Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T20:21:32.967Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Propagation management methods have altered the genetic variability of two traditional mango varieties in Myanmar, as revealed by SSR

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2011

R. Hirano ,
H. Ishii ,
Than Htun Oo ,
S. A. Gilani ,
A. Kikuchi  and
K. N. Watanabe
R. Hirano
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Tsukuba, 1-1-1, Tennodai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki305-8572, Japan
H. Ishii
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Tsukuba, 1-1-1, Tennodai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki305-8572, Japan
Than Htun Oo
Affiliation:
Vegetable and Fruits Research and Development Centre, Myanma Agriculture Service, Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation, Hlegu, Yangon Division, Myanmar
S. A. Gilani
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Tsukuba, 1-1-1, Tennodai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki305-8572, Japan
A. Kikuchi
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Tsukuba, 1-1-1, Tennodai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki305-8572, Japan
K. N. Watanabe*
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Tsukuba, 1-1-1, Tennodai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki305-8572, Japan
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: nabechan@gene.tsukuba.ac.jp
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Mango (Mangifera indica L.) is an important fruit crop with a long cultivation history in Myanmar. This study evaluated the genetic variation within two economically important traditional varieties, ‘Yin Kwe’ and ‘Sein Ta Lone’, and the relationship between genetic variation and propagation practices. Genetic variation was estimated by genotyping 94 individuals with 12 single sequence repeat markers. ‘Yin Kwe’ (n = 53) showed higher levels of observed heterozygosity (Ho = 0.59) and average genetic distance among individuals (Da = 0.29) than did ‘Sein Ta Lone’ (n = 41; Ho = 0.45; Da = 0.09). The differences between the two varieties at the DNA level were significant (Fst = 0.44). The broader genetic background in ‘Yin Kwe’ compared with ‘Sein Ta Lone’ was also demonstrated by neighbour-joining and principal coordinates analyses. Differences in variety uses and propagation practices were determined by interviewing local specialists in Lower Myanmar (southern Myanmar). ‘Yin Kwe’ was often used as a rootstock for ‘Sein Ta Lone’. Clonal propagation by grafting was observed frequently for ‘Sein Ta Lone’ but never for ‘Yin Kwe’. The differences in genetic variation between these two varieties might have been caused by the propagation practices for each variety, which result from their respective uses.

Keywords

genetic diversitylandracesMangifera indicaMyanmarpropagation managementtraditional variety
Type
Research Article
Information
Plant Genetic Resources , Volume 9 , Issue 3 , August 2011 , pp. 404 - 410
Copyright
Copyright © NIAB 2011

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

Bally, ISE, Graham, GC and Henry, RJ (1996) Genetic diversity of Kensington mango in Australia. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 36: 243–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Camacho Villa, TC, Maxted, N, Scholten, M and Ford-Lloyd, B (2005) Defining and identifying crop landraces. Plant Genetic Resources 3: 373–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davenport, TL and Núñes-Elisea, R (1997) Reproductive physiology. In: Litz, RE (ed.) The Mango: Botany, Production and Uses. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 69–146.Google Scholar
Doyle, JJ and Doyle, JLA (1987) A rapid DNA isolation procedure for small quantities of fresh leaf tissue. Phytochemical Bulletin 19: 11–15.Google Scholar
Duval, MF, Bunel, J, Sitbon, C and Risterucci, AM (2005) Development of microsatellite markers for mango (Mangifera indica L.). Molecular Ecology Notes 5: 824–826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankel, OH, Brown, AHD and Burdon, JJ (1995) The Conservation of Plant Biodiversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://www.cup.com.ac.uk/aus/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn = 9780521467315.Google Scholar
Gálvez-López, D, Hernández-Delgado, S, González-Paz, M, Becerra-Leor, EN, Salvador-Figueroa, M and Mayek-Pérez, N (2009) Genetic analysis of mango landraces from Mexico based on molecular markers. Plant Genetic Resources: Characterization and Utilization 7: 244–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartl, DL and Clark, AG (1997) Principles of Population Genetics, 3rd edn. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
Hirano, R, Khain Pann Witt, Hmon, Kawase, M and Watanabe, KN (2008) Mango Mangifera indica L. in Myanmar: a preview. Plant Genetic Resources Monograph PGRM. Series 5. Mimatsu Corporation, Tokyo.Google Scholar
Hirano, R, Than Htun, Oo and Watanabe, KN (2010) Myanmar mango landraces reveal genetic uniqueness over common cultivars from Florida, India and Southeast Asia. Genome 53: 321–330.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Honsho, C, Nishiyama, K, Eiadthong, W and Yonemori, K (2005) Isolation and characterization of new microsatellite markers in mango (Mangifera indica). Molecular Ecology Notes 5: 152–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kyaw, Htu (2007) Growing Mango for Commercial Purposes. Myanmar Agricultural Service, Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation, Myanmar (written in Myanmar language).Google Scholar
Langella, O (1999) Populations 1.2.30. Available at http://www.bioinformatics.org/project/?group_id = 84 (accessed 12 October 2009).Google Scholar
Myanma Agriculture Service (2005) Mango cultivation, Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation, Myanmar (written in Myanmar language).Google Scholar
Nei, M, Tajima, F and Tateno, Y (1983) Accuracy of estimated phylogenetic trees from molecular data. Journal of Molecular Evolution 19: 153–170.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peakall, R and Smouse, PE (2006) GENALEX 6: genetic analysis in Excel, population genetic software for teaching and research. Molecular Ecology Notes 6: 288–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peakall, R, Smouse, PE and Huff, DR (1995) Evolutionary implications of allozyme and RAPD variation in diploid populations of dioecious buffalograss (Buchloë dactyloides (Nutt.) Engelm.). Molecular Ecology 4: 135–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schnell, RJ and Knight, RJ (1991) Are polyembryonic mangoes dependable sources of nucellar seedlings for rootstocks? Proceedings of the Florida State Horticultural Society 104: 44–47.Google Scholar
Schnell, RJ, Olano, CT, Quintanilla, WE and Meerow, AW (2005) Isolation and characterization of 15 microsatellite loci from mango (Mangifera indica L.) and cross-species amplification in closely related taxa. Molecular Ecology Notes 5: 625–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schnell, RJ, Brown, JS, Olano, CT, Meerow, AW, Campbell, RJ and Kuhn, DN (2006) Mango genetic diversity analysis and pedigree inferences for Florida cultivars using microsatellite markers. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science 131: 214–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tereba, A (1999) Tools for analysis of population statistics. Profiles in DNA 2: 14–16.Google Scholar
Viruel, MA, Escribano, P, Barbieri, M, Ferri, M and Hormaza, JI (2005) Fingerprinting, embryo type and geographic differentiation in mango Mangifera indica L. Anacardiaceae. with microsatellites. Molecular Breeding 15: 383–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar