“…A number of molecular marker techniques have been used to overcome the limitations of morphological and biochemical markers in citrus genetic classification. Protein, isozymes (Rahman and Nito, 1994), and molecular markers such as restriction fragment length polymorphisms (RFLPs) (Liou et al, 1996), random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) (Machado et al,1996;Baig et al, 2009;Sun et al,2012;Malik et al,2012), sequence-characterized amplified regions (SCARs) (Nicolosi et al, 2000), amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) (Campos et al, 2005), microsatellites simple sequence repeats (SSRs) (Oliveira et al, 2002;Ahmad et al, 2003;Fu et al, 2003;Barkley et al, 2006;Polat, 2009;Jannati et al, 2009;El-Mouei et al, 2011;Uzun et al, 2011;Cristofani-Yaly et al, 2011;Garcίa-Lor et al, 2012;Polat et al, 2012;Kacar et al, 2013;Al-Mouei and Choumane, 2014), inter-simple sequence repeats (ISSRs) (De Pasquale et al, 2006), sequence related amplified polymorphism (SRAP) (Uzun et al, 2009;Uzun et al, 2011;Polat et al, 2012;Kacar et al, 2013), sequencespecific amplified polymorphism (S-SAP) and selectively amplified microsatellite polymorphic loci (SAMPL) have been employed to elucidating genetic diversity, determining parentage, and revealing phylogenetic relationships among various Citrus species. Compared to morphological data, molecular markers provide abundant information, are highly efficient, and are insensitive to environmental factors (Barkley et al, 2006).…”