Advertisement

Sugar Tech

, Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 23–29 | Cite as

Microsatellite DNA marker-assisted selection ofSaccharum spontaneum cytoplasm-derived germplasm

  • Y. B. Pan
  • T. L. Tew
  • R. J. Schnell
  • R. P. Viator
  • E. P. Richard
  • M. P. Grisham
  • W. H. White
Research Article

Abstract

New lines of Saccharum hybrids with an array of S. spontaneum cytoplasm backgrounds are reported. To expand the genetic base of sugarcane, we made eleven bi-parental crosses between ten S. spontaneum (S) and six commercial-type sugarcane (C) clones during the 2001 crossing season. Prior to crossing, all the maternal S. spontaneum inflorescences were emasculated by immersion in a 50°C circulating water bath for 5 minutes. Analysis of microsatellite fingerprints between parents and progeny allowed us to classify 1,952 progeny grown out from these crosses into four genotypic classes. Class H progeny inherited microsatellite alleles from both the S. spontaneum and the commercial-type parents and were, therefore, considered being F1 hybrids. Class S and Class C progeny inherited microsatellite alleles only from one parent and were considered to be either selfs of either parent or F1 hybrids that only inherited allele(s) from one parent. Class X progeny inherited non-parental microsatellite allele(s) in addition to the allele(s) from the maternal S. spontaneum parent and were considered to be contaminants. With the exception of one cross, eight to ten Class H progeny were pre-selected from each cross while still in seedling greenhouse and were backcrossed with commercial-type sugarcane clones. The remaining progeny were transplanted into a breeding nursery for phenotypic evaluation that concurred with the molecular classification. Pearson Correlation Coefficients between molecular and phenotypic classifications were inconsistent that justified the need of molecular markers in the selection process. This study demonstrated that the molecular approach of fingerprinting progeny to confirm parentage prior to field planting even with only one microsatellite marker might substantially increase selection efficiency.

Key words

Microsatellite DNA Markets Selection Sugarcane Cytoplasm-derived germplasm 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Al-Janabi, S.M.,McClelland, M.,Petersen, C.and Sobral, B.W.S. (1994). Phylogenetic analysis of organellar DNA sequences in the Andropogoneae: Saccharinae.Theor. Appl. Genet.88: 933–944.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Burner, D.M. (1997). Chromosome transmission and meiotic behavior in various sugarcane crosses.J. Amer. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol,17: 38–50.Google Scholar
  3. Burner, D.M.and Legendre, B.L. (1993a). Sugarcane genome amplification for the subtropics: a twenty year effort.Sugar Cane,3: 5–10.Google Scholar
  4. Burner, D.M.and Legendre, B.L. (1993b). Chromosome transmission and meiotic stability of sugarcane(Saccharum spp.) hybrid derivatives.Crop Sci.,33: 600–606.Google Scholar
  5. Copersucar Technology Center (1987). Copersucar International Sugarcane Breeding Workshop. Cupersucar Technology Center, Piracicaba-SP, Brazil.Google Scholar
  6. Cordeiro, G.M.,Taylor, G.O.and Henry, R.J. (2000). Characterisation of microsatellite markers from sugarcane.(Saccharum sp.), a highly polyploid species.Plant Sci.,155: 161–168.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cordeiro, G.M.and Henry, R.J. (2001). Evaluation of microsatellites (Simple Sequence Repeats) as genetic markers in sugarcane,Proc. Intl. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol.24: 627–629.Google Scholar
  8. Cordeiro, G.M.,Casu, R.,Mclntyre, C.L.,Manners, JMand Henry, R.J. (2001). Microsatellite marker from sugarcane(Saccharum sp.) ESTs transferable toErianthus and sorghum.Plant Sci.,160: 1151–1123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cordeiro, G.M., Pan, Y-B and Henry, R.J. (2003). Sugarcane microsatellites for the assessment of genetic diversity in sugarcane germplasm.Plant Sci., 181–189.Google Scholar
  10. Da Silva, J.A.G. (2001). Preliminary analysis of microsatellite markers derived from sugarcane expressed sequence tags (ESTs).Genet. Mol. Biol.24(1-4): 155–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. D’Hont, A, Lu, Y-H, Feldmann, P. and Glaszmann, J.C. (1993). Cytoplasmic diversity in sugarcane revealed by heterologous probes.Sugar Cane(1): 12–15.Google Scholar
  12. Dunckelman, P.H.and Legendre, B.L. (1982). Guide to sugarcane breeding in the temperate zone. USDA-ARS, ARM-S-22. New Orleans.Google Scholar
  13. Edwards, A.,Civitello, A.,Hammond, H.A.and Caskey, C.T. (1991). DNA typing and genetic mapping with trimeric and tetrameric tandem repeats.Am. J. Human Genet.59: 746–756.Google Scholar
  14. Grivet, L,D’Hont, A,Roques, D,Feldmann, P,Lanaud, C.and Glaszmann, J.C. (1996). RFLP mapping in cultivated sugarcaneSaccharum spp.): Genome organization in a highly polyploid and aneuploid interspecific hybrid. Genetics142: 987–1000.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Heinz, DJ (1987). Introduction, In: D. J. Heinz (ed.) Sugarcane Improvement through Breeding, Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 1–5.Google Scholar
  16. Jannoo, N,Forget, L, andDookun, A (2001) Contribution of microsatellites to sugarcane breeding program in Mauritius. Proc. Intl. Soc. Sugar. Cane Technol. 24: 637–639.Google Scholar
  17. Jeffreys, AJ,Wilson, Vand Thein, SL (1985) Hypervariable minisatellite regions in human DNA. Nature 314:67–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Machado, Jr GR,Walker, DI,Bressiani, JAand Da Silva, JAG (1995) Emasculation of sugarcane tassels using hot water. Proc. Int. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol. 22(2):346–351.Google Scholar
  19. Melloto-Passarin, DM, Calsar-Junior, T and Carrer, H (2004) Complete chloroplast DNA sequence of sugarcane reveals similarity and diversity amongSaccharum species, sorghum, maize, rice and wheat. Plant Genome XII Conference, W124.Google Scholar
  20. Milligan, SB,Martin, FA,Bischoff, KP,Quebedeaux, JP,Dufrene, EO,Quebedeaux, KL,Hoy, JW,Reagan, TE,Legendre, BLand Miller, JD (1994) Registration of ‘LCP 85- 384’ sugarcane. Crop Sci. 34(3):819–820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nagai, C (1984) Emasculation of sugarcane tassels by hot-water treatment. Ann. Rep. Expt. Sta., Hawaii Sugar Plant. Assn. p.3–4.Google Scholar
  22. Pan, Y-B,Burner, DMand Legendre, BL (2000) An assessment of the phylogenetic relationship among sugarcane and related taxa based on the nucleotide sequence of 5S rRNA intergenic spacers. Genetica 108:285–295.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pan, Y-B,Cordeiro, GM,Richard, Jr EPand Henry, RJ (2003a) Molecular genotyping of sugarcane clones with microsatellite DNA markers. Maydica 48:319–329.Google Scholar
  24. Pan, Y-B, Miller, JD, Schnell, RJ, Richard, Jr RP and Wei, Q (2003b) Application of microsatellite and RAPD fingerprints in the Florida sugarcane variety program. Sugar Cane Intl. March/ April 2003:19–28.Google Scholar
  25. Pan, Y-B,Burner, DM,Wei, Q,Cordeiro, GM,Legendre, BL,and Henry, RJ (2004a) NewSaccharum hybrids inS. spontaneum cytoplasm developed through a combination of conventional and molecular breeding approaches. Plant Genetic Resources 2(2): 131–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pan, Y-B, Burner, DM, Legendre, BL, Grisham, MP and White,WH (2004b) An assessment of the genetic diversity within a collection ofSaccharum spontaneum with RAPD-PCR. Genet. Res. Crop Evol. (In press).Google Scholar
  27. Piperidis, G,Taylor, GOand Smith, GR (2001) A microsatellite marker database for fingerprinting sugarcane clones. Proc Intl. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol. 24:632–633.Google Scholar
  28. Polymeropoulos, MH,Xiao, H,Rath, DSand Merril, CR (1991) Tetranucleotide repeat polymorphism at the human tyrosine hydroxylase gene. Nuc. Acids Res. 19(13):3753.Google Scholar
  29. Roach, BT (1969) Cytological studies inSaccharum: chromosome transmission in interspecific and intergeneric crosses. Proc. Intl. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol. 13:901–920.Google Scholar
  30. SAS Institute (1998) The SAS system for Windows. Release 7.00. Version 4.10. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
  31. Tai, PYP (1989) Progress and problems of intergeneric hybridization in sugarcane breeding, Proc. Inter-Am. Sugar Cane Sem. Vol.I:391- 395.Google Scholar
  32. Tai PYP,Miller JDand Legendre BL (1994) Preservation ofSaccharum spontaneum germplasm through storage of true seeds. Sugar Cane 6:3–8.Google Scholar
  33. Tew, TL, White, WH, Grisham, MP, Dufrene, EO, Garrison,DD, Veremis, JC, Pan, Y-B, Richard, Jr EP, Legendre, BL and Miller, JD (2003) Registration of ‘HoCP 96-540’ Sugarcane. Crop Science (In press)Google Scholar
  34. Veremis, JC,Tew, TLand Pan, Y-B (2003) Genetic diversity for tolerance to freeze injury among F1 hybrids betweenS. spontaneum and commercial-type sugarcane. Sugar J. 66(1):26.Google Scholar
  35. Weber, JLand May, PE (1989) Abundant class of human DNA polymorphisms which can be typed using the polymerase chain reaction. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 44:388–396.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Sugar Research & Promotion 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Y. B. Pan
    • 1
  • T. L. Tew
    • 1
  • R. J. Schnell
    • 2
  • R. P. Viator
    • 1
  • E. P. Richard
    • 1
  • M. P. Grisham
    • 1
  • W. H. White
    • 1
  1. 1.USDA-ARS, Southern Regional Research CenterSugarcane Research UnitHoumaUSA
  2. 2.USDA-ARSSubtropical Horticulture Research StationMiamiUSA

Personalised recommendations