4.7 Article

A comparative assessment of diversity of greater yam (Dioscorea alata) in China

期刊

SCIENTIA HORTICULTURAE
卷 243, 期 -, 页码 116-124

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.scienta.2018.08.016

关键词

Dioscorea alata; Diversity; Morphological; Chromosome; EST-SSR; Ploidy

资金

  1. Tropical Crop Germplasm Resources Protection Project from Ministry of Agriculture [16RZZY-11]
  2. Basic Research Business Expenses from Chinese Academy of Tropical Agricultural Sciences [1630032016008]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China (CN) [31260346]
  4. Natural Science Foundation of Hainan [318QN188]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dioscorea alata is a species of yam that is widely cultivated throughout the world, including China. Nevertheless, there is very limited knowledge on this type of yam diversity in China. In the present study, we assessed the genetic diversity of Chinese greater yam by analyzing their morphology, genotype, chromosome and ploidy. 142 cultivated greater yams were collected from eight geographical regions of China. 16 morphological characters were used for phenotypic variation assessment. Genotypic diversity was analyzed using 186 EST-SSR markers, while the chromosomes counting and ploidy evaluation were detected by flow cytometry. A broad morphological diversity was found, i.e. significant differences among accessions were found at each quantitative trait. The genetic similarity coefficients ranged from 0.42 to 0.91 with an average of 0.70. UPGMA and PCA indicated that the population was separated into two major clusters. The variation within pops accounted for 99.0%. 10 chromosome counts genotypes showed mainly 2n = 40, Da176 was a mixoploid with 20 and 40 chromosomes. Four levels of ploidy were detected by flow cytometry technology, and 87.3% of accessions had 40 chromosomes. Our findings demonstrated a broad variation of cultivated greater yam at phenotypic, genotypic and ploidy levels in two groups of observed cultivars.

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