Advertisement

Vegetos

, Volume 32, Issue 1, pp 48–57 | Cite as

Analysis of genetic variation using ISSR and the development of SCAR marker in synthetic autotetraploids of Vigna mungo (L.) Hepper

  • Daniel Regie Wahlang
  • Wanfulmi Suchiang
  • Shailendra Goel
  • Satyawada Rama RaoEmail author
Research Articles
  • 5 Downloads

Abstract

Autopolyploidy is one of the foremost mechanisms by which additional numbers of genome copies are acquired resulting in genetic and evolutionary novelty to the organisms. As such, it is considered to be a pathway for adaptation and has played a significant role in plant speciation. Autopolyploids are characterized by increased genome flexibility, allowing them to adapt and persist across heterogeneous landscapes in the long run. Genomic redundancy and polysomic inheritance are the hallmarks of doubled genome(s). In view of the significance of autopolyploidy in plant evolution, plant breeding and crop improvement, we sought to investigate the genetic variation/s associated with genome multiplication by exploiting artificial somatic autopolyploids in Vigna mungo. ISSR was employed to detect and identify any genomic DNA variation in colchitetraploids of V. mungo of three different generations, viz. C0, C1 and C2, in comparison to their putative diploids plants. Our data suggests a random, ‘short-term’ rapid change of the genome that may have occurred immediately after polyploidization. The population of autopolyploids demonstrated some degree of genetic heterozygosity in comparison to their diploid counterparts. Further, a polymorphic ISSR DNA loci was identified among the colchitetraploids which was translated into SCAR marker for identification of colchitetraploids versus the putative diploids of V. mungo.

Keywords

Autopolyploidy Genetic variation DNA marker ISSR SCAR 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The present work was carried out in Plant Biotechnology Laboratory, Department of Biotechnology and Bioinformatics, North-Eastern Hill University, Shillong. The authors are thankful to Indian Institute of Pulses Research, Kanpur for providing the germplasm, Department of Biotechnology, Government of India and Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Government of India– National fellowship for Higher education of ST students’ scheme for financial assistance and fellowship grants. Sincere appreciations are also due to the members of Plant Biotechnology Laboratory, Department of Biotechnology and Bioinformatics, North-Eastern Hill University, Shillong for their constant help and encouragement.

References

  1. Barker MS, Arrigo N, Baniaga AE, Li Z, Levin DA (2016) On the relative abundance of autopolyploids and allopolyploids. New Phytol 210:391–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chen ZJ (2007) Genetic and epigenetic mechanisms for gene expression and phenotypic variation in plant polyploids. Annu Rev Plant Biol 58:377–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chen ZJ, Ni Z (2006) Mechanisms of genomic rearrangements and gene expression changes in plant polyploids. BioEssays 28:240–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Comai L (2005) The advantages and disadvantages of being polyploid. Nat Rev Genet 6:836–846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cronn RC, Small RL, Wendel JF (1999) Duplicated genes evolve independently after polyploid formation in cotton. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96:14406–14411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cunha CM, Hinz RH, Pereira A, Tcacenco FA, Paulino EC, Stadnik MJ (2015) A SCAR marker for identifying susceptibility to Fusariumoxysporum f. sp. cubense in banana. Sci Hortic 191:108–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dar TH, Raina SN, Goel S (2013) Molecular analysis of genomic changes in synthetic autotetraploidPhlox drummondii Hook. Biol J Linnean Soc 110:591–605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dar TH, Raina SN, Goel S (2017) Cytogenetic and molecular evidences revealing genomic changes after autopolyploidization: a case study of synthetic autotetraploidPhlox drummondii Hook. Physiol Mol Biol Pla 23:641–650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Das K, Ganie SH, Mangla Y, Chaudhary M, Thakur RK, Tandon R, Raina SN, Goel S (2017) ISSR markers for gender identification and genetic diagnosis of Hippophaerhamnoides ssp. turkestanica growing at high altitudes in Ladakh region (Jammu and Kashmir). Protoplasma 254:1063–1077CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gao R, Wang H, Dong B, Yang X, Chen S, Jiang J, Zhang Z, Liu C, Zhao N, Chen F (2016) Morphological, genome and gene expression changes in newly induced autopolyploid Chrysanthemum lavandulifolium (fisch. Ex trautv.) makino. Int J Mol Sci 17:1690–1702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hegarty MJ, Hiscock SJ (2008) Genomic clues to the evolutionary success of polyploid plants. Curr Biol 18:435–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jaccard P (1901) Étude comparative de la distribution floraledansune portion des Alpeset des Jura. Bull Soc Vaud Sci Nat 37:547–579Google Scholar
  13. Leitch IJ, Bennett MD (2004) Genome downsizing in polyploid plants. Biol J Linn Soc 82:651–663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Liu S, Yang Y, Wei F, Duan J, Braynen J, Tian B, Cao G, Shi G, Yuan J (2017) Autopolyploidy leads to rapid genomic changes in Arabidopsis thaliana. Theor Biosci 136:199–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mable BK, Beland J, Di Berardo C (2004) Inheritance and dominance of self-incompatibility alleles in polyploid Arabidopsis lyrata. Heredity 93:476–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Murray MG, Thompson WF (1980) Rapid isolation of high molecular weight plant DNA. Nucleic Acids Res 8:4321–4326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Otto SP (2007) The evolutionary consequences of polyploidy. Cell 131:452–462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Parisod C, Holderegger R, Brochmann C (2010) Evolutionary consequences of autopolyploidy. New Phytol 186:5–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Del Pozo JC, Ramirez-Parra E (2015) Whole genome duplications in plants: an overview from Arabidopsis. J Exp Bot 66:6991–7003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rajesh MK, Jerard BA, Preethi P, Thomas RJ, Fayas TP, Rachana KE, Karun A (2013) Development of a RAPD-derived SCAR marker associated with tall-type palm trait in coconut. Scientia Hortic 150:312–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rao SR, Raina SN (2005) Cytological evalutation of colchitetraploidy in moth bean (Vigna aconitifolia) and its allied species. J Arid Legume 2:389–396Google Scholar
  22. Reddy MP, Sarla N, Siddiq EA (2002) Inter simple sequence repeat (ISSR) polymorphism and its application in plant breeding. Euphytica 128:9–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rieseberg LH (2001) Polyploid evolution: keeping the peace at genomic reunions. Curr Biol 11:R925–928CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rohlf FJ (1998) NTSYSpc. Version 2.10p. Applied biostatistics, Setauket, NY 11733–2870, USA. Available from: https://www.exetersoftware.com/cat/ntsyspc/ntsyspc.html
  25. Sairkar PK, Sharma A, Shukla NP (2016) SCAR marker for identification and discrimination of Commiphora wightii and C. myrrha. Mol Biol Int 1:2.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/1482796 Google Scholar
  26. Sattler MC, Carvalho CR, Clarindo WR (2016) The polyploidy and its key role in plant breeding. Planta 243:281–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Soltis DE, Soltis PS (1999) Polyploidy: recurrent formation and genome evolution. Trends Ecol Evol 14:348–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Soltis PS, Soltis DE (2000) The role of genetic and genomic attributes in the success of polyploids. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97:7051–7057CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Soltis DE, Soltis PS, Rieseberg LH (1993) Molecular data and the dynamic nature of polyploidy. Crit Rev Plant Sci 12:243–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Spoelhof JP, Soltis PS, Soltis DE (2017) Pure polyploidy: closing the gaps in autopolyploid research. J Syst Evol 55:340–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Stupar RM, Bhaskar PB, Yandell BS, Rensink WA, Hart AL, Ouyang S, Veilleux RE, Busse JS, Erhardt RJ, Buell CR, Jiang J (2007) Phenotypic and transcriptomic changes associated with potato autopolyploidization. Genetics 176:2055–2067CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wang J, Tian L, Lee HS, Wei NE, Jiang H, Watson B, Madlung A, Osborn TC, Doerge RW, Comai L, Chen ZJ (2006) Genomewidenonadditive gene regulation in Arabidopsis allotetraploids. Genetics 172:507–517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wu M, Zhang JP, Wang JC, Yang XM, Gao AN, Zhang XK, Liu WH, Li LH (2010) Cloning and characterization of repetitive sequences and development of SCAR markers specific for the P genome of Agropyron cristatum. Euphytica 172:363–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Yu Z, Haage K, Strei VE, Gierl A, Torres Ruiz RA (2009) A large number of tetraploid Arabidopsis thaliana lines, generated by a rapid strategy, reveal high stability of neo-tetraploids during consecutive generations. Theor Appl Genet 118:1107–1119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Yuskianti V, Shiraishi S (2010) Sequence characterized amplified region (SCAR) markers in Sengon (Paraseriathes falcataria (L.) Nielsen. HAYATI J Biosci 17:167–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zhang X, Ma HX, Zhou YJ, Xing JC, Chen JH, Yu GH, Sun XB, Wang L (2014) Identification and genetic division of Fusarium graminearum and Fusarium asiaticum by species-specific SCAR markers. J Phytopathol 162:81–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Plant Research 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniel Regie Wahlang
    • 1
  • Wanfulmi Suchiang
    • 1
  • Shailendra Goel
    • 2
  • Satyawada Rama Rao
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Plant Biotechnology Laboratory, Department of Biotechnology and BioinformaticsNorth-Eastern Hill UniversityShillongIndia
  2. 2.Department of BotanyUniversity of DelhiDelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations