GENETIC DIVERGENCE AMONG Passiflora cristalina Vanderpl & Zappi. GENOTYPES BASED ON FLOWER AND FRUIT CHARACTERISTICS

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate the genetic divergence among Passiflora cristalina genotypes and quantify the relative contribution of 30 flower and fruit characteristics, seeking to support the preservation and characterization of genetic resources of the species for preservation and use in future breeding programs. We evaluated 150 fruit and 150 flowers collected in 15 genotypes with naturally occurring in the municipality of Alta Floresta, MT. The characterization of genotypes was performed through 30 morphological characteristics of flowers and fruits, 21 of these for flower and 9 for fruit. Data were evaluated using the principal components and cluster methods obtained by UPGMA method from the similarity matrix (Euclidian mean distance), using the Genes software. By principal component analysis, it has been found that the first three components have absorbed 52.11% of the accumulated variation. The characteristics that most contributed to the discrimination of genotypes were fresh fruit weight, stigma length, length of corona filaments, fruit width, petal width and pulp weight, which are more responsive for the selection of P.cristalina genotypes. Smaller contributions to diversity were obtained from anther width, bract width and fruit length. The smallest contributions for diversity were obtained from the following characteristics: anther width, bract width and fruit length. Through UPGMA clustering method, it was found that there is a large genetic divergence among genotypes analyzed because all genotypes were grouped with over 50% of dissimilarity. This study identified genotypes 4, 5 and 9 as the most divergent and therefore the most suitable for breeding in future breeding programs and genetic conservation of the species.

Research Article Characterization of a segregating population of passion fruit with resistance to <i>Cowpea</i> <i>aphid-borne</i> <i>mosaic</i> <i>virus</i> through morpho-agronomic descriptors

“…Despite similar, this result differs from that reported by Castro et al (2012), who characterized accessions of P. edulis using 20 morphoagronomic descriptors and found 67.17% of the total variation in the first three components. Silveira et al (2016), in turn, quantified the relative contribution of 30 flower and fruit traits in Passiflora and showed that the first and second variables explained 22.45% and 16.81% of the variation, respectively, and 52.11% of the total variation was explained by the first three variables. By adopting the methodology proposed by Jolliffe (1973), which establishes the elimination of descriptors whose association between eigenvectors and eigenvalues is lower than 0.7, seven morpho-agronomic descriptors could be discarded: one related to the leaf (LL), three related to the flower (BW, CLFL, and LS), and three related to the fruit (FRW, FRM, and MFP).…”

Genetic divergence of native palms of Oenocarpus distichus considering biometric fruit variables

“…distichus individuals and consequently their heterosis in subsequent cycles, as reported for P . volubilis 29,32 . Similar groupings with the Tocher and UPGMA methods, the consistent genetic divergences between genotypes 2, 5 and 8 and the low number of groups may indicate a common ancestry for this plant in the region 12 , similar to that reported for Bactris gasipaes Kunth.…”

“…Matrix separation into heterogeneous groups may indicate distinct gene pools for controlled hybridizations and reciprocal recurrent selection and, therefore, be interesting for genetic improvement 18 . Additionally, the grouping restricts the crosses number, reducing costs and increasing genetic gains in subsequent cycles, due to the reduced in breeding coefficient in the population by excluding similar individuals 32 .…”

“…In a graphic dispersion of canonical variables the grouping was compatible with the ones grouped by Tocher’s method. The bigger contribution of the SM, AT and WF characteristics to genetic divergence is important in selection programs, for being more responsive in the superior genotype identification 32 . The variable FL, even presenting lower relative contribution to genotype divergence, should not be removed from the analyses because it is easy to determine using non-destructive methods 36 .…”