Theoretical and Applied Genetics

, Volume 126, Issue 2, pp 535–548 | Cite as

A high-throughput SNP marker system for parental polymorphism screening, and diversity analysis in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)

  • Matthew W. Blair
  • Andrés J. Cortés
  • R. Varma Penmetsa
  • Andrew Farmer
  • Noelia Carrasquilla-Garcia
  • Doug R. Cook
Original Paper

Abstract

Single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) detection has become a marker system of choice, because of the high abundance of source polymorphisms and the ease with which allele calls are automated. Various technologies exist for the evaluation of SNP loci and previously we validated two medium throughput technologies. In this study, our goal was to utilize a 768 feature, Illumina GoldenGate assay for common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) developed from conserved legume gene sequences and to use the new technology for (1) the evaluation of parental polymorphisms in a mini-core set of common bean accessions and (2) the analysis of genetic diversity in the crop. A total of 736 SNPs were scored on 236 diverse common bean genotypes with the GoldenGate array. Missing data and heterozygosity levels were low and 94 % of the SNPs were scorable. With the evaluation of the parental polymorphism genotypes, we estimated the utility of the SNP markers in mapping for inter-genepool and intra-genepool populations, the latter being of lower polymorphism than the former. When we performed the diversity analysis with the diverse genotypes, we found Illumina GoldenGate SNPs to provide equivalent evaluations as previous gene-based SNP markers, but less fine-distinctions than with previous microsatellite marker analysis. We did find, however, that the gene-based SNPs in the GoldenGate array had some utility in race structure analysis despite the low polymorphism. Furthermore the SNPs detected high heterozygosity in wild accessions which was probably a reflection of ascertainment bias. The Illumina SNPs were shown to be effective in distinguishing between the genepools, and therefore were most useful in saturation of inter-genepool genetic maps. The implications of these results for breeding in common bean are discussed as well as the advantages and disadvantages of the GoldenGate system for SNP detection.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank Lucy M. Díaz and Carolina Chavarro for DNA extraction and technical work, as well as Agobardo Hoyos and Alcides Hincapie for seed multiplication and greenhouse management. This research was part of the Tropical Legume project (to MWB as PI for common beans and DRC as PI for comparative legume genomics). Additional funding was from the US National Science Foundation award DBI 0605251 (to DRC).

Supplementary material

122_2012_1999_MOESM1_ESM.docx (24 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 23 kb)
122_2012_1999_MOESM2_ESM.xls (68 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (XLS 67 kb)

References

  1. Afanador LK, Hadley SD, Kelly JD (1993) Adoption of a mini-prep DNA extraction method for RAPD marker analysis in common bean. Bean Improv Coop 35:10–11Google Scholar
  2. Anderson JA, Churchill GA, Autrique JE, Tanksley SD, Sorrells ME (1993) Optimizing parental selection for genetic linkage maps. Genome 36:181–186PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benchimol LL, de Campos T, Carbonell SAM, Colombo CA, Chioratto AF, Formighieri EF, Gouvêa LRL, de Souza AP (2007) Structure of genetic diversity among common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) varieties of Mesoamerican and Andean origins using new develop microsatellite markers. Genet Resour Crop Evol 54:1747–1762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blair MW, Giraldo MC, Buendia HF, Tovar E, Duque MC, Beebe SE (2006a) Microsatellite marker diversity in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Theor Appl Genet 113:100–109PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blair MW, Iriarte G, Beebe S (2006b) QTL analysis of yield traits in an advanced backcross population derived from a cultivated Andean × wild common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cross. Theor Appl Genet 112:1149–1163PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blair M, Diaz LM, Buendía HF, Duque MC (2009) Genetic diversity, seed size associations and population structure of a core collection of common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Theor Appl Genet 119:955–972PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Broughton WJ, Hernández G, Blair MW, Beebe S, Gepts P, Vanderleyden J (2003) Beans (Phaseolus spp.) model food legumes. Plant Soil 55:55–128Google Scholar
  8. Chagné D, Batley J, Edwards D, Forster JW (2007) Single nucleotide polymorphism genotyping in plants. In: Oraguzie NC, Rikkerink EHA, Gardiner SE, Silva HNd (eds) Association mapping in plants, pp 77–94Google Scholar
  9. Cortés A, Chavarro C, Blair MW (2011) SNP marker diversity in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Theor Appl Genet. doi:10.1007/s00122-011-1630-8 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Cortés AJ, This D, Chavarro MC, Madriñan S, Blair MW (2012) Nucleotide diversity patterns at the drought related DREB encoding genes in wild and cultivated common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Theor Appl Genet 125(5):1069–1085PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Deulvot C, Charrel H, Marty A, Jacquin F, Donnadieu C, Lejeune-Hénaut I, Burstin J, Aubert G (2010) Highly-multiplexed SNP genotyping for genetic mapping and germplasm diversity studies in pea. BMC Genomics 11:468PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Evano G, Regnaut S, Goudet J (2005) Detecting the number of clusters of individuals using the software STRUCTURE: a simulation study. Mol Ecol 14:2611–2620Google Scholar
  13. Galeano CH, Fernández AC, Gómez M, Blair MW (2009a) Single strand conformation polymorphism based SNP and Indel markers for genetic mapping and synteny analysis of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). BMC Genomics 10:629PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Galeano CH, Gomez M, Rodriguez LM, Blair MW (2009b) CEL I nuclease for SNP discovery and marker development in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Crop Sci 49:381–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gepts P, Aragao F, Barros E, Blair MW, Brondani R, Broughton W, Hernández G, Kami J, Lariguet P, McClean P, Melotto M, Miklas P, Pedrosa-Harand A, Porch T, Sánchez F (2008) Genomics of Phaseolus beans, a major source of dietary protein and micronutrients in the tropics. In: Moore PH, Ming R (eds) Genomics of tropical crops, chap 5. Springer, Berlin, pp 113–143Google Scholar
  16. Hyten DL, Song Q, Choi IY, Yoon MS, Specht JE, Matukumalli LK, Nelson RL, Shoemaker RC, Young ND, Cregan PB (2008) High-throughput genotyping with the GoldenGate assay in the complex genome of soybean. Theor Appl Genet 116(7):945–952PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hyten DL, Song Q, Fickus EW, Quigley CV, Lim J-S, Choi I-Y, Hwang E-Y, Pastor-Corrales M, Cregan PB (2010) High-throughput SNP discovery and assay development in common bean. BMC Genomics 11:475PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kwak M, Gepts P (2009) Structure of genetic diversity in the two major gene pools of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L., Fabaceae). Theor Appl Genet 118:979–992PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Liu K, Muse SVB (2005) PowerMarker: integrated analysis environment for genetic marker data. Bioinformatics 21:2128–2129PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. McConnell M, Mamidi S, Lee R, Chikara S, Rossi M, Papa R, McClean P (2010) Syntenic relationships among legumes revealed using a gene-based genetic linkage map of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Theor Appl Genet 121:1103–1116PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Muchero W, Diop NN, Bhat PR, Fenton RD, Wanamaker S, Pottor M, Hearne S, Cisse N, Fatokun C, Ehlers JD, Roberts PA, Close TJ (2009) A consensus genetic map of cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L) Walp.] and synteny based on EST-derived SNPs. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106:18159–18164PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nei M (1978) Estimation of average heterozygosity and genetic distance from a small numbers of individuals. Genetics 89:583–590PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Oliphant A, Barker DL, Stuelpnagel JR, Chee MS (2002) BeadArray technology: enabling an accurate, cost-effective approach to high throughput genotyping. Biotechniques Suppl 5:6–58Google Scholar
  24. Perrier X, Flori A, Bonnot F (2003) Data analysis methods. In: Hamon P, Seguin M, Perrier X, Glaszmann JC (eds) Genetic diversity of cultivated tropical plants. Enfield Science Publishers, Montpellier, pp 43–76Google Scholar
  25. Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnelly P (2000) Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155(2):945–959Google Scholar
  26. Singh SP, Gepts P, Debouck DG (1991) Races of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris, Fabaceae). Econ Bot 45:379–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Yan JB, Shah T, Warburton M, Buckler ES, McMullen MD, Crouch J (2009) Genetic characterization and linkage disequilibrium estimation of a global maize collection using SNP markers. PLoS ONE 4(12):e8451PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Yan JB, Yang XH, Shah T, Sanchez-Villeda H, Li JS, Warburton M, Zhou Y, Crouch JH, Xu YB (2010) High-throughput SNP genotyping with the GoldenGate assay in maize. Mol Breed 25:441–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Zhao K, Wright M, Kimball J, Eizenga G, McClung A, Kovach M, Tyagi W, Liakat Ali ML, Tung C-W, Reynolds A, Bustamante CD, McCouch SR (2010) Genomic diversity and introgression in O. sativa reveal the impact of domestication and breeding on the rice genome. PLoS ONE 5(5):e10780Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthew W. Blair
    • 1
    • 2
  • Andrés J. Cortés
    • 3
  • R. Varma Penmetsa
    • 4
  • Andrew Farmer
    • 5
  • Noelia Carrasquilla-Garcia
    • 4
  • Doug R. Cook
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Plant Breeding and GeneticsCornell UniversityIthacaUSA
  2. 2.Universidad Nacional de ColombiaSedes Palmira and BogotáColombia
  3. 3.University of UppsalaUppsalaSweden
  4. 4.University of CaliforniaDavisUSA
  5. 5.National Center for Genomic ResearchAlbuquerqueUSA

Personalised recommendations