4.7 Article

Development, polymorphism, and cross-taxon utility of EST-SSR markers from safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.)

Journal

THEORETICAL AND APPLIED GENETICS
Volume 120, Issue 1, Pages 85-91

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00122-009-1161-8

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation [DBI-0332411]
  2. USDA Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service-National Research Initiative [03-35300-13104]
  3. USDA Initiative for Future Agriculture and Food Systems [IFAFS 2000-04292]
  4. NSF Plant Genome Research Program [DBI-0421630]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Due to their highly polymorphic and codominant nature, simple-sequence repeat (SSR) markers are a common choice for assaying genetic diversity and genetic mapping. In this paper, we describe the generation of an expressed-sequence tag (EST) collection for the oilseed crop safflower and the subsequent development of EST-SSR markers for the genetic analysis of safflower and related species. We assembled 40,874 reads into 19,395 unigenes, of which 4,416 (22.8%) contained at least one SSR. Primer pairs were developed and tested for 384 of these loci, resulting in a collection of 104 polymorphic markers that amplify reliably across 27 accessions (3 species) of the genus Carthamus. These markers exhibited a high level of polymorphism, with an average of 6.0 +/- A 0.4 alleles per locus and an average gene diversity of 0.54 +/- A 0.03 across Carthamus species. In terms of cross-taxon transferability, 50% of these primer pairs produced an amplicon in at least one other species in the Asteraceae, and 28% produced an amplicon in at least one species outside the safflower subfamily (i.e., lettuce, sunflower, and/or Gerbera). These markers represent a valuable resource for the genetic analysis of safflower and related species, and also have the potential to facilitate comparative map-based analyses across a broader array of taxa within the Asteraceae.

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