Journals / Turkish Journal of Botany / 2014 / Cilt: 38 - Sayı: 3

Molecular phylogeny of the genus Amygdalus (Rosaceae) based on nrDNA ITS and cpDNA trnS-trnG sequences

Pages
439–452
Publication Date
2014-05-16
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

NeighborNet analysis of the nrDNA ITS dataset of Iranian almonds supported reticulate relationships for all Amygdalus hybrids as previously reported.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:With over 40 species, almonds (Amygdalus L.) are among the most economically important Rosaceae fruit crops distributed in the Irano-Turanian region of southwestern and Central Asia and southeastern Europe.
📊
Key Findings & Data:While Amygdalus is considered a separate genus in floristic treatments of Asian countries it is a subgenus or a section of Prunus L. s.l. in other treatments.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:NeighborNet analysis of the nrDNA ITS dataset of Iranian almonds supported reticulate relationships for all Amygdalus hybrids as previously reported.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Key words: Amygdalus · molecular phylogeny · nrDNA ITS

Abstract

With over 40 species, almonds (Amygdalus L.) are among the most economically important Rosaceae fruit crops distributed in the Irano-Turanian region of southwestern and Central Asia and southeastern Europe. While Amygdalus is considered a separate genus in floristic treatments of Asian countries it is a subgenus or a section of Prunus L. s.l. in other treatments. Phylogenetic relationships of the Iranian wild almonds based on data from 2 nuclear and chloroplast spacers (nrDNA ITS and cpDNA trnS-trnG) were constructed using the maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood, Bayesian inference, and NeighborNet methods. Data from 2 nuclear and chloroplast spacers were congruent. All of the Iranian almonds formed a well-established monophyletic clade, and the subgenus Cerasus was recovered as sister to Amygdalus. Amygdalus spinosissima Bge. was sister to all other Amygdalus species included in this study. Most of the Amygdalus species were grouped in a monophyletic clade that consisted of 2 subclades. The taxonomic status of 2 traditional subgenera of Amygdalus, Amygdalus and Dodecandra (Spach) Browicz, did not agree with the phylogenetic relationships revealed here. Among the studied species of Amygdalus, species of the section Spartioides Spach form a monophyletic clade (BV = 83%). Amygdalus mira Koehne, Amygdalus davidiana (Carriere) Franch., Amygdalus triloba Ltdl., and Amygdalus nana L. were recovered outside the main clade Amygdalus, indicating that these species should be excluded from Amygdalus. Similar to the previous phylogenetic studies in Prunus s.l., phylogenetic analysis did not fully resolve relationships of the studied Amygdalus. NeighborNet analysis of the nrDNA ITS dataset of Iranian almonds supported reticulate relationships for all Amygdalus hybrids as previously reported.

Özet

With over 40 species, almonds (Amygdalus L.) are among the most economically important Rosaceae fruit crops distributed in the Irano-Turanian region of southwestern and Central Asia and southeastern Europe. While Amygdalus is considered a separate genus in floristic treatments of Asian countries it is a subgenus or a section of Prunus L. s.l. in other treatments. Phylogenetic relationships of the Iranian wild almonds based on data from 2 nuclear and chloroplast spacers (nrDNA ITS and cpDNA trnS-trnG) were constructed using the maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood, Bayesian inference, and NeighborNet methods. Data from 2 nuclear and chloroplast spacers were congruent. All of the Iranian almonds formed a well-established monophyletic clade, and the subgenus Cerasus was recovered as sister to Amygdalus. Amygdalus spinosissima Bge. was sister to all other Amygdalus species included in this study. Most of the Amygdalus species were grouped in a monophyletic clade that consisted of 2 subclades. The taxonomic status of 2 traditional subgenera of Amygdalus, Amygdalus and Dodecandra (Spach) Browicz, did not agree with the phylogenetic relationships revealed here. Among the studied species of Amygdalus, species of the section Spartioides Spach form a monophyletic clade (BV = 83%). Amygdalus mira Koehne, Amygdalus davidiana (Carriere) Franch., Amygdalus triloba Ltdl., and Amygdalus nana L. were recovered outside the main clade Amygdalus, indicating that these species should be excluded from Amygdalus. Similar to the previous phylogenetic studies in Prunus s.l., phylogenetic analysis did not fully resolve relationships of the studied Amygdalus. NeighborNet analysis of the nrDNA ITS dataset of Iranian almonds supported reticulate relationships for all Amygdalus hybrids as previously reported.

🔖

Cite This Article

VAFADAR, M., OSALOO, S. K., ATTAR, F. (2014). Molecular phylogeny of the genus Amygdalus (Rosaceae) based on nrDNA ITS and cpDNA trnS-trnG sequences. Turkish Journal of Botany, Cilt: 38 - Sayı: 3, 439–452. https://ajindex.com/articles/183341

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. Attar F, Maroofi H, Vafadar M (2009). Amygdalus kurdistanica and A. orazii spp. nov. (Rosaceae) from Iran. Nord J Bot 27: 324–327.
  2. Bortiri E, Oh SH, Jiang J, Baggett S, Granger A, Weeks C, Buckingham M, Potter D, Parfitt E (2001). Phylogeny and systematics of Prunus (Rosaceae) as determined by sequence analysis of ITS and the chloroplast trnL-trnF spacer DNA. Syst Bot 26: 797– 807. Browicz K (1969). Amygdalus L. In: Rechinger KH, editor. Flora Iranica, Vol. 66. Graz, Austria: Akademische Druck und Verlagsanstalt, pp. 166–187.
  3. Browicz K (1989). Conspect and chorology of the genera Amygdalus L. and Louiseania Carriere. Arbor Kornickie 34: 31–54.
  4. Browicz K, Zohary D (1996). The genus Amygdalus L. (Rosaceae): species relationships, distribution and evolution under domestication. Genet Resour Crop Ev 43: 229–247.
  5. Cunningham CW (1997). Can three incongruence tests predict when data should be combined? Mol Biol Evol 14: 733–740.
  6. Doyle JJ, Doyle JL (1987). A rapid DNA isolation procedure for small quantities of fresh leaf tissue. Phytochemical Bulletin 19: 11–15.
  7. Farris JS, Kallersjo M, Kluge AG, Bult C (1995). Testing significance of incongruence. Cladistics 10: 315–319.
  8. Felsenstein J (1985). Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39: 783–791.
  9. Ghahreman A, Attar F (1999). Biodiversity of Plant Species in Iran. Tehran, Iran: Tehran University Publications. Gouy M, Guindon S, Gascuel O (2010). SeaView version 4: a multiplatform graphical user interface for sequence alignment and phylogenetic tree building. Mol Biol Evol 27: 221–224.
  10. Hall TA (1999). BioEdit: a user-friendly biological sequence alignment editor and analysis program for Windows 95/98/ NT. Nucl Acid S 41: 95–98.
  11. Huson DH, Bryant D (2006). Application of Phylogenetic Networks in Evolutionary Studies. Mol Biol Evol 23: 254–267.
  12. Judd WS, Campbell ChS, Kellogg EA, Stevens PF (2002). Plant Systematics (A Phylogenetic Approach). Massachusetts, USA: Sinauer Associates Inc., Publishers.
  13. Khatamsaz M (1993).
  14. Flora of Iran. Tehran, Iran: Research Institute of Forests and Rangelands Press.
  15. Lakrin MA, Blackshields G, Brown NP, Chenna R, McGettigan PA, McWilliam H, Valentin F, Wallace IM, Wilm A, Lopez R et al. (2007). ClustalW and ClustalX version 2.0. Bioinformatics 23: 2947–2948.
  16. Lee S, Wen J (2001). A phylogenetic analysis of Prunus and the Amygdaloideae (Rosaceae) using ITS sequences of nuclear ribosomal DNA. Am J Bot 88: 150–160.
  17. Lemey Ph, Salemi M, Vandamme AM (2009). The