4.7 Article

Cleaved AFLP (cAFLP), a modified amplified fragment length polymorphism analysis for cotton

Journal

THEORETICAL AND APPLIED GENETICS
Volume 111, Issue 7, Pages 1385-1395

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00122-005-0070-8

Keywords

Gossypium spp; cultivated tetraploid; AFLP; cleaved AFLP; genetic similarity

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In certain plant species including cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L. or Gossypium barbadense L.), the level of amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) is relatively low, limiting its utilization in the development of genome-wide linkage maps. We propose the use of frequent restriction enzymes in combination with AFLP to cleave the AFLP fragments, called cleaved AFLP analysis (cAFLP). Using four Upland cotton genotypes (G. hirsutum) and three Pima cotton (G. barbadense), we demonstrated that cAFLP generated 67% and 132% more polymorphic markers than AFLP in Upland and Pima cotton, respectively. This resulted in 15.5 and 25.5 polymorphic cAFLP markers per AFLP primer combination, as compared to 9.1 and 11.0 polymorphic AFLP. The cAFLP-based genetic similarity (GS) is generally lower than the AFLP-based GS, even though both marker systems are overall congruent. In some cases, cAFLP can better resolve genetic relationships between genotypes, rendering a higher discriminatory power. Given the high-resolution power of capillary-based DNA sequencing system, we further propose that AFLP and cAFLP amplicons from the same primer combination can be pooled as one sample before electrophoresis. The combination produced an average of 18.5 and 31.0 polymorphic markers per primer pair in Upland and Pima cotton, respectively. Using several restriction enzyme combinations before pre-selective amplification in combination with various frequent 4 bp-cutters or 6 bp-cutters after selective amplification, the pooled AFLP and cAFLP will provide unlimited number of polymorphic markers for genome-wide mapping and fingerprinting.

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