Molecular Characterization of Tree Peony Germplasm ... - Springer Link

3 downloads 0 Views 336KB Size Report
Jan 26, 2008 - Using Sequence-Related Amplified Polymorphism. Markers. Xiao Yan Han Æ Liang Sheng Wang Æ Qing Yan Shu Æ. Zheng An Liu Æ Su Xia ...
Biochem Genet (2008) 46:162–179 DOI 10.1007/s10528-007-9140-8

Molecular Characterization of Tree Peony Germplasm Using Sequence-Related Amplified Polymorphism Markers Xiao Yan Han Æ Liang Sheng Wang Æ Qing Yan Shu Æ Zheng An Liu Æ Su Xia Xu Æ Takuya Tetsumura

Received: 22 March 2007 / Accepted: 1 November 2007 / Published online: 26 January 2008 Ó Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Abstract This study examined 63 tree peony specimens, consisting of 3 wild species and 63 cultivars, using sequence-related amplified polymorphism (SRAP) markers for the purpose of detecting genomic polymorphisms. Bulk DNA samples from each specimen were evaluated with 23 SRAP primer pairs. Among the 296 different amplicons, 262 were polymorphic. The maximum parsimony, neighborjoining, and unweighted pair-group method using arithmetic average trees were largely in congruence. In the three trees, the wild species Paeonia ludlowii and P. delavayi formed separate clusters with strong bootstrap support, and P. ostii was closely related to all cultivars. The cultivars were divided into groups with various corresponding bootstrap values. The genetic similarity among the genotypes ranged from 0.02 to 0.73. These results demonstrate that SRAP markers are effective in

Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10528-007-9140-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. X. Y. Han  L. S. Wang (&)  Q. Y. Shu (&)  Z. A. Liu Beijing Botanical Garden, Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 20 Nanxin Cun, Xiangshan, Haidian District, Beijing 100093, P.R. China e-mail: [email protected] Q. Y. Shu e-mail: [email protected] X. Y. Han Graduate School of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, P.R. China S. X. Xu Key Laboratory of Molecular Physiology and Biochemistry, Institute of Subtropical Botany, Xiamen, Fujian 361006, P.R. China T. Tetsumura Faculty of Agriculture, University of Miyazaki, Miyazaki 889-2192, Japan

123

Biochem Genet (2008) 46:162–179

163

detecting genomic polymorphisms in the tree peony and should be useful for linkage map construction and molecular marker assisted selection breeding. Keywords Tree peony  SRAP marker  Genomic polymorphism  MAS breeding

Introduction The tree peony belongs to the section Moutan in the genus Paeonia, Paeoniaceae. It is one of the earliest and most famous horticultural plants in the world. In China, tree peonies have been used as ornamental plants and have been cultivated since the Dongjin Dynasty 1600 years ago. The root bark of the tree peony, known as dan pi, is widely grown and is an important ingredient in Chinese traditional medicine. Tree peony was introduced to Japan early in 724–749 (Mega 1983) and brought to Europe in 1787 (Li 1999) from China, the center of cultivation. In China, all wild species are widely dispersed, and more than 1,500 cultivars have been planted. The section is divided into eight species with highly polymorphic phenotypes and wide distribution. As there are so many cultivars, some ornamental characters, such as color and flower forms, have been described for classification and practical utilization. Based on flower color, cultivars were simply classified as red, purple,

Fig. 1 Examples of tree peony flower form and flower color. A, Single form, reddish black. B, Single form, white. C, Anemone form, yellow. D, Chrysanthemum form, red. E, Rose form, pink. F, Crown form, yellow. G, Crown form, pink. H, Globular form, purple. I, Crown-proliferation form, purple

123

164

Biochem Genet (2008) 46:162–179

yellow, white, and secondary colors. They were also characterized by flower form: single, lotus, chrysanthemum, rose, crown, globular, and others (Fig. 1). There are also four cultivar groups based on geographic locations in China: Zhongyuan, Xibei, Xinan, and Jiangnan. In addition, there are three cultivar groups around the world known as Japanese, European, and American (Li 2005). As the number of tree peony cultivars increases, it is difficult to classify them according to ornamental characters only. The sequence-related amplified polymorphism (SRAP) technique preferentially amplifies open reading frames based on twoprimer amplification. The forward and reverse primers are 17 and 18 nucleotides long and start at the 50 end. The forward primer consists of a filler sequence 10 bases long, followed by CCGG; the reverse primer has a filler sequence 11 bases long, followed by AATT. Both sequences are followed by three selective nucleotides at the 30 end (Li and Quiros 2001). With these unique primer designations, SRAP markers were more reproducible, stable, and less complex, compared with other molecular markers. SRAP has been used in the study of Brassica (Li and Quiros 2001), Cucurbita (Ferriol et al. 2003), buffalograss [Buchloe dactyloides (Nutt.) Englem] (Budak et al. 2004a), and Nelumbo (Liu et al. 2006b). In the case of buffalograss, Budak et al. (2004b) showed SRAP to be more powerful for genetic diversity among closely related cultivars than SSR, ISSR, and RAPD. The purposes of this study were to characterize the genetic variability of the tree peony and to use SRAP markers to enhance our knowledge of the genetic basis of its agronomic characteristics. SRAP markers are expected to assist in establishing a new classification system of cultivars, shortening their breeding course, and investigating the relationship among cultivars. Moreover, this study will lay a foundation for further usage of SRAP marker systems in the breeding of other ornamental plants.

Materials and Methods Plant Materials Three wild species and 63 cultivars from the Resources Garden, Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences, representing a wide range of adaptation, were employed in this study (Table 1, Fig. 1). The wild species are Paeonia ludlowii (Stern and Talor) Hong, P. delavayi Franchet, Bull (with yellow flowers), and P. ostii T. Hong. The cultivars included 2 American cultivars (‘Jin Dao’ = ‘Golden Isles’ and ‘Hai Huang’ = ‘High Noon’), 3 French cultivars (‘Jin Huang’ = ‘Alice Harding’, ‘Jin Ge’ = ‘Souvenir de Maxime Cornu’, and ‘Jin Zhi’ = ‘Chromatella’), 12 Japanese cultivars, and 46 Chinese cultivars (30 from the Zhongyuan cultivar group, 9 from the Xibei cultivar group, 2 from the Xinan cultivar group, and 5 from the Jangnan cultivar group). The samples covered six main color series (white, pink, yellow, red, reddish black, and purple) and seven main flower forms (single, lotus, crown, chrysanthemum, rose, globular, and crown-proliferation). The indices of flower color were measured in the spring when the plants blossom. The color of fresh petals in the middle portion was measured using the Royal Horticultural Society Color

123

Chrysanthemum form

Globular form

Single form

Crown form

Anemone form

Anemone form

Chrysanthemum form

Rose form

Single form

Crown form

Crown form

10 Xue Zhong Song Tan

11 Yu Ban Xiu Qiu

12 Bai He Liang Chi

13 Yin Bai He

14 Yao Chi Jiu Nu

15 Jiu Zui Yang Fei

16 Ru Hua Si Yu

17 Shao Nu Qun

18 Bai Yuan Chun

19 Zhao Fen

20 Zui Xi Shi

Chrysanthemum form

Single form

9 P. ostii

Rose form

Crown form

8 Feng Wei

23 Hua Jing (Hanakisoi)

Anemone form

7 Wu Da Zhou (Godaishu¯)

22 Han Ying Shi Zi (Kanzakurajishi)

Anemone form

6 Bai Wang Shi Zi (Hakuo¯jishi)

Single form

Crown form

5 Jing Yu

21 Zhong Chuan Fen

Chrysanthemum form

Single form

Anemone form

2 Yu Ban Bai

4 Bai Yu Bing

Single form

1 Feng Dan

3 Yu Pan Tuo Jin

Flower form

Cultivar

Table 1 Characteristics of 66 tree peonies in this study

Japanese

Japanese

Xibei

Zhongyuan

Zhongyuan

Zhongyuan

Zhongyuan

Zhongyuan

Zhongyuan

Xibei

Xibei

Xibei

Xibei

Xibei

Wild

Jiangnan

Japanese

Japanese

Zhongyuan

Zhongyuan

Zhongyuan

Zhongyuan

Jiangnan

Cultivar-group

Pink

Pink

Pink

Pink

Pink

Pink

Pink

Pink

Pink

White (spot)

White (spot)

White (spot)

White (spot)

White (spot)

White

White

White

White

White

White

White

White

White

Color

65D

56B

72B

63D

69C

62D

75B

84C

69A

56D

56D

56D

56D

56D

56D

56C

11D

4D

56D

69C

56A

56D

56D

RHSCCCa

36.99

71.18

48.10

65.69

77.14

72.52

61.72

66.69

68.15

70.15

66.43

69.65

67.92

66.62

83.44

83.76

78.75

77.16

75.75

79.91

68.70

78.26

75.74

L*

15.14

2.45

39.23

25.78

3.90

4.12

26.48

8.54

21.04

17.72

22.97

19.37

22.32

22.93

2.25

8.51

5.60

5.76

7.36

6.53

7.54

6.46

4.50

C*

CIELch coordinatesb

67.76

53.97

-19.45

-2.56

75.47

21.65

-21.07

-21.37

-22.82

-24.97

-24.13

-24.06

-23.75

-17.93

-26.91

117.65

120.00

126.67

109.76

106.83

11.16

115.22

97.66

[h]

Biochem Genet (2008) 46:162–179 165

123

123

Anemone form

Single form

Chrysanthemum form

Anemone form

Rose form

Chrysanthemum form

42 Chu Wu (hatsugarasu)

43 Yu Yi Huang

44 Huang Hua Kui

45 Jin Dao2 (Golden Isles)

46 Hai Huang (High Noon)

Crown form

41 Shu Hua Zi

Crown form

Anemone form

35 Zhu Sha Lei

40 Yan Long Zi

Anemone form

34 Fang Ji (Ho¯ki)

39 Guan Shi Mo Yu

Chrysanthemum form

33 Qi Bao Dian (shichiho¯den)

Rose form

Single form

32 Hu Chuan Han (Togawakan)

38 Hua Wang (Kao¯)

Crown form

31 Hong Zhu Nu

Chrysanthemum form

Crown form

30 Fu Gui Hong

Chrysanthemum form

Crown form

29 Shan Hua Lan Man

37 Tai Yang (Taiyo¯)

Single form

28 Huo Lian Jin Dan

36 Chun Hong Jiao Yan

Anemone form

Crown form

27 Qing Chun

25 Gui Fei Cha Cui

26 Hong Lian

Chrysanthemum form

Crown-proliferation form

24 Jin Dao1 (Nishikijima)

Flower form

Cultivar

Table 1 continued

American

American

Zhongyuan

Zhongyuan

Japanese

Zhongyuan

Zhongyuan

Zhongyuan

Japanese

Japanese

Zhongyuan

Zhongyuan

Japanese

Japanese

Japanese

Zhongyuan

Zhongyuan

Zhongyuan

Zhongyuan

Xibei

Xibei

Zhongyuan

Japanese

Cultivar-group

Yellow

Yellow

Yellow

Yellow

Reddish black

Reddish black

Reddish black

Reddish black

Red

Red

Red

Red

Red

Red

Red

Red

Red

Red

Red

Red

Red

Pink

Pink

Color

2B

5B

11D

11D

59A

59B

59A

79B

67A

52A

58B

80C

45B

63B

45B

64C

72B

58C

66C

71A

82C

62B

63A

RHSCCCa

76.60

77.91

72.92

73.95

18.80

24.11

20.77

17.41

40.09

37.28

59.17

60.73

34.52

40.36

35.51

39.45

33.01

49.15

48.58

28.25

47.82

63.45

36.15

L*

43.07

53.13

19.21

31.55

15.43

29.69

22.25

13.54

43.30

49.05

37.62

31.27

44.35

46.93

50.63

45.41

47.95

46.06

40.44

40.32

46.53

22.58

49.48

C*

CIELch coordinatesb

108.18

106.32

115.86

114.89

11.06

5.30

11.51

5.51

-5.13

17.08

-3.26

-16.88

17.68

3.22

18.51

-10.72

-15.16

5.89

-4.91

-12.78

-19.25

-9.56

10.34

[h]

166 Biochem Genet (2008) 46:162–179

Rose form

Rose form

Single form

Single form

Crown form

Crown form

Single form

Rose form

Anemone form

Single form

Chrysanthemum form

Crown-proliferation form

Globular form

Anemone form

Crown form

Rose form

Rose form

Chrysanthemum form

Rose form

48 Jin Huang (Alice Harding)

49 Jin Zhi (Chromatella)

50 P. ludlowii

51 P. delavayi

52 Yao Huang

53 Jin Yu Jiao Zhang

54 Tai Ping Hong Dan

55 Tai Ping Hong Chong

56 Hu lan

57 Pan Zhong Qu Guo

58 Ge Jin Zi

59 Jia Ge Jin Zi

60 Zi Guang Ge

61 Mu Ai

62 Shou An Hong

63 Luo Yang Hong

64 Dao Da Chen (Shimadaijin)

65 Qing Luo

66 Que Hao

b

L*, Lightness; C*, chromas (brightness); [h], hue angle (degree)

Royal Horticultural Society Color Chart

Crown form

47 Jin Ge (Souvenir de Maxime Cornu)

a

Flower form

Cultivar

Table 1 continued

Jiangnan

Jiangnan

Japanese

Zhongyuan

Zhongyuan

Xibei

Zhongyuan

Zhongyuan

Zhongyuan

Zhongyuan

Jiangnan

Xinan

Xinan

Zhongyuan

Zhongyuan

Wild

Wild

France

France

France

Cultivar-group

Purple

Purple

Purple

Purple

Purple

Purple

Purple

Purple

Purple

Purple

Purple

Purple

Purple

Yellow

Yellow

Yellow

Yellow

Yellow

Yellow

Yellow

Color

80A

78A

72A

72B

77A

72A

72A

72B

67B

67C

76A

74B

74A

27D

2D

13A

14B

1C

1C

4B

RHSCCCa

40.20

34.18

28.79

37.00

34.93

29.73

27.27

25.92

27.29

26.24

67.34

66.84

67.92

67.62

74.71

73.24

75.48

75.50

75.93

75.28

L*

43.93

42.15

42.73

48.50

48.86

41.64

40.11

38.60

41.56

39.01

18.46

18.30

17.00

21.68

11.34

59.07

65.79

64.04

68.19

39.80

C*

CIELch coordinatesb

-3.88

-20.06

-22.41

-18.28

-22.31

-19.05

-13.26

-14.74

-11.52

-13.75

-24.38

-24.46

-23.65

111.39

117.24

102.74

99.26

99.18

98.76

106.33

[h]

Biochem Genet (2008) 46:162–179 167

123

168

Biochem Genet (2008) 46:162–179

Chart (RHSCC 2001) and an NF333 spectrophotometer (Nippon Denshoku Industry Co., Tokyo).

DNA Extraction and PCR Reaction System Selection A modified version of the cetyltrimethyl ammonium bromide (CTAB) method was used to extract genomic DNA. Approximately 0.3 g fresh leaf tissue from a bulk of five plants was placed into liquid nitrogen, crushed rapidly in a mortar, and transferred to a 2.0 ml tube; 0.9 ml 2 9 CTAB buffer (0.5 M EDTA, 2 M Tris– HCl, pH 8, 5 M NaCl, 2% CTAB, and 0.1% b-mercaptoethanol) was added to the tubes, mixed, and incubated at 65°C for 60 min. After incubation, the samples were cooled to room temperature and centrifuged at 12,000 rpm for 10 min, followed by extraction with 0.5 ml chloroform-isoamyl alcohol (24:1) twice, and precipitation with 2.5 volumes ethanol at -20°C. The pellet was washed twice with 1 ml 75% ethanol. The DNA was then suspended in 0.1 9 TE (1 mM Tris–HCl, 0.1 mM EDTA, pH 8.0) buffer. DNA quality was detected in a 1% agarose gel stained with ethidium bromide (0.46 lg/ml) and quantified using a Nucleic Acid and Protein Analyzer (DU 640, Beckman Coulter, Calif.). The DNA was quantified to 30 ng/ll and then stored at -20°C for PCR templates. Based on our preliminary study, 25 SRAP primer pairs were assayed using five forward and reverse primers each on the 66 samples (Table 2). Primers were excluded from the study if their banding patterns were difficult to score or if they failed to amplify consistently in all lines. From the total 25 primer pairs, 23 primer combinations were selected for their consistent amplifications and clear banding patterns (Table 3). The PCR reaction mixture (2 ll) was composed of 90 ng genomic DNA, 200 lM dNTPs, 2.5 mM MgCl2, 0.3 lM primer, 10 9 buffer, and 1 U Taq DNA polymerase (Transgen Biotech, Beijing). The amplification was carried out in an Eppendorf Mastercycler Gradient (Type 5331, Eppendorf AG, Hamburg, Germany) using the following program: 3 min denaturing at 94°C, eight cycles of 30 s denaturing at 94°C, 30 s annealing at 37°C, and 90 s elongation at 72°C. In the following 32 cycles Table 2 Forward and reverse SRAP primers used in this study

123

Primer

Type

Sequence (50 –30 )

Me2

Forward

TGA GTC CAA ACC GGA GC

Me4

Forward

TGA GTC CAA ACC GGA CC

Me5

Forward

TGA GTC CAA ACC GGA AG

Me7

Forward

TGA GTC CAA ACC GGA CA

Me8

Forward

TGA GTC CAA ACC GGA AC

Em1

Reverse

GAC TGC GTA CGA ATT AAT

Em2

Reverse

GAC TGC GTA CGA ATT TGC

Em3

Reverse

GAC TGC GTA CGA ATT GAC

Em8

Reverse

GAC TGC GTA CGA ATT CTG

Em10

Reverse

GAC TGC GTA CGA ATT CAG

Me4 + Em2

Me4 + Em3

Me4 + Em8

Me4 + Em10

Me5 + Em1

Me5 + Em2

Me5 + Em3

Me5 + Em8

Me5 + Em10

Me7 + Em2

Me7 + Em3

Me7 + Em8

Me7 + Em10

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

Me8 + Em3

Me4 + Em1

6

Me8 + Em2

Me2 + Em10

5

22

Me2 + Em8

4

21

Me2 + Em3

3

Me8 + Em1

Me2 + Em2

2

20

Me2 + Em1

1

Combinations

11

11

12

19

11

15

6

11

15

16

6

12

10

13

10

12

10

12

11

20

16

21

Total fragments

10

10

10

18

9

15

5

9

14

16

5

10

8

9

9

11

9

10

9

18

14

21

pol

a

Total

90.9

90.9

83.3

94.7

81.8

100

83.3

81.8

93.3

100

83.3

83.3

80

69.2

90

91.7

90

83.3

81.8

90

87.5

100

%pol

b

9

8

10

18

7

11

6

9

11

14

4

10

9

10

10

6

9

9

6

17

11

18

Total

a

9

7

10

18

6

11

6

9

11

14

4

10

9

9

10

6

9

9

5

17

11

18

pol

Zhongyuan

Cultivar group

100

87.5

100

100

85.7

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

90

100

100

100

100

83.3

100

100

100

%pol

b

Table 3 Genetic diversity estimates of tree peony specimens using SRAP primer pairs

5

3

5

11

3

7

4

8

8

4

1

4

3

6

6

9

3

6

4

13

9

14

Total

Xibei

5

3

5

10

2

7

4

8

8

4

1

4

3

5

6

9

3

6

3

13

5

14

pol

a

100

100

100

90.9

66.7

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

83.3

100

100

100

100

75

100

55.6

100

%pol

b

2

1

2

3

3

3

1

2

1

1

1

3

3

3

0

0

0

1

3

0

2

0

Total

Xinan

2

0

2

2

1

3

1

1

1

1

1

3

3

3

0

0

0

1

1

0

2

0

pol

a

100

0

100

66.7

33.3

100

100

50

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

33.3

100

100

100

%pol

b

7

5

8

14

6

9

4

5

7

5

1

6

9

7

5

4

4

7

4

13

8

13

Total

Jiangnan

7

4

8

13

5

9

4

5

7

5

1

2

9

7

5

4

4

6

3

12

8

13

pola

100

80

100

92.9

83.3

100

100

100

100

100

100

33.3

100

100

100

100

100

85.7

75

92.3

100

100

%polb

Biochem Genet (2008) 46:162–179 169

123

123

4.2

66

SD

Num. of samples

Me2 + Em1

Me2 + Em2

Me2 + Em3

Me2 + Em8

Me2 + Em10

Me4 + Em1

Me4 + Em2

Me4 + Em3

Me4 + Em8

Me4 + Em10

Me5 + Em1

Me5 + Em2

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

6

12

10

13

10

12

10

12

11

20

16

21

Total fragments

12.9

Average

Combinations

16

296

Total

Total fragments

Me8 + Em10

1

23

Combinations

Table 3 continued

17.5

87.5



81.3

%pol

b

3

9

6

9

7

7

8

6

6

12

9

17

Total

Japan

3

9

6

9

7

7

8

6

5

12

9

17

pol

a

Cultivar group

4.2

11.4

262

13

pol

a

Total

30

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

10

b

3.8

9.9

228

83.3

100

100

100

a

pol

%pol

3.8

10.1

233

11

Total

Zhongyuan

Cultivar group

3

4

4

4

2

5

4

4

6

3

7

4

Total

France

18.3

97.3



90.9

%pol

b

3

4

4

2

2

5

4

4

3

3

6

4

pol

a

9

3.5

6.3

146

10

Total

Xibei

100

100

100

50

100

100

100

100

50

100

85.7

100

%pol

b

3.4

6

137

9

pol

a

1

1

2

2

1

3

0

5

4

5

3

4

Total

2

a

0

1

0

2

1

1

0

4

2

4

1

4

pol

1.3

1.5

35

0

Total

Xinan

America

19.8

94



90

%pol

b

0

100

0

100

100

33.3

100

80

50

80

33.3

100

b

27.3

86.2



100

b

%pol

%pol

1.2

1.2

28

0

pol

a

5

6

2

9

4

6

4

7

6

6

11

7

Total

Wild

5

3.2

6.9

159

8

Total

6.5

6.5

149

8

pola

4

6

0

9

4

6

4

6

6

6

9

6

pola

Jiangnan

80

100

0

100

100

100

100

85.7

100

100

81.8

85.7

%polb

93.2

93.2



100

%polb

170 Biochem Genet (2008) 46:162–179

11

18 Me7 + Em8

b

a

4.2

66

SD

Num. of samples

Percentage of polymorphic fragments

Number of polymorphic fragments

12.9

Average

16

296

23 Me8 + Em10

Total

11

11

21 Me8 + Em2

22 Me8 + Em3

19

15

17 Me7 + Em3

12

6

19 Me7 + Em10

11

15 Me5 + Em10

16 Me7 + Em2

20 Me8 + Em1

16

15

13 Me5 + Em3

Total fragments

14 Me5 + Em8

Combinations

Table 3 continued

12

3.8

8.2

189

8

8

4

8

17

5

9

3

10

11

7

Total

Japan

3.7

8.1

186

8

8

4

8

16

4

9

3

10

11

7

pol

a

Cultivar group

18.3

98.1



100

100

100

100

94.1

80

100

100

100

100

100

%pol

b

3

2.6

4.3

99

3

6

5

4

12

5

0

2

5

3

4

Total

France

2.3

3.9

90

3

5

5

3

12

4

0

2

5

3

4

pol

a

16.3

92.3



100

83.3

100

75

100

80

100

100

100

100

100

%pol

b

2

1.9

3

68

6

5

2

3

4

5

1

1

3

2

5

Total

America

1.5

2

46

4

4

2

2

3

3

1

1

1

1

4

pol

a

33.4

69.1



66.7

80

100

66.7

75

60

100

100

33.3

50

80

%pol

b

3

3

7

161

12

8

6

8

14

5

10

3

6

11

5

Total

Wild

2.9

6.4

147

11

8

5

8

12

3

9

3

6

11

5

pola

21.9

88.9



91.7

100

83.3

100

85.7

60

90

100

100

100

100

%polb

Biochem Genet (2008) 46:162–179 171

123

172

Biochem Genet (2008) 46:162–179

the annealing temperature was increased to 50°C, with a final elongation step of 7 min at 72°C. Each PCR product (10 ll) was fractionated on 2% agarose gel and stained with ethidium bromide for 40 min. A 100 bp plus DNA Ladder Marker (Transgen Biotech) was used as the size marker. Electrophoresis was carried out at a constant 108 V for 1 h at room temperature. Gels were photographed using a White/ Ultraviolet Transilluminator (UVP, Spring Scientific, New York). Data Analysis Using ‘‘1’’ to represent the presence and ‘‘0’’ the absence of each SRAP fragment and thus a specific allele, genetic similarities between cultivars were measured by the Dice similarity coefficient based on the proportion of shared alleles (Dice 1945; Nei and Li 1979). The MP (maximum parsimony), NJ (neighbor-joining), and UPGMA (unweighted pair-group method with arithmetic averages) trees were constructed using the PAUP 4.0b10 computer program (Swofford 1998). Parsimony analysis was performed by a heuristic search with a tree bisection-reconnection branch-swapping algorithm. The wild species P. ludlowii and P. delavayi were used as outgroups in the NJ and MP trees based on previous phylogenetic hypotheses. Topological congruence with previous phylogenetic hypotheses was assessed with the Templeton test (Templeton 1983), as implemented in PAUP 4.0b10 (Swofford 1998). NJ and UPGMA trees were constructed using distance measures. The number of 1,000 replicates was used for all bootstrap tests. Results Performance of SRAP Marker All 23 SRAP primer pairs amplified products in all bulk DNA specimens (Table 3). In total 296 amplicons were observed, of which 34 (12.5%) were monomorphic and 262 (87.5%) were polymorphic. The number of amplicons produced by each primer set ranged from 6 (Me5/Em2; Me7/Em2) to 21 (Me2/Em1), with an average of 12.9 amplicons/primer set. The polymorphic amplicons ranged from 5 (Me7/Em2 and Me5/Em2) to 21 ((Me2/Em1), with an average of 11.4 amplicons/primer set. The percentage of polymorphic markers produced by each primer pair ranged from 69.2% (Me4/Em8) to 100% (Me2/Em1; Me5/Em3; Me7/Em3). The percentage of polymorphic markers produced by each primer pair was 97.3% for the Zhongyuan, 94.0% for Xibei, 86.2% for Xinan, 93.2% for Jiangnan, 98.1% for Japanese, 92.3% for French, 69.1% for American, and 88.9% for wild groups. Twelve Japanese cultivars shared the highest polymorphic percentage (98.1%), and the two American cultivars shared the lowest (69.1%). The limited number of cultivars along with the two primer combinations (Me4/Em10 and Me5/Em2) did not generate many polymorphic fragments in American cultivars, which may partly contribute to the low polymorphic percentage. An example of the amplification products of SRAP reactions is presented in Fig. 2 for Me8/Em10. The cultivars shared a common band (780 bp), and different cultivar

123

Biochem Genet (2008) 46:162–179

173

3000

3000

1500

1500

1000

1000

500

500

300

300

Fig. 2 PCR amplification of tree peony genomic DNA from 23 specimens. Lane: 1 ‘Shou An Hong’, 2 ‘Zhao Fen’, 3 ‘Jing Yu’, 4 ‘Gui Fei Cha Cui’, 5 ‘Yu Yi Huang’, 6 ‘Ru Hua Si Yu’, 7 ‘Zhu Sha Lei’, 8 ‘Hong Zhu Nu’, 9 ‘Yin Bai He’, 10 ‘Zhong Chuan Fen’, 11 ‘Qing Chun’, 12 ‘Feng Dan’, 13 ‘Que Hao’, 14 ‘Qing Luo’, 15 P. ludowii, 16 P. delavayi, 17 P. ostii, 18 ‘Chu Wu’, 19 ‘Han Ying Shi Zi’, 20 ‘Dao Da Chen’, 21 ‘Jin Huang’, 22 ‘Jin Dao’, 23 ‘Hai Huang’. M: 100 bp plus DNA ladder marker (5,000, 3,000, 2,000, 1,500, 1,000, 900, 800, 700, 600, 500, 400, 300, 200, 100; Transgen Biotech, Beijing). SRAP primer pair was Me8/Em10. The DNA samples were fractionated in 2% agarose gels stained with ethidium bromide

groups had different common bands. The Zhongyuan group (lanes 1–8) shared a band of 700 bp. The Xibei group (lanes 9–11) shared bands of 1,400 and 1,500 bp. The Jiangnan group (lanes 12–14) shared bands of 500, 550, and 600 bp. The wild species (lanes 15–17) shared the band of 780 bp. The Japanese group (lanes 18–20) shared bands of 520 and 1,400 bp. The French and American groups (lanes 21–23) shared bands of 450, 1,400, and 1,550 bp. However, the large number of polymorphic bands indicated abundant genetic differences among and within cultivar groups, especially between the wild species (P. ludlowii, lane 15; P. delavayi, lane 16) and the cultivars. Three wild species had only one band in common (780 bp), and P. ludlowii and P. delavayi shared another two bands (330 and 650 bp). P. ostii was more similar to the cultivars, compared with P. ludlowii and P. delavayi.

Genetic Similarity Genetic similarity among all specimens ranged from 0.02 to 0.73, with an average of 0.62 (Supplementary material S1). The most similar cultivars are ‘Yao Chi Jiu Nu’ and ‘Yin Bai He’, sharing 0.73 genetic similarity, both of which originated from the Xibei group and have a blackish purple blotch at the base of the white petals. The biggest difference between them is the flower form; ‘Yao Chi Jiu Nu’ has an anemone form with 3–4 whorls of petals, and ‘Yin Bai He’ has a crown form with many whorls of petals in which most of the stamens develop into petals. The least similar cultivars are ‘Dao Da Chen’ and ‘Zui Xi Shi’, sharing 0.02 genetic similarity. The flower of ‘Dao Da Chen’ is purple with a rose form; it originated from Japan. ‘Zui Xi Shi’ is pink with a crown flower form and is derived from the Zhongyuan group. Although most cultivars had the same ancestors, after developing and adapting to various environments over thousands of years, they now share moderate similarity.

123

174

Biochem Genet (2008) 46:162–179

Topological Trees and Bootstrap Support of Different Clades The NJ, UPGMA, and one of the MP trees (obtained from 1,934 trees) with bootstrap support above 50% are shown in Fig. 3 and Supplementary materials S2 and S3. The wild species P. ludlowii and P. delavayi formed separate clusters from the cultivars tested in this study, with bootstraps of 93%, 100%, and 92% in NJ, UPGMA, and MP trees, respectively. P. ostii was more closely related to the cultivars. Since P. ludlowii and P. delavayi are wild species, their genetic diversity

Fig. 3 Neighbor-joining tree of 66 tree peony genotypes calculated on PAUP 4.0b10 by means of 23 SRAP primer pairs. Bootstrap values over 50 are indicated above the branch; based on 1,000 resamplings of the data set

123

Biochem Genet (2008) 46:162–179

175

was different from that of the cultivars (Fig. 2). The two were very different in geographic distribution and morphology among wild species. P. ludlowii has yellow flowers with one whorl of petals (single form) and was distributed mainly in Tibet and Sichuan; P. delavayi, with yellow or red flowers and a single form, was found mainly in Yunnan province. Their floral disks are fleshy, but the floral disks of other wild species and all the cultivars are leathery. According to references, the two species did not contribute to the formation of Chinese cultivars because of geographic isolation, and the dendrograms support this hypothesis. P. ostii was found in Henan province and was considered to contribute to the formation of Chinese cultivars; indeed, it shares more genetic similarity and is distributed as a sister clade among cultivars of the Zhongyuan group. The NJ, UPGMA, and MP trees generally agree on the division of cultivars, and incongruence occurred in only a few branches. The NJ tree was divided into two clades. The clade including ‘Bai Yu Bing’, ‘Dao Da Chen’, ‘Ru Hua Si Yu’, and ‘Hu Lan’ was the most distinct clade of all the cultivars examined in this study (Fig. 3). In this clade, ‘Ru Hua Si Yu’ and ‘Hu Lan’ were distributed in a separate branch with 77% bootstrap value (82% in the UPGMA tree, 56% in the MP tree). The other clade was further divided into two branches, with branch I including all Xibei cultivars, most Japanese cultivars, and one French cultivar, and branch II including all American cultivars and most of the Zhongyuan and French cultivars. In cluster I, nine Xibei cultivars fell into one large branch and were concentrated on two small branches with 71% and 95% bootstrap values. In the first small branch, ‘Xue Zhong Song Tan’ and ‘Yu Ban Xiu Qiu’, with white flowers, were divided from the other three with red or pink flowers. In the UPGMA and MP trees, Xibei tree peonies are distributed on two branches. P. ostii, ‘Bai Wang Shi Zi’, and ‘Jing Yu’, with white flowers, are distributed in the same branch with a 69% bootstrap value. Four other white-flower cultivars formed another branch: ‘Yu Ban Bai’ and ‘Yu Pan Tuo Jin’, which came from the Zhongyuan group, showed a 99% bootstrap value (97% in UPGMA and MP trees) and formed a secondary branch, and ‘Feng Wei’ and ‘Feng Dan’, which came from the Jiangnan group, showed a 51% bootstrap value and formed the other secondary branch. The Japanese cultivar ‘Hua Wang’ and the French cultivar ‘Jin Huang’ were distributed in one branch with a 71% bootstrap value (67% UPGMA, 63% MP). Another Japanese cultivar, ‘Chu Wu’, and the Zhongyuan tree peony ‘Shu Hua Zi’, both with reddish black flowers, clustered together with a 97% bootstrap value (93% UPGMA, 90% MP). It can be concluded that flower color has some relation to genetic diversity. In cluster II, all non-Chinese cultivars with yellow flowers were grouped into one branch. They were from America (‘Jin Dao’ and ‘Hai Huang’) and France (‘Jin Ge’ and ‘Jin Zhi’). Two cultivars from the Chinese Zhongyuan group with light yellow flowers, ‘Yu Yi Huang’ and ‘Huang Hua Kui’, were also grouped in this branch. The female parent of ‘Jin Huang’, ‘Hai Huang’, ‘Jin Dao’, ‘Jin Ge’, and ‘Jin Zhi’ is P. lutea (= P. delavayi with yellow flowers). The male parent is unclear. The origin of Chinese cultivars with light yellow flowers such as ‘Yao Huang’, ‘Jin Yu Jiao Zhang’, ‘Huang Hua Kui’, and ‘Yu Yi Huang’ is not clear either. Generally, the color of Chinese cultivars with yellow flowers is thinner than that of American and French cultivars. Most cultivars from the Zhongyuan group were distributed nearby

123

176

Biochem Genet (2008) 46:162–179

on the dendrogram with strong bootstrap support, indicating their closely consanguineous relationships. For example, ‘Gui Fei Cha Cui’ and ‘Shan Hua Lan Man’ formed a branch with bootstrap values of 97% (NJ), 89% (UPGMA), and 83% (MP). Unequivocally, further subgroups were based mainly on flower color. Three cultivars with red flowers, ‘Huo Lian Jin Dan’, ‘Zhu Sha Lei’, and’Yan Long Zi’, and a lot of cultivars with white flowers were grouped together. Considering the flower form, only ‘Fang Ji’ and ‘Wu Da Zhou’, with an anemone form, and ‘Tai Ping Hong Chong’, ‘Jin Dao 2’, and ‘Hai Huang’, with a rose form, were grouped together.

Discussion In this study, 23 primer pairs were used to distinguish 66 specimens, resulting in 262 polymorphic fragments, accounting for 87.5% of the total fragments amplified. Three large branches in close congruence with their geographic classification were grouped on the dendrogram. Some secondary branches had a certain degree of relationship to the flower color and form. This is the first attempt using SRAP molecular markers to characterize the genetic diversity of the tree peony and considering so many cultivars and wild species. SRAP markers were indicated to be effective for examining genetic diversity and genetic relationships among a wide range of diverse populations, and they show promise for developing molecular markers that could reliably determine the relative genetic contributions of specific populations to existing and newly developed cultivars. Some molecular marker techniques have recently been employed in tree peony studies, such as RAPD (Pei et al. 1995; Zou et al. 1999a, b), RFLP (Zhao et al. 2004), and ISSR (Suo et al. 2004, 2005). Most of the studies, however, focused on establishment of the phylogenetic relationships among wild species or interspecies. Until now only two molecular marker techniques have been applied to analyze tree peony cultivars: RAPD (Chen et al. 2001; Su et al. 2006) and AFLP (Liu et al. 2006a). Chen, Liu, and Su got materials from Shandong, Henan, and Gansu provinces, respectively. Cultivars from Shandong and Henan provinces belong to the Zhongyuan group; cultivars from Gansu province belong to the Xibei group. Because they used haploid materials, they found only small genetic distances. We share nine and eight cultivars with Chen and Liu’s study, respectively. The relative positions of those cultivars on the dendrogram are not different between our work and theirs. We share no common cultivars with Su’s work, but both of our studies demonstrate that there are some, but not obvious, relations between flower color, flower form, and genetic information. The information obtained from these studies is insufficient for characterizing so many cultivars. Until now, the genetic diversity of cultivars used in this research has not been explored. Finding specific markers related to ornamental characteristics, such as flower color and form, are our major concerns for tree peony breeding. Though these studies suggest that they are not closely related, further research may be needed to develop more molecular markers and include more cultivars, which can further demonstrate the relationship between markers and ornamental characteristics.

123

Biochem Genet (2008) 46:162–179

177

In China, the tree peony has been domesticated for more than 1,600 years. Its cultivars were developed mainly by natural and artificial hybridization and preserved by nonsexual propagation. The great majority of the cultivars are synthetic populations developed from successive generations of random matings of wild species and their progeny. China is the world center of tree peony cultivation, and the Zhongyuan region is the cultivation center of China. Five wild species, P. ostii, P. rockii, P. jishanensis, P. qiui, and P. suffruticosa ssp. Yinpingmudan, are known as the progenitors of cultivars dispersed in the Zhongyuan region (Zhou et al. 2003). In the long breeding history, wild species and their hybrid descendants coexisted in the same area. In that case, it is likely that different lots of seeds of the same cultivar are genetically heterogeneous, because of the multiple cycles of random mating that occur in seed production fields due to the pollinators. Thus the cultivars of the Zhongyuan group have a broad parental base and a complex genetic background; they demonstrate wide genetic diversity, which is in accordance with the NJ tree. Among all the wild species in this study, P. ostii contributed more genetic information to the cultivars of this group, showing high similarity with these cultivars, so it failed to appear as an outgroup on the NJ and MP trees. Comparatively, the Xibei group is more congenetic and simpler. Although it is widely distributed in different areas, it is considered to stem from P. rockii and mostly shares the same morphological characteristics, such as a clear black–purple or purple–red blotch at the base of the petals. The cultivars from the Xinan and Jiangnan groups were shown to resemble closely the Zhongyuan cultivars. Many Zhongyuan cultivars were introduced to Xinan and Jiangnan, and they joined into a large hybridization circle there and formed new cultivars. Japanese tree peony cultivars were introduced from China early on and have been bred indigenously for more than 1,000 years. The Japanese cultivars were not pooled in a single branch but were dispersed in every large branch on the dendrogram, indicating their intimate pedigree with Chinese cultivars. Only a few cultivars have yellow flowers. ‘Jin Huang’, ‘Jin Ge’, ‘Jin Zhi’, ‘Hai Huang’, and ‘Jin Dao’ with yellow flowers are the crossbred offspring of P. lutea (= P. delavayi, with yellow flowers) and some uncertain cultivars that may come from China or Japan. The origin of Chinese cultivars with yellow flowers is not clear. We compared all 11 yellow flower samples in this study. Among all the fragments generated by 23 primer combinations, they shared one fragment with the same size (approximately 400 bp) produced by primer pair Me7/Em8. Non-Chinese cultivars with yellow flowers (‘Jin Huang’, ‘Jin Ge’, ‘Jin Zhi’, ‘Hai Huang’, and ‘Jin Dao 2’) shared two fragments 750 bp and 450 bp in length with P. lutea, by primer pairs Me2/Em2 and Me8/Em3, respectively. Chinese cultivars with yellow flowers (‘Jin Yu Jiao Zhang’, ‘Yu Yi Huang’, ‘Huang Hua Kui’, ‘Yao Huang’) shared another two fragments, about 200 bp and 400 bp in length, with P. lutea, by primer pairs Me7/Em8 and Me4/Em8, respectively. All cultivars with yellow flowers shared more fragments with P. lutea than with P. ludlowii. We deduced that the relation of cultivars with yellow flowers is closer to P. lutea than to P. ludlowii. The exact information of the shared bands needs to be characterized. The complexity and overlap of the origin of tree peony cultivars has resulted in abundant genetic diversity. The cultivars adapted to different environments and

123

178

Biochem Genet (2008) 46:162–179

underwent genetic modification, which is reflected in the comb form of the UPGMA and MP trees. The NJ tree, however, can give us instructive information. Increasing the knowledge of the molecular diversity of a crop is essential for extending its genetic base, identifying cultivars, and selecting parental varieties for breeding programs. In this sense, tree peony cultivars are poorly characterized. Although many classification methods, including many molecular marker systems, have been applied to these species, the cultivars are still classified mainly by traditional phenetic characteristics such as flower color, flower form, and geographic distribution. Wang et al. (2001, 2004) classified the Chinese Zhongyuan and Xibei cultivars according to anthocyanidin phenotypes in the petals, in an attempt at chemical classification, but much confusion remains and many problems are unsolved. Unresolved questions include the identification of homonym and synonym, and changes in flower color and flower form of the same cultivar in different areas, etc. The descriptions of cultivars are changeable based on traditional classification; thus, SRAP markers may serve as a suitable tool to identify substantial differences and the intrinsic diversity among them. In breeding, we should choose parents with large genetic distance, and we can select hybrid offspring by SRAP in the seedling stage. Based on so many advantages, SRAP markers can also facilitate the construction of tree peony linkage maps, genetic fingerprinting, and core germplasm. Acknowledgments This work was supported by the National High Technology Research and Development Program of China (863 Program) (Grant No. 2006AA100109), the Knowledge Innovation Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (KSCX2–YW-Z-064), and the Pilot Research Program of the Institute of Botany, CAS. The authors thank Prof. Hong-Jie Li for his kind help. The authors also thank Xia Tao and Cheng Li-Bao for their technical instruction. The authors also thank the members of the Physiology and Genetic Breeding of Ornamental Plants Research Group, IBCAS, for their kind help.

References Budak H, Shearman RC, Parmaksiz I, Gaussoin RE, Riordan TP, Dweikat I (2004a) Molecular characterization of buffalograss germplasm using sequence-related amplified polymorphism markers. Theor Appl Genet 108:328–334 Budak H, Shearman RC, Parmaksiz I, Riordan TP, Dweikat I (2004b) Comparative analysis of seeded and vegetative biotype buffalograsses based on phylogenetic relationship using ISSRs, SSRs, RAPDs, and SRAPs. Theor Appl Genet 109:280–288 Chen XM, Zheng GS, Zhang SW (2001) RAPD analysis of tree peony cultivars. Acta Hort Sin 28:370– 372 Dice LR (1945) Measures of the amount of ecological association between species. Ecology 26:297–302 Ferriol M, Pico B, Nuze F (2003) Genetic diversity of a germplasm collection of Cucurbita pepo using SRAP and AFLP markers. Theor Appl Genet 107:271–282 Li G, 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. Theor Appl Genet 103:455–461 Li JJ (1999) Chinese tree peony and herbaceous peony. Chinese Forestry Press, Beijing, p 17 Li JJ (2005) Chinese tree peony (in English). China Forestry Publishing House, Beijing, pp 36–42 Liu P, Wang ZC, Shang F (2006a) AFLP analysis of genetic diversity of Paeonia suffruticosa cultivars in Henan Province. Acta Hort Sin 33:1369–1372 Liu YG, Teng YY, Pan C, Han YC, Zhou MQ, Hu ZL (2006b) Cluster analysis of Nelumbo based on SRAP markers. Amino Acids & Biotic Res 28:29–32

123

Biochem Genet (2008) 46:162–179

179

Mega K (1983) Tree peony and paeonia. In: Somei T (ed) NHK publisher, Japan, p 131 Nei M, Li WH (1979) Mathematical model for studying genetic variation in terms of restriction endonucleases. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 76:5269–5273 Pei YL, Zou YP, Yin Z, Wang XQ, Zhang ZX, Hong DY (1995) Preliminary report of RAPD analysis in Paeonia suffruticosa subsp. spontanea and Paeonia rockii. Acta Phytotax Sin 33:350–356 Su X, Zhang H, Dong LN, Zhang JQ, Zhu XT, Sun K (2006) RAPD classification and identification of Paeonia rockii varieties planted in Gansu Province. Acta Bot Boreal–Occident Sin 26:696–701 Suo ZL, Zhou SL, Zhang HJ (2004) DNA molecular evidences of the inter-specific hybrids between Paeonia ostii and P. suffruticosa based on ISSR markers. Forest Res 17:700 –705 Suo ZL, Zhang HJ, Zhang ZM, Chen FF, Chen FH (2005) DNA molecular evidences of the inter-specific hybrids between Paeonia rockii and P. suffruticosa based on ISSR markers. Acta Bot Yunnan 27:42–48 Swofford DL (1998) PAUP, phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (and other methods). Version 4. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts Templeton AR (1983) Phylogenetic inference from restriction endoclease cleavagesite maps with particular reference to the evolution of human and apes. Evolution 37:221–224 Wang LS, Shiraishi A, Hashimoto F, Aoki N, Shimizu K, Sakata Y (2001) Analysis of petal anthocyanins to investigate flower coloration of Zhongyuan (Chinese) and Daikon Island (Japanese) tree peony cultivars. J Plant Res 114:33–43 Wang LS, Hashimoto F, Shiraishi A, Aoki N, Li JJ, Sakata Y (2004) Chemical taxonomy of the Xibei tree peony from China by floral pigmentation. J Plant Res 117:47–55 Zhao X, Zhou ZQ, Lin QB, Pan KY, Hong DY (2004) Molecular evidence for the interspecific relationships in Paeonia sect. Moutan: PCR-RFLP and sequence analysis of glycerol-3-phosphate acyltransferase (GPAT) gene. Acta Phytotax Sin 42:236–244 Zhou ZQ, Pan KY, Hong DY (2003) Advances in studies on relationships among wild tree peony species and the origin of cultivated tree peonies. Acta Hort Sin 30:751–757 Zou YP, Cai ML, Zhang ZX (1999a) The genetic diversity and protect strategy of Paeonia. Jishanensis. The Natural Sci Headway 9:468–472 Zou YP, Cai ML, Wang ZP (1999b) Systematic studies on Paeonia sect. Moutan DC. based on RAPD analysis. Acta Phytotax Sin 37:220–227

123