Advertisement

Assessment of genetic diversity in Moroccan fig (Ficus carica L.) collection by combining morphological and physicochemical descriptors

  • L. Hssaini
  • H. Hanine
  • R. Razouk
  • S. Ennahli
  • A. Mekaoui
  • A. Ejjilani
  • J. CharafiEmail author
Research Article
  • 16 Downloads

Abstract

There are not many exhaustive works emphasizing the amount of genetic diversity based on multivariate analysis of a large sample of fig (Ficus carica L.) cultivars in Morocco. In this study, 96 local and 44 introduced fig cultivars were assessed using 41 descriptors. The studied genotypes exhibited a highly significant variability based on morphological, colorimetric and physicochemical traits. Most of characters showed a high coefficient of variations (> 30%) revealing a high level of phenotypic diversity among the genotypes. Principal component analysis showed that the first 10 components explained 60.26% of the total inertia. Fruit weight, caliber, stalk, neck size, fruit shape, and skin color coordinates contributed to most of the total variation. Matrix of correlations showed significant positive and negative correlations among variables particularly fruit sizes, shape and skin color. Cluster analysis using the Unweighted Pair Group Method with Arithmetic Averages procedure for studied accessions revealed two major clusters and five subclusters. Principal component analysis scatter plot expressed a low level of variance compared to the cluster. It confirmed the same classification of the fig accessions, where fruit dimensions and skin color coordinates were the most discriminant descriptors. The results highlight a high phenotypic diversity within studied fig germplasm, which is probably more genetically related. The accessions panel can be recognized as an important gene pool for future breeding programs. The present study is of importance for planning fig genetic resources inventory, preserving the existing genetic variability and establishing national collections.

Keywords

Ficus carica L. Germplasm characterization Pomological variability Fruit quality Morocco 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was the financial support of Competitive Mechanism of Research-Development and Extension (MCRDV) program founded by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, Rural Development, Water and Forests of Morocco.

Author contributions

Lahcen Hssaini designed the research methodology, analyzed samples, performed the statistical analysis and interpreted the data. Jamal Charafi and Hafida Hanine helped in the methodology and provided the technical support for designing and conducting research, and Said Ennahli contributed in the statistical analysis and performed the review. Rachid Razouk, Assia Ejjilani and Abderrahman Mekaoui contributed in plant sampling and analysis.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Achtak H, Oukabli A, Ater M, Santoni S, Kjellberg F, Khadari B (2009) Microsatellite markers as reliable tools for fig cultivar identification. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 134(6):624–631Google Scholar
  2. Achtak H, Ater M, Oukabli A, Santoni S, Kjellberg F, Khadari B (2010) Traditional agroecosystems as conservatories and incubators of cultivated plant varietal diversity: the case of fig (Ficus Carica L.) in Morocco. BMC Plant Biol 10(1):28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aljane F, Ferchichi A, Boukhris M (2008) Pomological characteristics of local fig (Ficus carica) cultivars in southern tunisia. Acta Hortic 798:123–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aljane F, Nahdi S, Essid A (2012) Genetic diversity of some accessions of Tunisian fig tree (Ficus Carica L.) based in morphological and chemical traits. J Nat Prod Plant Resour 2:350–359Google Scholar
  5. Almajalia D, Abdel-Ghanib AH, Migdadia H (2012) Evaluation of genetic diversity among Jordanian fig germplasm accessions by morphological traits and ISSR markers. Sci Hortic 147:8–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ater M, El Oualkadi A, Achtak H, Oukabli A, Khadari B (2008) Diversity of the local varieties of the fig tree in the North-Western Morocco. Acta Hortic 798:69–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ateyyeh AF, Sadder MT (2006) Growth pattern and fruit characteristics of six common fig (Ficus Carica L.) cultivars in Jordan. Jordan J Agric Sci 2(2):105–112Google Scholar
  8. Badgujar SB, Patel VV, Bandivdekar AH, Mahajan RT (2014) Traditional uses, phytochemistry and pharmacology of Ficus carica: a review. Pharm Biol 52(11):1487–1503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Benettayeb ZE, Bencheikh M, Setti B, Chaillou S (2017) Genetic diversity of Algerian fig (Ficus Carica L.) cultivars based on morphological and quality traits. Hortic Soc India 74(3):311–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Çalişkan O, Polat AA (2012) Morphological diversity among fig (Ficus Carica L.) accessions sampled from the Eastern Mediterranean Region of Turkey. Turk J Agric For 36(2):179–193Google Scholar
  11. Caliskan O, Bayazit S, Ilgin M, Karatas N (2017) Morphological diversity of caprifig (Ficus carica var. caprificus) accessions in the eastern Mediterranean region of Turkey: potential utility for caprification. Sci Hortic 222:46–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Can HZ, Misirli A, Kara S, Seferoglu G, Sahin N, Aksoy U (2001) Fig (Ficus Carica L.) selection study for fresh market in western Turkey. Acta Hortic 605:197–203Google Scholar
  13. Chalack L, Chehade A, Mattar E, Khadari B (2005) Morphological characterization of fig accessions cultivated in Lebanon. Acta Hortic 798:54–61Google Scholar
  14. Ciarmiello LF, Piccirillo P, Carillo P, De Luca A, Woodrow P (2015) Determination of the genetic relatedness of fig (Ficus Carica L.) accessions using RAPD fingerprint and their agro-morphological characterization. S Afr J Bot 97:40–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Darjazi BB (2011) Morphological and pomological characteristics of fig (Ficus Carica L.) cultivars from Varamin Iran. Afr J Biotechnol 10(82):19096–19105Google Scholar
  16. Ercisli S, Tosun M, Karlidag H, Dzubur A, Hadziabulic S, Aliman Y (2012) Color and antioxidant characteristics of some fresh fig (Ficus Carica L.) genotypes from northeastern Turkey. Plant Foods Hum Nutr 67(3):271–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Essid A, Aljane F, Ferchichi A (2017) Morphological characterization and pollen evaluation of some Tunisian ex situ planted caprifig (Ficus Carica L.) ecotypes. S Afr J Bot 111:134–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. FAOSTAT (2017) Food and Agriculture Organization statistical database. 436 http://faostat.fao.org/default.aspx. Accessed 24 Oct 2018
  19. Ferrara E, Papa G (2003) Evaluation of fig cultivars for breba crop. Acta Hort 605:91–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gaaliche B, Trad M, Mars M (2011) Scientia Horticulturae effect of pollination intensity, frequency and pollen source on fig (Ficus Carica L.) productivity and fruit quality. Sci Hortic 130(4):737–742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gozlekcİ S (2011) Pomological traits of fig (Ficus Carica L.) genotypes collected in the West Mediterranean region in Turkey. J Anim Plant Sci 21(4):646–652Google Scholar
  22. Hirst K (1996) Fig trees and archaeology. The history of the domestication of fig trees. About.com Archaeology. http://archaeology.about.com/od/domestications/a/fig_ trees.htm
  23. Hmimsa Y, Aumeeruddy-Thomas Y, Ater M (2012) Vernacular taxonomy, classification and varietal diversity of fig (Ficus Carica L.) among Jbala cultivators in northern Morocco. Hum Ecol 40(2):301–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hmimsa Y, Aumeeruddy-thomas Y, Ater M (2017) Une forme spontanée de figuier (Ficus Carica L.), le nābūt. Revue d’ethnoecologieGoogle Scholar
  25. Hssaini L, Hanine H, Razouk R, Ennahli S, Mekaoui A, Charafi J (2019) Characterization of local fig clones (Ficus Carica L.) collected in Northern Morocco. Fruits 74(2):55–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. IIghbareyeh JMH, Carmona EC, Ortiz AC, Suliemieh AA, Ighbareyeh MH, Daraweesh AM (2018) Analysis of physical factors of climate and bioclimate and their effects on almonds production to increase the economy in Hebron area of Palestine. Arab J Geosci 11(21):683Google Scholar
  27. IPGRI and CIHEAM (2003) Descriptors for Figs. International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI), Rome, Italy, and the International Centre for Advanced Mediterranean Agronomic Studies (CIHEAM), Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
  28. Khadari B, Grout C, Santoni S, Kjellberg F (2005) Contrasted genetic diversity and differentiation among Mediterranean populations of Ficus Carica L.: a study using mtDNA RFLP. Genet Resour Crop Evol 52(1):97–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Khadivi A, Anjam R, Anjam K (2018) Morphological and pomological characterization of edible fig (Ficus Carica L.) to select the superior trees. Sci Hortic 238:66–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mahdavian M, Lessani H, Kuhi M, Zare H, Krami M, Tabatabei Z (2006) Assessment of genetic diversity among different fig (Ficus Carica L.) collection from Iran. Acta Hortic 760:29–37Google Scholar
  31. Mars M, Chebli T, Marrakchi M (1998) Multivariate analysis of fig (Ficus Carica L.) germplasm in southern Tunisia. Acta Hortic 480:75–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Messaoudi Z, Haddadi L (2005) Morphological and chemical characterization of fourteen fig trees cultivated in Oulmes area, Morocco. Acta Hortic 798:83–86Google Scholar
  33. Norman PE, Tongoona P, Shanahan PE (2011) Determination of interrelationships among agr-morphological traits of yams (Discorea spp.) using correrlation and factor analyses. J Appl Biosci 45:3059–3070Google Scholar
  34. Papadopoulou K, Ehaliotis C, Tourna M, Kastani P, Karydis I, Zervakis G (2002) Genetic relatedness among diocious Ficus Carica L. cultivars by random amplified polymorphic DNA analysis, and evaluation of agronomic and morphological characters. Genetica 114(2):183–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pereira C, López Corrales M, Martín A, Villalobos MDC, Córdoba MDG, Serradilla MJ (2017) Physicochemical and nutritional characterization of brebas for fresh consumption from nine fig varieties (Ficus Carica L.) grown in Extremadura (Spain). J Food Qual.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/6302109 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Podgornik M, Vuk I, Vrhovnik I, Bandelj D (2010) Scientia Horticulturae A survey and morphological evaluation of fig (Ficus Carica L.) genetic resources from Slovenia. Sci Hortic 125(3):380–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Polat AA, Çalışkan O (2017) Correlations among important fruit quality and plant characteristics of some fig genotypes. J Life Sci 11:141–144Google Scholar
  38. Pourghayoumi M, Bakhshi D, Rahemi M, Noroozisharaf A, Jafari M, Salehi M, Chamane R, Hernandez F (2017) Phytochemical attributes of some dried fig (Ficus Carica L.) fruit cultivars grown in Iran. Agric Conspec Sci 81(3):161–166Google Scholar
  39. Rodolfi M, Ganino T, Chiancone B, Petruccelli R (2018) Identification and characterization of Italian common figs (Ficus carica) using nuclear microsatellite markers. Genet Resour Crop Evol 65(5):1337–1348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rodov V, Vinokur Y, Horev B (2012) Brief postharvest exposure to pulsed light stimulates coloration and anthocyanin accumulation in fig fruit (Ficus Carica L.). Postharvest Biol Tec 68:43–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Rodrigues MGF, Monteiro LNH, Flà A, Dos Santos TP, Pavan BE, Conceiã A (2018) Genetic variability in morphological characters among Fig tree accessions Fig genetic conservation. Genet Mol Res 17(4):1Google Scholar
  42. Saddoud O, Baraket G, Chatti K (2011) Using morphological characters and simple sequence repeat (SSR) Markers to characterize Tunisian fig (Ficus Carica L.) cultivars. Acta Biol Cracov Ser Bot 53(2):7–14Google Scholar
  43. Sanches J, Melgarejo P, Hemandz F, Martienz JJ (2002) Chemical and morphological characterization of four fig tree cultivars (Ficus carica L.) grown under similar culture conditions. Acta Hortic 605:33–36Google Scholar
  44. Sedaghat S, Rahemi M (2018) Effects of physio-chemical changes during fruit development on nutritional quality of fig (Ficus Carica L. var. ‘Sabz’) under rain-fed condition. Sci Hortic 237:44–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Tsantili E, Shin Y, Nock JF, Watkins CB (2010) Antioxidant concentrations during chilling injury development in peaches. Postharvest Biol Tech 57(1):27–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Veberic R, Mikulic-Petkovsek M (2016) Phytochemical composition of common fig (Ficus Carica L.) cultivars. In: Preddy S (ed) Nutritional composition of fruit cultivars. American Press, UK, pp 235–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Viuda-Martos M, Barber X, Pérez-Álvarez JA, Fernández-López J (2015) Assessment of chemical, physico-chemical, techno-functional and antioxidant properties of fig (Ficus Carica L.) powder co-products. Ind Crop Prod 69:472–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wang Z, Cui Y, Vainstein A, Chen S, Ma H (2017) Regulation of fig (Ficus Carica L.) fruit color: metabolomic and transcriptomic analyses of the flavonoid biosynthetic pathway. Front Plant Sci 8:1990CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zohary D, Hopf M, Weiss E (2012) Domestication of Plants in the Old World: the origin and spread of domesticated plants in Southwest Asia, Europe, and the Mediterranean Basin. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Institute for Agricultural Research (INRA)MeknesMorocco
  2. 2.Laboratory of Bioprocess and Bio-Interfaces, Faculty of Science and TechnicsBeni-MellalMorocco
  3. 3.National School of Agriculture (ENA)MeknesMorocco

Personalised recommendations