Advertisement

Molecular Breeding

, Volume 25, Issue 3, pp 501–516 | Cite as

Detection of somaclonal variation during cocoa somatic embryogenesis characterised using cleaved amplified polymorphic sequence and the new freeware Artbio

  • Carlos M. Rodríguez LópezEmail author
  • Hector Sicilia Bravo
  • Andrew C. Wetten
  • Michael J. Wilkinson
Article

Abstract

The scarcity and stochastic nature of genetic mutations presents a significant challenge for scientists seeking to characterise de novo mutation frequency at specific loci. Such mutations can be particularly numerous during regeneration of plants from in vitro culture and can undermine the value of germplasm conservation efforts. We used cleaved amplified polymorphic sequence (CAPS) analysis to characterise new mutations amongst a clonal population of cocoa plants regenerated via a somatic embryogenesis protocol used previously for cocoa cryopreservation. Efficacy of the CAPS system for mutation detection was greatly improved after an ‘a priori’ in silico screen of reference target sequences for actual and potential restriction enzyme recognition sites using a new freely available software called Artbio. Artbio surveys known sequences for existing restriction enzyme recognition sites but also identifies all single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) deviations from such motifs. Using this software, we performed an in silico screen of seven loci for restriction sites and their potential mutant SNP variants that were possible from 21 restriction enzymes. The four most informative locus-enzyme combinations were then used to survey the regenerant populations for de novo mutants. We characterised the pattern of point mutations and, using the outputs of Artbio, calculated the ratio of base substitution in 114 somatic embryo-derived cocoa regenerants originating from two explant genotypes. We found 49 polymorphisms, comprising 26.3% of the samples screened, with an inferred rate of 2.8 × 10−3 substitutions/screened base. This elevated rate is of a similar order of magnitude to previous reports of de novo microsatellite length mutations arising in the crop and suggests caution should be exercised when applying somatic embryogenesis for the conservation of plant germplasm.

Keywords

Artbio Somaclonal variation SNPs CAPS PCR–RFLP Theobroma cacao 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Cocoa Research UK for funding this study.

Supplementary material

11032_2009_9348_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (15 kb)
(PDF 15 kb)
11032_2009_9348_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (73 kb)
(PDF 73 kb)

References

  1. Albani MC, Wilkinson MJ (1998) Inter simple sequence repeat polymerase chain reaction for the detection of somaclonal variation. Plant Breed 117:573–575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bala A, Murphy P, Giller KE (2003) Distribution and diversity of rhizobia nodulating agroforestry legumes in soils from three continents in the tropics. Mol Ecol 12:917–930CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Blondon F, Marie D, Brown S, Kondorosi A (1994) Genome size and base composition in Medicago sativa and M. Truncatula species. Plant Genet Breed 37(2):264–270Google Scholar
  4. Bouman H, De Klerk GJ (2001) Measurement of the extent of somaclonal variation in begonia plants regenerated under various conditions. Comparison of three assays. Theor Appl Genet 102:111–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Britt BA (1999) Molecular genetics of DNA repair in higher plants. Trends Plant Sci 4:20–22CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Chan TA, Hermekin H, Lengauer C, Kinzler KW, Vogelstein B (1999) 14–3-3 is required to prevent mitotic catastrophe after DNA damage. Nature 401:616–620CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Charters YM (2000) The potential of anchored microsatellite analysis for cocoa germplasm characterization. PhD thesis, School of Plant Sciences, Reading UniversityGoogle Scholar
  8. Cheng KC, Cahill SD, Kasai H, Nishimura S, Loeb LA (1992) 8-Hydroxyguanine, an abundant form of oxidative DNA damage, causes G-T and A-C substitutions. J Biol Chem 267(1):166–172PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Clegg MT, Gaus BS, Learn GH, Morton BR (1994) Rates and patterns of chloroplast DNA evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91:6795–6801CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Cotton RGH (1997) Mutation detection. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  11. Dahl F, Stenberg J, Fredriksson S, Welch K, Zhang M, Nilsson M, Bicknell D, Bodmer WF, Davis RW, Ji H (2007) Multigene amplification and massively parallel sequencing for cancer mutation discovery. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104(22):9387–9392CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Devos KM, Beales J, Ogihara Y, Doust AN (2005) Comparative sequence analysis of the Phytochrome C Gene and its upstream region in allohexaploid wheat reveals new data on the evolution of its three constituent genomes. Plant Mol Biol 58(5):625–641CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Fang JY, Wetten A, Hadley P (2004) Cryopreservation of cocoa (Theobroma cacao L.) somatic embryos for long-term germplasm storage. Plant Sci 166(3):669–675CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gautier C (2000) Compositional bias in DNA. Curr Opin Genet Dev 10:656–661CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. González-Martínez SC, Wheeler NC, Ersoz E, Nelson CD, Neale DB (2007) Association genetics in Pinus taeda L. I. Wood Property Traits. Genetics 175:399–409CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Graur D, Li WH (2000) Fundamentals of molecular evolution. Sinauer, SunderlandGoogle Scholar
  17. GuhaMajumdar M, Sears BB (2005) Chloroplast DNA base substitutions: an experimental assessment. Mol Gen Genomics 273:177–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jin N, Chow CY, Liu L, Zolov SN, Bronson R, Davisson M, Petersen JL, Zhang Y, Park S, Duex JE, Goldowitz D, Meisler MH, Weisman LS (2008) VAC14 nucleates a protein complex essential for the acute interconversion of PI3P and PI(3, 5)P2 in yeast and mouse. EMBO J 27(24):3221–3234CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Joyce SM, Cassells AC, Jain SM (2003) Stress and aberrant phenotypes in in vitro culture. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 74:103–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kaeppler SM, Phillips RL, Olhoft P (1998) Molecular basis of heritable tissue culture-induced variation in plants. Current plant science and biotechnology in agriculture. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  21. Karling S, Burge C, Campbell AM (1992) Statistical analyses of counts and distributions of restriction sites in DNA sequences. Nucl Acids Res 20:1363–1370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kimura M (1980) A simple method for estimating evolutionary rates of base substitutions through comparative studies of nucleotide sequences. J Mol Evol 16(2):111–120CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Kohler SW, Provost GS, Fieck A, Kretz PL, Bullock WO, Sorge JA, Putmant DL, Short JM (1991) Spectra of spontaneous and mutagen-induced mutations in the lacIgene in transgenic mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 88:7958–7962CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Lanaud C, Risterucci AM, Pieretti I, Falque M, Bouet A, Lagoda PJL (1999) Isolation and characterization of microsatellites in Theobroma cacao L. Mol Ecol 8:2141–2143CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Li Z, Traore A, Maximova SN, Gupta PK (1998) Somatic embryogenesis and plant regeneration from floral explants of cocoa (Theobroma cacao L.) using thidiazuron. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant 34:293–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lopez-Baez O, Bollon H, Eskes A (1993) Embryogenèse somatique de cacaoyer Theobroma cacao L. à partir de pièces florales. C R Acad Sci Paris 316:579–584Google Scholar
  27. Maki H (2002) Origins of spontaneous mutations: specificity and directionality of base-substitution, frameshift, and sequence-substitution mutageneses. Annu Rev Genet 36:279–303CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Marie D, Brown SC (1993) A cytometric exercise in plant DNA histograms, with 2C values for 70 species. Biol Cell 78:41–51CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Noro Y, Takano-Shimizu T, Syono K, Kishima Y, Sano Y (2007) Genetic variations in rice in vitro cultures at the EPSPs-RPS20 region. Theor Appl Genet 114(4):705–711CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Oh TJ, Cullis MA, Kunert K, Engelborghs I, Swennen R, Cullis CA (2007) Genomic changes associated with somaclonal variation in banana (Musa spp.). Physiol Plant 129(4):766–774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Paton NW, Khan SA, Hayes A, Moussouni F, Brass A, Eilbeck K, Goble CA, Hubbard SJ (2000) Conceptual modelling of genomic information. Bioinformatics 16(6):548–557CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Peschke VM, Phillips RL (1992) Genetic implications of somaclonal variation in plants. Adv Genet 13:41–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Phillips RL, Kaeppler SM, Olhoft P (1994) Genetic instability of plant tissue cultures: breakdown of normal controls. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91:5222–5226CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Piwnica-Worms H (1999) Fools in rush in. Nature 401:535–537CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Radman M (1999) Enzymes of evolutionary change. Nature 401:866–869CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Risterucci AM, Grivet L, N’Goran J, Pieretti I, Flament MH, Lanaud C (2000) A high density linkage map of Theobroma cacao L. Theor Appl Genet 101:948–955CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rodríguez López CM, Wetten AC, Wilkinson MJ (2004) Detection and quantification of in vitro-culture induced chimerism using simple sequence repeats (SSR) analysis in Theobroma cacao (L.). Theor Appl Genet 110:157–166CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Rognes T, Seeberg E (1998) SALSA: improved protein database searching by a new algorithm for assembly of sequence fragments into gapped alignments. Bioinformatics 14:839–845CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Sagot M-F, Wakabayashi Y (2003) Pattern inference under many guises. In: Reed BA, Sales CL (eds) Recent advances in algorithms and combinatorics. Springer, New York, pp 245–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sahasrabudhe SR, Luo X, Humayun MZ (1991) Specificity of base substitutions induced by the acridine mutagen ICR-191: mispairing by guanine N7 adducts as a mutagenic mechanism. Genetics 119:981–989Google Scholar
  41. Sawa S, Ito T, Okada K (1997) A rapid method for detection of single base changes in Arabidopsis thaliana using the polymerase chain reaction. Plant Mol Biol Reporter 15:179–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Thomas RK, Nickerson E, Simons JF, Jänne PA, Tengs T, Yuza Y, Garraway LA, LaFramboise T, Lee JC, Shah K, O’Neill K, Sasaki H, Lindeman N, Wong K-K, Borras AM, Gutmann EJ, Dragnev KH, DeBiasi R, Chen T-H, Glatt KA, Greulich H, Desany B, Lubeski CK, Brockman W, Alvarez P, Hutchison SK, Leamon JH, Ronan MT, Turenchalk GS, Egholm M, Sellers WR, Rothberg JM, Meyerson M (2006) Sensitive mutation detection in heterogeneous cancer specimens by massively parallel picoliter reactor sequencing. Nature Med 12:852–855CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Thomas RK, Baker AC, Debiasi RM, Winckler W, Laframboise T, Lin WM, Wang M, Feng W, Zander T, Macconnaill LE, Lee JC, Nicoletti R, Hatton C, Goyette M, Girard L, Majmudar K, Ziaugra L, Wong KK, Gabriel S, Beroukhim R, Peyton M, Barretina J, Dutt A, Emery C (2007) High-throughput oncogene mutation profiling in human cancer. Nature Genet 39:347–351CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Traore A, Maximova SN, Guiltinan MJ (2003) Micropropagation of Theobroma cacao L. using somatic embryo-derived plants. In vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant 39:332–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Vettori C, Vendramin GG, Anzidei M, Pastorelli R, Paffetti D, Glannini R (2004) Geographic distribution of chloroplast variation in Italian populations of beech (Fagus sylvatica L.). Theor Appl Genet 109:1–9CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Wang D, Kreutzer DA, Essigmann JM (1998) Mutagenicity and repair of oxidative DNA damage: insights from studies using defined lesions. Mutat Res 400(1–2):99–115PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Whittaker JC, Harbord RM, Boxall N, Mackay I, Dawson G, Sibly RM (2003) Likelihood-based estimation of microsatellite mutation rates. Genetics 164:781–787PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Wolfe KH, Sharp PM, Wen-Hsiung L (1987) Rates of nucleotide substitutions vary greatly among plant mitochondrial, chloroplast and nuclear DNAs. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 84:9054–9058CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Wolfe KH, Sharp PM, Wen-Hsiung L (1989) Rates of synonymous substitutions in plant nuclear genes. Mol Evol 29:208–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Yu J, Buckler ES (2006) Genetic association mapping and genome organization of maize. Curr Opin Biotech 17(2):155–160PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Zakeri S, Mehrizi AA, Djadid ND, Snounou G (2006) Circumsporozoite protein gene diversity among temperate and tropical Plasmodium vivax isolates from Iran. Trop Med Int Health 11(5):729–737CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Zoldos V, Papes D, Brown SC, Panaud O, Siljak-Yakovlev S (1998) Genome size and base composition of seven Quercus species: inter- and intra-population. Genome 41:162–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carlos M. Rodríguez López
    • 2
    Email author
  • Hector Sicilia Bravo
    • 3
  • Andrew C. Wetten
    • 1
  • Michael J. Wilkinson
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Biological SciencesReading UniversityWhiteknights, ReadingUK
  2. 2.Institute of Biological Environmental and Rural SciencesAberystwyth UniversityPenglais, CeredigionUK
  3. 3.Fundación de Estudios PortuariosS/C de TenerifeSpain

Personalised recommendations