Abstract
In this study, the level of genetic variation in the phenotypic traits of 215 sugar beet germplasm resources was evaluated by correlation analysis, principal component analysis and cluster analysis. The genetic diversity of the descriptive traits showed the highest growth potential index (1.423) and the lowest graininess index (0.176). Among the quantitative traits, the coefficient of variation was the highest for α-N content (78.226%) and the lowest for seed set (17.995%). Correlation analysis showed that there were extremely negative correlations between the number of leaves and the 100-seedling weight and sugar content. In terms of belowground traits, the root yield exhibited extremely significantly positive relationship with sugar yield, potassium content and α-N content. Principal component analysis of ten quantitative traits showed that the cumulative contribution of the first four principal components was 71.325%. These principal components included sugar yield, sugar content, leaf number and ring number per vascular bundle. The 215 germplasm resources were divided into four groups by cluster analysis. Group II and Group III could be used for breeding new varieties of energy beet, fodder beet or sugar beet, and Group IV members could be used for germplasm resource development and breeding. Overall, these results provide a theoretical basis for the selection, utilization and breeding of sugar beet germplasm resources.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abou-Elwafa, S.F., A.E.A. Amin, and I. Eujayl. 2020. Genetic diversity of sugar beet under heat stress and deficit irrigation. Agronomy Journal 112(5): 3579–3590. https://doi.org/10.1002/agj2.20356.
Ambati, D., R.M. Phuke, V. Vani, S.V. Sai Prasad, J.B. Singh, C.P. Patidar, P. Malviya, A. Gautam, and V.G. Dubey. 2020. Assessment of genetic diversity and development of core germplasm in durum wheat using agronomic and grain quality traits. Cereal Research Communications 48: 375–382. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42976-020-00050-z.
Archak, S., R.K. Tyagi, P.N. Harer, L.B. Mahase, N. Singh, O.P. Dahiya, M.A. Nizar, M. Singh, V. Tilekar, V. Kumar, M. Dutta, N.P. Singh, and K.C. Bansal. 2016. Characterization of chickpea germplasm conserved in the Indian National Genebank and development of a core set using qualitative and quantitative trait data. The Crop Journal 4(5): 417–424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cj.2016.06.013.
Bedeian, A.G., and K.W. Mossholder. 2000. On the use of the coefficient of variation as a measure of diversity. Organizational Research Methods 3(3): 285–297. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442810033005.
Cui, P. 2006. Descriptors and date standard for beet (Beta vulgaris L.). Beijing: China Agriculture Press.
Duraisam, R., K. Salelgn, and A.K. Berekete. 2017. Production of beet sugar and bio-ethanol from sugar beet and it bagasse: A review. International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT) 43(4): 222–233. https://doi.org/10.14445/22315381/IJETT-V43P237.
Evans, E., and U. Messerschmidt. 2017. Review: Sugar beets as a substitute for grain for lactating dairy cattle. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology 8: 25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40104-017-0154-8.
Evgenidis, G., E. Traka-Mavrona, and M. Koutsika-Sotiriou. 2011. Principal component and cluster analysis as a tool in the assessment of tomato hybrids and cultivars. International Journal of Agronomy. https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/697879.
Fugate, K.K., L.G. Campbell, G. Covarrubias-Pazaran, L. Rodriguez-Bonilla, and J. Zalapa. 2019. Genetic differentiation and diversity of sugarbeet germplasm resistant to the sugarbeet root maggot. Plant Genetic Resources 17(6): 514–521. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1479262119000388.
Gai, J., Y.-M. Zhang, and J. Wang. 2003. Genetic system of quantitative traits in plants. Beijing: China Science Press.
Götze, P., J. Rücknagel, M. Wensch-Dorendorf, B. Märländer, and O. Christen. 2017. Crop rotation effects on yield, technological quality and yield stability of sugar beet after 45 trial years. European Journal of Agronomy 82: 50–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2016.10.003.
Guo, Y.Y., S.M. Zhou, Z.D. Chen, and W. Jiang. 2018. Identification evaluation and genetic diversity analysis of local cucumber varieties in Guangxi. Southern Journal of Agriculture 49(7): 1273–1281. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.2095-1191.2018.07.03.
Lee, H.Y., N.Y. Ro, H.J. Jeong, J.K. Kwon, J. Jo, Y. Ha, A. Jung, J.W. Han, J. Venkatesh, and B.C. Kang. 2016. Genetic diversity and population structure analysis to construct a core collection from a large Capsicum germplasm. BMC Genetics 17(1): 142. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12863-016-0452-8.
Li, J., B. Schulz, and B. Stich. 2010. Population structure and genetic diversity in elite sugar beet germplasm investigated with SSR markers. Euphytica 175(1): 35–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-010-0161-8.
Li, J., A.K. Lühmann, K. Weißleder, and B. Stich. 2011. Genome-wide distribution of genetic diversity and linkage disequilibrium in elite sugar beet germplasm. BMC Genomics 12: 484. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-12-484.
Mahmoodi, R., M.R. Dadpour, D. Hassani, M. Zeinalabedini, E. Vendramin, and C.A. Leslie. 2021. Composite core set construction and diversity analysis of Iranian walnut germplasm using molecular markers and phenotypic traits. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0248623.
Mai, T.T.P., C.M. Hardner, M.M. Alam, R.J. Henry, and B.L. Topp. 2021. Phenotypic characterisation for growth and nut characteristics revealed the extent of genetic diversity in wild macadamia germplasm. Agriculture 11: 680. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11070680.
Maji, A.T., and A.A. Shaibu. 2012. Application of principal component analysis for rice germplasm characterization and evaluation. Journal of Plant Breeding and Crop Science 4(6): 87–93. https://doi.org/10.5897/JPBCS11.093.
Odong, T.L., J. Heerwaarden, J. Jansen, T.J.L. Hintum, and F.A. Eeuwijk. 2011. Determination of genetic structure of germplasm collections: Are traditional hierarchical clustering methods appropriate for molecular marker data? Theoretical and Applied Genetics 123(2): 195–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00122-011-1576-x.
Ortiz-Burgos, S. 2016. Shannon-Weaver Diversity Index. In Encyclopedia of estuaries. Encyclopedia of Earth sciences series, ed. M.J. Kennish. Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8801-4_233.
Peng, Y., G. Wang, F. Cao, and F.-F. Fu. 2020. Collection and evaluation of thirty-seven pomegranate germplasm resources. Applied Biological Chemistry 63: 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13765-020-00497-y.
Placide, R., H. Shimelis, M. Lain, D. Gahakwa. 2015. Application of principal component analysis to yield and yield related traits to identify sweet potato breeding parents. Journal of Tropical Agriculture 92(1): 1–15.
Ramanatha Rao, V., and T. Hodgkin. 2002. Genetic diversity and conservation and utilization of plant genetic resources. Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture 68: 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013359015812.
Saccomani, M., P. Stevanato, M. Cagnin, G. Fama, M.D. Biaggi, and E. Biancardi. 2005. Genetic diversity for root morpho-physiological traits and productivity in sugar beet. In 33rd Biennial meeting of American Society of Sugarbeet Technologist.
Shannon, C.E., W. Weaver, R.E. Blahut, and B. Hajek. 1949. The mathematical theory of communication, 3–14. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Sinha, S., and N. Kumaravadivel. 2016. Understanding genetic diversity of sorghum using quantitative traits. Scientifica 2016: 3075023. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/3075023.
Srivastava, S., A.D. Pathak, R. Kumar, and B.B. Joshi. 2017. Genetic diversity of sugar beet genotypes evaluated by microsatellite DNA markers. Journal of Environmental Biology 38(5): 777.
Taški-Ajduković, K., N. Nagl, Ž Ćurčić, and M. Zorić. 2017. Estimation of genetic diversity and relationship in sugar beet pollinators based on SSR markers. Electronic Journal of Biotechnology 27: 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejbt.2017.02.001.
Tomaszewska, J., D. Bieliński, M. Binczarski, J. Berlowska, P. Dziugan, J. Piotrowski, A. Stanishevsky, and I.A. Witońska. 2018. Products of sugar beet processing as raw materials for chemicals and biodegradable polymers. RSC Advances 8: 3161–3177. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7RA12782K.
Xi, Z.-Y., S.-H. Zhang, X.-H. Li, C.-X. Xie, M.-S. Li, Z.-F. Hao, D.-G. Zhang, Y.-H. Liang, L. Bai, and S.-H. Zhang. 2008. Identification and mapping of a novel sugarcane mosaic virus resistance gene in maize. Acta Agronomica Sinica 34(9): 1494–1499. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1875-2780(09)60002-X.
Zhang, Y.-F., G.-L. Li, X.-F. Wang, Y.-Q. Sun, and S.-Y. Zhang. 2017. Transcriptomic profiling of taproot growth and sucrose accumulation in sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) at different developmental stages. PLoS ONE 12(4): e0175454. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0175454.
Zhang, Z.Q., L. Wang, C. Bai, H.Z. Zhong, X.D. Li, and Z.J. Fu. 2019. Analysis of agronomic characters of 104 beet germplasm resources. Crops 3: 29–36. https://doi.org/10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2019.03.006.
Funding
This research was funded by the National Sugar Beet Germplasm Resources Platform (NCGRC-2021-017); the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Areas programme (19210157); the Identification, Evaluation, Cataloging and Warehousing of Sugar Beet Germplasm Resources programme (19210911); the Safe Preservation of Sugar Beet Germplasm Resources (19211031); the National sugar industry technology system project (CARS-170102); the Natural Science Foundation of Heilongjiang Province of China (LH2019C057); and the Scientific Research Foundation of the Higher Education Institutions of Heilongjiang Province (KJCX201920).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Liu, D., Wang, X., Li, W. et al. Genetic Diversity Analysis of the Phenotypic Traits of 215 Sugar Beet Germplasm Resources. Sugar Tech 24, 1790–1800 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12355-022-01120-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12355-022-01120-8