Theoretical and Applied Genetics

, Volume 111, Issue 3, pp 530–539 | Cite as

Patterns of AFLP variation in a core subset of cultivated hexaploid oat germplasm

  • Yong Bi Fu
  • Gregory W. Peterson
  • David Williams
  • Ken W. Richards
  • Jennifer Mitchell Fetch
Original Paper


Many core collections have been developed from large collections of crop germplasm, but most of these have not been characterized, particularly using molecular techniques, for germplasm management and utilization. We have attempted to characterize a structured sample representing a world collection of 11,622 cultivated hexaploid oat accessions in the hope of understanding the genetic structure of the world collection. The amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) technique was applied to screen 670 accessions representing 79 countries and one group of uncertain origin. For each accession, 170 AFLP polymorphic bands detected by five AFLP primer pairs were scored. Analyses of the AFLP data showed the effectiveness of the stratified sampling applied in capturing country-wise AFLP variation. The frequencies of polymorphic bands ranged from 0.11 to 0.99, with an average of 0.72. The majority (89.9%) of the AFLP variation resided within accessions of each country, and only 6.2% of the AFLP differences existed among accessions of major geographic regions. Accessions from the Mediterranean region were the most distinct, while those from Russia and the USA were the most diverse. The two distinct groups that were observed were separated largely on the basis of common oat and red oat. Red oat was genetically more diverse than its common and hull-less counterparts, and hull-less oat was more related to common oat than red oat. Landrace and non-landrace accessions displayed similar AFLP variation patterns. These patterns are significant for understanding the domestication of cultivated oat and are useful in classifying the intraspecific diversity of oat germplasm, developing specific core subsets of the oat collection, and exploring new sources of genes for oat improvement.



The authors would like to thank Drs. Axel Diederichsen, James Chong, Tom Fetch, and Brian Rossnagel for their stimulating discussions on the project; Mr. Dallas Kessler and Ms. Angela Taylor for their technical assistance in sampling, planting, and screening the germplasm; and Drs. Van Ripley and Axel Diederichsen for their helpful comments on the manuscript.


  1. Baum BR (1977) Oats. Thorn Press, OttawaGoogle Scholar
  2. Brown AHD (1989a) The case for core collection. In: Brown AHD, Frankel OH, Marshall DR, Williams JT (eds) The use of plant genetic resources. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 136–156Google Scholar
  3. Brown AHD (1989b) Core collections: a practical approach to genetic resources management. Genome 31:818–824Google Scholar
  4. Brown AHD, Spillane C (1999) Implementing core collections—principles, procedures, progress, problems and promise. In: Johnson RC, Hodgkin T (eds) Collections for today and tomorrow. International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, Rome, pp 1–9Google Scholar
  5. Coffman FA (1977) Oat history, identification and classification. USDA-ARS Tech Bull No 1516, Washington. D.C.Google Scholar
  6. Diederichsen A (2004) Case studies for the use of infraspecific classification in managing germplasm collection of cultivated plants. Acta Hortic 634:127–139Google Scholar
  7. Diederichsen A, Timmermans E, Williams DJ, Richards KW (2001) Holding of Avena germplasm at plant gene resources of Canada and status of the collection. Oat Newslet 47:35–42Google Scholar
  8. Excoffier L, Smouse PE, Quattro JM (1992) Analysis of molecular variance inferred from metric distances among DNA haplotypes: application to human mitochondrial DNA restriction data. Genetics 131:479–491PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization) (1998) Report on the State of the World’s Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome ItalyGoogle Scholar
  10. Frankel OH, Brown AHD (1984) Plant genetic resources today: a critical appraisal. In: Holden JHW, Williams JT (eds) Crop genetic resources: conservation and evaluation. George Allen and Unwin, Winchester, pp 249–268Google Scholar
  11. Fu YB (2003) Applications of bulking in molecular characterization of plant germplasm: a critical review. Plant Genet Resour 1:161–167Google Scholar
  12. Fu YB, Peterson GW, Scoles G, Rossnagel B, Schoen DJ, Richards KW (2003) Allelic diversity changes in 96 Canadian oat cultivars released from 1886 to 2001. Crop Sci 43:1989–1995Google Scholar
  13. Fu YB, Kibite S, Richards KW (2004) Amplified fragment length polymorphism analysis of 96 Canadian oat cultivars released between 1886 and 2001. Can J Plant Sci 84:23–30Google Scholar
  14. Hansen M, Kraft T, Christiansson M, Nilsson N-O (1999) Evaluation of AFLP in beta. Theor Appl Genet 98:845–852Google Scholar
  15. Harlan JR (1972) Genetic resources in sorghum. In: Rao NGP, House LR (eds) Sorghum in the seventies. Oxford/ IBH, New Delhi, pp 1–13Google Scholar
  16. Huff DR (1997) RAPD characterization of heterogeneous perennial ryegrass cultivars. Crop Sci 37:557–564Google Scholar
  17. Jellen EN, Beard J (2000) Geographical distribution of a chromosome 7C and 17 intergenomic translocation in cultivated oat. Crop Sci 40:256–263Google Scholar
  18. Karp A (2002) The new genetic era: will it help us in managing genetic diversity? In: Engels JMM, Rao VR, Brown AHD, Jackson MT (eds) Managing plant genetic diversity. International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, Rome, pp 43–56Google Scholar
  19. Liu F, Sun GL, Salomon B, Bothmer von R (2001) Distribution of allozymic alleles and genetic diversity in the American barley core collection. Theor Appl Genet 102:606–615Google Scholar
  20. Murphy JP, Hoffman LA (1992) The origin, history, and production of oat. In: Marshall HG, Sorrells ME (eds) Oat science and technology. American Society of Agronomy/Crop Science Society of America, Madison, pp 1–28Google Scholar
  21. Murphy JP, Phillips TD (1993) Isozyme variation in cultivated oat and its progenitor species Avena sterilis L. Crop Sci 33:1366–1372Google Scholar
  22. O’Donoughue LS, Souza E, Tanksley SD, Sorrells ME (1994) Relationships among North American oat cultivars based on restriction fragment length polymorphisms. Crop Sci 34:1251–1258Google Scholar
  23. Phillips TD, Murphy JP (1993) Distribution and analysis of isozyme polymorphism in North American cultivated oat germplasm. Crop Sci 33:460–469Google Scholar
  24. Rodionova NA, Soldatov VN, Merzhko VE, Jarosh NP, Kobyljanskij VL (1994) Flora of cultivated plants, vol 2, part 3: oat (in Russian). Kolos, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  25. Rohlf FJ (1997) ntsys-pc 2.1. Numerical taxonomy and multivariate analysis system. Exeter Software, SetauketGoogle Scholar
  26. SAS Institute (2004) The SAS system for windows V8.02. SAS Institute, Cary, N.C.Google Scholar
  27. Schneider S, Roessli D, Excoffier L (2002) arlequin version 2.001: a software for population genetics data analysis. Genetics and Biometry Laboratory, University of Geneva, Switzerland (available at
  28. Schoen DJ, Brown AHD (1993) Conservation of allelic richness in wild crop relatives is aided by assessment of genetic markers. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 90:10623–10627PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Sokal RR, Michener CD (1958) A statistical method for evaluating systematic relationships. Univ Kansas Sci Bull 38:1409–1438Google Scholar
  30. Souza E, Sorrells ME (1989) Pedigree analysis of North American oat cultivars released from 1951 to 1985. Crop Sci 29:595–601Google Scholar
  31. Souza E, Sorrells ME (1991a) Relationships among 70 North American oat germplasms: I. Cluster analysis using quantitative characters. Crop Sci 31:599–605Google Scholar
  32. Souza E, Sorrells ME (1991b) Relationships among 70 North American oat germplasms: II. Cluster analysis using qualitative characters. Crop Sci 31:605–612Google Scholar
  33. Stanton TR (1923) Naked oats. J Hered 14:177–183Google Scholar
  34. Thomas H (1995) Oats. In: Smartt J, Simmonds NW (eds) Evolution of crop plants. Longman Group, New York, pp 132–140Google Scholar
  35. Ude G, Pillay M, Ogundiwin E, Tenkouano A (2003) Genetic diversity in an African plantain core collection using AFLP and RAPD markers. Theor Appl Genet 107:248–255PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Vavilov NI (1926) Studies on the origin of cultivated plants (in Russian and English). State Press, LeningradGoogle Scholar
  37. Vavilov NI (1951) The origin, variation, immunity and breeding of cultivated plants. Chron Bot 13:1–366Google Scholar
  38. Vos P, Hogers R, Bleeker M, Reijans M, van De Lee T, Hornes M, Frijters A, Peleman J, Kuiper M, Zabeau M (1995) AFLP: a new technique for DNA fingerprinting. Nucleic Acids Res 23:4407–4414PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Zeven AC, Zhukovsky PM (1975) Dictionary of cultivated plants and their centres of diversity. Centre for Agricultural Publishing and Documentation, WageningenGoogle Scholar
  40. Zhou X, Jellen EN, Murphy JP (1999) Progenitor germplasm of domesticated hexaploid oat. Crop Sci 39:1208–1214Google Scholar
  41. Zhukovsky PM (1968) New centres of the origin and new gene centres of cultivated plants including specifically endemic micro-centres of species closely allied to cultivated species (in Russian with English abstract). Bot Zh 53:430–460Google Scholar
  42. Zohary D, Hopf M (2000) Domestication of plants in the old world: the origin and spread of cultivated plants in West Asia, Europe and the Nile Valley, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yong Bi Fu
    • 1
  • Gregory W. Peterson
    • 1
  • David Williams
    • 1
  • Ken W. Richards
    • 1
  • Jennifer Mitchell Fetch
    • 2
  1. 1.Plant Gene Resources of Canada, Saskatoon Research CentreAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaSaskatoonCanada
  2. 2.Cereal Research CentreAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaWinnipegCanada

Personalised recommendations