CC BY
36
UDC 577.21:58(470.57)
GENETIC DIFFERENTIATION OF HISTORIC CULTIVARS OF HERBACIOUS PAEONIA BASED ON SRAP MARKERS: DOCUMENTATION AND CONSERVATION OF BOTANIC COLLECTIONS
N.B. VLASAVA1, D C. MICHENER2, A.N. YUKHIMUK1, V.V. GAISHUN1, R.
BRYANT3, E D. AGABALAEVA1, E.V. SPIRIDOVICH1
1 The Central Botanical Gardens of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus,
Minsk, Belarus
2 Matthaei Botanical Garden and Nichols Arboretum of the University of Michigan,
Ann Arbor, USA
3 Department of Statistics of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA
Identification of genotypes of Paeonia spp. from field genebank collections in botanical gardens of Belarus and USA was conducted on the basis of genome screening with sequence related amplified polymorphism (SRAP) molecular markers. Studied taxa include historic P. lactiflora cultivars of European, American and Soviet selection, interspecific hybrids and species. The developed 113 SRAP markers (9.4 loci per primer) were effective to discriminate all 54 studied accessions, generating their first relationship analysis. NJ and UPGMA clustering of genotypes as well as PCoA were consistent with the region of their reported breeding. Interspecific hybrids 'Orlenok' and 'Novost Altaya' resolved with their parent species. Regression analysis reveals strong correlations between a number of genetic markers and a set of ancestry and morphological data. Developed markers are demonstrated to be useful for further passportization of herbaceous peony collections, solving controversial issues in relationships and origin of the cultivars, and to establish conservation value of genetic Paeonia resources.
Key words: Paeonia lactiflora Pall., Paeonia sp., peonies, SRAP markers, cultivars, living collections, genetic diversity, conservation.
Introduction
Paeonia L. (family Paeoniaceae) comprises about 35 species of shrubs and perennial herbs distributed widely in the northern hemisphere [20, 26, 29]. The genus possesses great ornamental and medicinal value, which is a reason for its extensive culture, breeding and wide representation in botanical garden collections. Section Paeonia has the most taxa (about 27 herbaceous taxa, including P. lactiflora Pall.) and the most diverse geographic range (from East and Central Asia, the Western Himalayas to the European Mediterranean region). This section has about 1/3 rare to endemic species as well as evidence of complex reticulated evolution that results in incompletely-understood phylogenetic relationships between species [27].
Contemporary cultivated herbaceous peonies mainly belong to P. lactiflora, although there is a great diversity of interspecific and intersectional hybrids. Over 3,000 cultivars have been introduced or bred outside of Eastern Asia since 1820s, half of which are presumed extinct [D. Michener, communication from R. Jakubowoski - ICRA Registrar, unpublished]. Many points of the origin and phylogenetic relationships among P. lactiflora cultivars (and other species) are unclear since their documented history is inconclusive or absent and synonymy is present. To understand the cultivated peony phylogeny, it's domestication history and breeding potential of desirable ornamental characteristics as well as resistance to diseases and adaptability to environmental factors, it is critical to identify, profile, and assess the genetic diversity across the field genebanks of available historical accessions.
Botanical mentioned collections are a national heritage asset and much of it likely now unique. Botanical garden collections are essential for research related to genotypes that will be needed during the pending global climate change [6, 22]. Specifically, botanical gardens collections can function as field genebanks where their rich but selected genetic pool reflects significant artificial selection from complex socio-cultural historical factors as well as
acquisition of new genotypes for subsequent educational or research objectives. Effectively understanding this captured diversity and its phylogenetics, evaluating cultivars for their bio-cultural conservation value, and predicting which cultivars carry useful traits for future breeding requires using contemporary molecular genetics approaches [23].
Use of molecular genetics and genomic approaches to resolve fundamental questions on the phylogenetics and origin of cultivated plants from their wild ancestors though domestication has become accepted [3, 5, 13, 17, 18, 28]. Molecular markers for cultivar identification, genetic map construction, genetic diversity assessment, and molecular marker-assisted selection (MAS) have been found useful in many horticultural plants [16], including ornamentals [7]. Within the genus Paeonia, several recent studies document the genetic diversity of cultivated and wild species of tree and herbaceous peonies and show the high resolution power of different types of molecular markers for phylogenetic and domestication aims [8, 31, 32]. In particular, sequence related amplified polymorphism (SRAP) markers were successfully applied for genetic diversity documentation in various plant species and groups [15, 24], including tree and herbaceous peonies [9, 10, 12]. SRAPs spot coding regions of the genome, for up to 20% are co-dominant, possess capacity to elucidate markers with inherent biological significance, and therefore could facilitate the construction of linkage maps [15, 24].
Molecular certification of the genetic diversity in historical collections (field genebanks) of genus Paeonia is a critical step to resolve the confounded taxonomy and phylogeny of cultivated peonies; this is the first study to survey European, American and Soviet genetic resources of cultivated peonies for analytical depth. These methods provide a unique opportunity to distinguish genotypes/cultivars rigorously, which is intractable when based only on morphological characteristics - especially when historical documentation is lacking. The resultant datasets will help resolve and reconstruct the sequence and geographically dispersed history and process of herbaceous peony domestication in the important regions of its selection - Europe, USA, former USSR.
The aim of this research was to develop SRAP molecular marker systems effective for large-scale fingerprinting of herbaceous Paeonia genetic resources, mainly P. lactiflora cultivars, and possessing enough resolution power to discriminate the intraspecific (cultivars), interspecific (hybrids) and species levels, to conduct analysis on the first set of samples and reveal their relationships. Complete molecular profiling of the historically-deep collections of Central Botanical Gardens NAS of Belarus (CBG) and Matthaei Botanical Gardens and Nichols Arboretum of the University of Michigan (MBGNA) and wild parent species should help breeders in their work towards desired characteristics.
Objects and methods of research
Individual research objects were accessions from collections of genus Paeonia of the CBG and MBGNA. The collections of the CBG comprises more than 320 herbaceous genotypes including cultivars from Soviet selection programmes as well as endangered Paeonia species; MBGNA maintains more than 250 herbaceous cultivars of American and European selection as well as Chinese origin. Institutional databases of the peony collections are on-line and contain accession name, morphological description, available information on history and origin [http://mbgna.umich.edu/peony/; http://hbc.bas-net.by/bcb/eng/].
In this study four wild Paeonia species and 50 accessions of cultivated peonies were included: cultivars of P. lactiflora and interspecific hybrids (30 of European, 4 - American and 15 - Soviet selection) and several unresolved accessions for verification. The wild species are P. lactiflora Pall., P. tenuifolia L., P. daurica subsp. mlokosewitschii (Lomakin) D.Y.Hong (further noted as P. mlokosewitschii) and P. anomala L. (Appendix Table).
Material for genotyping was collected at MBGNA and CBG (Table 1) during the growing season (June - August, 2013 and 2014; Table 1). From each analysed peony plant 3 leaves were sampled (bulked), which were dehydrated directly after the harvest using silica gel (Silicagel 60, 0.2-0.5 mm, AppliChem).
Table 1
Locations of the MBGNA and CBG Paeonia collections, sampled for SRAP-genotyping
No Location NS* GL, DMS/ DD GD, km (No)
Latitude Longitude 1 2
1 CBG, Minsk, Belarus 24 53°55'15.1356"N/ 53.920871 027°36'38.8224"E/ 27.610784 4250.85 -
2 MBGNA, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA 30 42°16'51.7404"N/ 42.281039 083°43'32.3112"E /83.725642 - 4250.85
*Abbreviation: NS - number of samples taken for genotyping, GL - geographic location, GD - geographic distance, noted in km; coordinate format: DMS - degrees minutes seconds, DD - decimal degrees.
Genomic DNA was isolated from silica dehydrated plant leaves by CTAB method [4]. A weighed leaf tissue (100 mg) was ground in a homogenizer (TissueLyser LT, Qiagen), and then 2X CTAB extraction buffer was added, containing 2% w/v of cetyltrimethylammonium bromide (CTAB), 1.41 M NaCl, 0.10 M Tris-HCl, 0.02 M EDTA. RNA degradation in DNA samples was performed as described [11]. Prior the SRAP-analysis the amount of DNA in each sample was equated and its equivalent amount was used for each PCR. DNA samples were stored at -20°C. For the detection of genotypic variability between individuals of the investigated Paeonia genotypes we have tested 4 pairs of SRAP primers (PrimeTech, Belarus): Me05/Em01; Me05/Em10; Me07/Em01; Me07/Em10 (Table 2), described previously for tree and herbaceous peonies of Chinese origin [12]. The primers revealed consistent amplification and polymorphism between species, interspecific hybrids and P. lactiflora cultivars, and were used in our study.
Table 2
Forward and reverse SRAP primers used in this study
Primer Type Sequence (5'^3') Tm, °C
Me05 Forward TGAGTCCAAACCGGAAG 47
Me07 Forward TGAGTCCAAACCGGACA 47
Em01 Reverse GACTGCGTACGAATTAAT 43
Em10 Reverse GACTGCGTACGAATTCAG 48
The PCR reaction mixture (25 |l) contains 60 ng of genomic DNA, 200 |M dNTPs, 2.5 mM MgCl2, 20 pM of each primer, 10x buffer, and 1 U Taq DNA polymerase (Primetech, Belarus). The amplification was carried out in Sure Cycler (Type 8800, Agilent Technologies, USA) using the following program: 3 min denaturing at 94°C, eight cycles of 30 sec denaturing at 94°C, 30 sec annealing at 37°C, and 90 sec elongation at 72°C. In the following 32 cycles the annealing temperature was increased to 50°C, with a final elongation step of 7 min at 72°C. Each PCR product (15 |l) was fractionated into microchips (Bioanalizator 2100, Agilent) or into 1.2% agarose gel and visualized by staining with ethidium bromide. Electrophoresis was carried out at a constant 100 V for 120 min at room temperature. Ladder Markers (100 bp and 1kb, Primetech, Belarus) were loaded each time as the reference for fragments size estimation. Gels were documented using a Molecular Imager VersaDoc MP 4000 image system (BioRad, USA). The molecular sizes of the fragments were calculated
using specialized software Bioanalyser Expert 2100 (Agilent) or QuantityOne (BioRad) on the basis of molecular weight standards.
Data analysis. The profiles of amplified DNA fragments obtained by SRAP-PCR analysis were the basis for the creation of binary matrices, where the presence of the amplicon was designated as "1" and the absence - as "0". Only distinct, discrete and reproducible amplicons were scored. A marker was considered as polymorphic if fragment was absent in at least one of the accessions. Reproducibility was estimated by scoring and comparing fragments profiles produced under identical conditions of at least two biological repetitions. Polymorphism information content of each primer (PIC) was calculated according by the following equation: PIC = 1 - £pi2, where pi is the frequency of the ith allele for each SRAP marker locus in the set of 54 peony accessions investigated [2].
Genetic similarities between cultivars were measured by the Nei similarity coefficient based on the proportion of shared alleles [19]. The NJ (neighbor-joining), UPGMA (unweighted pair-group method with arithmetic averages) trees were constructed using the Treecon software [30]. The wild species Paeonia daurica subsp. mlokosewitschii (Lomakin) was used as an outgroup in the NJ trees as a most distant species based on known phylogeny [25]. The number of 1,000 replicates was used for all bootstrap tests. Calculation of genetic diversity indices and the number of rare alleles, principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) were performed using GenAlex [21].
Predicting the morphologic characteristics and origin data beyond genotyping data. Predicting the following parameters: type of flower (single, semi-double, double), season of blooming (very early, early, early midseason, midseason, late midseason, late and very late), year of introduction, region (country of introduction) was performed using simple linear regression model and Poisson regression model.
Results and discussion
1. Levels of polymorphism and molecular identification of Paeonia cultivars revealed by SRAP markers. Iteratively selected informative SRAP primers were used to detect polymorphisms at the intra- and interspecific levels, i.e. to show the variability of genomic DNA of different P. lactiflora cultivars and Paeonia species, (see Table 2). The method produced discrete reproducible amplicons; their set were unique to each studied genotype differentiate every genotype. The amplicons' profiles obtained using SRAP primers are shown in Table 3.
Table 3
Characteristics of the amplicons of genotypes of Paeonia obtained with SRAP markers
Primer pair No markers Diapason of fragments length, bp No of fragments per sample (min/max/aver) No of polymorphic markers/ % PIC
Me05 / Em01 30 74-1908 3/16/9.5 30/100 0.325
Me05 / Em10 22 84-869 3/13/8 22/100 0.329
Me07 / Em01 36 98-1756 6/16/11 36/100 0.247
Me07 / Em10 25 97-1065 5/13/9 23/92 0.159
Mean 28,3 - 4.25/14.5/9.4 27.8/98 0.265
Total 113
The selected primers pairs generated amplicons in the size range from 74-1908 bp, the number of received markers varied from 22 to 36. The percentage of polymorphic loci identified with primers Me05/Em01, Me05/Em10 and Me07/Em01 was 100%, with primer Me07/Em10 - 92%. The total number of generated SRAP markers for the studied genotypes of Paeonia was 113, with an average of 9.38 markers per sample. Percentage of polymorphic
content of primer pairs varied from 0.159 (for Me07/Em10 combination) to 0.329 (for Me05/Em10), with an average of 0.265. Primers revealed number of genotype-specific markers. For P. daurica subsp. mlokosewitschii (Lomakin) D.Y.Hong applied SRAP primers detected 4 specific markers; for P. anomala L. - 3; for P. tenuifolia L. - it was revealed 3 unique bands. Among P. lactiflora Pall. cultivars by 1 individual markers possesses 'Albert Crousse' (Crousse, 1893), Augustin D'Hour (Calot, 1867), Suruga (Millet, 1955) and 'Vesennii', 3 individual markers were revealed for 'Novost Altaja' (Lutchnik, 1963).
2. Genetic similarity and cluster analysis of Paeonia species and cultivars. The values of Nei's genetic distance for analysed genotypes (based on the frequency of 113 SRAP alleles) were used to construct a cluster maps using the UPGMA and NJ algorithm. NJ phylogram of pruned genetic distances data (50 accessions) is presented in Fig. 1. (In this analysis accessions with unresolved labels were excluded). We interpret Fig. 1 to represent the genetic relationships among accessions. On NJ dendrogram (see Fig. 1) all accessions are distinctly separated from each other and 2 major groups are evident and assigned as cluster I and II. Cluster I contains species P. mlokosewitschii, P. teniufolia, P. anomala, and interspecific hybrid 'Orlenok'. Cluster II contains wild P. lactiflora itself and its domesticated cultivars. For this analysis P. mlokosewitschii served as an outgroup for the phylogeny data [25, 14]. Its role as an outgroup from the other taxa is also supported by this research (genetic distances; data not presented). Similarly, the clustering of P. lactiflora x tenuifolia hybrid 'Orlenok' between its parent species is consistent with its breeding history (Fomitcheva, 1963) [1] and further confirms the power of developed SRAP markers to resolve hybrid interspecific origin of Paeonia cultivars.
Cluster II has an internal hierarchy: P. lactiflora is relatively separated while clusters A, B and C are suggested. It reflects cultivar-landraces of European (fundamentally French and English), American and Soviet selection. Further subclusterization is observed. Cluster A includes the cultivars 'Albert Crousse' (Crousse, 1893; Double, pink, midseason), 'Arcturus' (Auten, 1933; Single, red, very early) and 'Arlequin' (Dessert & Mechin, 1921; Anemone, pink, midseason). Given the presumed later parentage of the single/anemone forms (if derived from Japanese selections introduced after the mid- to late-1800s), the anomaly is 'Albert Crousse', indicating research with additional related cultivars is needed.
Cluster B1 holds 'Novost Altaya' (CBG accession), 'Arkady Gaidar' (syn. 'Arkadij Gaydar'), 'Pamiati Gagarina', 'Mirnyi', and 'Belyi Parus'. Their breeding history suggests a common derivation. 'Mirnyi' and 'Belyi Parus' (Sosnovets) were selected from open-pollination work involving intervarietal and interspecific parents at the Botanical Garden of the Moscow State University starting in 1951 [1]. Cultivars 'Pamiati Gagarina' and 'Arkady Gaidar' were both bred by Krasnova in 1957 and 1958, respectively; all are historically congruent.
Assessing authenticity of all samples of 'Novost Altaya'(CBG, A, K) - an interspecific hybrid of P. anomala and P. lactiflora, has been requested from this study. When plotted all three 'Novost Altaya' samples from different original sources all placed differe ntly on the dendrogram (data not presented). The accession 'Novost Altaya_A' clusters with the interspecific hybrid 'Orlenok', and is likely authentic. Based on clustering analysis Novost Altaya CBG was likely mislabeled. This shows the method's power to r esolve identification queries where only morphological features are suggestive.
The rest of Soviet selections and two historical French cultivars ('M-lle Leonie Callot' and 'Pierre Reignoux') are grouped at cluster B2. A future goal is to much better resolve the historic French phylogeny with additional samples and taxa. One possibility is these cultivars were bred from different parental cultivars than the others, thus grouping them with the Soviet cluster. Lacking breeding records, expanding study to include contemporary sister-cultivars is likely the best approach. Intriguingly in the Soviet group, 'Vecheriaya Moskva' was separated yet it; closely distributed 'Zhemchuzhnaya rossyp' and 'Mirazh' are of Japanese flower type.
The distant position of cluster C from the species (Cluster I) based on developed SRAP polymorphic genomic regions is significant. Although the historically oldest French cultivars are here, these were likely bred from (or were simply renamed) old Chinese landraces-cultivars that were then "new" in Western Europe. The long history of domestication in China, presumably not involving repeated breeding with wild P. lactiflora or any other herbaceous peony species, would account for the genetic distance indicated here. This is counter-intuitive since one would expect the historically "old" cultivars to cluster basally with the species. However, the history of Paeonia domestication in Western Europe and America is doubtlessly based on highly-developed Chinese (and later Japanese) domesticates as ancestral, not the wild species. Thus the unexpected "old" French cultivars are removed from species and opens new research questions.
To examine fine relationships among the peony accessions employed, Principal coordinates analysis (PCoA) was performed using standardized molecular data. It is graphically presented in Fig 3. In general, the relationships between genotypes revealed by PoCA was conceptually consistent with the data obtained in this study by both UPGMA and NJ clustering analysis. The total variance explained by the first, second and third principal coordinates using PoCA was 6.18%, 5.12% and 4.49%, respectively. PC2 differentiates a subset of species and interspecific hybrids from most of the P. lactiflora cultivars; PC1 reflects a clear geographic European-USSR gradient in Paeonia, with spatially dispersed (unclustered) US cultivars.
All analysed wild herbaceous peony species such as P.mlokosewitschii, P. anomala, P. lactiflora and P. tenuifolia were clearly distant from all other peony accessions. The interspecific hybrids 'Orlenok' and 'Novost Altaya' (A and K accessions) are close to their parent species, so PCoA data are in congruent with previously presented cluster analysis data.
Compact and close enough distribution of Soviet cultivars to species, compared to another groups, may be evidence of breeding that included wild Paeonia species, while the broad range of other cultivars is more of a continuum with the exception of a cultivar cluster centered around the problematic 'A Crousse' (as already discussed). The scattered distribution of American cultivars among European may reflect gene flow through additional introductions directly from China and Japan, and may also provide indication for a desire for phenotypically different forms driving novel breeding. The small sample size for the American group (4 accessions) indicates a bigger study is needed.
Further analysis of relationship of Paeonia accessions by their region of origin (wild species, Europe, USSR and USA) by Nei genetic distance/ similarity indices is summarized in Table 4. The closest regions are Europe and USSR (genetic distance - 0.024), and most distant are Wild and USA groups (genetic distance - 0.103). At the same time USA and USSR groups are relatively equally distant to the European group analysed (genetic identity 0.97 and 0.98, respectfully).
This finding is consistent with the suggestion that US breeders by early 1900s were using novel source material rather than re-breeding only from existing European cultivars. What is needed is a better understanding of what was being sought by the breeders and what material was available.
In USSR the peony breeding program began in 1949 based on about 200 cultivars, mostly of French selection; wild species hybridization was widely applied [1].
Table 3
Nei's genetic identity (above diagonal) and genetic distance (below diagonal) between groups of Paeonia
by region of origin
Group Wild Europe USSR USA
Wild **** 0.9290 0.9363 0.9018
Europe 0.0736 **** 0.9763 0.9683
USSR 0.0658 0.0240 **** 0.9544
USA 0.1034 0.0323 0.0467 ****
3. Predicting morphologic and non-morphological characteristics for future breeding work. The sets of genetic markers, characteristic to each accession were analyzed for significant interactions with standard morphological descriptors of this genotype that could be logically (including biologically) coded as a numeric value. The 'year of introduction' and 'season of bloom' (early, middle, late) revealed the significant correlation with several markers at analyzed genotypes (data not shown). The other parameters as type of flower (single, semidouble, double) and 'region' (country of introduction) did not reveal significant correlation with genetic data. Since all floral forms have been bred in all regions, this was anticipated. For "year" simple linear regression model revealed significant relationship with SRAP marker 1.6_410bp (p= 0.0171), indicating genetic diversity in the cultivars increases over time, which makes sense if new genotypes were available. Poisson regression analysis of genotypic data and 'season of bloom' produced a significant relationship for 1 SRAP marker 1.16_829bp (p= 0.036). Both correlations suggest that a deeper survey of the molecular markers could help finding genetic linkage with favorable traits and will be useful in both applied and theoretical work on herbaceous peony breeding and certification.
Conclusions
Applied SRAP analysis allow to generate 113 markers (in average 9.4 loci per primer), and demonstrated high resolution power for effective discrimination herbaceous Paeonia on the specific level, interspecific (hybrids), and intraspecific (P. lactiflora cultivars). This is well supported by the fact, that species, interspecific hybrids 'Orlenok' and 'Novost Altaya' and P. lactiflora cultivars were found to be characterized by several unique genotype markers.
Clusterization analysis using UPGMA and NJ algorithm, and also results of principal coordinate analysis allow for the first time to generate relationship between the studied genotypes, which revealed its consistency with the region of origin of genotypes, as well as with available data on the pedigree. Specifically, European landraces and Soviet cultivars of P. lactiflora were clustered distinctly by groups; interspecific hybrids 'Orlenok' and 'Novost Altaya' were located between their parent species, although it is necessary to study the contribution of each parent more precisely.
Developed markers and genotypic passports of all studied genotypes could be thus used for the delimitation and identification of P. lactiflora cultivars including interspecific hybrids, revision of the unresolved origin issues, and relationship calculation, exchange of the certified material. Regression analysis in combination with SRAP markers is a powerful tool to produce markers important for MAS (such as SCAR, SNP, SSR, QTL), useful to construct linkage map of valuable traits of Paeonia cultivars [15, 24]. When added with markers of chloroplast genome regions, large-scale capability of next-generation techniques, and on a wider set of samples from the studied regions (Europe, USA, USSR, and China as an initial
center of domestication), it could be used for solving phylogeography of cultivated P. lactiflora.
Acknowledgement
This work was financially supported by the State Scientific program "Genofong" during 2013-2014 (project "To create a national reference, active working and DNA collections of ornamental, medicinal and non-traditional fruit-berry and bioenergy plants, to ensure their replenishment, documentation and efficient use").
Authors are grateful to Dr. Yin-Long Qiu for the critical review of the article.
Reference list
1. Миронова Л.Н., Реут А.А. Пионы. Достижения отечественных селекционеров // Вавиловский журнал генетики и селекции. - 2013. - Т. 17(2). - С. 349-358.
2. Anderson J.A., Churchill G.A., Autrique J.E., Tanksley S.D., Sorrells M.E. Optimizing parental selection for genetic linkage maps // Genome. - 1993. - Vol. 36(1). - P. 181-186.
3. Burger J.C., Chapman M.A., & Burke J.M. Molecular insights into the evolution of crop plants // American Journal of Botany. - 2008. - Vol. 95(2), - P. 113-122.
4. Dempster E.L., Pryor K.V., Francis D., Young J.E., Rogers H.J. Rapid DNA extraction from ferns for PCR-based analyses // Biotechniques. - 1999. - V 27(1). - P. 66-68.
5. Doebley J.F., Gaut B.S., & Smith B.D. The molecular genetics of crop domestication // Cell. - 2006. - Vol. 127(7). - P. 1309-1321.
6. Donaldson J.S. Botanic gardens science for conservation and global change // Trends in plant science. - 2009. - Vol. 14(11). - P. 608-613.
7. Fu X., Ning G., Gao L., Bao M. Genetic diversity of Dianthus accessions as assessed using two molecular marker systems (SRAPs and ISSRs) and morphological traits // Scientia Horticulturae. - 2008. - Vol. 117(3). - P. 263-270.
8. Gilmore B., Bassil N., Nyberg A., Knaus B., Smith D., Barney D.L., Hummer K. Microsatellite marker development in peony using next generation sequencing // Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science. - 2013. - Vol. 138(1). - P. 64-74.
9. Guo X., Wang X., Yu X., Sun X., Zhou T. Molecular Identification and Genetic Variation of 13 Herbaceous Peony Cultivars Using SRAP Markers // Acta Horticulturae. -2011. - Vol. 918. - P. 333.
10. Han X.Y., Wang L.S., Shu Q.Y., Liu Z.A., Xu S.X., Tetsumura T. Molecular characterization of tree peony germplasm using sequence-related amplified polymorphism markers // Biochemical genetics. - 2008. - Vol. 46(3-4). - P. 162-179.
11. Hansen K.T., Elven R., Brochmann C. Molecules and morphology in concert: Tests of some hypotheses in arctic potentilla (Rosaceae) // American Journal of Botany. -2000. - Vol. 87(10). - P.1466-1479.
12. Hao Q., Liu Z.A., Shu Q.Y., Zhang R.E., De Rick J., Wang L.S. Studies on Paeonia cultivars and hybrids identification based on SRAP analysis // Hereditas. - 2008. - Vol. 145(1). - P. 38-47.
13. Harris S.A., Robinson J.P., Juniper B.E. Genetic clues to the origin of the apple // Trends in Genetics. - 2002. - Vol. 18(8). - P. 426-430. Hong D.Y., Zhou S.L. Paeonia (Paeoniaceae) in the Caucasus // Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society. - 2003. - Vol. 143(2). - P. 135-150.
14. Hong D.-Y. Peonies of the world: Taxonomy and phytogeography. - St. Louis: Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew Publishing, - 2010. - pp. 302.
15. Li G., Quiros C.F. Sequence-related amplified polymorphism (SRAP), a new marker system based on a simple PCR reaction: its application to mapping and gene tagging in Brassica // Theoretical and Applied Genetics. - 2001. - Vol. 103(2-3). - P. 455-461.
16. Mondini L., Noorani A., Pagnotta M.A. Assessing plant genetic diversity by molecular tools // Diversity. - 2009. - Vol. 1(1). - P. 19-35.
17. Moore G.A. Oranges and lemons: clues to the taxonomy of citrus from molecular markers // Trends Genet. - 2001. - Vol. 17. - P. 536-540.
18. Myles S., Boyko A.R., Owens C.L., Brown P.J., Grassi F., Aradhya M.K., et al. & Buckler E.S. Genetic structure and domestication history of the grape // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. - 2011. - Vol. 108(9). - P. 3530-3535.
19. Nei M., Li W.H. Mathematical model for studying genetic variation in terms of restriction endonucleases // PNAS. - 1979. - Vol. 76(10). - P. 5269-5273.
20. Pan K.-Y. Paeonia. / In: Flora Reipublicae Siniccae. 1979. - Vol. 27, - P. 37-59. Science Press, Beijing.
21. Peakall R., Smouse P.E. GenAlEx 6.4: genetic analysis in Excel. Population Genetic Software for teaching and research // Mol. Ecol. Notes. - 2010. - Vol. 6. - P. 288295.
22. Primack R.B., Miller-Rushing A.J. The role of botanical gardens in climate change research // New Phytologist. - 2009. - Vol. 182(2). - P. 303-313.
23. Rao V.R., Hodgkin T. Genetic diversity and conservation and utilization of plant genetic resources// Plant cell, tissue and organ culture. - 2002. - V. 68(1). - P. 1-19.
24. Robarts D.W., Wolfe A.D. Sequence-related amplified polymorphism (SRAP) markers: A potential resource for studies in plant molecular biology // Applications in plant sciences. - 2014. - Vol. 2(7). apps.1400017.
25. Sang T., Pan J., ZhangD., Ferguson D., Wang C., Pan K.Y., HongD.Y. Origins of polyploids: an example from peonies (Paeonia) and a model for angiosperms // Biological Journal of the Linnean Society. - 2004. - Vol. 82(4). - P. 561-571.
26. Stern F.C. A Study of the Genus Paeonia. - London: Royal Horticult. Soc., 1946. -
155 pp.
27. Tank D.C., Sang T. Phylogenetic Utility of the Glycerol-3-Phosphate Acyltransferase Gene: Evolution and Implications in Paeonia (Paeoniaceae) // Molecular phylogenetics and evolution. - 2001. - Vol. 19(3). - P. 421-429.
28. This P., Lacombe T., Thomas M.R. Historical origins and genetic diversity of wine grapes // Trends in Genetics. - 2006. - Vol. 22(9). - P. 511-519.
29. Tzanoudakis D. Karyotypes of four wild Paeonia species from Greece // Nordic J. Bot. - 1983. - Vol. 3. - P. 307-318.
30. Van de Peer Y., De Wachter Y. TREECON for Windows: a software package for the construction and drawing of evolutionary trees for the Microsoft Windows environment // Comput. Applic. Biosci. - 1994. - Vol. 10. - P. 569-570.
31. Yuan J.H., Cornille A., Giraud T., Cheng F.Y., Hu Y.H. Independent domestications of cultivated tree peonies from different wild peony species // Molecular ecology. - 2014. - Vol. 23(1). - P. 82-95.
32. Zhang J.J., Shu Q.Y., Liu Z.A., Ren H.X., Wang L.S., De Keyser E. Two EST-derived marker systems for cultivar identification in tree peony// Plant Cell Rep. - 2012. -Vol. 31. - P. 299-310.
Appendix Table
Characteristics of 54 Paeonia cultivars and species in this study
No * Name (Transliteration; variants) Originator Year Country Description **
1. Белый Парус (Belyi Parus) Sosnovets 1961 USSR Lac. Double, white, semi early
2. Памяти Гагарина (Pamiati Gagarina) Krasnova 1957 USSR Lac. Double, pink, midseason
3. Новость Алтая (Novost' Altaya; Novost Altaja) Lutchnik 1963 USSR P.lactiflora х anomala hybrid, Single, lilac-rosy, early
4. Мираж (Mirazh; Miraj, Mirage) Krasnova 1959 USSR Lac. Japanese, pink, midearly
5. Мирный (Mirnyi, Mirnij, Mirnii) Sosnovets 1952 USSR Lac. Double, pink white, early
6. Аркадий Гайдар (Arkady Gaidar; Arkadij Gaydar) Krasnova 1958 USSR Lac. Double, red, very late
7. Победа (Pobeda) Kupoljan 1957 USSR Lac. Double, red, late
8. Suruga_etalon Cyt.: Millet before 1955 France Lac. Japanese, red, late
9. Жемчужная россыпь (Zhenchuzhnaya rossyp) Gorobetz-Tyran 1989 USSR Lac. Japanese, pink, late
10. Вечерняя Москва (Vechernya Moskva) Sosnovets 1961 USSR Lac. Double, crimson, magenta, late
11. Восток (Vostok) Krasnova 1957 USSR Lac. Double, dark violet, midseason
12. Зорька (Zor'ka; Zorka) Sosnowets -Fomitschewa 1965 USSR Lac. Double, light pink, late
13. Весенний (Vesennii; Vesennij, Wesennij) Krasnova 1959 USSR Lac. Double, light pink, midseason
14. M-lle Leonie Callot (Syn. Mons. Charles Levêque') Calot 1861 France Lac. Double, pink, late midseason
15. Pierre Reignoux Dessert 1908 France Lac. Double, pink, midseason
16. Paeonia anomala L. N/a N/a N/a Pink form
17. Paeonia anomala L. N/a N/a N/a White form
18. Suruga Millet 1955 NL Lac. Japanese, red, late. R.
19. Новость Алтая_К (Novost' Altaya, Novost Altaja) Lutchnik 1963 USSR P.lactiflora х anomala hybrid, Single, lilac-rosy, early. R
20. Новость Алтая_А (Novost' Altaya, Novost Altaja) Lutchnik 1963 USSR P.lactiflora х anomala hybrid, Single, lilac-rosy, early. R
21. Орленок (Orlenok; Orlionok) Fomitcheva 1963 USSR Lac. Single, red, early
22. Paeonia lactiflora Pall. N/a
23. Paeonia tenuifolia L. N/a
24. Paeonia daurica subsp. mlokosewitschii (Lomakin) D.Y.Hong N/a
25. Albert Crousse Crousse 1893 France Lac. Double, pink, midseason
26. Arcturus Auten 1933 USA Lac. Single, red, very early
27. Arlequin Dessert & Mechin 1921 France Lac. Anemone, pink, midseason
28. Augustin D'Hour (Syn. General MacMahon) Calot 1867 France Lac. Double, red, midseason
29. Boule de Neige Calot 1862 France Lac. Double, white, early midseason
30. Couronne d'Or Calot 1873 France Lac. Double, white, late
Appendix Table. Continuation
31. Do Tell Auten 1946 USA Lac. Japanese, pink, midseason
32. Duc de Wellington Calot 1859 France Lac. Double, white, NL, but midseason
33. Duchesse de Nemours Calot 1856 France Lac. Double, white, early
34. Felix Crousse Crousse 1881 France Lac. Double, red, late midseason
35. Fortune Teller Auten 1936 France Lac. Single, red, not listed
36. Gigantea Calot 1860 France Lac. Double, pink, early midseason
37. Kelway's Majestic Kelway 1929 England Lac. Japanese, red, early
38. La Perle Crousse 1886 France Lac. Double, pink, midseason
39. La Rosiere Crousse 1888 France Lac. Semi-double, white, midseason
40. La Tulipe Calot 1872 France Lac. Double, pink, early midseason
41. Marguerite Gerard Crousse 1892 France Lac. Double, pink, midseason
42. Marie Crousse Crousse 1892 France Lac. Double, pink, midseason
43. Marie d'Hour Calot 1883 France Lac. Double, pink, midseason
44. Marie Lemoine Calot 1869 France Lac. Double, white, late
45. Madame Emile Galle Crousse 1881 France Lac. Double, pink, late
46. Madame Boulanger Crousse 1886 France Lac. Double, pink, late midseason
47. Madame de Verneville Crousse 1885 France Lac. Double, white, early
48. Monsieur Dupont Calot 1872 France Lac. Double, white, late midseason
49. Monsieur Jules Elie Crousse 1888 France Lac. Double, pink, early
50. Octavie Demay Calot 1867 France Lac. Double, pink, early
51. Pasteur Crousse 1896 France Lac. Double, pink, late midseason
52. Petite Renee Dessert & Mechin 1899 France Lac. Japanese, pink, midseason
53. Polar Star Sass & Interstate 1932 USA Lac. Japanese, white, midseason
54. Edulus Superba Lemon 1824 France Lac. Double, pink, early
Note: *Accessions 1-24 - are from the collection of CBG; 25-54 - from MBGNA. ** R - accessions for revision; Lac. - P. lactiflora cultivar; N/a - information not applicable; NL - information not listed in available sources
Власова А.Б., Миченер Д.С., Юхимук А.Н., Гайшун В.В., Агабалаева Е.В., Бриант Р., Спиридович Е.В. Генетическая дифференциация исторических сортов Paeonia на основе SRAP маркеров: документирование и сохранение ботанических коллекций // Труды Гос. Никит. ботан. сада. - Ялта, 2014. - Т. 139. - С. 187-199.
Идентификация генотипов Paeonia spp. генбанков открытого грунта из коллекций ботанических садов Беларуси и США было проведено на основе скрининга генома SRAP маркерами. Разработанные 113 SPAP маркеров (в среднем 9,4 локус на праймер) эффективно дифференцировали все исследованные 54 генотипа на меж- и внутривидовом уровнях, в том числе исторические сорта сорта Р. lactiflora европейской, американской и советской селекции, межвидовые гибриды и родительские виды, и позволили проанализировать генетическую взаимосвязь между образцами. Кластеризация генотипов в UPGMA и NJ филограммах и данные PCoA согласовывались с регионом селекции генотипов, имеющимися данными о происхождении и филогении видов; межвидовые гибриды 'Орленок' и 'Новость Алтая' располагались со своими родительскими видами. Регрессионный анализ выявил корреляцию между рядом генетических маркеров, родословной и морфологическими признаками. Разработанные маркеры полезны для дальнейшей паспортизации коллекций Paeonia, решения спорных вопросов происхождения сортов, обмена сертифицированным материалом, сохранения генетических ресурсов пионов.
Ключевые слова: Paeonia lactiflora Pall., Paeonia sp., пионы, SRAP маркеры, сорта, живые коллекции, генетическое разнообразие, сохранение.
