Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T15:13:03.109Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetic diversity and marker trait association for yield attributing traits in accessions of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) in India

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 October 2022

Chainika Gupta ,
Romesh Kumar Salgotra Open the ORCID record for Romesh Kumar Salgotra [Opens in a new window] ,
Raul Alvarez Venegas ,
Reetika Mahajan  and
Umang Koul
Chainika Gupta*
Affiliation:
School for Biotechnology, Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences & Technology of Jammu, Chatha, Jammu-180009 (J&K), India
Romesh Kumar Salgotra*
Affiliation:
School for Biotechnology, Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences & Technology of Jammu, Chatha, Jammu-180009 (J&K), India
Raul Alvarez Venegas
Affiliation:
CINVESTAV-IPN Unidad Irapuato, Km. 9.6 Libramiento Norte, Carretera Irapuato-Leon. C.P. 36821, Irapuato, Guanajuato, México
Reetika Mahajan
Affiliation:
Division of Plant Biotechnology, Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences & Technology of Kashmir, Shalamar, Srinagar-190025 (J&K), India
Umang Koul
Affiliation:
School for Biotechnology, Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences & Technology of Jammu, Chatha, Jammu-180009 (J&K), India
*
Author for correspondence: Romesh Kumar Salgotra, E-mail: [email protected]; Chainika Gupta, E-mail: [email protected]
Author for correspondence: Romesh Kumar Salgotra, E-mail: [email protected]; Chainika Gupta, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) is a highly economically important crop worldwide and a particularly important source of protein and minerals for people in less developed countries. Improving yield is a vital objective to meet the increasing demand for food due to the expanding human population. The present study was undertaken to study the genetic architecture of agronomic traits of common bean in India, particularly in the north-western Himalayan region. Marker-trait association (MTA) analysis was performed in a population of 100 common bean accessions using polymorphic microsatellite markers. Population structure analysis based on SSR markers divided the accessions into three main subpopulations. Ten significant MTAs were found using general linear model (GLM) and mixed linear model (MLM) approaches. We found two markers i.e. BM142 and J04555 associated with 100 seed weight and pods per plant common in both the GLM and MLM approach markers. All the MTAs were considered as major MTAs contributing more than 25% phenotypic variation. The significant quantitative trait loci identified in this study could be used in marker-assisted breeding to accelerate the genetic improvement of yield and development of high yielding common beans lines.

Keywords

Association mappingcommon beansgenetic diversitypopulation structureSSR markers
Type
Research Article
Information
Plant Genetic Resources , Volume 20 , Issue 2 , April 2022 , pp. 98 - 107
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of NIAB

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Asfaw, A, Blair, MW and Almekinders, C (2009) Genetic diversity and population structure of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) landraces from the East African highlands. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 120, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Asfaw, A, Almekinders, CJM, Blair, MW and Struik, PC (2012) Participatory approach in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) breeding for drought tolerance for southern Ethiopia. Plant Breeding 131, 125–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Assefa, T, Wu, J, Beebe, SE, Rao, MI, Marcomin, D and Rubyogo, JC (2015) Improving adaptation to drought stress in small red common bean: phenotypic differences and predicted genotypic effects on grain yield, yield components and harvest index. Euphytica 203, 477–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Assefa, T, Mahama, AA, Brown, AV, Cannon, EKS, Rubyogo, JC, Rao, IM, Blair, MW and Cannon, SB (2019) A review of breeding objectives, genomic resources, and marker-assisted methods in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Molecular Breeding 39, 20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bashir, H, Bashir, Z, Mahajan, R, Nazir, M, Mir, RA, Nehvi, FA and Majeed, S (2020) Molecular characterization and insights into the origin of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) landraces of north western Himalayas. Nucleus 63, 271–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beebe, SE, Rao, IM, Blair, MW and Acosta-Gallegos, JA (2013) Phenotyping common beans for adaptation to drought. Frontiers in Physiology 4, 35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bezaweletaw, K, Belete, B and Sripichitt, P (2006) Genetic gain in grain yield potential and associated agronomic traits in haricot bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Kasetsart Journal (Natural Science) 40, 835–847.Google Scholar
Bitocchi, E, Nanni, L, Bellucci, E, Rossi, M, Giardini, A, Zeuli, PS, Logozzo, G, Stougaard, J, McClean, P, Attene, G and Papa, R (2012) Mesoamerican origin of the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) is revealed by sequence data. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 109, E788–E796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blair, MW, Giraldo, MC, Buendia, HF, Tovar, E, Duque, MC and Beebe, SE (2006) Microsatellite marker diversity in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Theoretical and Applied Genetics 113, 100–109.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blair, M, Gonzales, LF, Kimani, PM and Butare, L (2010) Genetic diversity, inter-gene pool introgression and nutritional quality of common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) from central Africa. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 121, 237–248.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blair, MW, Soler, A and Cortes, AJ (2012) Diversification and population structure in common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). PLoS ONE 7, e49488.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boros, L, Wawer, A and Borucka, K (2014) Morphological, phenological and agronomical characterisation of variability among common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) local populations from the national centre for plant genetic resources: Polish genebank. Journal of Horticultural Research 22, 123–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Botstein, D, White, RL, Skolnick, M and Davis, RW (1980) Construction of a genetic linkage map in man using restriction fragment length polymorphisms. American Journal of Human Genetics 32, 314–331.Google ScholarPubMed
Bradbury, PJ, Zhang, Z, Kroon, DE, Casstevens, TM, Ramdoss, Y and Buckler, ES (2007) TASSEL: software for association mapping of complex traits in diverse samples. Bioinformatics 23, 2633–2635.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bralewski, TW, Fiebig, M and Kotlinska, T (2007) Characteristic of selected local cultivars of beans from Poland, Slovak Republic and Ukraine. Zeszyty Problemowe Postepow Nauk Rolniczych 517, 179–186.Google Scholar
Bressani, R (1983) Research needs to upgrade the nutritional quality of common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris). Plant Foods for Human Nutrition 32, 101–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broughton, WJ, Hernandez, G, Blair, MW, Beebe, SE, Gepts, P and Vanderleyden, J (2003) Beans (Phaseolus spp.)—model food legumes. Plant and Soil 252, 55–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bukhari, A, Bhat, MA, Ahmad, M and Saleem, N (2015) Examination of genetic diversity in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) using random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) markers. African Journal of Biotechnology 14, 451–458.Google Scholar
Burton, GM (1952) Quantitative inheritance in grasses. Proceedings of 6th International Grassland Congress 1, 277–283.Google Scholar
Cabral, PDS, de Souza, LC, da Costa, GF, Silva, FHL and Soares, TCB (2018) Investigation of the genetic diversity of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) cultivars using molecular markers. Genetics and Molecular Research 17, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carovic-Stanko, K, Liber, Z, Vidak, M, Baresic, A, Grdisa, M, Lazarevic, B and Satovic, Z (2017) Genetic diversity of Croatian common bean landraces. Frontiers in Plant Science 8, 604.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chiorato, AF, Carbonell, SAM, Benchimol, LL, Chiavegato, MB, Santos Dias, LAD and Colombo, CA (2007) Genetic diversity in common bean accessions evaluated by means of morpho-agronomical and RAPD data. Scientia Agricola 64, 256–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choudhary, N, Bawa, V, Paliwal, R, Singh, B, Bhat, MA, Mir, JI, Gupta, M, Sofi, PA, Thudi, M, Varshney, RK and Mir, RR (2018) Gene/QTL discovery for anthracnose in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) from North-Western Himalayas. PLoS ONE 13, e0191700.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Ron, AM, Papa, R, Bitocchi, E, Gonzalez, AM, Debouck, DG, Brick, MA, Fourie, D, Marsolais, F, Beaver, J, Geffroy, V, McClean, P, Santalla, M, Lozano, R, Yuste-Lisbona, FJ and Casquero, PA (2015) Common bean: grain legumes. In De Ron, AM (ed), Handbook of Plant Breeding. New York: Springer, pp. 1–36.Google Scholar
Devi, J, Sharma, A, Singh, Y, Katoch, V and Sharma, KC (2015) Genetic variability and character association studies in French bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) under North-Western Himalayas. Legume Research 38, 149–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diaz, LM and Blair, MW (2006) Race structure within the Mesoamerican gene pool of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) as determined by microsatellite markers. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 114, 143–154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Doyle, JJ and Doyle, JL (1987) A rapid DNA isolation procedure to small amounts of fresh leaf tissue. Phytochemical Bulletin 19, 11–15.Google Scholar
Earl, D and von Holdt, B (2012) STRUCTURE HARVESTER: a website and program for visualizing STRUCTURE output and implementing the Evanno method. Conservation Genetics Resources 4, 359–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evano, G, Regnaut, S and Goudet, J (2005) Detecting the number of clusters of individuals using the software STRUCTURE: a simulation study. Molecular Ecology 14, 2611–2620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FAO (2019) FAOSTAT. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Available at http://www.fao.org/ (Accessed 10 May 2021).Google Scholar
Flint-Garcia, SA, Thuillet, AC, Yu, J, Pressoir, G, Romero, SM, Mitchell, SE, Doebley, J, Kresovich, S, Goodman, MM and Buckler, ES (2005) Maize association population: a high-resolution platform for QTL dissection. Plant Journal 44, 1054–1064.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaitan-Solis, E, Duque, MC, Edwards, KJ and Tohme, J (2002) Microsatellite repeats in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris): isolation, characterization, and cross-species amplification in Phaseolus sp. Crop Science 42, 2128–2136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galeano, CH, Cortes, AJ, Fernandez, AC, Soler, A, Franco-Herrera, N, Makunde, G, Vanderleyden, J and Blair, MW (2012) Gene-based single nucleotide polymorphism markers for genetic and association mapping in common bean. BMC Genetics 13, 48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gepts, P and Debouck, D (1991) Origin, domestication, and evolution of the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). In Schoonhoven, AV (ed), Common Beans: Research for Crop Improvement. Cali: CIAT, pp. 7–53.Google Scholar
Gepts, P, Osborn, T, Rashka, K and Bliss, F (1986) Phaseolin–protein variability in wild forms and landraces of the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.): evidence for multiple centers of domestication. Economic Botany 40, 451–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gill-Langarica, HR, Muruaga-Martinez, JS, Vargas-Vazquez, MLP, Rosales-Serna, R and Mayek-Perez, N (2011) Genetic diversity analysis of common beans based on molecular markers. Genetics and Molecular Biology 34, 595–605.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gioia, T, Logozzo, G, Marzario, S, Spagnoletti Zeuli, P and Gepts, P (2019) Evolution of SSR diversity from wild types to U.S. advanced cultivars in the Andean and Mesoamerican domestications of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris). PLoS ONE 14, e0211342.Google ScholarPubMed
Gupta, N, Zargar, SM, Singh, R, Nazir, M, Mahajan, R and Salgotra, RK (2020) Marker association study of yield attributing traits in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Molecular Biology Reports 47, 6769–6783.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hancock, JM (1999) Microsatellites and other simple sequences: genomic context and mutation mechanisms. In Goldstein, DB and Schlotterer, C (eds), Microsatellites: Evolution and Applications. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 1–9.Google Scholar
Jimenez, OR and Korpelainen, H (2012) Microsatellite markers reveal promising genetic diversity and seed trait associations in common bean landraces (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) from Nicaragua. Plant Genetic Resources 10, 108–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joshi, BD and Mehra, KL (1984) Path analysis of productivity in French bean. Progressive Horticulture 16, 78–84.Google Scholar
Kwak, M and Gepts, P (2009) Structure of genetic diversity in the two major gene pools of common bean [Phaseolus vulgaris (L.) Fabaceae]. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 118, 979–992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lei, L, Wang, L, Wang, S and Wu, J (2020) Marker-trait association analysis of seed traits in accessions of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) in China. Frontiers in Genetics 11, 698.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leite, ME, Santos, JB, Carneiro, FF and Couto, KR (2011) Natural selection in common bean microsatellite alleles and identification of QTLs for grain yield. Electronic Journal of Biotechnology 14, 5–6.Google Scholar
Liu, K and Muse, SV (2005) Power marker: an integrated analysis environment for genetic marker analysis. Bioinformatics 21, 2128–2129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyngdoh, YA, Thapa, U, Shadap, A, Singh, J and Tomar, BS (2018) Studies on genetic variability and character association for yield and yield related traits in French bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Legume Research 41, 810–815.Google Scholar
Mahajan, R, Zargar, SM, Singh, R, Salgotra, RK, Farhat, S and Sonah, H (2017 a) Population structure analysis and selection of core set among common bean genotypes from Jammu and Kashmir, India. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology 182, 16–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mahajan, R, Zargar, SM, Salgotra, RK, Singh, R, Wani, AA, Nazir, M and Sofi, PA (2017 b) Linkage disequilibrium based association mapping of micronutrients in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.): a collection of Jammu & Kashmir, India. 3. Biotech 7, 295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matus, IA and Hayes, PM (2002) Genetic diversity in three groups of barley germplasm assessed by simple sequence repeats. Genome 45, 1095–1106.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mir, RR, Choudhary, N, Bawa, V, Jan, S, Singh, B, Bhat, MA, Paliwal, R, Kumar, A, Chitikineni, A, Thudi, M and Varshney, RK (2021) Allelic diversity, structural analysis, and genome-wide association study (GWAS) for yield and related traits using unexplored common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) germplasm from Western Himalayas. Frontiers in Genetics 11, 609603.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mitchell, SE, Kresovich, S, Jester, CA, Hernandez, CJ and Szewc-McFadden, AK (1997) Application of multiplex-PCR and fluorescence based, semi-automated allele sizing technology for genotyping plant genetic resources. Crop Science 37, 617–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nei, M (1987) Molecular Evolutionary Genetics. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nemli, S, Asciogul, TK, Kay, HB, Kahraman, A, Siyok, DE and Tanyolac, B (2014) Association mapping for five agronomic traits in the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 94, 3141–3151.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Okii, D, Tukamuhabwa, P, Kami, J, Namayanja, A, Paparu, P, Ugen, M and Gepts, P (2014) The genetic diversity and population structure of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) germplasm in Uganda. African Journal of Biotechnology 13, 2935–2949.Google Scholar
Pathania, A, Sharma, SK and Sharma, PN (2014) Common bean. In Singh, M, Bisht, IS and Dutta, M (eds), Broadening the Genetic Base of Grain Legumes. New Delhi: Springer, pp. 11–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peakall, R and Smouse, PE (2012) GenAlEx 6.5: genetic analysis in Excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research – an update. Bioinformatics 28, 2537–2539.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Perrier, X and Jacquemoud-Collet, JP (2006) DARwin software. Available at http://darwin.cirad.fr/darwin.Google Scholar
Prakash, J and Ram, RB (2014) Genetic variability, correlation and path analysis for seed yield and yield related traits in French bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) under Lucknow conditions. International Journal of Innovative Science Engineering and Technology 6, 41–50.Google Scholar
Prakash, J, Ram, RB and Meena, ML (2015) Genetic variation and characters interrelationship studies for quantitative and qualitative traits in French bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) under Lucknow conditions. Legume Research 38, 425–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pritchard, JK, Stephens, M and Donnelly, P (2000) Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155, 945–959.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rana, JC, Sharma, TR, Tyagi, RK, Chahota, RK, Gautam, NK, Singh, M, Sharma, PN and Ojha, SN (2015) Characterisation of 4274 accessions of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) germplasm conserved in the Indian gene bank for phenological, morphological and agricultural traits. Euphytica 205, 441–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rao, IM, Beebe, SE, Polania, J, Grajales, M, Cajiao, C, Ricaurte, J, Garcia, R and Rivera, M (2017) Evidence for genotypic differences among elite lines of common bean in their ability to remobilize photosynthate to increase yield under drought. Journal of Agricultural Science 155, 857–875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ribeiro, ND, Filho, AC, Poersch, NL, Jost, E and Rosa, SS (2008) Genetic progress in traits of yield, phenology and morphology of common bean. Crop Breeding and Applied Biotechnology 8, 232–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sajgalik, M, Ondreickova, K, Hauptvogel, P, Mihalik, D, Glasa, M and Kraic, J (2019) Higher effectiveness of new common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) germplasm acquisition by collecting expeditions associated with molecular analyses. Sustainability 11, 5270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salgotra, RK, Katoch, PC and Sood, M (2002) Performance of rice hybrids for yield and quality traits under mid-hill conditions of Himachal Pradesh. Journal of Research. SKUAST-J 1, 38–42.Google Scholar
Salgotra, RK, Gupta, BB and Ahmed, MI (2012) Characterization of thermo-sensitive genic male sterility (TGMS) rice genotypes (Oryza sativa L.) at different altitudes. Australian Journal of Crop Science 6, 957–962.Google Scholar
Scarano, D, Rubio, F, Jose Ruiz, J, Raoa, R and Corradoa, G (2014) Morphological and genetic diversity among and within common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) landraces from the Campania region (Southern Italy). Scientia Horticulturae 180, 72–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharma, PN, Diaz, LM and Blair, MW (2013) Genetic diversity of Indian common beans elucidated with two germplasm collections and by morphological and microsatellite markers. Plant Genetic Resources: Characterisation and Utilisation 11, 121–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheoran, OP, Tonk, DS, Kaushik, LS, Hasija, RC and Pannu, RS (1998) Statistical software package for agricultural research workers. In Hooda, DS and Hasina, RC (eds), Recent Advances in Information Theory, Statistics & Computer Applications. Hisar: Department of Mathematics Statistics, CCS HAU, pp. 139–143.Google Scholar
Shevkani, K, Singh, N, Kaur, A and Rana, JC (2015) Structural and functional characterization of kidney bean and field pea protein isolates: a comparative study. Food Hydrocolloids 43, 679–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, SP, Gepts, P and Debouck, D (1991 a) Races of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris, Fabaceae). Economic Botany 45, 379–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, SP, Nodari, R and Gepts, P (1991 b) Genetic diversity in cultivated common bean: I. Allozymes. Crop Science 31, 19–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, DK, Singh, DP and Singh, SS (2018) Studies of genetic variability, heritability and genetic advance for yield and related traits in French bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry 7, 236–240.Google Scholar
Sivasubramanian, S and Madhavamenon, P (1973) Combining ability in rice. Madras Agricultural Journal 60, 419–421.Google Scholar
Stoilova, T, Pereira, G, Tavers-de-Sousa, MM and Carnide, V (2005) Diversity in common bean landraces (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) from Bulgaria and Portugal. Journal of Central European Agriculture 6, 443–448.Google Scholar
Stoilova, T, Pereira, G and Tavers-de-Sousa, MM (2013) Morphological characterization of a small common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) collection under different environments. Journal of Central European Agriculture 14, 854–864.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sun, G, Zhu, C, Kramer, MH, Yang, SS, Song, W, Piepho, HP and Yu, J (2010) Variation explained in mixed-model association mapping. Heredity 105, 333–340.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tiwari, M, Singh, NK, Rathore, M and Kumar, N (2005) RAPD markers in the analysis of genetic diversity among common bean germplasm from Central Himalaya. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 52, 315–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vidak, M, Satovic, Z, Liber, Z, Grdisa, M, Gunjaca, J, Kilian, A and Carovic-Stanko, K (2021) Assessment of the origin and diversity of Croatian common bean germplasm using phaseolin type, SSR and SNP markers and morphological traits. Plants 10, 665.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Villegas, VH, Song, Q and Kelly, JD (2016) Genome-wide association analysis for drought tolerance and associated traits in common bean. The Plant Genome 10, 1.Google Scholar
Wright, S (1951) The genetical structure of populations. Annals of Eugenics 15, 323–354.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yan, J, Warburton, M and Crouch, J (2011) Association mapping for enhancing maize (Zea mays L.) genetic improvement. Crop Science 51, 433–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zondervan, KT and Cardon, LR (2004) The complex interplay among factors that influence allelic association. Nature Reviews Genetics 5, 89–100.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Gupta et al. supplementary material

Gupta et al. supplementary material 1

Download Gupta et al. supplementary material(File)
File 245.2 KB
Supplementary material: Image

Gupta et al. supplementary material

Gupta et al. supplementary material 2

Download Gupta et al. supplementary material(Image)
Image 72 KB