2011
DOI: 10.1590/s0100-204x2011000700006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Genomic behavior of hybrid combinations between elephant grass and pearl millet

Abstract: -The objective of this work was to evaluate the genomic behavior of hybrid combinations between elephant grass (Pennisetum purpureum) and pearl millet (P. glaucum). Tetraploid (AAA'B) and pentaploid (AA'A'BB) chromosome races resulting from the backcross of the hexaploid hybrid to its parents elephant grass (A'A'BB) and pearl millet (AA) were analyzed as to chromosome number and DNA content. Genotypes of elephant grass, millet, and triploid and hexaploid induced hybrids were compared. Pentaploid and tetraploid… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
5
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
(21 reference statements)
2
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Similar results were found by Leão et al (2011), who evaluated the genetic diversity of 136 accessions of grape by quantitative morpho-agronomic traits and obtained 30 groups, with the largest concentrating only 30.14% of the accessions, indicating genetic variability and good division of the accessions among groups. Other studies have demonstrated that the number of groups formed is not always a synonym of high variability, because there may be a great accumulation of genotypes in a single group (Campos et al, 2010;Silva et al, 2013).…”
Section: Cluster Analyses Based On Quantitative Morpho-agronomic Traitssupporting
confidence: 85%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Similar results were found by Leão et al (2011), who evaluated the genetic diversity of 136 accessions of grape by quantitative morpho-agronomic traits and obtained 30 groups, with the largest concentrating only 30.14% of the accessions, indicating genetic variability and good division of the accessions among groups. Other studies have demonstrated that the number of groups formed is not always a synonym of high variability, because there may be a great accumulation of genotypes in a single group (Campos et al, 2010;Silva et al, 2013).…”
Section: Cluster Analyses Based On Quantitative Morpho-agronomic Traitssupporting
confidence: 85%
“…These results indicate variability in the germplasm bank, since although 40% of genotypes are gathered in only one group, 10 groups were formed. Similar results were obtained by Leão et al (2011), who evaluated 136 accessions of grape by multi-category descriptors and obtained nine groups formed, with good dispersion of the genotypes in each group, given that the group with the most accessions had 35.3% of the total 136, indicating great variability. Silva et al (2013), however, obtained 12 groups, evaluating 88 accessions of coffee, but also reported low variability, with 54.5% of the accessions in only one group.…”
Section: Cluster Analyses Based On the Discrete Qualitative (Multi-casupporting
confidence: 83%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The reunion of two genomes in a single nucleus results in intergenomic conflicts, leading to genetic and epigenetic reorganizations (Riddle;Birchler, 2003). This has been evidenced in works carried out with natural and synthetic hybrids, which have demonstrated that the new genomic constitution, resulting from hybridization, leads to elimination of DNA sequences (Feldman et al, 1997;Shaked et al, 2001;Leitch;Bennett, 2004;Leão et al, 2011;Nunes et al, 2013), chromosome rearrangements (Pires et al, 2004;Pontes et al, 2004;Udall;Quijada;Osborn, 2005), chromosome elimination (Germand et al, 2005;Ishii et al, 2010;Sanei et al, 2011;Andrade-Vieira et al, 2013), epigenetic alterations such as methylation of coding and non-coding DNA sequences Feldman, 2004;Salmon;Ainouche;Wendel, 2005;Lukens et al, 2006), gene silencing (Lee;Chen, 2001;Doyle et al, 2008;Gaeta et al, 2007;) and activation of genes and retroelements that alter the expression of adjacent genes (Adams;Wendel, 2005;Feldman;Levy, 2002Levy, , 2003.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%