Euphytica

, Volume 153, Issue 1–2, pp 73–85 | Cite as

Characterization of dinucleotide and trinucleotide EST-derived microsatellites in the wheat genome

  • Agata Gadaleta
  • Giacomo Mangini
  • Giuseppina Mulè
  • Antonio Blanco
Article

Abstract

Over the past decade microsatellites or simple sequence repeats (SSRs) have attracted a considerable amount of attention from researchers. The aim of the present paper was to analyse expressed sequence tag-derived SSR (EST-SSR) marker variability in wheat and to investigate the relationships between the number and type of repeat units and the level of microsatellite polymorphism. Two hundred and forty-one new EST-SSR markers available in a public database (http://wheat.pw.usda.gov) were characterized in eight durum wheat cultivars (Svevo, Ciccio, Primadur, Duilio, Meridiano, Claudio, Latino, Messapia), two accessions of Triticum turgidum var. dicoccoides (MG4343, MG29896), one accession of T. turgidum var. dicoccum (MG5323) and in the common wheat cv. Chinese Spring. Of these, 201 primer pairs (83.4%) amplified PCR products successfully, while the remaining 40 (16.6%) failed to amplify any product. Of the EST-SSRs analysed, 45.2% of the primer pairs amplified one or two PCR products. Multiple discrete PCR products were observed among both di- and trinucleotide EST-SSR markers (31.2 and 40.5%, respectively). Markers based on dinucleotide microsatellites were more polymorphic than those based on trinucleotide SSRs in the 12 wheat genotypes tested (68.9 and 52.7%, respectively). An average of 2.5 alleles for dinucleotide and 2.0 alleles for trinucleotide SSRs was observed. The data reported in the present work indicate the presence of a significant relationship between motif sequence types and polymorphism. The primer set based on the AG repeat motif showed the lowest percentage of polymorphism (55.0%), while the primer set based on the AC repeat motif showed t he highest percentage (85.0%). Among trinucleotide SSRs, the AGG microsatellite markers showed the highest percentage of polymorphism (70.0%), and the ACG motif the lowest value (25.0%). The characterization of these new EST-SSR markers and the results of our studyon the effect of repeat number and type of motifs could have important applications in the genetic analysis of agronomically important traits, quantitative trait locus discovery and marker-assisted selection.

Keywords

EST-SSR Microsatellites Molecular markers Wheat 

Abbreviations

EST

Expressed sequence tag

SSR

Simple sequence repeat

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research project was supported by grants from Ministero delle Politiche Agricole, Alimentari e Forestali, project ‘FRUMISIS’.

References

  1. Anderson JA, Churchill GA, Sutrique JE, Tanksley SD, Sorrells ME (1993) Optimizing parental selection for genetic linkage maps. Genome 36:181–186Google Scholar
  2. Baek HJ, Beharav A, Nevo E (2003) Ecological-genomic diversity of microsatellites in wild barley Hordeum spontaneum, population in Jordan. Theor Appl Genet 106:397–410PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bandopadhyay R, Sharma S, Rustgi S, Singh R, Kumar A, Balyan HS, Gupta PK (2004) DNA polymorphic among 18 species of Triticum-Aegilops complex using wheat EST-SSRs. Plant Sci 166:349–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Becker J, Heun M (1996) Barley microsatellites: allele variation and mapping. Plant Mol Biol 27:835–845CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cho YG, Ishii T, Temnykh S, Chen X, Lipovich L, McCouch SR, Park WD, Ayer N, Cartinhour S (2000) Diversity of microsatellites derived from genomic libraries and GenBank sequences in rice (Oryza sativa). Theor Appl Genet 100:713–722CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Decroocq V, Fave MG, Hagen L, Bordenave L (2003) Development and transferability of apricot and grape EST microsatellite markers across taxa. Theor Appl Genet 106:912–922PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Edwards KJ, Barker JHA, Daly A, Jones C, Karp A (1996) Microsatellite libraries enriched for several microsatellite sequences in plants. Biotechniques 20:759–760Google Scholar
  8. Eujayl I, Sorrells ME, Baum M, Wolters P, Powell W (2001) Assessment of genotypic variation among cultivated durum wheat based on EST-SSRs and genomic SSRs. Euphytica 119:39–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Eujayl I, Sorrells ME, Baum M, Wolters P, Powell W (2002) Isolation of EST-derived microsatellite markers for genotyping the A and B genomes of wheat. Theor Appl Genet 104:399–407PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fisher PJ, Richardson TE, Gardener RC (1998) Characteristics of single- and multi-copy microsatellites in Pinus radiate. Theor Appl Genet 96:969–979CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gao L, Tang J, Li H, Jia J (2003) Analysis of microsatellites in major crops assessed by computational and experimental approaches. Mol Breed 12:245–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Guyomarc’h H, Sourdille P, Charmet G, Edwards KJ, Bernard M (2002) Characterization of polymorphic microsatellite markers from Aegilops tauschii and transferability to the D-genome of bread wheat. Theor Appl Genet 104:1164–1172PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Holton TA, Christopher JT, McClure L, Harker N, Henry RJ (2002) Identification and mapping of polymorphic SSR markers from expressed gene sequences of barley and wheat. Mol Breed 9:63–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kanteny RV, La Rota M, Matthews DE, Sorrells ME (2002) Data mining for simple sequences repeats in expressed sequence tags from barley, maize, rice, sorghum, and wheat. Plant Mol Biol 48:501–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lagercrantz U, Ellegren H, Andersson L (1993) The abundance of various polymorphic microsatellite motifs differs between plants and vertebrates. Nucleic Acids Res 21:1111–1115PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Leigh F, Lea V, Law J, Wolters P, Powell W, Donini P (2003). Assessment of EST- and genomic microsatellite markers for variety discrimination and genetic diversity studies in wheat. Euphytica 133:359–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Li YC, Korol AB, Fahima T, Beiles A, Nevo E (2002) Microsatellites: genomic distribution, putative functions, and mutational mechanisms (a review). Mol Ecol 11:2543–2565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Morgante M, Olivieri AM (1993) PCR-amplified microsatellites as markers in plant genetics. Plant J 3:175–183PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Morgante M, Hanafey M, Powell W (2002) Microsatellites are preferentially associated with non repetitive DNA in plant genomes. Nat Genet 30:194–200PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Nicot N, Chiquet V, Gandon B, Amilhat L, Legeai F, Leroy P, Bernard M, Sourdille P (2004) Study of simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers from wheat expressed sequence tags (ESTs). Theor Appl Genet 109:800–805PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ostrander EA, Pong PM, Rine J, Duyk G (1992) Construction of small-insert genomic DNA libraries highly enriched for microsatellite sequences. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 89:3419–3423PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Peng JH, Nora L, Capitan V (2005) Characterization of EST-derived microsatellites in the wheat genome and development of eSSR markers. Funct Integra Genomics 5:80–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ramsay L, Macaulay M, Cardle L, Morgante M, Degli Ivanissevich S, Maestri E, Powell W, Waugh R (1999) Intimate association of microsatellite repeats with retrotransposons and other dispersed repetitive elements in barley. Plant J 17:415–425PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Röder MS, Korzun V, Wendehake K, Plaschke J, Tixier NH, Laroy P, Ganal MV (1998). A microsatellite map of wheat. Genetics 149:2007–2023PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Rudd S (2003) Expressed sequence tags: alternative or complement to whole genome sequences? Trends Plant Sci 8:321–329PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schlötterrer C, Tautz D (1992) Slippage synthesis of simple sequence DNA. Nucleic Acids Res 20:211–215Google Scholar
  27. Sharp PJ, Kreis M, Shewry PR, Gale MD (1988) Location of β-amylases sequences in wheat and its relatives. Theor Appl Genet 75:286–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Smulders MJM, Bredemeijer G, Rus-Kortekass W, Arens P, Vosman B (1997) Use of short microsatellites from data base sequences to generate polymorphism among Lycopersicon esculentum cultivars and accessions of␣other Lycopersicon species. Theor Appl Genet 97:264–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Song QJ, Fickus EW, Cregan PB (2002) Characterization of trinucleotide SSR motifs in wheat. Theor Appl Genet 104:286–293PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Thiel T, Michaelek W, Varshney RK, Graner A (2003) Exploiting EST databases for the development and characterization of gene-derived SSR-markers in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.). Theor Appl Genet 106:411–422PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Tòth G, Gáspári Z, Jurka J (2000) Microsatellites in different eukaryotic genomes: survey and analysis. Genome Res 10:967–981PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Turpeinen T, Tenhola T, Manninen O, Nevo E, Nissila E (2001) Microsatellite diversity associated with ecology factors in Hordeum spontaneum populations in Israel. Mol Ecol 10:1577–1591PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Weber JL (1990) Informativeness of human (dC-dA)n × (dG-dT)n polymorphisms. Genomics 7:524–530PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Weising K, Fing RWM, Keeling RG, Atkinson RG, Gardner RC (1996) Characterization of microsatellites from Actinidia chinensis. Mol Breed 2:117–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Westman AL, Kresovich S (1998) The potential of cross-taxa simple sequence repeat (SSR) amplification between Arabidopsis thaliana L. and crop brassicas. Theor Appl Genet 96:272–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Yu JK, La Rota M, Kanteny RV, Sorrels ME (2004) EST derived SSR markers for comparative mapping in wheat and rice. Mol Gen Genomics 271:742–751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Zang LY, Bernard M, Leroy P, Feuillet C, Sourdille P (2005) High transferability of bread wheat EST-derived SSRs to other cereals. Theor Appl Genet 111:677–687CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Agata Gadaleta
    • 1
  • Giacomo Mangini
    • 1
  • Giuseppina Mulè
    • 2
  • Antonio Blanco
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Agro-Forestry and Environmental Biology and ChemistryUniversity of BariBariItaly
  2. 2.Institute of Sciences of Food ProductionNational Research Council (CNR) BariItaly

Personalised recommendations