2022
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0273499
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Morpho-molecular genetic diversity and population structure analysis in garden pea (Pisum sativum L.) genotypes using simple sequence repeat markers

Abstract: Garden pea (Pisum sativum L.) is a self-pollinated plant species which played an important role for the foundation of modern genetics. Genetic diversity among 56 garden pea genotypes was assessed using 12 morphological descriptors, 19 quantitative traits and 8 simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers. Eight morphological descriptors were found polymorphic, and highest Shannon diversity index was recorded for pod curvature (1.18). Mahalanobis D 2 illustrating genetic divergence arranged 56 genotypes into six cluste… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
11
1

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
(48 reference statements)
0
11
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Using Tocher’s approach (D 2 analysis) divided the genotypes into 9 diverse groups with four monogenotypic pointing towards diversity among genotypes [ 34 , 35 ]. The clustering pattern showed that genotypes with the same geographical distribution fall into different clusters, demonstrating that the genetic makeup of the genotype has an impact on the clustering pattern [ 18 ]. The utilization of genotypes in hybridization from the same cluster would presumably little diverge from one another and therefore, they may not be able to synthesize desirable segregants [ 36 , 37 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Using Tocher’s approach (D 2 analysis) divided the genotypes into 9 diverse groups with four monogenotypic pointing towards diversity among genotypes [ 34 , 35 ]. The clustering pattern showed that genotypes with the same geographical distribution fall into different clusters, demonstrating that the genetic makeup of the genotype has an impact on the clustering pattern [ 18 ]. The utilization of genotypes in hybridization from the same cluster would presumably little diverge from one another and therefore, they may not be able to synthesize desirable segregants [ 36 , 37 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…evaluations of morphological features, isozymes, total seed protein and molecular markers [ 1 ]. The assessment of genetic diversity and relationships of germplasm through morphological characterization is the first step in any breeding program [ 18 ], although they involve lots of labour and time besides sensitive to environmental factors [ 17 ]. Molecular markers are therefore viewed as the best tools to understand genetic relationships in crop species as they are independent of environmental variables, dominant/co-dominant in nature and suggest precise scoring techniques [ 18 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These techniques allow for the grouping of genotypes based on agricultural, biochemical, and physiological traits, thereby facilitating the selection of diverse parents for crossbreeding programs and enhancing genetic diversity 61 . By utilizing these multivariate analysis techniques, distant groups of genotypes can be identified based on their traits, enabling their use as parents in crossbreeding programs to increase genetic diversity and potentially improve desirable traits in the offspring 62 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, the garlic germplasm characterization should continue using phenotypic and molecular approaches for more accurate and reliable results. Specifically, simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers have been a standard tool in genetic variability studies and are often applied in plant breeding (Sharma et al, 2022;de-Oliveira et al, 2023), including garlic, due to their informativeness and stability (da Cunha et al, 2014;Poljuha et al, 2021;Li et al, 2022).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%