Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T21:41:43.216Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Molecular phylogeny of genus Musa determined by simple sequence repeat markers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 August 2015

Huimin Feng
Affiliation:
Key Laboratory of Tropical Crop Molecular Breeding of Sanya, Qiongzhou University, 1 Yucai Road, Sanya572022, Hainan Province, People's Republic of China Hainan University, Haikou570228, Hainan Province, People's Republic of China
You Chen
Affiliation:
Key Laboratory of Tropical Crop Molecular Breeding of Sanya, Qiongzhou University, 1 Yucai Road, Sanya572022, Hainan Province, People's Republic of China
Bo Li
Affiliation:
Institute of Tropical Bioscience and Biotechnology, Chinese Academy of Tropical Agriculture Sciences, Haikou571101, Hainan Province, People's Republic of China
Yaoting Wu*
Affiliation:
Key Laboratory of Tropical Crop Molecular Breeding of Sanya, Qiongzhou University, 1 Yucai Road, Sanya572022, Hainan Province, People's Republic of China
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Musa L. was previously separated into five sections (Eumusa, Rhodochlamys, Callimusa, Australimusa and Ingentimusa) based on basic chromosome numbers and morphological characters. However, several molecular analyses currently support restructuring of Musa species into two sections, Musa and Callimusa. The application of simple sequence repeat molecular marker analysis to Musa phylogeny provided valuable, supplemental information about the classification of, and relationships between, Musa species and subspecies. Totally, 28 accessions of Musa acuminata Colla subspecies and varieties and 25 accessions of other Musa species were evaluated; 12 primers produced 91 polymorphic bands, polymorphic information content ranged from 0.4473 to 0.8394 (average = 0.7226), indicating that the primers showed a high level of polymorphism. Our results generally agreed with previous phylogenetic analyses based on molecular data. One clade comprised species of sections Australimusa and Callimusa (X= 10/9); most species of sections Eumusa and Rhodochlamys (X= 11) formed the other clade. The relationships between most species were as expected; however, some species did not conform to findings of previous studies. A wide range of variability was observed in the M. acuminata complex. M. acuminata var. chinensis and M. acuminata subsp. 522 showed the most distant relationships to other subspecies: Musa laterita, Musa ornata and Musa velutina clustered with M. acuminata var. chinensis, suggesting that they may constitute a secondary gene pool for the improvement of cultivated bananas. Molecular data indicated that Musa tongbiguanensis Chen You & Yao-Ting Wu, which was observed and described by our research group in Yunnan, China, was a distinct, new species.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © NIAB 2015 

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

Argent, GCG (1976) The wild bananas of Papua New Guinea. Notes from the Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh 35: 77114.Google Scholar
Baker, JG (1893) A synopsis of the genera and species of Musaceae. Annals Botany (Oxford) 7: 189229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bekele, E and Shigeta, M (2011) Phylogenetic relationships between Ensete and Musa species as revealed by the trnT trnF region of cpDNA. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 58: 259269.Google Scholar
Botstein, D, White, RL, Skolnick, M and Davis, RW (1980) Construction of a genetic linkage map in man using restriction fragment length polymorphisms. The American Journal of Human Genetics 32: 314331.Google Scholar
Cheesman, EE (1947) Classification of the bananas: the genus Musa L. Kew Bulletin 2: 106107.Google Scholar
Chen, Y, Feng, HM and Wu, YT (2008) Musa tongbiguanensis (Musaceae), a new species in Yunnan, China. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin 24: 425429.Google Scholar
Christelová, P, Valárik, M, Hřibová, E, de Langhe, E and Doležel, J (2011) A multi gene sequence-based phylogeny of the Musaceae (banana) family. BMC Evolutionary Biology 11: 103.Google Scholar
Condit, R and Hubbell, SP (1991) Abundance and DNA sequence of two-base repeat regions in tropical tree genomes. Genome 34: 6671.Google Scholar
Crouch, HK, Crouch, JH, Jarret, RL, Cregan, PB and Ortiz, R (1998) Segregation at microsatellite loci in haploid and diploid gametes of Musa . Crop Science 38: 211217.Google Scholar
Crouch, JH, Ortiz, R and Crouch, HK (2000) Utilization of molecular genetic techniques in support of plantain and banana improvement. Acta Horticulturae 540: 185191.Google Scholar
Feng, HM, Chen, Y and Deng, CJ (2009) Distribution of wild Musa species. Journal of Fruit Science 26: 361368 (in Chinese).Google Scholar
Gawel, NJ and Jarret, RL (1991) Chloroplast DNA restriction fragment length polymorphisms (RFLPs) in Musa species. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 81: 783786.Google Scholar
Gawel, NJ, Jarret, RL and Whittemore, AP (1992) Restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP)-based phylogenetic analysis of Musa . Theoretical and Applied Genetics 84: 286290.Google Scholar
Häkkinen, M (2013) Reappraisal of sectional taxonomy in Musa (Musaceae). Taxon 62: 809813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Häkkinen, M and Hong, W (2007) New species and variety of Musa (Musaceae) from Yunnan, China. Novon 17: 440446.Google Scholar
Häkkinen, M, Suleiman, M and Gisil, J (2005) Musa beccarii (Musaceae) varieties in Sabah, northern Borneo. ACTA Phytotaxonomica Geobotanica 56: 135140.Google Scholar
Häkkinen, M, Hong, W and Ge, XJ (2008) Musa itinerans (Musaceae) and its intraspecific taxa in China. Novon 18: 5060.Google Scholar
Howell, EC, Newbury, HJ, Swennen, RL, Withers, LA and Ford-Lloyd, BV (1997) The use of RAPD for identifying and classifying Musa germplasm. Genome 37: 328332.Google Scholar
INIBAP/CIRAD(1996) Descriptors for Banana (Musa spp.). Montpellier, France: INIBAP.Google Scholar
Lebot, V (1999) Biomolecular evidence for plant domestication in Sahul. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 46: 619628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, LF, Häkkinen, M, Yuan, YM, Hao, G and Ge, XJ (2010) Molecular phylogeny and systematics of the banana family (Musaceae) inferred from multiple nuclear and chloroplast DNA fragments, with a special reference to the genus Musa . Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 57: 110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, AZ, Li, DZ and Li, XW (2002) Taxonomic notes on wild bananas (Musa) from China. Botanical Bulletin Academia Sinica 43: 7781.Google Scholar
Liu, AZ, Kress, WJ and Li, DZ (2010) Phylogenetic analyses of the banana family (Musaceae) based on nuclear ribosomal (ITS) and chloroplast (trnL-F) evidence. Taxon 59: 2028.Google Scholar
Muhammad, Y, Andrew, CJ, Renata, RM, Rodomiro, O and Rosa, MEGM (2011) Musa genetic diversity revealed by SRAP and AFLP. Molecular Biotechnology 47: 189199.Google Scholar
Nei, M and Li, W (1979) Mathematical model for studying genetic variation in terms of restriction endonucleases. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 76: 52695273.Google Scholar
Nwakanma, DC, Pillay, M, Okoli, BE and Tenkouano, A (2003) Sectional relationships in the genus Musa L. inferred from the PCR-RFLP of organelle DNA sequences. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 107: 850856.Google Scholar
Paterson, AH, Brubaker, C and Wendel, JFA (1993) A rapid method for extraction of cotton (Gossypium spp.) genomic DNA suitable for RFLP or PCR analysis. Plant Molecular Biology Reporter 11: 122127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perrier, X, Bakry, F, Carreel, F, Jenny, C, Horry, JP, Lebot, V and Hippolyte, I (2009) Combining biological approaches to shed light on the evolution of edible bananas. Ethnobotany Research and Applications 7: 199216.Google Scholar
Perrier, X, Langhe, ED, Donohue, M, Lentfer, C, Vrydaghs, L, Bakry, F, Carreel, F, Hippolyte, I, Horry, JP, Jenny, C, Lebot, V, Risterucci, AM, Tomekpe, K, Doutrelepont, H, Ball, T, Manwaring, J, Maret, PD and Denham, T (2011) Multidisciplinary perspectives on banana (Musa spp.) domestication. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States 28: 13111318.Google Scholar
Rohlf, FJ (2000) NTSYS-pc: Numerical Taxonomy and Multivariate Analysis System, Version 2.1. New York: Exeter Publications.Google Scholar
Sagot, P (1887) Sur le genre bananier. Bulletin de la Sociétébotanique de France 34: 328330.Google Scholar
Simmonds, NW (1960) Notes on banana taxonomy. Kew Bull 14: 198212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmonds, NW (1962) The Evolution of the Bananas. London: Longmans.Google Scholar
Simmonds, NW and Weatherup, SC (1990) Numerical taxonomy of the wild bananas (Musa). New Phytologist 115: 567571.Google Scholar
Ude, G, Pillay, M, Nwakanma, D and Tenkouano, A (2002) Analysis of genetic diversity and sectional relationships in Musa using AFLP markers. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 104: 12391245.Google Scholar
Wong, C, Argent, G, Kiew, R, Set, O and Gan, Y (2002) The genetic relations of Musa species from Mount Jaya, New Guinea, and a reappraisal of the sections of Musa (Musaceae). Gardens Bulletin 55: 97111.Google Scholar
Yap, V and Nelson, RJ (1996) WinBoot: A Program of Performing Bootstrap Analysis of Binary Data to Determine the Confidence Limits of UPGMA-based Dendrograms. Manila, the Philippines: International Rice Research Institute.Google Scholar
Zhang, J, Wu, YT, Guo, WZ and Zhang, TZ (2000) Fast screening of microsatellite markers in cotton with PAGE/silver staining. Journal of Cotton Science 12: 267269.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Feng supplementary material

Table S1

Download Feng supplementary material(File)
File 82.4 KB
Supplementary material: File

Feng supplementary material

Table S2

Download Feng supplementary material(File)
File 44.5 KB