AFLP analysis of genetic relationships among aromatic grapevines (Vitis vinifera)

Abstract

Genotypic diversity has been detected among aromatic grapevines (Vitis vinifera) by molecular markers (AFLPs). The 22 primer-pairs generated a total of 1,331 bands of which 564 (40%) were polymorphic over all the genotypes. The bootstrap analysis pointed out that a large number of polymorphic bands (200-400) has to be used for a better estimation of the genetic distances among genotypes; 383 polymorphic AFLP bands were used for the cluster and the principal coordinate analyses because they did not present missing data across all the genotypes. The cluster analysis (UPGMA), based on polymorphic AFLP markers, revealed no relationship between the Moscato and Malvasia grapevines. The Malvasias, unlike the Moscatos distinguished by their distinct muscat aroma, have to be considered a more complex group because it includes muscat and non-muscat grapevines. The principal coordinate analysis (PCO) confirmed the pattern of the cluster analysis only for those varieties which presented a low coefficient of dissimilarity, while for the other varieties there was no correspondence between the two analyses. The pattern of aggregation among aromatic grapevines in the cluster and principal coordinate analyses does not support any classification that might include an aromatic grapevine group in V. vinifera. Even though some synonyms and homonyms are present among aromatic grapevines (V. vinifera), genetic diversity exists among genotypes in AFLP markers.

Retrotransposon-based molecular markers for grapevine species and cultivars identification

“…Different PCR-based molecular markers have been used for the comparison of grapevine genotypes, including RAPD and ISSR systems (Herrera et al 2002), microsatellites (Thomas and Scott 1993;Bowers et al 1996;Sefc et al 1999) and AFLPs (Cervera et al 1998;Fanizza et al 2003).…”

“…The coefficient of variation (CV) trend from five to 120 polymorphic bands was evaluated on Nei coefficient matrices for SSR markers and on dissimilarity coefficient (1-SM) matrices (Fanizza et al 2003) for multilocus markers. For each molecular marker system the CV trend was calculated three times on three independent sets of 1,000 bootstrap analyses performed with the Phylip package (Felsenstein 1989) on three randomised matrices of presence/absence.…”

Molecular Markers for Assessing Must Varietal Origin

“…Other molecular markers have been applied to characterize grapevine varieties such as inter-simple sequence repeat (ISSR), randomly amplified polymorphic DNA, amplified fragment length polymorphism, and chloroplastidial microsatellites, among others (Benjak et al 2005;Cunha et al 2009;Fanizza et al 2003;Herrera et al 2002;Moreno et al 1998). ISSR markers are frequently used on genetic diversity, phylogeny, gene tagging, genome mapping, and evolutionary biology studies (Godwin et al 1997;Gupta et al 1994;Reddy et al 2002;Zietkiewicz et al 1994).…”

DNA Markers for Food Products Authentication

“…Different sets of molecular markers were used in studies on the identification of grapevine varieties [77,[113][114][115][116]. It is reported that the selection of a set of few SSR markers can be used to discriminate successfully V. vinifera L. varieties and to trace the row material used to produce the must [33].…”