2007
DOI: 10.1016/j.scienta.2006.10.020
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Genetic characterization of different demes in Prunus persica revealed by RAPD markers

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
8
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
2
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The broad potential of persimmon retrotransposon primers for future analyses of classification and phylogenetic relationship was further made evident by the clearcut separation between persimmon and its several related species, the unambiguous clusters that were congruent with geographic origins within the persimmon species, and groupings of citrus, grape, and pear that were consistent with the genetic relationships or taxonomic classifications reported in these crops. In addition, we detected high similarity among peach and its variations, supporting the results of Cheng (2007). The IRAP molecular data generated by these persimmon retrotransposon primers revealed genotypes of high genetic similarity in peach, bud sports in persimmon, and different superior lines from 'Mandarin Oranges', which could all be distinguished well, suggesting that the transferable persimmon retrotransposon primers tested might offer a potential primer resource for variation identification, especially in bud sports.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 82%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The broad potential of persimmon retrotransposon primers for future analyses of classification and phylogenetic relationship was further made evident by the clearcut separation between persimmon and its several related species, the unambiguous clusters that were congruent with geographic origins within the persimmon species, and groupings of citrus, grape, and pear that were consistent with the genetic relationships or taxonomic classifications reported in these crops. In addition, we detected high similarity among peach and its variations, supporting the results of Cheng (2007). The IRAP molecular data generated by these persimmon retrotransposon primers revealed genotypes of high genetic similarity in peach, bud sports in persimmon, and different superior lines from 'Mandarin Oranges', which could all be distinguished well, suggesting that the transferable persimmon retrotransposon primers tested might offer a potential primer resource for variation identification, especially in bud sports.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 82%
“…DNA isolation of persimmon, apple, pear, and hawthorn followed the methods of Doyle and Doyle (1987); isolation of citrus, grape, loquat, kiwifruit, jujube, chestnut, and ginkgo DNA followed the methods of Cheng et al (2003); plum and peach DNA isolation followed the protocol of Cheng (2007). Quality and quantity of DNA preparations were checked by standard spectrophotometry and the samples were diluted to a concentration of 10 ng/μL before use.…”
Section: Genomic Dna Extractionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The markers provide a very reliable and convenient tool for analyzing genetic diversity of P. davidiana. Recent literatures from many studies reported genetic variations on peach and related species in the subgenus Amygdalus using molecular biological analyses Bouhadida et al, 2007;Cheng, 2007a;Cheng, 2007b;Cheng and Huang, 2009;Cipriani et al, 1999;Dirlewanger et al, 2002;Shiran, 2007;Sosinski et al, 2000;Testolin et al, 2000;Wang et al, 2002), however, the genetic diversity and genetic structure of natural populations of P. davidiana still remains unknown.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For cluster analysis, in addition, bootstrapping is performed to obtain the strength of clusters, which can be thought as a confidence limit and can be included in the dendrogram as percentage values 11, 13, 14. Some studies, further, provide all pairwise similarities in matrix form 9, 15–17…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%