4.5 Article

Phylogenetic History of Phytophthora cryptogea and P. drechsleri Isolates from Floriculture Crops in North Carolina Greenhouses

期刊

PHYTOPATHOLOGY
卷 101, 期 11, 页码 1373-1384

出版社

AMER PHYTOPATHOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1094/PHYTO-11-10-0302

关键词

-

资金

  1. Fred C. Gloeckner Foundation, Harrison, NY
  2. United States Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service
  3. North Carolina Agricultural Research Service, Raleigh

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The evolutionary history of Phytophthora cryptogea and P. drechsleri isolates previously collected from floriculture crops in North Carolina commercial greenhouses was explored with coalescent- and parsimony-based analyses. Initially, 68 isolates representing 13 location host groups were sequenced at multiple loci. Sequences of all isolates within a group were identical. A subset of isolates were selected, cloned to resolve heterozygous sites, and analyzed with SNAP Workbench. The internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region of the ribosomal DNA and cytochrome oxidase 11 gene genealogies were congruent and indicated that P cryptogea and P.drechsleri are sister species diverged from a common ancestor with no evidence of gene flow. In contrast, genealogies inferred from beta-tubulin (beta-tub) and translation elongation factor 1 alpha (EF-1 alpha) genes were in conflict with these loci. Coalescent analysis based on a nonrecombining partition in beta-tub and EF-1 alpha showed an initial (older) split between P cryptogea and P drechsleri, with a later (recent) event separating the remaining P cryptogea haplotypes from P. drechsleri. A parsimony-based minimal ancestral recombination graph inferred recombination between P cryptogea and P drechsleri isolates in the ITS region and beta-tub, suggesting genetic exchange between species. Also, putative recombination between A1 and A2 mating types of P cryptogea suggests that sexual reproduction has occurred in the history of these P cryptogea isolates.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据