2014
DOI: 10.1080/15427528.2013.861889
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Look into Genetic Diversity of Enset (Ensete ventricosum(Welw.) Cheesman) Using Transferable Microsatellite Sequences of Banana in Ethiopia

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
20
2

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
2
20
2
Order By: Relevance
“…This is similar to what has been reported based on SSR marker analysis of enset genetic diversity (Gerura et al , 2019), but differs from what has been reported by Olango et al (2015), which reported that higher gene diversity in cultivated enset population (0.59) than wild enset population (0.40), but similar hetrozygosity for cultivated and wild enset populatons (0.5). The genetic diversity for both cultivated and wild enset reported in the current study (Table 4) is lower than previous enset genetic diversity studies conducted using SSR makers (Getachew et al , 2014; Olango et al, 2015 ; Gerura et al , 2019). These differences and discrepancies might be due to the nature of the different types of markers used.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 82%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This is similar to what has been reported based on SSR marker analysis of enset genetic diversity (Gerura et al , 2019), but differs from what has been reported by Olango et al (2015), which reported that higher gene diversity in cultivated enset population (0.59) than wild enset population (0.40), but similar hetrozygosity for cultivated and wild enset populatons (0.5). The genetic diversity for both cultivated and wild enset reported in the current study (Table 4) is lower than previous enset genetic diversity studies conducted using SSR makers (Getachew et al , 2014; Olango et al, 2015 ; Gerura et al , 2019). These differences and discrepancies might be due to the nature of the different types of markers used.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 82%
“…Genetic analysis of intraspecific variation in enset has mainly relied upon data for ‘anonymous’ molecular markers, such as amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLP) (Tsegaye & Struik, 2002), random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) (Birmeta et al, 2004), inter simple sequence repeats (ISSR) (Tobiaw & Bekele, 2013) and microsatellites (simple sequence repeat (SSR) polymorphisms (Getachew et al , 2014; Olango et al , 2015; Gerura et al , 2019). Given that enset is vegetatively propagated, genetic divergence among cultivars may be minimal (McKey et al, 2010) and could be difficult to detect using these marker types.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Only few reports used SSR markers for study in population of wild bananas such as M. balbisiana (Ge et al 2005) and Ensete ventricosum (Getachew et al 2014). None of them has validated markers to be used across the banana species diversity.…”
Section: Wild Banana Species Fingerprintingmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Molecular markers are powerful tools in the assessment of genetic diversity which can assist the management of plant genetic resources [19,20]. Previous enset genetic diversity studies have used molecular techniques including ampli ed fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) [14], random ampli cation of polymorphic DNA (RAPD) [21], inter simple sequence repeat (ISSR) [22] and simple sequence repeat (SSR) [23]. SSR markers are highly polymorphic, co-dominant and the primer sequences are generally well conserved within and between related species [24].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%