4.5 Article

An assessment of the genetic relationship between sweet and grain sorghums, within Sorghum bicolor ssp bicolor (L.) Moench, using AFLP markers

Journal

EUPHYTICA
Volume 157, Issue 1-2, Pages 161-176

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10681-007-9408-4

Keywords

AFLP; genetic diversity; grain sorghum; Sorghum bicolor; sweet sorghum

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Compared to grain sorghums, sweet sorghums typically have lower grain yield and thick, tall stalks which accumulate high levels of sugar (sucrose, fructose and glucose). Unlike commercial grain sorghum (S. bicolor ssp. bicolor) cultivars, which are usually F-1 hybrids, commercial sweet sorghums were selected as wild accessions or have undergone limited plant breeding. Although all sweet sorghums are classified within S. bicolor ssp. bicolor, their genetic relationship with grain sorghums is yet to be investigated. Ninety-five genotypes, including 31 sweet sorghums and 64 grain sorghums, representing all five races within the subspecies bicolor, were screened with 277 polymorphic amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) markers. Cluster analysis separated older sweet sorghum accessions (collected in mid 1800s) from those developed and released during the early to mid 1900s. These groups were emphasised in a principle component analysis of the results such that sweet sorghum lines were largely distinguished from the others, particularly by a group of markers located on sorghum chromosomes SBI-08 and SBI-10. Other studies have shown that QTL and ESTs for sugar-related traits, as well as for height and anthesis, map to SBI-10. Although the clusters obtained did not group clearly on the basis of racial classification, the sweet sorghum lines often cluster with grain sorghums of similar racial origin thus suggesting that sweet sorghum is of polyphyletic origin within S. bicolor ssp. bicolor.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available