Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T01:58:00.510Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Allelic diversity of a panel of Aegilops mutica Boiss (Amblyopyrym muticum (Boiss.) Eig) from Turkey

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 November 2022

Ahmad Alsaleh Open the ORCID record for Ahmad Alsaleh [Opens in a new window] ,
Esra Çakır Open the ORCID record for Esra Çakır [Opens in a new window] ,
Harun Bektas Open the ORCID record for Harun Bektas [Opens in a new window]  and
Hakan Ozkan Open the ORCID record for Hakan Ozkan [Opens in a new window]
Ahmad Alsaleh
Affiliation:
Department of Biotechnology, Institute of Natural and Applied Sciences, Çukurova University, Adana, Turkey
Esra Çakır
Affiliation:
Department of Field Crops, Faculty of Agriculture, Çukurova University, Adana, Turkey
Harun Bektas
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Biotechnology, Faculty of Agriculture, Siirt University, Siirt, Turkey
Hakan Ozkan*
Affiliation:
Department of Biotechnology, Institute of Natural and Applied Sciences, Çukurova University, Adana, Turkey Department of Field Crops, Faculty of Agriculture, Çukurova University, Adana, Turkey
*
Author for correspondence: Hakan Ozkan, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The members of the Aegilops genus serve as a vast pool of allele discovery for wheat improvement in abiotic and biotic stress responses. Aegilops mutica Boiss (Amblyopyrym muticum (Boiss) Eig) is an unexplored candidate with significant potential. Even though it has been used in cytogenetics applications within the last century, natural population diversity and allele discovery have been neglected. As an endemic species for Anatolia and the lower Caucasian region, it has an unexplored population structure. Here, seventy-five genotypes from five different newly collected populations from central Anatolia were evaluated with 29 polymorphic SSR loci. Significant diversity within (83%) and between (17%) the populations was obtained. Three of the populations were clearly separated, while two had some level of the mixture. Relatively easy cross-species hybridization and introgressions make Ae. mutica a good candidate for novel allele discovery and pre-breeding. Here, for the first time, representative natural populations of Ae. mutica were compared and population structures were revealed with SSR markers which may clear the misty vision that geneticists might have regarding Ae. mutica. This could be exploited in genetic resource conservation and breeding programs and maybe a point for further studies.

Keywords

Ae. muticaaegilopscrop wild relativesdendrogramPCoA analysispopulation structure
Type
Research Article
Information
Plant Genetic Resources , Volume 20 , Issue 2 , April 2022 , pp. 156 - 161
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

Assadi, M (1996) A new species of Ephedra L. and reports of two new or interesting grasses from Iran. Iranian Journal of Botany 7, 1–5.Google Scholar
Assefa, S and Fehrmann, H (2000) Resistance to wheat leaf rust in Aegilops tauschii Coss. and inheritance of resistance in hexaploid wheat. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 47, 135–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baum, B, Edwards, T and Johnson, D (2009) Phylogenetic relationships among diploid Aegilops species inferred from 5S rDNA units. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 53, 34–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bedő, Z and Láng, L (2015) Wheat breeding: current status and bottlenecks. In Molnár-Láng, M, Ceoloni, C and Doležel, J (eds), Alien Introgression in Wheat. Cham: Springer, pp. 77–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blum, A (2011) Genetic resources for drought resistance. In Blum, A (ed.), Plant Breeding for Water-Limited Environments. New York, NY: Springer, pp. 217–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bordbar, F, Rahiminejad, MR, Saeidi, H and Blattner, FR (2011) Phylogeny and genetic diversity of D-genome species of Aegilops and Triticum (Triticeae, Poaceae) from Iran based on microsatellites, ITS, and trnL-F. Plant Systematics and Evolution 291, 117–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ceoloni, C, Kuzmanović, L, Ruggeri, R, Rossini, F, Forte, P, Cuccurullo, A and Bitti, A (2017) Harnessing genetic diversity of wild gene pools to enhance wheat crop production and sustainability: challenges and opportunities. Diversity 9, 55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charmet, G (2011) Wheat domestication: lessons for the future. Comptes Rendus Biologies 334, 212–220.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coombes, B, Fellers, JP, Grewal, S, Rusholme-Pilcher, R, Hubbart-Edwards, S, Yang, C, Joynson, R, King, IP, King, J and Hall, A (2022) Whole genome sequencing uncovers the structural and transcriptomic landscape of hexaploid wheat/Am. muticum introgression lines. bioRxiv:2021.2011.2016.468825.Google Scholar
Doyle, JJ and Doyle, JL (1987) A rapid DNA isolation procedure for small quantities of fresh leaf tissue. Phytochemical Bulletin 19, 11–15.Google Scholar
Dubcovsky, J and Dvorak, J (2007) Genome plasticity a key factor in the success of polyploid wheat under domestication. Science (New York, N.Y.) 316, 1862–1866.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dvořák, J and Zhang, HB (1992) Reconstruction of the phylogeny of the genus Triticum from variation in repeated nucleotide sequences. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 84, 419–429.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Earl, DA and Vonholdt, BM (2012) Structure harvester: a website and program for visualizing structure output and implementing the Evanno method. Conservation Genetics Resources 4, 359–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edet, OU, Gorafi, YSA, Nasuda, S and Tsujimoto, H (2018) DArTseq-based analysis of genomic relationships among species of tribe Triticeae. Scientific Reports 8, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eldarov, M, Aminov, N and van Slageren, M (2015) Distribution and ecological diversity of Aegilops L. in the greater and lesser Caucasus regions of Azerbaijan. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 62, 265–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evanno, 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 ScholarPubMed
Feldman, M and Levy, AA (2015) Origin and evolution of wheat and related triticeae species. In Molnár-Láng, M, Ceoloni, C and Doležel, J (eds), Alien Introgression in Wheat. Cham: Springer, pp. 21–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fellers, JP, Matthews, A, Fritz, AK, Rouse, MN, Grewal, S, Hubbart-Edwards, S, King, IP and King, J (2020) Resistance to wheat rusts identified in wheat/Amblyopyrum muticum chromosome introgressions. Crop Science 60, 1957–1964.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glémin, S, Scornavacca, C, Dainat, J, Burgarella, C, Viader, V, Ardisson, M, Sarah, G, Santoni, S, David, J and Ranwez, V (2019) Pervasive hybridizations in the history of wheat relatives. Science Advances 5, eaav9188.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grewal, S, Coombes, B, Joynson, R, Hall, A, Fellers, J, Yang, CY, Scholefield, D, Ashling, S, Isaac, P, King, IP and King, J (2022) Chromosome-specific KASP markers for detecting Amblyopyrum muticum segments in wheat introgression lines. The Plant Genome 15, e20193, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harlan, JR and de Wet, JMJ (1971) Toward a rational classification of cultivated plants. TAXON 20, 509–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haruntyunyan, M, Dulloo, ME, Yeritsyan, N and Danielyan, A (2010) Red list assessment of nine Aegilops species in Armenia. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 57, 1177–1189. doi: 10.1007/s10722-010-9558-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hegde, SG, Valkoun, J and Waines, JG (2002) Genetic diversity in wild and weedy Aegilops, Amblyopyrum, and Secale species - A preliminary survey. Crop Science 42, 608–614.Google Scholar
Hubisz, MJ, Falush, D, Stephens, M and Pritchard, JK (2009) Inferring weak population structure with the assistance of sample group information. Molecular Ecology Resources 9, 1322–1332.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hysing, SC (2007) Genetic resources for disease resistance breeding in wheat. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae Sueciae 2007, 9.Google Scholar
Iefimenko, TS, Antonyuk, MZ, Martynenko, VS, Navalihina, AG and Ternovska, TK (2018) Introgression of Aegilops mutica genes into common wheat genome. Cytology and Genetics 52, 21–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaccard, P (1908) Nouvelles recherches sur la distribution florale. Bulletin de la Société vaudoise des Sciences Naturelles 44, 223–270.Google Scholar
Jaradat, A (2013) Wheat landraces: a mini review. Emirates Journal of Food and Agriculture 25, 20–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kilian, B, Mammen, K, Millet, E, Sharma, R, Graner, A, Salamini, F, Hammer, K and Ozkan, H (2013) Aegilops. In Kole, C (ed.), Wild Crop Relatives: Genomic and Breeding Resources. Cereals: Springer, pp. 1–76.Google Scholar
King, J, Grewal, S, Yang, CY, Hubbart, S, Scholefield, D, Ashling, S and King, IP (2017) A step change in the transfer of interspecific variation into wheat from Amblyopyrum muticum. Plant Biotechnology Journal 15, 217–226.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
King, J, Newell, C, Grewal, S, Hubbart-Edwards, S, Yang, CY, Scholefield, D and King, IP (2019) Development of stable homozygous Wheat/Amblyopyrum muticum (Aegilops mutica) introgression lines and their cytogenetic and molecular characterization. Frontiers in Plant Science 10, 10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kishii, M (2019) An update of recent use of Aegilops species in wheat breeding. Frontiers in Plant Science 10, 585.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, SH, Tuberosa, R, Jackson, SA and Varshney, RK (2014) Genomics of plant genetic resources: a gateway to a new era of global food security. Plant Genetic Resources-Characterization and Utilization 12, 2–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, L-F, Zhang, Z-B, Wang, Z-H, Li, N, Sha, Y, Wang, X-F, Ding, N, Li, Y, Zhao, J, Wu, Y, Gong, L, Mafessoni, F, Levy, AA and Liu, B (2022) Genome sequences of five Sitopsis species of Aegilops and the origin of polyploid wheat B subgenome. Molecular Plant 15, 488–503.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liu, C, Li, GR, Gong, WP, Li, GY, Han, R, Li, HS, Song, JM, Liu, AF, Cao, XY, Chu, XS, Yang, ZJ, Huang, CY, Zhao, ZD and Liu, JJ (2015) Molecular and cytogenetic characterization of a powdery mildew-resistant Wheat-Aegilops mutica partial amphiploid and addition line. Cytogenetic and Genome Research 147, 186–194.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lukaszewski, AJ (2017) Chromosomes 1BS and 1RS for control of male fertility in wheats and triticales with cytoplasms of Aegilops kotschyi, Ae. mutica and Ae. uniaristata. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 130, 2521–2526.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Makkouk, KM, Comeau, A and Ghulam, W (1994) Resistance to barley yellow dwarf luteovirus in Aegilops species. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 74, 631–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merezhko, AF (1998) Impact of plant genetic resources on wheat breeding (Reprinted from Wheat: Prospects for global improvement. Euphytica 100, 295–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, G (2005) How to date the correct partner?–Role of the Ph1 locus. Frontiers of wheat bioscience. The 100th Memorial Issue of Wheat Information Service. Kihara Memorial Foundation For the Advancement of Life Sciences, Yokohama, Japan, 49–57.Google Scholar
Mujeeb-Kazi, A, Rosas, V and Roldan, S (1996) Conservation of the genetic variation of Triticum tauschii (Coss.) Schmalh. (Aegilops squarrosa auct. non L.) in synthetic hexaploid wheats (T. turgidum L. s.lat. x T. tauschii; 2n=6x=42, AABBDD) and its potential utilization for wheat improvement. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 43, 129–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mujeeb-Kazi, A, Kazi, AG, Dundas, I, Rasheed, A, Ogbonnaya, F, Kishii, M, Bonnett, D, Wang, RR, Xu, S, Chen, P and Mahmood, T (2013) Genetic diversity for wheat improvement as a conduit to food security. Advances in Agronomy 122, 179–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naghavi, MR, Hajikram, M, Taleei, AR and Aghaei, MJ (2010) Microsatellite analysis of genetic diversity and population genetic structure of Aegilops tauschii Coss. in northern Iran. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 57, 423–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Othmeni, M, Grewal, S, Hubbart-Edwards, S, Yang, CY, Scholefield, D, Ashling, S and King, J (2019) The use of pentaploid crosses for the introgression of Amblyopyrum muticum and D-Genome chromosome segments ınto durum wheat. Frontiers in Plant Science 10, 1100.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Özkan, H, Brandolini, A, Pozzi, C, Effgen, S, Wunder, J and Salamini, FA (2005) Reconsideration of the domestication geography of tetraploid wheats. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 110, 1052–1060.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peakall, R and Smouse, PE (2006) GENALEX 6: genetic analysis in Excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research. Molecular Ecology Notes 6, 288–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perrier, X and Jacquemoud-Collet, JP (2006) DARwin software: Dissimilarity analysis and representation for windows. Available at http://darwin.cirad.fr/darwin.Google Scholar
Perrier, X, Flori, A and Bonnot, F (2003) Methods of data analysis. In Hamon, S, Seguin, M, Perrier, X and Glaszmann, J-C (eds), Genetic Diversity of Cultivated Tropical Plants. Montpellier, France: CRC Press. CIRAD, pp. 31–63.Google Scholar
Pritchard, JK, Stephens, M and Donnelly, P (2000) Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155, 945–959.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salamini, F, Ozkan, H, Brandolini, A, Schafer-Pregl, R and Martin, W (2002) Genetics and geography of wild cereal domestication in the near east. Nature Reviews Genetics 3, 429–441.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sasanuma, T, Chabane, K, Endo, TR and Valkoun, J (2004) Characterization of genetic variation in and phylogenetic relationships among diploid Aegilops species by AFLP: incongruity of chloroplast and nuclear data. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 108, 612–618.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schneider, A, Molnar, I and Molnar-Lang, M (2008) Utilisation of Aegilops (goatgrass) species to widen the genetic diversity of cultivated wheat. Euphytica 163, 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schuelke, M (2000) An economic method for the fluorescent labeling of PCR fragments. Nature Biotechnology 18, 233–234.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sorrells, ME, Gustafson, JP, Somers, D, Chao, S, Benscher, D, Guedira-Brown, G, Huttner, E, Kilian, A, Mcguire, PE, Ross, K, Tanaka, J, Wenzl, P, Williams, K and Qualset, CO (2011) Reconstruction of the Synthetic W7984 × Opata M85 wheat reference population. Genome 54, 875–882.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tuberosa, R, Graner, A and Varshney, RK (2011) Genomics of plant genetic resources: an introduction. Plant Genetic Resources-Characterization and Utilization 9, 151–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Slageren, MW (1994) Wild Wheats: a Monograph of Aegilops L. and Amblyopyrum (Jaub. & Spach) Eig (Poaceae). Wageningen, The Netherlands: Agricultural University.Google Scholar
Villar, R, Maranon, T, Quero, JL, Panadero, P, Arenas, F and Lambers, H (2005) Variation in relative growth rate of 20 Aegilops species (Poaceae) in the field: the importance of net assimilation rate or specific leaf area depends on the time scale. Plant and Soil 272, 11–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Alsaleh et al. supplementary material

Table S1 and Figure S1

Download Alsaleh et al. supplementary material(File)
File 76.6 KB