, Volume 24, Issue 5, pp 855–864 | Cite as

Single primer amplification reaction (SPAR) reveals intra-specific natural variation in Prosopis cineraria (L.) Druce

  • Santosh Kumar Sharma
  • Deepika Rawat
  • Shrawan Kumar
  • Arun Kumar
  • Suman Kumaria
  • Rama Rao SatyawadaEmail author
Original Paper


Prosopis cineraria, an important multipurpose tree and vital component of the otherwise fragile ecosystem of arid and semiarid regions of India. It is highly drought tolerant and sprouts profusely during the extreme dry summer months when most other trees are leafless. P. cineraria is known to exhibit comparable genetic variations at intra-specific and inter-population levels reflected through morphological and cytogenetical diversity in regions, where this plant grows naturally. In the present study, single primer amplification reaction (SPAR) methods have been used for determination of diversity at DNA level in 30 accessions of P. cineraria collected from different districts of Rajasthan. The analyses include the use of six minisatellite core sequence primers for direct amplification of minisatellite DNA (DAMD), eight inter simple sequence repeats (ISSR) and 20 arbitrary primed decamer sequences for random amplification (RAPD) reactions. Upon analysis of the data generated, all the three SPAR methods, either independently and/or in combination, revealed wide range of genetic variation among accessions. Comparison of matrix of individual SPAR method using MxComp component of NTSYS-pc 2.02 K software proving that analysis of natural genetic variation using combination of SPAR methods particularly ISSR and DAMD, rather than an isolated approach, is very effective. Such an approach also yields better information and reflection of the relatedness and affinities at intra-species and inter-population levels. Therefore, it is opined that in order to reveal the intrinsic intra-specific variation, SPAR approaches involving more than one DNA marker may reveal more authentic genetic variation in tropical tree species like P. cineraria.


RAPD ISSR DAMD NJ tree Clustering 


  1. Arya S, Bisht RP, Tomar R, Toky OP, Harris PJC (1995) Genetic variation in minerals, crude protein and structural carbohydrates of foliage in provenances of young plants of Prosopis cineraria (L.) Druce in India. Agrofor Syst 29:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bhandari MM (1978) Flora of the Indian desert. Scientific Publishers, JodhpurGoogle Scholar
  3. Bhattacharya E, Dandin SB, Ranade SA (2005) Single primer amplification methods reveal exotic and indigenous mulberry varieties are similarly diverse. J Biosci 30:669–677CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bhattacharya E, Ranade SA (2001) RAPD and DAMD profile differences amongst mulberry varieties. BMC Plant Biol 1:3 (
  5. Burdak LR (1982) Recent advances in desert afforestation. Dissertation submitted to Shri R.N. Kaul, Director, Forestry Research, F.R.I., Dehra DunGoogle Scholar
  6. Burkart A (1976) A monograph of the genus Prosopis (Leguminosae, Subfamily Mimosoideae). J Arnold Arbor 57:219–249Google Scholar
  7. Ferreyra LI, Bessega C, Vilardi JC, Saidman BO (2004) First report on RAPDs patterns able to differentiate some Argentinean species of section Algarobia (Prosopis, Leguminosae). Genetica 121:33–42CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Ferreyra LI, Bessega C, Vilardi JC, Saidman BO (2007) Consistency of population genetics parameters estimated from isozyme and RAPDs dataset in species of genus Prosopis (Leguminosae, Mimosoideae). Genetica 131:217–230CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Gates PJ, Brown K (1988) Acacia tortilis and Prosopis cineraria: leguminous trees for and areas. Outlook Agric 17:61–64Google Scholar
  10. Goswami M, Ranade SA (1999) Analysis of variations in RAPD profiles among accessions of Prosopis. J Genet 78:141–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gupta M, Chyi YS, Romero-Severson J, Owen JL (1994) Amplification of DNA markers from evolutionarily diverse genomes using single primers of SSRs. Theor Appl Genet 89:998–1006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Heath DD, Iwana GK, Delvin RH (1993) PCR primed with VNTR core sequences yield species specific patterns and hypervariable probes. Nucleic Acids Res 21:5782–5785CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Hickey A, Singer GAC (2004) Genomic and proteomic adaptations to growth at high temperature. Genome Biol 5:117CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Hunziker JH, Saidman BO, Naranjo CA, Palacois RA, Poggio L, Burghardt AD (1986) Hybridization and genetic variation of Argentine species of Prosopis. For Ecol Manage 16:301–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jaccard P (1901) Etude comparative de la distribution orale dans une portion des Alpes et des Jura. Bull Soc Vaudoise Sci Nat 37:547–579Google Scholar
  16. Kaul RN (1967) Trees or grass lands in the Rajasthan—old problems and new approaches. Indian For 93:434–435Google Scholar
  17. Lamarque AL, Maestri DM, Grosso NR, Zygadlo JA, Guzman CA (1994) Proximate composition and seed lipid components of some Prosopis (Leguminosae) from Argentina. J Sci Food Agric 66:323–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Leakey RB, Last FT (1980) Biology and potential of Prosopis species in arid environment with particular reference to P. cineraria. J Arid Environ 3:9–24Google Scholar
  19. Mahoney D (1990) Trees of Somalia—a field guide for development workers. Oxfam/HDRA, Oxford, pp 133–136Google Scholar
  20. Mann HS, Shankarnarayan KA (1980) The role of Prosopis cineraria in an agropastoral system in Western Rajasthan. In: LeHouerou HN (ed) Browse in Africa. International Livestock Centre for Africa, Addis Ababa, pp 437–442Google Scholar
  21. Mertia RS, Prasad R, Kandpal BK, Narain P (2006) Regeneration of Lasiurus sindicus in relation to grazing pressure Rajasthan (India). Trop Grassl 40:40–44Google Scholar
  22. Murray HG, Thompson WF (1980) Rapid isolation of high molecular weight plant DNA. Nucleic Acids Res 8:4321–4325CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Naranjo CA, Poggio L, Zeiger SE (1984) Phenol chromatography, morphology and cytogenetics in three species and natural hybrids of Prosopis (Leguminosae, Mimisoideae). Plant Syst Evol 144:257–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Pant GB, Hingane LS (2006) Climatic changes in and around the Rajasthan desert during the 20th century. Int J Climatol 4:391–401Google Scholar
  25. Pavlicek A, Hrda S, Flegr J (1999) FreeTree—freeware program for construction of phylogenetic trees on the basis of distance data and bootstrapping/jackknife analysis of the tree robustness. Application in the RAPD analysis of the genus Frenkelia. Folia Biol (Praha.) 4:597–599Google Scholar
  26. Ranade SA, Farooqui N (2002) Assessment of profile variations amongst provenances of neem using single-primer amplification reaction (SPAR) methods. Mol Biol Today 3:1–10Google Scholar
  27. Ranade SA, Rana TS, Narzary D (2009) SPAR profile and genetic diversity amongst pomegranate (Punica granatum L.) genotypes. Physiol Mol Biol Plants 15:61–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rawat D, Kumar A, Rao SR (2007) Studies on cytogenetical variation in Prosopis cineraria (Linn.) Druce—a key stone tree species of Indian desert. Silvae Genet 56:184–189Google Scholar
  29. Sahni KC (1998) The book of Indian trees. Bombay natural history society, MumbaiGoogle Scholar
  30. Saidman BO, Vilardi JC (1987) Analysis of genetic similarities among seven species of Prosopis Leguminosae: Mimosoideae. Theor Appl Genet 75:109–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Saxena S, Chandra R, Srivastava AP, Mishra M, Pathak RK, Ranade SA (2005) Analysis of genetic diversity among papaya cultivars using Single Primer Amplification Reaction (SPAR) methods. J Hortic Sci Biotechnol 80:291–296Google Scholar
  32. Sinha BC (2001) Book of state animal, bird, tree and flower of India. Wildlife Institute of India, Dehra Dun, p 24Google Scholar
  33. Srivastava AP, Chandra R, Ranade SA (2005) Applicability of PCR based molecular markers for parentage analysis of three commercial mango hybrids. Indian J Plant Breed Genet 64:275–280Google Scholar
  34. Srivastava AP, Chandra R, Saxena S, Rajan S, Ranade SA, Prasad V (2007) A PCR-based assessment of genetic diversity, and parentage analysis among commercial mango cultivars and hybrids. J Hortic Sci Biotech 82:951–959Google Scholar
  35. Strelchenko P, Kovalyova O, Okuno K (1999) Genetic differentiation and geographical distribution of Barley Germplasm based on RAPD markers. Genet Resour Crop Evol 46:193–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Trivedi S (2003) Do microsatellites have biased associations. Nucleus 46:61–76Google Scholar
  37. Welsh J, McClelland M (1990) Fingerprinting genomes using PCR with arbitrary primers. Nucleic Acids Res 18:7213–7218CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Williams JGK, Kubelik AR, Livak KJ, Rafalski JA, Tingey SV (1990) DNA polymorphisms amplified by arbitrary primers are useful as genetic markers. Nucl Acids Res 18:6531–6535CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Wood HM, Grahame JW, Humphray S, Rogers J, Butlin RK (2008) Sequence differentiation in regions identified by a genome scan for local adaptation. Mol Ecol 17:3123–3135CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Santosh Kumar Sharma
    • 1
  • Deepika Rawat
    • 3
  • Shrawan Kumar
    • 2
  • Arun Kumar
    • 3
    • 4
  • Suman Kumaria
    • 2
  • Rama Rao Satyawada
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Biotechnology and BioinformaticsNorth Eastern Hill UniversityShillongIndia
  2. 2.Department of Botany (Centre for Advanced Studies)North Eastern Hill UniversityShillongIndia
  3. 3.Cytogenetics and Molecular Biology Laboratory, Department of BotanyJai Narain Vyas UniversityJodhpurIndia
  4. 4.Directorate of Rapeseed-Mustard ResearchIndian Council of Agriculture ResearchBharatpurIndia

Personalised recommendations