Advertisement

Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution

, Volume 51, Issue 6, pp 643–653 | Cite as

Relating Morphologic and RAPD Marker Varlation to Collection Site Environment in wild Populations of Red Clover (Trifolium Pratense L.)

  • S.L. Greene
  • M. Gritsenko
  • G. Vandemark
Article

Abstract

Although genotypic and phenotypic markers are used to describe genetic diversity, describing patterns of variationattributable to geographic differentiation is complex.We examined concordance between morphologic and RAPDmarker classification of 33 wild red clover populations collected from the Caucasus Mountains, Russia andcompared how morphologic and RAPD markers differed in their correspondence to collection site attributes.Wealso examined if wild red clover populations collected from sites located in areas more conducive to gene flow (i.e.adjacent to roads, or drainage systems) had the same concordance between morphologic and RAPD markers aspopulations collected from sites less conducive to gene flow.We measured 15 morphologic traits in a commongarden and carried out a Random Amplified Polymorphic DNA (RAPD) analysis. There was a significantdifference among the 33 populations for 14 out of 15 morphological traits. Morphology clustered the populationsinto classes that corresponded to three climate regimes. Classification schemes generated by morphologic andRAPD data did not coincide. Morphologic data corresponded with site data for populations collected at all sites.RAPD data corresponded to site data for only those populations collected at sites not conducive to gene flow. Apopulation's adaptation to collection site needs to be considered in using neutral markers to effectivelydiscriminating geographic differentiation.We discuss the practical lessons of this study on the effective collection,conservation and use of plant genetic resources.

Keywords

Gene Flow Genetic Resource Wild Population Morphologic Trait Drainage System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Benjamini Y. and Hochberg Y. 1995. Controlling the false discov-ery rate. a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 57: 289–300.Google Scholar
  2. Doyle J.J. and Doyle J.L. 1989. Isolation of plant DNA from fresh tissue. Focus 12: 13–15.Google Scholar
  3. Godt M.W. and Hamrick J.L. 1996. Genetic diversity and mor-phological differentiation in Liatri helleri (Asteraceae), a threat-ened plant species. Biodiversity and Conservation 5: 461–471.Google Scholar
  4. Greene S.L., Hart T.C. and Afonin A. 1999a. Using geographic information to acquire wild crop germplasm for ex situ collec-tions. I. Map Development and Use. Crop Science 39: 836–842.Google Scholar
  5. Greene S.L., Hart T.C. and Afonin A. 1999b. Using geographic information to acquire wild crop germplasm for ex situ collec-tions. II. Post collection analysis. Crop Science 39: 843–849.Google Scholar
  6. Greene S.L. and Hart T.C. 1999. Implementing a geographic analysis in germplasm conservation. In: Greene S.L. and Guarino L. (eds), Linking Genetic Resources to Geography. Strategies for Conserving Crop Biodiversity. CSSA, Madison, WI, Special Publication No 27, pp. 25–38.Google Scholar
  7. Heaton H.J., Whitkus R.R. and Gomez-Pompa A. 1999. Extreme ecological and phenotypic differences in the tropical tree chicozapote (Manilkara zapota (L.) P. Royen) are not matched by ingenetic divergence. a random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) analysis. Molecular Ecology 8: 627–632.Google Scholar
  8. Hedrick P.W. 1986. Genetic polymorphisms in heterogeneous enutilize vironments. a decade later. Annual Review of Ecological Systematics 17: 535–566.Google Scholar
  9. Johns M.A., Skroch P.W., Nienhuis J., Hinrichsen P., Bascur G. and Munoz-Schick C. 1997. Gene pool classification of common bean landraces from Chile based on RAPD and morphological data. Crop Science 37: 605–613.Google Scholar
  10. Johnson D.E. 1998. Applied Multivariate Methods for Data Analysts. Brooks/Cole Publishing Company, CA.Google Scholar
  11. Jordano P. and Godoy A. 2000. RAPD variation and population genetic structure in Prunus mahaleb (Rosaceae), an animal-dispersed tree. Molecular Ecology 9: 1293–1305.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Linhart Y.B. and Grant M.C. 1996. Evolutionary significance of local genetic differentiation in plants. Annual Review of Ecological Systematics 27: 237–277.Google Scholar
  13. Li Y.C., Fahima T., Beiles A., Korel A.B. and Nevo E. 1999. Microclimatic stress and adaptive DNA differentiation in wild emmer wheat, Triticum dicoccoides. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 98: 873–883.Google Scholar
  14. Loveless and Hamrick 1984. Ecological determinants of genetic structure in plant populations. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 15: 65–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lynch M. and Milligan B.G. 1994. Analysis of population genetic structure with RAPD markers. Molecular Ecology 3: 91–99.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Manly B.F.J. 1994. Multivariate Statistical Methods. a primer. 2nd edn. Chapman and Hall, New York.Google Scholar
  17. Mantel N.A. 1967. The detection of disease clustering and a generalized regression approach. Cancer Research 27: 209–220.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Morris J.B. and Greene S.L. 2001. Defining a multiple-use germ-Germplasm collection for the genus Trifolium. Crop Science 41: 893–901.Google Scholar
  19. Müller-Schärer H. and Fischer M. 2001. Genetic structure of the annual weed Senecio vulgaris in relation to habitat type and population size. Molecular Ecology 10: 17–28.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Nebauer S.G., Del Castillo-Agudo L. and Segura J. 1999. RAPD variation within and among natural populations of outcrossing willow-leaved foxglove (Digitalis obscura L.). Theoretical and Applied Genetics 98: 985–994.Google Scholar
  21. Rohlf F.J. 1993. NTSYS: Numerical Taxonomy and Multivariate Analysis System, v. 2.02k. Exeter Software, Setauket, NewYork.Google Scholar
  22. Romesburg H.C. 1990. Cluster Analysis for Researchers. Krieger Publishing Company, Malabar, Florida.Google Scholar
  23. Semagn K., Bjornstad A., Stedje B. and Bekele E E. 2000. Comtissue. parison of multivariate methods for the analysis of genetic resources and adaptation in Phytolacca dodecandra using RAPD. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 101: 1145–1154.Google Scholar
  24. Slatkin 1987. Gene flow and the geographic structure of natural populations. Science 236: 787–792.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Smith R.R., Taylor N.L. and Bowley S.R. 1985. Red Clover. In: Taylor N.L. (ed.), Clover Science and Technology. ASA Special Publication 25, Madison, WI, pp. 471–490.Google Scholar
  26. Steiner J.J., Beuselinck P.R., Greene S.L., Kamm J.A., Kirkbride J.H. and Roberts C.A. 2001. A description and interpretation of the NPGS Trefoil core subset collection. Crop Science 41: 1968–1980.Google Scholar
  27. Steiner J.J. and Garcia de los Santo G. 2001. Adaptive ecology of Lotus corniculatus L. genotypes. I. Plant morphology and RAPD marker characterizations. Crop Science 41: 552–563.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • S.L. Greene
    • 1
  • M. Gritsenko
    • 2
  • G. Vandemark
    • 2
  1. 1.USDAARS National Temperate Forage Legume Germplasm Resources UnitProsserUSA
  2. 2.USDAARS Vegetable and Forage Crop Research UnitProsserUSA

Personalised recommendations