Advertisement

Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution

, Volume 56, Issue 6, pp 829–842 | Cite as

Genetic identity and relationships of Iranian apple (Malus × domestica Borkh.) cultivars and landraces, wild Malus species and representative old apple cultivars based on simple sequence repeat (SSR) marker analysis

  • Ali Gharghani
  • Zabihollah Zamani
  • Alireza Talaie
  • Nnadozie C. Oraguzie
  • Reza Fatahi
  • Hassan Hajnajari
  • Claudia Wiedow
  • Susan E. Gardiner
Research Article

Abstract

In order to shed light on the role of Iran in apple evolution and domestication, we chose to investigate the relationships of a collection of 159 accessions of wild and domesticated apples including Iranian indigenous apple cultivars and landraces, selected wild species, and old apple scion and rootstock cultivars from different parts of the world. The majority of the wild species belonged to M. sieversii, which is widely believed to be the main maternal wild ancestor of domestic apples, from Kazakhstan and M. orientalis, which is one of the probable minor ancestors of domestic apples, from Turkey and Russia located on the east and west of Iran, respectively. The accessions were assigned into six arbitrary populations for the purpose of generating information on genetic parameters. Nine simple sequence repeat (SSR) loci selected from previous studies in apple were screened over DNA extracted from all the accessions. Results showed that all SSR loci displayed a very high degree of polymorphism with 11–25 alleles per locus. In total, there were 153 alleles across all loci with an average of 17 alleles per locus. The SSR allelic data were then used for estimation of population genetic parameters, including genetic variation statistics, F-statistics, gene flow, genetic identity, genetic distance and then cluster analysis using POPGENE 1.32 software. The F-statistics and gene flow in particular, showed that there was more intra-population than between population variation. The genetic identity and genetic distance estimates, and the dendrogram generated from the un-weighted pair group arithmetic average (UPGMA) method of cluster analysis showed that the Iranian cultivars and landraces were more closely related to M. sieversii from Central Asia (east of Iran) and M. orientalis native to Turkey and Russia than to other accessions of Malus species. Also, the old apple cultivars from different parts of the world have a closer genetic relationship to M. sieversii, M. orientalis and the Iranian apples, than to other wild species. Based on these results, we suggest that the Iranian apples may occupy an intermediate position between the domesticated varieties and wild species. We propose that Iran could be one of the major players in apples’ domestication and transfer from Central Asia to the western countries.

Keywords

Apple rootstock cultivars Apple scion cultivars Genetic diversity Genetic relationship Iranian apples Malus spp M. orientalis M. sieversii Microsatellite 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank the Ministry of Science, Research and Technology of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the University of Tehran for financial assistance towards travel to and living costs in New Zealand. We also thank HortResearch New Zealand, in particular, the genome mapping laboratory in Palmerston North, for providing the facilities to do this research. We are grateful to Dr Phil. Forsline at the USDA-ARS, Plant Genetic Resource Unit, Cornell University, Geneva, NY, USA. for providing leaf samples from the wild Malus species and Hossein Gharaghani, a masterate student at the College of Agriculture, University of Tehran, for preparing and sending DNA samples from some Iranian accessions.

References

  1. Bruford MW, Ciofi C, Funk SM (1998) Characteristics of microsatellites. In: Karp A, Isaac PG, Ingram DS (eds) Molecular tools for screening Biodiversity. Chapman & Hall, London, pp 202–205Google Scholar
  2. Celton J-M, Tustin DS, Chagné D, and Gardiner SE (2008) Construction of a dense genetic linkage map for apple rootstocks using SSRs developed from Malus ESTs and Pyrus genomic sequences. Tree Genetics and Genomes Online First. doi  10.1007/s11295-008-0171-z
  3. Coart E, Vekemans X, Smulders MJM, Wagner I, Huylenbroeck J, Bockstaele E, Roldán-Ruiz I (2003) Genetic variation in the endangered wild apple (Malus sylvestris (L.) Mill.) in Belgium as revealed by amplified fragment length polymorphism and microsatellite markers. Mol Ecol 12:845–857. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-294X.2003.01778.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Coart E, Van Glabeke S, De Loose M, Larsen AS, Roldan-Ruiz I (2006) Chloroplast diversity in the genus Malus: new insights into the relationship between the European wild apple (Malus sylvestris (L.) Mill.) and the domesticated apple (Malus domestica Borkh.). Mol Ecol 15:2171–2182. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2006.02924.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Damyar S, Hassani D, Dastjerdi R, Hajnajari H, Zeinanloo AA, Fallahi E (2007) Evaluation of Iranian native apple cultivars and genotypes. J Food Agric Environ 5(3&4):207–211Google Scholar
  6. Dunemann F, Kahnau R, Schmidt H (1994) Genetic relationships in Malus evaluated by RAPD ‘fingerprinting’ of cultivars and wild species. Plant Breed 113:150–159. doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0523.1994.tb00717.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dzhangaliev AD (2003) The wild apple tree of Kazakhstan. Hortic Rev (Am Soc Hortic Sci) 29:63–371Google Scholar
  8. Forsline PL, Aldwinckle HS, Dickson EE, Luby JJ, Hokanson SC (2003) Collection, maintenance, characterization, and utilization of wild apples of central Asia. Hortic Rev (Am Soc Hortic Sci) 29:1–61Google Scholar
  9. Gardiner SE, Bassett HCM, Madie C, Noiton DAM (1996) Isozyme, random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD), restriction fragment-length polymorphism (RFLP) markers to deduce a putative parent for the ‘Braeburn’ apple. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 121:996–1001Google Scholar
  10. Hajnajari H (2006) Apple, In: National Fruit Cultivars Collections of Iran; Germplasm and Pomology. Agricultural Education Press, Tehran, IranGoogle Scholar
  11. Hamrick JL, Godt MJW (1990) Allozyme diversity in plant species. In: Brown AHD, Clegg MT, Kahler AL, Weir BS (eds) Plant population genetics, breeding, and genetic resources. Sinauer Assoc, Sunderland, Mass, pp 43–63Google Scholar
  12. Harris SA, Robinson JP, Juniper BE (2002) Genetic clues to the origin of the apple. Trends Genet 18:426–430. doi: 10.1016/S0168-9525(02)02689-6 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hokanson SC, Szewc-McFadden AK, Lamboy WF, McFerson JR (1998) Microsatellite (SSR) markers reveal genetic identities, genetic diversity and relationships in a Malus × domestica Borkh. core subset collection. Theor Appl Genet 97:671–683. doi: 10.1007/s001220050943 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Janick J (2005) The origins of fruits, fruit growing, and fruit breeding. Plant Breed Rev 25:255–320Google Scholar
  15. Janick J, Cummins JN, Brown SK, Hemmat M (1996) Apples. In: Janick J, Moore JN (eds) Fruit breeding: tree and tropical fruits. John Wiley & Sons, New york, pp 1–77Google Scholar
  16. Juniper BE (1999) Tracing the origins of the Apple. St. Catherine’s College, Oxford, pp 20–23Google Scholar
  17. Kimura M, Crow JF (1964) The number of alleles that can be maintained in a finite population. Genetics 49:725–738PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Khoshbakht K, Hammer K (2006) Savadkouh (Iran) – an evolutionary centre for fruit trees and shrubs. Genet Resour Crop Evol 53:641–651. doi: 10.1007/s10722-005-7467-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lamboy WF, Yu J, Forsline PL, Weeden NF (1996) Partitioning of allozyme diversity in wild populations of Malus sieversii L. and implications for germplasm collection. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 121:982–987Google Scholar
  20. Larsen AS, Asmussen CB, Coart E, Olrik DC, Kjaer ED (2006) Hybridization and genetic variation in Danish populations of European crab apple (Malus sylvestris). Tree Genet Genomes 2:86–97. doi: 10.1007/s11295-005-0030-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Liebhard R, Gianfranceschi L, Koller B, Ryder CD, Tarchini R, van de Weg E, Gessler C (2002) Development and characterisation of 140 new microsatellites in apple (Malus × domestica Borkh.). Mol Breed 10:217–241. doi: 10.1023/A:1020525906332 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lowe A, Harris S, Ashton P (2004) Ecological genetics; design, analysis and application. Blackwell publishing, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  23. Lunde L (1988) The silk roads; a history. Aramco Services Company, print edition of Saudi Aramco World, vol 39, Number 4, 11–53Google Scholar
  24. Morgan J, Richards A (1993) The book of apples. Ebury Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  25. Nei M (1973) Analysis of gene diversity in subdivided populations. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 70:3321–3323. doi: 10.1073/pnas.70.12.3321 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nei M (1978) Estimation of average heterozygosity and genetic distance from a small number of individuals. Genetics 89:583–590PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Pereira-Lorenzo S, Ramos-Cabrer AM, Diaz-Hernandez MB (2007) Evaluation of genetic identity and variation of local apple cultivars (Malus × domestica Borkh.) from Spain using microsatellite markers. Genet Resour Crop Evol 54:405–420. doi: 10.1007/s10722-006-0003-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pigoloskaya NV, Yakubsky AU, Petroshfsky EP, Belnitsky AM, Estrviva LV (1965) History of Iran; from ancient time up to 18th century. Translated to Persian by Karim Keshavarz in 1965Google Scholar
  29. Ponomarenko V (1987) History of Malus domestica Borkh. origin and evolution. Bot J USSR 176:10–18 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  30. Ponomarenko V (1991) On a little known species Malus × asiatica (Rosaceae). Bot ZH 76:715–720 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  31. Rechinger KH (1963–2001) Flora Iranica, vol 152, Rosaceae, Akademische Druck- u. Verlagsanstalt, GrazGoogle Scholar
  32. Rehder A (1940) Manual of cultivated trees and shrubs. MacMillan, New York, NY, pp 389–399Google Scholar
  33. Robinson JP, Harris SA, Juniper BE (2001) Taxonomy of the genus Malus Mill. (Rosaceae) with emphasis on the cultivated apple, Malus domestica Borkh. Plant Syst Evol 226:35–58. doi: 10.1007/s006060170072 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shannon CE, Weaver W (1949) The mathematical theory of communication. University of Illinois Press, UrbanaGoogle Scholar
  35. Tian-Ming H, Xue-Sen C, Zheng X, Jiang-Sheng G, Pei-Jun L, Wen L, Qing L, Yan W (2007) Using SSR markers to determine the population genetic structure of wild apricot (Prunus armeniaca L.) in the Ily valley of West China. Genet Resour Crop Evol 54:563–572. doi: 10.1007/s10722-006-0013-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Vavilov NI (1926) Studies on the origin of cultivated plants. Tr Byuro Prikl Bot 16:139–245Google Scholar
  37. Wagner I, Weeden NF (2000) Isozymes in Malus sylvestris, Malus × domestica and in related Malus species. Acta Hortic 538:51–56Google Scholar
  38. Wright S (1978) Variability within and among natural populations, vol 4. The Univ. of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  39. Yeh FC, Yang RC, Boyle T (1997) POPGENE. CIFOR and University of Alberta, Canada Version 1.21Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ali Gharghani
    • 1
    • 2
  • Zabihollah Zamani
    • 1
  • Alireza Talaie
    • 1
  • Nnadozie C. Oraguzie
    • 3
  • Reza Fatahi
    • 1
  • Hassan Hajnajari
    • 4
  • Claudia Wiedow
    • 5
  • Susan E. Gardiner
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of Horticultural ScienceUniversity of TehranKarajIran
  2. 2.Department of Horticultural Sciences, Faculty of AgricultureUniversity of ShirazShirazIran
  3. 3.Department of Horticulture & Landscape Architecture, IARECWashington State UniversityProsserUSA
  4. 4.Horticulture DepartmentSeed and Plant Improvement Institute (SPII)KarajIran
  5. 5.The Horticulture and Food Research Institute of New Zealand Ltd (HortResearch)Palmerston NorthNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations