Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-568f69f84b-n9pbb Total loading time: 0.222 Render date: 2021-09-16T20:17:10.329Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Molecular-level and trait-level differentiation between the cultivated apple (Malus× domestica Borkh.) and its main progenitor Malus sieversii

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2014

Satish Kumar*
Affiliation:
The New Zealand Institute for Plant and Food Research Limited, Private Bag 1401, Havelock North 4157, New Zealand
Pierre Raulier
Affiliation:
Université Catholique de Louvain, 1348 Louvain-La-Neuve, Belgium
David Chagné
Affiliation:
The New Zealand Institute for Plant and Food Research Limited, Private Bag 11600, Palmerston North, New Zealand
Claire Whitworth
Affiliation:
The New Zealand Institute for Plant and Food Research Limited, Private Bag 1401, Havelock North 4157, New Zealand
*Corresponding
* Corresponding author. E-mail: satish.kumar@plantandfood.co.nz

Abstract

The present study is the first to compare the trait-level differentiation (Q st) and the molecular-level differentiation (F st) between Malus× domestica and Malus sieversii. A set of 115 accessions representing M.× domestica (99) and M. sieversii (16) were genotyped using the International RosBREED SNP Consortium apple 8K SNP array and phenotyped for eight fruit quality traits in a clonally replicated experiment. A set of 3521 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) with an average call rate of 98% was retained following SNP data quality filters. About 86% of the total SNPs were polymorphic in M. sieversii, while all but three SNPs were polymorphic in M. × domestica. The patterns of linkage disequilibrium were different, especially at the longer distances, between the two species. No differentiation (F st= 0) was observed for nearly 23% of the SNPs, but about 20% of the SNPs exhibited a high genetic differentiation (F st≥ 0.15). A highly significant (P< 0.001) genome-level F st= 0.12 was observed between M. × domestica and M. sieversii. The average estimated Q st value was 0.20 (range 0.08–0.40), and for three of the eight studied traits (crispness, flavour intensity and fruit weight), Q st value was more than twice the estimated genome-level F st value. A higher Q st value than F st value for four of the eight fruit quality traits indicated differential (or directional) selection for these traits in M. × domestica. The average posterior probability of assignment of M. × domestica accessions to the M. sieversii gene pool was 11%, supporting the hypothesis of M. sieversii being one of the progenitors of the domesticated apple.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © NIAB 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allendorf, FW and Seeb, LW (2000) Concordance of genetic divergence among sockeye salmon populations at allozyme, nuclear DNA, and mitochondrial DNA markers. Evolution 54: 640651.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brookfield, P, Murphy, P, Harker, R and MacRae, E (1997) Starch degradation and starch pattern indices; interpretation and relationship to maturity. Postharvest Biology and Technology 11: 2330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, AG (1975) Apples. In: Janick, J and Moore, JN (eds) Advances in Fruit Breeding. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press, pp. 337.Google Scholar
Browning, SR and Browning, BL (2007) Rapid and accurate haplotype phasing and missing data inference for whole genome association studies using localized haplotype clustering. American Journal of Human Genetics 81: 10841097.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chagné, D, Carlisle, C, Blond, C, Volz, RK, Whitworth, C, Oraguzie, NZ, Crowhurst, RN, Allan, AC, Espley, RV, Hellens, RP and Gardiner, SE (2007) Mapping a candidate gene (MdMYB10) for red flesh and foliage colour in apple. BMC Genomics 8: 212.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chagné, D, Crowhurst, RN, Troggio, M, Davey, MW, Gilmore, B, Lawley, C, Vanderzande, S, Hellens, RP, Kumar, S, Cestaro, A, Velasco, R, Main, D, Rees, JD, Iezzoni, A, Mockler, T, Wilhelm, L, van de Weg, E, Gardiner, SE, Bassil, N and Peace, C (2012) Genome-wide SNP detection, validation, and development of an 8K SNP array for apple. PLoS One 7: e31745.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chapman, C (1989) Principles of germplasm evaluation. In: Stalker, HT and Chapman, C (eds) IBPGR Training Courses: Lecture Series 2. Scientific Management of Germplasm: Characterization, Evaluation, and Enhancement. Rome: International Board for Plant Genetic Resources, pp. 5564.Google Scholar
Clegg, MT (1990) Molecular diversity in plant populations. In: Brown, AHD, Clegg, MT, Kahler, AL and Weir, BS (eds) Plant Population Genetics, Breeding, and Genetic Resources. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates, Inc., pp. 98115.Google Scholar
Coart, E, Van Glabeke, S, De Loose, M, Larsen, AS and 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.). Molecular Ecology 15: 21712182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cockerham, CC and Weir, BS (1993) Estimation of gene flow from F-statistics. Evolution 47: 855863.Google ScholarPubMed
Cornille, A, Gladieux, P, Smulders, MJM, Roldan-Ruiz, I, Laurens, F, Le Cam, B, Nersesyan, A, Clavel, J, Olonova, M, Feugey, L, Gabrielyan, I, Zhang, X-G, Tenaillon, MI and Giraud, T (2012) New insight into the history of domesticated apple: secondary contribution of the European wild apple to the genome of cultivated Varieties. PLoS Genetics 8: e1002703.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Doebley, J (1989) Isozymic evidence and the evolution of crop plants. In: Soltis, DE and Soltis, PS (eds) Isozymes in Plant Biology. Portland, OR: Dioscorides Press, pp. 165191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunemann, F, Kahnau, R and Schmidt, H (1994) Genetic relationships in Malus evaluated by RAPD ‘fingerprinting’ of cultivars and wild species. Plant Breeding 113: 150159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Espley, RV, Hellens, RP, Putterill, J, Stevenson, DE, Kutty-Amma, S and Allan, AC (2007) Red colouration in apple fruit is due to the activity of the MYB transcription factor, MdMYB10. Plant Journal 49: 414427.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Foll, M and Gaggiotti, O (2008) A genome-scan method to identify selected loci appropriate for both dominant and codominant markers: a Bayesian perspective. Genetics 180: 977993.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Forsline, PL and Aldwinckle, HS (2004) Evaluation of Malus sieversii seedling populations for disease resistance and horticultural traits. Acta Horticulturae 663: 529534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankham, R (1999) Quantitative genetics in conservation biology. Genetic Resources 74: 37244.Google ScholarPubMed
Gharghani, A, Zamani, Z, Talaie, A, Oraguzie, NC, Fatahi, R, Hajnajari, H, Wiedow, C and Gardiner, SE (2009) 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. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 56: 829842.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilmour, AR, Cullis, BR, Harding, SA and Thompson, R (2006) ASReml Update: What's New in Release 2.00. Hemel Hempstead: VSN International Limited.Google Scholar
Gross, BL, Henk, AD, Forsline, PL, Richards, CM and Volk, GM (2012) Identification of interspecific hybrids among domesticated apple and its wild relatives. Tree Genetics and Genomes 8: 12231235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, SA, Robinson, JP and Juniper, BE (2002) Genetic clues to the origin of the apple. Trends in Genetics 18: 426430.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harrison, N and Harrison, R (2011) On the evolutionary history of the domesticated apple. Nature Genetics 43: 10431044.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Helyar, SJ, Hemmer-Hansen, J, Bekkevold, D, Taylor, MI, Ogden, R, Limborg, MT, Cariani, A, Maes, GE, Diopere, E, Carvalho, GR and Nielsen, EE (2011) Application of SNPs for population genetics of nonmodel organisms: new opportunities and challenges. Molecular Ecology Resources 11: 123136.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hill, WG and Robertson, A (1968) Linkage disequilibrium in finite populations. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 38: 226231.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hilu, KW (1989) Taxonomy of cultivated plants. In: Stalker, HT and Chapman, C (eds) IBPGR Training Courses: Lecture Series 2. Scientific Management of Germplasm: Characterization, Evaluation, and Enhancement. Rome: International Board for Plant Genetic Resources, pp. 3340.Google Scholar
Hokanson, SC, Szewc-McFadden, AK, Lamboy, WF and McFerson, JR (1998) Microsatellite (SSR) markers reveal genetic identities, genetic diversity and relationships in a Malus domestica Borkh. core subset collection. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 97: 671683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaeuffer, R, Reale, D, Coltman, DW and Pontier, D (2007) Detecting population structure using STRUCTURE software: effect of background linkage disequilibrium. Heredity 99: 374380.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Khan, SA, Beekwilder, J, Schaart, JG, Mumm, R, Soriano, JM, Jacobsen, E and Schouten, HJ (2013) Differences in acidity of apples are probably mainly caused by a malic acid transporter gene on LG16. Tree Genetics and Genomes 9: 475487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirk, H and Freeland, JR (2011) Applications and implications of neutral versus non-neutral markers in molecular ecology. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 12: 39663988.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kumar, SK, Volz, RK, Alspach, PA and Bus, VGM (2010) Development of a recurrent apple breeding programme in New Zealand: a synthesis of results, and a proposed revised breeding strategy. Euphytica 173: 207222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumar, S, Chagné, D, Bink, MCAM, Volz, RK, Whitworth, C and Charmaine, C (2012) Genomic selection for fruit quality traits in apple (Malus× domestica Borkh.). PLoS One 7: e36674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumar, S, Garrick, DG, Bink, MCAM, Whitworth, C, Chagné, D and Volz, RK (2013) Novel genomic approaches unravel genetic architecture of complex traits in apple. BMC Genomic 14: 93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Larsen, AS, Asmussen, CB, Coart, E, Olrik, DC and Kjaer, ED (2006) Hybridization and genetic variation in Danish populations of European crab apple (Malus sylvestris). Tree Genetics and Genomes 2: 8697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leberg, PL (2002) Estimating allelic richness: effects of sample size and bottleneck. Molecular Ecology 11: 24452449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lin-Wang, K, Micheletti, D, Palmer, J, Volz, R, Lozano, L, Espley, R, Hellens, RP, Chagne, D, Rowan, DD, Troggio, M, Iglesias, I and Allan, A (2011) High temperature reduces apple fruit colour via modulation of the anthocyanin regulatory complex. Plant and Cell Environment 34: 11761190.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lipka, AE, Tian, F, Wang, Q, Peiffer, J, Li, M, Bradbury, PJ, Gore, MA, Buckler, ES and Zhang, Z (2012) GAPIT: genome association and prediction integrated tool. Bioinformatics 28: 23972399.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liu, N, Chen, L, Wang, S, Oh, C and Zhao, H (2005) Comparison of single nucleotide polymorphisms and microsatellites in inference of population structure. BMC Genetics 6: S26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Luby, JJ, Alspach, PA, Bus, VGM and Oraguzie, NC (2002) Field resistance to fire blight in a diverse apple (Malus sp.) germplasm collection. Journal of American Society of Horticultural Science 127: 245253.Google Scholar
Lynch, M and Walsh, B (1998) Genetics and Analysis of Quantitative Traits. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
Mangin, B, Siberchicot, A, Nicolas, S, Doligez, A, This, P and Cierco-Ayrolles, C (2012) Novel measures of linkage disequilibrium that corrects the bias due to population structure and relatedness. Heredity 108: 285291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKay, JK and Latta, RG (2002) Adaptive population divergence: markers, QTL and traits. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 17: 285291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merilä, J and Crnokrak, P (2001) Comparison of genetic differentiation at marker loci and quantitative traits. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 14: 92103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Micheletti, D, Troggio, M, Zharkikh, A, Costa, F, Malnoy, M, Velasco, R and Salvi, S (2011) Genetic diversity of the genus Malus and implications for linkage mapping with SNPs. Tree Genetics and Genomes 7: 857868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myles, S, Peiffer, J, Brown, PJ, Ersoz, ES, Zhang, Z, Costich, DE and Buckler, ES (2009) Association mapping: critical considerations shift from genotyping to experimental design. Plant Cell 21: 21942202.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nielsen, EE, Hansen, MM and Meldrup, D (2006) Evidence of microsatellite hitch-hiking selection in Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua L.): implications for inferring population structure in non-model organisms. Molecular Ecology 15: 32193229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noiton, DAM, Hofstee, M, Alspach, PA, Brewer, L and Howard, C (1999) Increasing genetic diversity for apple breeding: a preliminary report. Acta Horticulturae 484: 105107.Google Scholar
Pritchard, JK, Stephens, M and Donnelly, P (2000) Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155: 945959.Google ScholarPubMed
Ritland, K (2000) Marker-inferred relatedness as a tool for detecting heritability in nature. Molecular Ecology 9: 11951204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robinson, JP, Harris, SA and Juniper, BE (2001) Taxonomy of the genus Malus Mill. (Rosaceae) with emphasis on the cultivated apple, Malus × domestica Borkh. Plant Systematics and Evolution 226: 3558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Røen, D, Ekholm, A and Rumpunen, K (2009) Estimating useful diversity in the Norwegian core collection of apples. Acta Horticulturae 814: 131136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rousset, F (2008) GENEPOP'007: a complete re-implementation of the GENEPOP software for Windows and Linux. Molecular Ecology Resources 8: 103106.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spitze, K (1993) Population structure in Daphnia obtusa: quantitative genetic and allozyme variation. Genetics 135: 367374.Google Scholar
Van Raden, PM (2008) Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions. Journal of Dairy Science 91: 44144423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Treuren, R, Kemp, H, Ernsting, G, Jongejans, B, Houtman, H and Visser, L (2010) Microsatellite genotyping of apple (Malus × domestica Borkh.) genetic resources in the Netherlands: application in collection management and variety identification. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 57: 853865.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Velasco, R, Zharkikh, A, Affourtit, J, Dhingra, A, Cestaro, A, Kalyanaraman, A, Fontana, P, Bhatnagar, SK, Troggio, M, Pruss, D, Salvi, S, Pindo, M, Baldi, P, Castelletti, S, Cavaiuolo, M, Coppola, G, Costa, F, Cova, V, Dal Ri, A, Goremykin, V, Komjanc, M, Longhi, S, Magnago, P, Malacarne, G, Malnoy, M, Micheletti, D, Moretto, M, Perazzolli, M, Si-Ammour, A, Vezzulli, S, Zini, E, Eldredge, G, Fitzgerald, LM, Gutin, N, Lanchbury, J, Macalma, T, Mitchell, JT, Reid, J, Wardell, B, Kodira, C, Chen, Z, Desany, B, Niazi, F, Palmer, M, Koepke, T, Jiwan, D, Schaeffer, S, Krishnan, V, Wu, C, Chu, VT, King, ST, Vick, J, Tao, Q, Mraz, A, Stormo, A, Stromo, K, Bogden, R, Ederle, D, Stella, A, Vecchietti, A, Kater, MM, Masiero, S, Lasserre, P, Lespinasse, Y, Allan, AC, Bus, V, Chagné, D, Crowhurst, RN, Gleave, AP, Lavezzo, E, Fawcett, JA, Proost, S, Rouzé, P, Sterck, L, Toppo, S, Lazzari, B, Hellens, RP, Durel, CE, Gutin, A, Bumgarner, RE, Gardiner, SE, Skolnick, M, Egholm, M, Van de Peer, Y, Salamini, F and Viola, R (2010) The genome of the domesticated apple (Malus × domestica Borkh.). Nature Genetics 42: 833839.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weir, BS and Cockerham, CC (1984) Estimating F-statistics for the analysis of population structure. Evolution 38: 13581370.Google ScholarPubMed
Whitlock, MC (1999) Neutral additive genetic variance in a metapopulation. Genetic Resources 74: 215221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, K, Wang, A and Brown, S (2012) Genetic characterization of the Ma locus with pH and titratable acidity in apple. Molecular Breeding 30: 899912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yan, G, Long, H, Song, W and Chen, R (2008) Genetic polymorphism of Malus sieversii populations in Xinjiang, China. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 55: 171181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yu, J, Pressoir, G, Briggs, WH, Vroh-Bi, I, Yamasaki, M, Doebley, JF, McMullen, MD, Gaut, BS, Nielsen, DM, Holland, JB, Kresovich, S and Buckler, ES (2006) A unified mixed-model method for association mapping that accounts for multiple levels of relatedness. Nature Genetics 38: 203208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Kumar Supplementary Material

Table S1

Download Kumar Supplementary Material(File)
File 29 KB
16
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Molecular-level and trait-level differentiation between the cultivated apple (Malus× domestica Borkh.) and its main progenitor Malus sieversii
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Molecular-level and trait-level differentiation between the cultivated apple (Malus× domestica Borkh.) and its main progenitor Malus sieversii
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Molecular-level and trait-level differentiation between the cultivated apple (Malus× domestica Borkh.) and its main progenitor Malus sieversii
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *