4.7 Review

Advances in molecular marker techniques and their applications in plant sciences

期刊

PLANT CELL REPORTS
卷 27, 期 4, 页码 617-631

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00299-008-0507-z

关键词

molecular marker; CAPS; REMAP; SRAP; retrotransposon-based; plant sciences; agriculture

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Detection and analysis of genetic variation can help us to understand the molecular basis of various biological phenomena in plants. Since the entire plant kingdom cannot be covered under sequencing projects, molecular markers and their correlation to phenotypes provide us with requisite landmarks for elucidation of genetic variation. Genetic or DNA based marker techniques such as RFLP (restriction fragment length polymorphism), RAPD (random amplified polymorphic DNA), SSR (simple sequence repeats) and AFLP (amplified fragment length polymorphism) are routinely being used in ecological, evolutionary, taxonomical, phylogenic and genetic studies of plant sciences. These techniques are well established and their advantages as well as limitations have been realized. In recent years, a new class of advanced techniques has emerged, primarily derived from combination of earlier basic techniques. Advanced marker techniques tend to amalgamate advantageous features of several basic techniques. The newer methods also incorporate modifications in the methodology of basic techniques to increase the sensitivity and resolution to detect genetic discontinuity and distinctiveness. The advanced marker techniques also utilize newer class of DNA elements such as retrotransposons, mitochondrial and chloroplast based microsatellites, thereby revealing genetic variation through increased genome coverage. Techniques such as RAPD and AFLP are also being applied to cDNA-based templates to study patterns of gene expression and uncover the genetic basis of biological responses. The review details account of techniques used in identification of markers and their applicability in plant sciences.

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

4.7
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