Advertisement

Theoretical and Applied Genetics

, Volume 84, Issue 7–8, pp 859–865 | Cite as

Chloroplast DNA diversity among wild and cultivated members of Cucurbita (Cucurbitaceae)

  • Hugh D. Wilson
  • John Doebley
  • Melvin Duvall
Article

Summary

Cladistic analysis of 86 chloroplast DNA restriction-site mutations among 30 samples representing 15 species of Cucurbita indicates that annual species of the genus are derived from perennials. The Malabar Gourd, C. ficifolia, is placed as a basal, sister taxon relative to other domesticated species and allied wild-types. The pattern of variation supports three species groups as monophyletic: (1) C. fraterna, C. pepo, and C. texana, (2) C. lundelliana, C. martinezii, C. mixta, C. moschata and C. sororia, and (3) C. foetidissima and C. pedatifolia. Domesticated samples representing subspecies of C. pepo are divided into two concordant groups, one of which is allied to wild-types referable to C. texana and C. fraterna. The data failed to resolve relationships among cultivars of C. moschata and C. mixta and their association to the wild C. sororia. The South American domesticate, C. maxima, and its companion weed, C. andreana, show close affinity and alliance to C. equadorensis.

Key words

Cucurbita Phylogeny cpDNA Domestication Evolution 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andres TC (1990) Biosystematics, theories on the origin, and breeding potential of Cucurbita ficifolia. In: Bates DA, Robinson RW, Jeffrey C (eds) Biology and utilization of the Cucurbitaceae. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, pp 102–119Google Scholar
  2. Bailey LH (1943) Species of Cucurbita. Gentes Herbarum 6:267–322Google Scholar
  3. Bemis WP, Rhodes AM, Whitaker TW, Carmer SG (1970) Numerical taxonomy applied to Cucurbita relationships. Am J Bot 57:404–412Google Scholar
  4. Decker DS (1985) Numerical analysis of allozyme variation in Cucurbita pepo L. Econ Bot 39:300–309Google Scholar
  5. Decker DS (1988) Origin(s), evolution, and systematics of Cucurbita pepo (Cucurbitaceae). Econ Bot 42:4–15Google Scholar
  6. Decker-Walters, DS (1990) Evidence for multiple domestication of Cucurbita pepo. In Bates DA, Robinson RW, Jeffry C (eds) Biology and utilization of the Cucurbitaceae. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, pp 96–101Google Scholar
  7. Decker-Walters DS, Walters TW, Posluszny U (1990) Genealogy and gene flow among annual domesticated species of Cucurbita. Can Jour Bot 68:782–789Google Scholar
  8. Feinberg AP, Vogelstein B (1983) A technique for radiolabelling DNA restriction endonuclease fragments to high specific activity. Anal Biochem 132:6–13PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Felsenstein J (1985) Confidence limits on phylogenies with a molecular clock. Syst Zool 34:152–161Google Scholar
  10. Hurd DP, Lindsley EG, Whitaker TW (1971) Squash and gourd bees (Peponapis, Xenoglassd) and the origin of the cultivated Cucurbita. Evolution 25:218–234Google Scholar
  11. Jansen RK, Palmer JD (1987) Chloroplast DNA from lettuce and Barnadesia (Asteraceae): structure, gene localization, and characterization of a large inversion. Curr Genet 11:553–564Google Scholar
  12. Maniatis T, Fritsch EF, Sambrook J (1982) Molecular Cloning: a laboratory manual. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Merrick LC (1990) Systematics and evolution of a domesticated squash, Cucurbita argyrosperma, and its wild and weedy relatives. In: Bates DA, Robinson RW, Jeffrey C (eds) Biology and utilization of the Cucurbitaceae. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, pp 77–95Google Scholar
  14. Merrick LC, Bates DM (1989) Classification and nomenclature of Cucurbita argyosperma Huber. Baileya 23:94–102Google Scholar
  15. Nee M (1990) The domestication of Cucurbita (Cucurbitaceae). Econ Bot 44 (3 supplement): 56–68Google Scholar
  16. Puchalski JT, Robinson RW (1990) Electrophoretic analysis of isozymes in Cucurbita and Cucumis and its application for phylogenetic studies. In: Bates DA, Robinson RW, Jeffrey C (eds) Biology and utilization of the Cucurbitaceae. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, pp 60–76Google Scholar
  17. Saghai-Maroof MA, Soliman KM, Jorgensen RA, Allard RW (1984) Ribosomal DNA spacer length polymorphism in barley: Mendelian inheritance, chromosomal location and population dynamics. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 81:8014–8018PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Singh AK (1990) Cytogenetics and evolution in the Cucurbitaceae. In: Bates DA, Robinson RW, Jeffrey C (eds) Biology and utilization of the Cucurbitaceae. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, pp 10–28Google Scholar
  19. Swofford DL (1985) PAUP: Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony. User's Manual. Illinois Natural History Survey, ChampaignGoogle Scholar
  20. Sytsma KJ, Gottlieb LD (1986) Chloroplast DNA evolution and phylogenetic relationships in Clarkia sect, peripetasma (Onagraceae). Evolution 40:1248–1261Google Scholar
  21. Weeden NF, Robinson RW (1990) Isozyme studies in Cucurbita. In: Bates DA, Robinson RW, Jeffrey C (eds) Biology and utilization of the Cucurbitaceae. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, pp. 51–59Google Scholar
  22. Weiling F (1959) Genomanalytische Untersuchungen bei kurbis (Cucurbita L.). Zuchter 29:161–179Google Scholar
  23. Whitaker TW, Bemis WP (1964) Evolution of the genus Cucurbita. Evolution 18:553–559Google Scholar
  24. Whitaker TW, Bermis WP (1975) Origin and evolution of the cultivated Cucurbita. Bull Torrey Bot Club 102:362–368Google Scholar
  25. Whittaker TW, Carter GF (1946) Critical notes on the origin and domestication of the cultivated species of Cucurbita. Am J Bot 33:10–15Google Scholar
  26. Wilson HD (1989) Discordant patterns of allozyme and morphological variation in Mexican Cucurbita. Syst Bot 14:612–623Google Scholar
  27. Wilson HD (1990) Gene flow in squash species. Bioscience 40:449–455Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hugh D. Wilson
    • 1
  • John Doebley
    • 2
  • Melvin Duvall
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of BiologyTexas A and M UniversityCollege StationUSA
  2. 2.Department of Plant BiologyUniversity of MinnesotaSt. PaulUSA
  3. 3.Department of Botany and Plant SciencesUniversity of CaliforniaRiversideUSA

Personalised recommendations