4.7 Article

Evaluation of chloroplast DNA markers for intraspecific identification of Phalaenopsis equestris cultivars

Journal

SCIENTIA HORTICULTURAE
Volume 203, Issue -, Pages 86-94

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scienta.2016.03.021

Keywords

Chloroplast DNA marker; DNA barcode; Moth orchids; Phalaenopsis equestris

Categories

Funding

  1. Ministry of Science and Technology [MOST 102-2321-B-006-017, 103-2321-B-006-009, 104-2321-B-006-001]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Evaluation of insertion/deletion (InDel) regions by comparative chloroplast DNA (cpDNA) analysis of two endemic moth orchids, Phalaenopsis aphrodite and P. equestris, identified 15 highly variable cpDNA regions that could be served as useful markers for interspecific differentiation of moth orchids. In this study, we evaluated 31 cpDNA regions carrying simple sequence repeats (SSRs) or InDelsfrom two moth orchids to reveal intraspecific markers for distinguishing the cultivars of P. equestris. In total, 18 of the cpDNA markers were variable among cultivars of P. equestris; 9 cpDNA markers were highly variable, with polymorphic information content >= 5.5. The petA-psbJ, psbB-psbT and rps16-trnQ markers showed the best discriminatory power; 11 P. equestris cultivars could be separated into at least five groups. From the sequences for six selected cpDNA regions, the rps16-trnQ and psbB-psbT intergenic spacers were the best DNA barcodes; 11 P. equestris cultivars could be separated into six distinct groups. Phylogenetic analysis revealed that P. equestris cultivars have evolved into two major lineages, and the species in the Stauroglottis and Amboinenses sections are in a non-monophyletic relationship. We have revealed a set of cpDNA markers that could be used for intraspecific identification and phylogenetic study of P. equestris cultivars. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available