Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-v2bm5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T15:02:17.491Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Deciphering population structure and diversity in Luffa cylindrica (L.) M. Roem. using morphological and sequence-related amplified polymorphism markers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 July 2015

Ruchi Tyagi
Affiliation:
Department of Bioscience and Biotechnology, Banasthali University, Banasthali-304022, Rajasthan, India
Vinay Sharma*
Affiliation:
Department of Bioscience and Biotechnology, Banasthali University, Banasthali-304022, Rajasthan, India
Amish Kumar Sureja
Affiliation:
Division of Vegetable Science, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi-110 012, India
Anilabh Das Munshi
Affiliation:
Division of Vegetable Science, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi-110 012, India
Lalit Arya
Affiliation:
Division of Genomic Resources, National Research Centre on DNA Fingerprinting, IARI, New Delhi-110 012, India
Manjusha Verma
Affiliation:
Division of Genomic Resources, National Research Centre on DNA Fingerprinting, IARI, New Delhi-110 012, India
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: vinaysharma30@yahoo.co.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Luffa cylindrica (L.) M. Roem. is an underutilized vegetable and a potential biodiesel crop for future. Its fruits are edible and used as vegetable. To aid in the selection of lines for breeding, genetic variation and structure of ten populations of L. cylindrica were determined with three morphological characters and 23 sequence-related amplified polymorphism (SRAP) markers. All the three morphological characters were found diverse among 45 accessions. The SRAP primers produced a total of 177 bands, out of which 129 were polymorphic. Informative markers assessed by different measures (polymorphism information content = 0.18, marker index = 1.26, resolving power = 2.87) will direct the selection of primers for cultivar identification in L. cylindrica. Low level of genetic differentiation among populations and higher level within populations (Gst= 0.4073, Nm= 0.7277, He= 0.124, I= 0.20) was detected that might be due to cross-pollinated nature of L. cylindrica. The clustering pattern obtained through dendrogram and principal coordinate analysis was loosely concordant with the geographical distribution. The Bayesian structure analysis indicated an admixture type of population distribution. The results designate that SRAP and morphological markers are informative for characterization of L. cylindrica and identification of distinctive cultivars.

Type
Short Communications
Copyright
Copyright © NIAB 2015 

Introduction

Luffa cylindrica is an annual vine commonly called sponge gourd, loofah, vegetable sponge, bath sponge or dish cloth gourd (2n= 2x= 26) (Chandra, Reference Chandra1995). It is the most cultivated species in India (Prakash et al., Reference Prakash, Pandey, Radhamani and Bisht2013a, Reference Prakash, Radhamani, Pandey and Yadavb). It has wide industrial applications (Oboh and Aluyor, Reference Oboh and Aluyor2009; Partap et al., Reference Partap, Kumar, Sharma and Jha2012) but considered an underutilized crop as primarily grown for domestic consumption and commercial cultivation is secondary (Malik et al., Reference Malik, Ellington, Wehner and Sanders2001; Silva et al., Reference Silva, Ranil and Fonseka2012; Jaenicke and Höschie-Zeiedon, Reference Jaenicke and Höschie-Zeiedon2006). Prakash et al. (Reference Prakash, Pati, Arya, Pandey and Verma2014) conducted genetic diversity in Luffa species; however, knowledge about the genetic diversity and population structure of L. cylindrica is scarce. Therefore, there is an urgency of characterization of genetic structure for effective conservation, management and utilization of L. cylindrica. Sequence-related amplified polymorphism (SRAP) marker (Li and Quiros, Reference Li and Quiros2001) that amplifies the open reading frames is becoming the marker of choice for genetic diversity, gene mapping and genotypes fingerprinting (Li et al., Reference Li, Gao, Yang and Quiros2003) due to their simplicity, reliability, reasonable throughput rate and easy isolation of bands for sequencing. The objectives of this study were: (1) to evaluate SRAP marker effectiveness in cultivar identification; (2) to study genetic diversity in L. cylindrica for use in breeding programmes; (3) to determine the genetic structure of L. cylindrica population.

Experimental

The sampling strategy consisted of assemblage of 45 accessions from different geographical regions of India. (Table S1, available online). These accessions were selfed and maintained as pure lines in the fields of IARI, New Delhi during March to May 2013.

For morphological characterization, three seed characters, viz. seed coat colour, seed surface and seed wing's presence or absence based on Bal et al. (Reference Bal, Hari, Radha, Madhusudan, Bhuwon and Madhusudan2004) descriptor with some modifications (Table S1, available online) were documented.

For SRAP marker analysis, total genomic DNA was extracted from young leaves using the Cetyl Trimethyl Ammonium Bromide (CTAB) method (Saghai-Maroof et al., Reference Saghai-Maroof, Soliman, Jorgesm and Allard1984). A total of 60 different SRAP primer combinations (ten forward and six reverse primers) were used (Table 1). 12.5 μl reaction contained 50 ng DNA, 1X Taq buffer, 0.2 mM deoxyribo Nucleoside Tri Phosphates (dNTPs), 1.5 mM MgCl2, 8 μM each of forward and reverse primer and 0.5 U Taq DNA polymerase (Thermo-Scientific, Waltham, Massachusetts, USA). The PCR amplification was carried out in Bioer-Gene Procycler using the following thermal profile: 5 min at 94°C followed by five cycles of 1 min at 94°C, 1 min at 35°C, and 2 min at 72°C; 35 cycles of 1 min at 94°C, 1 min at 50°C, and 1 min at 72°C and a final extension of 5 min at 72°C. The amplification products were run in 2% (w/v) agarose gel in 1X Tris Borate EDTA (TBE) buffer with 50 bp and 1 Kb ladder (Thermo-Scientific).

Table 1 The SRAP forward and reverse primers used for Luffa cylindrica accessions

The marker performance was investigated by calculating polymorphism information content (PIC), marker index (MI), resolving power (Rp) and percent polymorphism (P%) (Powell et al., Reference Powell, Morgante, Andre, Hanafey, Vogel, Tingey and Rafalski1996; Prevost and Wilkinson, Reference Prevost and Wilkinson1999; De Riek et al., Reference De Riek, Calsyn, Everaert, Bockstaele and Loose2001). Population genetic diversity parameters were determined by the POPGENE 1.31 (Yeh and Boyle, University of Alberta, Canada; Yeh and Boyle, Reference Yeh and Boyle1997) (Table 2). Dendrogram and principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) was carried out through the NTSYS-pc 2.20 (Rohlf, Setauket, New York; Rohlf, Reference Rohlf2000) and population structure by using the STRUCTURE 2.3.4 (Dr. Sung-Chur Sim, Ohio State University; Pritchard et al., Reference Pritchard, Stephens and Donnelly2000).

Table 2 Genetic diversity within populations of Luffa cylindrica

N a= observed number of alleles, N e= effective number of alleles, H e= Nei's (Reference Nei1973) gene diversity, G st= coefficient of differentiation, N m= estimate of gene flow, N m= 0.5 (1 − G st)/G st (McDermott and McDonald, Reference McDermott and McDonald1993), I= Shannon's information index.

Discussion

SRAP along with morphological markers provide valuable information about the existing diversity of L. cylindrica. Variation in seed traits was reported earlier by Prakash et al. (Reference Prakash, Pandey, Radhamani and Bisht2013a, Reference Prakash, Radhamani, Pandey and Yadavb). Hence, we studied within species variation in seed traits; however, insignificant diversity was observed which might be due to few traits and more traits should be incorporated in future studies. The primers Me3-Em5, Me5-Em6, Me9-Em5, Me3-Em6 and Me4-Em1 had higher Rp, PIC, MI and P% values, and were more informative for genetic diversity and cultivar identification (Table S2, available online). Nei's gene diversity (H e= 0.120) was comparable to dicotyledons (H e= 0.0960) (Hamrick et al., Reference Hamrick, Godt and Sherman-Broyles1992) and similarity coefficient value of 0.77 suggests moderate genetic diversity. Our results were in conformity with previous studies on L. cylindrica (Cruz et al., Reference Cruz, Tolentino, Altoveros, Villavicencio, Siopongco, dela Vina and Laude1997; Marr et al., Reference Marr, Bhattarai and Xia2005). L. cylindrica is an annual, wild, monoceious and self-compatible crop (Sujatha et al., Reference Sujatha, Chithakari, Raghuvardhan, Prasad, Khan, Sadanandam and Christopher2013; Silva et al., Reference Silva, Ranil and Fonseka2012; Sinnot and Bloch, Reference Sinnot and Bloch1943). As long-lived perennials have higher genetic diversity as compared with annual or short-lived perennials (Hamrick and Godt, Reference Hamrick and Godt1996; Nybom and Bartish, Reference Nybom and Bartish2000; Nybom, Reference Nybom2004) and self-incompatibility maintains high genetic diversity (Borba et al., Reference Borba, Semir and Shepherd2001), thus supports our results. West Bengal and Uttar Pradesh population exhibit highest genetic diversity (~0.190), which might be due to large number of accessions in both populations (Table 2) as compared with other six populations ( < 0.154). Heterozygosity measured by molecular markers is significantly correlated with population size (Frankham, Reference Frankham1996). Small groupings were observed in sub-clusters in both Unweighted pair group method with arithmetic average (UPGMA) and PCoA; however, no association was found between genetic distance and geographic region (Figs S1 and S2, available online). Regional isolation may not reproduce the genetic make-up of diverse accessions due to dispersal of seeds from their native cultivation places (Kumar and Shekhawat, Reference Kumar and Shekhawat2009) and thus no association.

Self-pollinated crops have low diversity within populations than cross-pollinated (Huang et al., Reference Huang, Zhang and Li2009) and small animals promote gene flow between populations (Levin and Miller, Reference Levin and Miller2005). L. cylindrica is a cross-pollinated crop (Jayaramappa et al., Reference Jayaramappa, Pattabhiramaiah and Bhargava2011; Bhardwaj and Srivastava, Reference Bhardwaj and Srivastava2012) and N m value was comparable to animal-pollinated species (Huang et al., Reference Huang, Zhang and Li2009) indicating high gene flow among populations, thus high genetic diversity within populations and low among populations (Table 2). The genetic differentiation (G st) among populations was estimated to be 0.4073, which indicate that 40.73% of the genetic variability was distributed among populations, and 59.27% of the variation existed within populations. Maximum genetic distance was observed between Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh populations (Table S3, available online) and accessions of these populations could be utilized for Luffa improvement programmes. Population structure revealed three clusters contrary to two (UPGMA and PCoA) and not geographically distributed (Fig. S3, available online). The genetic data are multivariate and population structure can have complex pattern without correspondence in the different methods utilized (Kalinowski, Reference Kalinowski2009). Although this study provides a foundation for gauging the inherent genetic diversity and structure in L. cylindrica, there is an urgent need to evaluate population structure in more accessions in Asia as well as Africa using varied molecular markers to signify the diversity at the species level.

Supplementary material

To view supplementary material for this article, please visit http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1479262115000258

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the Head, DGR and the Director, NBPGR for permitting access to the facilities. They thank D. K. Pokhriyal (Technical Assistant) for his assistance in conducting the experiments.

References

Bal, KJ, Hari, BKC, Radha, KT, Madhusudan, G, Bhuwon, RS and Madhusudan, PU (2004) Descriptors for Sponge Gourd [Luffa cylindrica (L.) Roem.] . Kathmandu, Nepal: NARC, LIBIRD and IPGRI.Google Scholar
Bhardwaj, H and Srivastava, M (2012) A study on insect visitors of certain cucurbit vegetable crops in an agro-ecosystem near Bikaner, Rajasthan, India. Journal Academica 2: 99126.Google Scholar
Borba, EL, Semir, J and Shepherd, GJ (2001) Self-incompatibility, inbreeding depression and crossing potential in five Brazilian pleurothallis (Orchidaceae) species. Annals of Botany 88: 8999.Google Scholar
Chandra, U (1995) Distribution, domestication and genetic diversity of Luffa gourd in Indian subcontinent. Indian Journal of Plant Genetic Resources 8: 189196.Google Scholar
Cruz, VMV, Tolentino, MIS, Altoveros, NC, Villavicencio, MLH, Siopongco, LB, dela Vina, AC and Laude, RP (1997) Correlations among accessions of Southeast Asian Luffa genetic resources and variability estimated by morphological and biochemical methods. Philippines Journal of Crop Science 22: 131140.Google Scholar
De Riek, J, Calsyn, E, Everaert, I, Bockstaele, EV and Loose, MD (2001) AFLP based alternatives for the assessment of distinctness, uniformity and stability of sugar beet varieties. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 103: 12541265.Google Scholar
Frankham, R (1996) Relationship of genetic variation to population size in wildlife. Conservation Biology 10: 15001508.Google Scholar
Hamrick, JL and Godt, MJW (1996) Effects of life history traits on genetic diversity in plant species. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, B 351: 12911298.Google Scholar
Hamrick, JL, Godt, MJW and Sherman-Broyles, SL (1992) Factors influencing levels of genetic diversity in woody plant species. New Forests 6: 95124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, Y, Zhang, CQ and Li, DZ (2009) Low genetic diversity and high genetic differentiation in the critically endangered Omphalogramma souliei (Primulaceae): implications for its conservation. Journal of Systematics and Evolution 4: 103109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaenicke, H and Höschie-Zeiedon, I (2006) Strategic Framework for Underutilized Plant Species Research and Development, with Specific Reference to Asia and the Pacific, and to Sub-Saharan Africa. Rome, Italy: International Centre for Underutilized Crops, Colombo, Sri Lanka and Global Facilitation Unit for Underutilized Species, p. 33.Google Scholar
Jayaramappa, KV, Pattabhiramaiah, M and Bhargava, HR (2011) Influence of bee-attractants on yield parameters of ridge gourd (Luffa acutangula L.) (Cucurbitaceae). World Applied Sciences Journal 15: 457462.Google Scholar
Kalinowski, ST (2009) How well do evolutionary trees describe genetic relationships among populations? Heredity 102: 506513. doi:10.1038/hdy.2008.Google Scholar
Kumar, A and Shekhawat, NS (2009) Plant tissue culture and molecular markers. Their role in improving crop productivity. New Delhi: I.K. International.Google Scholar
Levin, RA and Miller, JS (2005) Relationships within tribe Lycieae (Solanaceae): paraphyly of Lycium and multiple origins of gender dimorphism. American Journal of Botany 92: 20442053.Google Scholar
Li, G and Quiros, CF (2001) Sequence-related amplified polymorphism (SRAP), a new marker system based on a simple PCR reaction: its application to mapping and gene tagging in Brassica . Theoretical and Applied Genetics 103: 455461.Google Scholar
Li, G, Gao, M, Yang, B and Quiros, CF (2003) Gene for gene alignment between the Brassica and Arabidopsis genomes by direct transcriptome mapping. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 107: 168180.Google Scholar
Malik, IJ, Ellington, TL, Wehner, TC and Sanders, DC (2001) Seed treatment effects on emergence of Luffa sponge gourd. Cucurbit Genetics Cooperative Report 24: 107109.Google Scholar
Marr, KL, Bhattarai, NK and Xia, YM (2005) Allozymic, morphological, and phenological diversity in cultivated Luffa acutangula (Cucurbitaceae) from China, Laos, and Nepal, and allozyme divergence between L. acutangula and L. aegyptiaca . Economic Botany 59: 154165.Google Scholar
McDermott, J and McDonald, B (1993) Gene flow in plant pathosystems. Annual Review of Phytopathology 31: 353373.Google Scholar
Nei, M (1973) Analysis of gene diversity in subdivided populations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 70: 33213324.Google Scholar
Nybom, H (2004) Comparison of different nuclear DNA markers for estimating intraspecific genetic diversity in plants. Molecular Ecology 13: 11431155.Google Scholar
Nybom, H and Bartish, IV (2000) Effects of life history traits and sampling strategies on genetic diversity estimates obtained with RAPD markers in plants. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 3: 93114.Google Scholar
Oboh, O and Aluyor, EO (2009) Luffa cylindrica – an emerging cash crop. African Journal of Agricultural Research 4: 684688.Google Scholar
Partap, S, Kumar, A, Sharma, NK and Jha, KK (2012) Luffa cylindrica: an important medicinal plant. Journal of Natural Product and Plant Resources 2: 127134.Google Scholar
Powell, W, Morgante, M, Andre, C, Hanafey, M, Vogel, J, Tingey, S and Rafalski, A (1996) The comparison of RFLP, RAPD, AFLP and SSR (microsatellite) markers for germplasm analysis. Molecular Breeding 2: 225238.Google Scholar
Prakash, K, Pandey, A, Radhamani, J and Bisht, IS (2013a) Morphological variability in cultivated and wild species of Luffa (Cucurbitaceae) from India. Genetic Resources Crop Evolution 60: 23192329 doi:10.1007/s10722-013-9999-7 Google Scholar
Prakash, K, Radhamani, J, Pandey, A and Yadav, S (2013b) A preliminary investigation of cultivated and wild species of Luffa for oil and protein contents. Plant Genetic Resources: Characterization and Utilization 12: 103111.Google Scholar
Prakash, K, Pati, K, Arya, L, Pandey, A and Verma, M (2014) Population structure and diversity in cultivated and wild Luffa species. Biochemical Systematics and Ecology 56: 165170 doi:10.1016/jbse.2014.05.012 Google Scholar
Prevost, A and Wilkinson, MJ (1999) A new system of comparing PCR primers applied to ISSR fingerprinting of potato cultivars. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 98: 107112.Google Scholar
Pritchard, JK, Stephens, P and Donnelly, P (2000) Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155: 945959.Google Scholar
Rohlf, FJ (2000) NTSYS-pc: Numerical Taxonomy and Multivariate Analysis System, Version 2.1. Setauket, New York: Exeter Software.Google Scholar
Saghai-Maroof, MA, Soliman, KM, Jorgesm, RA and Allard, RW (1984) Ribosomal DNA spacer-length polymorphisms in barley: mendelian inheritance, chromosomal location, and population dynamics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 81: 80148018.Google Scholar
Silva, MWKP, Ranil, RHG and Fonseka, RM (2012) Luffa cylindrica (L.) M. Roemer (Sponge Gourd-Niyan wetakolu): an emerging high potential underutilized cucurbit. Tropical Agriculture Research 23: 186191.Google Scholar
Sinnot, EW and Bloch, R (1943) Luffa sponges, a new crop for the Americas. Journal of New York Botanical Garden 44: 125134.Google Scholar
Sujatha, D, Chithakari, R, Raghuvardhan, L, Prasad, B, Khan, RG, Sadanandam, A and Christopher, RT (2013) In vitro plantlet regeneration and genetic transformation of sponge gourd (Luffa cylindrica L.). African Journal of Plant Science 7: 244252.Google Scholar
Yeh, FC and Boyle, TJB (1997) Population genetic analysis of codominant and dominant markers and quantitative traits. Belgian Journal of Botany 129: 157.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Table 1 The SRAP forward and reverse primers used for Luffa cylindrica accessions

Figure 1

Table 2 Genetic diversity within populations of Luffa cylindrica

Supplementary material: File

Tyagi supplementary material

Tables S1-S3 and Figures S1-S3

Download Tyagi supplementary material(File)
File 618.9 KB