrus genetic differences mutation breeding seedlessness thornlessness

🔖

Cite This Article

SULU, G., KACAR, Y. A., POLAT, I., KİTAPCİ, A., TURGUTOGLU, E., SİMSEK, O., SATAR, G. (2020). Identification of genetic diversity among mutant lemon and mandarin varieties using different molecular markers. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, Cilt: 44 - Sayı: 5, 465–478. https://ajindex.com/articles/179389

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

Open in New Tab ↗

↗New Tab

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (9)

Agarwal M, 2008, PLANT CELL REP, V27, P617, DOI 10.1007/s00299-008-0507-z Agisimanto D, 2016, SAINS MALAYS, V45, P329 Aka-Kacar Y., 2005,
BIOLOGIA, V60, P295. Amar MH, 2011, SCI HORTIC-AMSTERDAM, V128, P220, DOI 10.1016/j.scienta.2011.01.021 Atak C, 2004, MUTAT RES-FUND MOL M, V556, P35, DOI 10.1016/j.mrfmmm.2004.06.037 Barkley NA, 2006, THEOR APPL GENET, V112, P1519, DOI 10.1007/s00122-006-0255-9 Barkley NA, 2009, PLANT SYST EVOL, V282, P71, DOI 10.1007/s00606-009-0208-2 Bermejo A, 2012, SPAN J AGRIC RES, V10, P768, DOI 10.5424/sjar/2012103-460-11 BERMEJO A, 2011, FOOD NUTR SCI, P00169, DOI [DOI 10.4236/FNS.2011.23024, DOI 10.4236/fns.2011.23024] Biswas MK, 2014, PLOS ONE, V9, DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0104182 Biswas MK, 2011, SCI HORTIC-AMSTERDAM, V129, P798, DOI 10.1016/j.scienta.2011.06.015 Cameron J., 1968,
CITRUS IND, VVol.II, P325 Campos ET, 2005,
INTERCIENCIA, V30, P687 Capparelli R, 2004, BIOTECHNOL LETT, V26, P1295, DOI 10.1023/B:BILE.0000044920.36497.fc Carrillo-Medrano S. H., 2018, Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Agricolas, V9, P11 Chapot H, 1975,
CITRUS, P6. Chen CX, 2008, TREE GENET GENOMES, V4, P1, DOI 10.1007/s11295-007-0083-3 Cheng ChangFeng, 2008, Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences, V21, P1378 Christov N. K., 2004,
GENETIKA, V36, P47 Crowley JR, 2011, THESIS. Degirmenci D, 2008, MUSTAFA KEMAL U ZIRA, V13, P13 DENG ZN, 1995, J HORTIC SCI, V70, P117, DOI 10.1080/14620316.1995.11515281 DICE LR, 1945,
ECOLOGY, V26, P297, DOI 10.2307/1932409 Donini B., 1982, Induced mutations in vegetatively propagated plants II. Coimbatore, India, 11-15 February 1980, P29 Doyle J. J., 1990,
FOCUS, V12, P13. Duran C, 2009, CURR BIOINFORM, V4, P16, DOI 10.2174/157489309787158198 Fang DQ, 1997, THEOR APPL GENET, V95, P408, DOI 10.1007/s001220050577 Federici CT, 1998, THEOR APPL GENET, V96, P812, DOI 10.1007/s001220050807 Fu J, 2011, PLANT BREEDING, V130, P287, DOI 10.1111/j.1439-0523.2010.01773.x FUJITA K, 1994, PCR METH APPL, V4, pS137 Garcia-Lor A, 2015, TREE GENET GENOMES, V11, DOI 10.1007/s11295-015-0951-1 Goldenberg L., 2014, Food and Nutrition Sciences, V5, P943, DOI 10.4236/fns.2014.510105 Gulsen O, 2007, SCI HORTIC-AMSTERDAM, V112, P184, DOI 10.1016/j.scienta.2006.12.040 Gulsen O, 2001, J AM SOC HORTIC SCI, V126, P309, DOI 10.21273/JASHS.126.3.309 Gulsen O, 2010,
EUPHYTICA, V173, P265, DOI 10.1007/s10681-010-0146-7 HEARN CJ, 1984, J AM SOC HORTIC SCI, V109, P270 HENSZ R A, 1985, Journal of the Rio Grande Valley Horticultural Society, V38, P