Skip to main content
BMC Plant Biology logoLink to BMC Plant Biology
. 2013 Dec 1;13:194. doi: 10.1186/1471-2229-13-194

Development and characterization of microsatellite markers for Morus spp. and assessment of their transferability to other closely related species

Balachandran Mathithumilan 1,#, Niteen Narharirao Kadam 1,#, Jyoti Biradar 2, Sowmya H Reddy 1, Mahadeva Ankaiah 1, Madhura J Narayanan 1, Udayakumar Makarla 1, Paramjit Khurana 3, Sheshshayee Madavalam Sreeman 1,
PMCID: PMC3879070  PMID: 24289047

Abstract

Background

Adoption of genomics based breeding has emerged as a promising approach for achieving comprehensive crop improvement. Such an approach is more relevant in the case of perennial species like mulberry. However, unavailability of genomic resources of co-dominant marker systems has been the major constraint for adopting molecular breeding to achieve genetic enhancement of Mulberry. The goal of this study was to develop and characterize a large number of locus specific genic and genomic SSR markers which can be effectively used for molecular characterization of mulberry species/genotypes.

Result

We analyzed a total of 3485 DNA sequences including genomic and expressed sequences (ESTs) of mulberry (Morus alba L.) genome. We identified 358 sequences to develop appropriate microsatellite primer pairs representing 222 genomic and 136 EST regions. Primers amplifying locus specific regions of Dudia white (a genotype of Morus alba L), were identified and 137 genomic and 51 genic SSR markers were standardized. A two pronged strategy was adopted to assess the applicability of these SSR markers using mulberry species and genotypes along with a few closely related species belonging to the family Moraceae viz., Ficus, Fig and Jackfruit. While 100% of these markers amplified specific loci on the mulberry genome, 79% were transferable to other related species indicating the robustness of these markers and the potential they hold in analyzing the molecular and genetic diversity among mulberry germplasm as well as other related species. The inherent ability of these markers in detecting heterozygosity combined with a high average polymorphic information content (PIC) of 0.559 ranging between 0.076 and 0.943 clearly demonstrates their potential as genomic resources in diversity analysis. The dissimilarity coefficient determined based on Neighbor joining method, revealed that the markers were successful in segregating the mulberry species, genotypes and other related species into distinct clusters.

Conclusion

We report a total of 188 genomic and genic SSR markers in Morus alba L. A large proportion of these markers (164) were polymorphic both among mulberry species and genotypes. A substantial number of these markers (149) were also transferable to other related species like Ficus, Fig and Jackfruit. The extent of polymorphism revealed and the ability to detect heterozygosity among the cross pollinated mulberry species and genotypes render these markers an invaluable genomic resource that can be utilized in assessing molecular diversity as well as in QTL mapping and subsequently mulberry crop improvement through MAS.

Background

Mulberry, a perennial out-breeding tree species is distributed in varied environments ranging from tropical to sub-arctic regions. The wide distribution can be attributed to its capability to adapt to diverse agro-climatic conditions, fast regeneration and both sexual and asexual modes of propagation. The mulberry leaf serves as the sole source of food to the domesticated silkworm, Bombyxmori L., and hence contributes significantly to the success of silk industry in India. It is predicted that around 27,000 MT of raw silk would need to be produced by the year 2030 to meet the demand in India [1]. This goal is strongly dependant on improving mulberry productivity. Enhancing the yield potential and minimizing the yield loss due to stresses are therefore the most viable strategies to achieve genetic enhancement of mulberry [2].

Despite the significant progress achieved so far, genetic improvement of mulberry yield potential through conventional breeding has been distressingly slow, mainly because of the perennial growth habit and complex inheritance pattern. Convincing evidences suggest that relevant traits need to be introgressed onto an elite genetic background to achieve greater success in crop improvement endeavors. Thus, the applications of modern molecular and genomic tools are expected to strongly complement the breeding efforts in enhancing yield potential of mulberry [2]. Advances in PCR based genomic approaches have generated robust DNA marker systems [3,4], which offer an effective approach to augment breeding methods for mulberry improvement [5]. Randomly amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD), Amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) and Inter simple sequence repeats (ISSR) have been the most frequently employed marker systems to study the genetic diversity among mulberry species and genotypes [6-8]. Though these marker systems provide a good option to discriminate the evolutionary relationships among species [9], being dominant, RAPD, AFLP and ISSR markers have limited application in marker assisted breeding, especially in heterozygous out-breeding perennial species like mulberry. Lack of sufficient number of co-dominant marker systems renders molecular breeding practices in mulberry still a distant possibility.

Microsatellites or simple sequence repeats (SSR) are short stretches of tandemly repeated DNA sequences, distributed throughout the eukaryotic genome [10,11]. SSR markers display locus specificity, are co-dominant and highly transferable to other related species [12] and hence are the most attractive choice of marker systems for mulberry. Further, the higher ability to detect polymorphism by the SSR markers is an added advantage while analyzing closely related species and/or genotypes, which is often the case in breeding programs [13]. The efficiency of the SSR markers in genetic screening has been reported in tree species like peach, olive and fig [14-16].

Except for the reports of Aggarwal et al. [17] and Zhao et al. [18], there have not been many efforts in developing co-dominant markers in mulberry. From this background, the main aim of this work was to generate SSR markers for characterizing mulberry germplasm and/or mapping populations. We report a large number of genic and genomic SSR markers for mulberry and examined their transferability to closely related species like Ficus (Ficusbengalensis), Fig (Ficuscarica) and Jackfruit (Artocarpusheterophyllus).

Result and discussion

Pre-cloning enrichment strategy was adopted to isolate the genomic microsatellite regions and a set of previously characterized expressed sequence tags (ESTs) [19-21] were analyzed to identify genic microsatellite regions. A total of 3485 sequences, including 1094 genomic and 2391 EST sequences were analyzed for the presence of microsatellite regions. Locus specific primers were designed for such target sequences to develop SSR markers.

Isolation and characterization of genomic microsatellites

Analysis of the genomic sequences revealed a total of 900 diverse microsatellite loci (Table 1). Among them, 167 (18.56%) sequences had mono nucleotide repeats (MNR) followed by 303 (33.67%) sequences with di-nucleotide repeats (DNR). Tri nucleotide repeats (TNR) were found among 155 (17.22%) sequences while tetra (TtNR), penta (PNR) and hexa (HNR) nucleotide repeats were relatively less frequent in the enrichment library (Figure 1). Besides these types, 52 (5.78%) microsatellite loci with repeat motifs having more than six nucleotide bases referred to as long nucleotide repeats (LNR) were also identified. It is well accepted that di, tri, tetra, penta and hexa repeat motifs represent an appropriate marker system and can generally distinguish greater diversity [22]. Hence, the LNRs and MNRs were excluded from designing locus specific primers. In our study, “TC/AG” repeats constituted the most frequent DNR microsatellite variant (25.5%) followed by “CT/GA”. While “AT/TA” and “AG/TC” repeats were reported as the most frequent in plant genomes [17,23-29]. He et al. [30] identified “GA/CT” as the most frequently occurring di-repeat motifs in groundnut. Our results revealed the presence of both the types of DNR motifs indicating a possibility that these markers would be able to distinguish greater diversity among mulberry accessions. The least abundant DNR motifs found in genomic SSRs was “CA/GT and CG/GC”. The frequency of “GC” repeats was generally less in genomic regions of most plants as reported in peach [31], coffee [32], rubber tree [33], wheat [34] and soybean [35]. While “GAA” repeats were most frequent (15.9%) among the TNRs, “AAAT” repeats were the most frequent tetra nucleotide repeats (16.6%). Similarly, “AAAAC” and “AAAAAG” repeat types were more frequent among the PNR and HNR groups, respectively.

Table 1.

Sequences analyzed while developing genomic and genic SSR markers in mulberry

Library No. of colonies screened No. of clones sequenced/Transcripts screened Clones with SSR repeats Sequences containing more than one SSR Total no. of repeats Primers developed Primers standardized/Locus specific amplification
Genomic
1588
1094
484
234
900
222
137
EST
-
2391
800
254
1155
136
51
Total 3485 1284 488 2055 358 188

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Classification and diversity of repeat types among the identified genomic and genic microsatellite motifs. The total number of microsatellite motifs on genomic sequences is illustrated in panel A while the genic microsatellites are in B. The locus specific marker diversity of genomic and genic microsatellites is illustrated in A1 and B1, respectively.

Based on the repeat sequences, the microsatellite regions were classified as perfect, interrupted (more than one of the same repeat motif spaced by a few base pairs) and compound repeats (different repeat motifs occurring tandemly and/or interrupted by a few base pairs). Details about the genomic SSR marker types, their repeat motifs detected in the enrichment library and the gene bank accession number are presented in Table 2. Of the repeat regions identified, 74.5% were perfect, 6.5% were interrupted and 19% were compound repeats. Repeat regions of the “perfect” type are more common in plant genome compared with “interrupted” or “compound” [36,37]. Though greater representation of compound repeat motifs is not common in plant genomes, they seem to exhibit greater levels of polymorphism and hence have a distinct advantage in mapping and diversity analysis [38-41].

Table 2.

Details of the genomic SSR markers developed for mulberry

Sl no Primer name Primer sequence GenBank-ID Amplicon size Repeat motif Ta (°C) Repeat type
1
MulSSRIF
GATCTGAAGTCACCCAGCC
GF101960
236
TC
56.8
Perfect
 
MulSSRIR
GCAGAATCTTTTCAGCTTCCA
 
 
 
 
 
2
MulSSR2F
GGTGCCTGAAGATATGTGG
BV722881
154
AC
56.8
Perfect
 
MulSSR2R
CTCTGAGGGAAGCAGAAG
 
 
 
 
 
3
MulSSR23F
CGGAAACAGCCCAAAGAAGG
GF101977
223
AAACCT
56.8
Perfect
 
MulSSR23R
AGGAGGGGTTTAGGGG
 
 
 
 
 
4
MulSSR26F
CCACTGGTGCCTGAAG
BV722891
282
AC
56.8
Perfect
 
MulSSR26R
CATCTCATACTGGGGC
 
 
 
 
 
5
MulSSR-82 F
CAATCACTAACGGGGGAAG
BV722895
240
CT
56.8
Perfect
 
MulSSR-82R
GCTCTTTTTGGTGCTCC
 
 
 
 
 
6
MULSSR59F
GGTTTCATTTTCCCTCTCGA
BV722893
243
TTC
56.8
Perfect
 
MULSSR59R
GGCCGATGCGAACAGA
 
 
 
 
 
7
MULSSR85F
CCGGAGAAATTCCAAAGG
BV722896
304
TC
56.8
Perfect
 
MULSSR85R
CATCCAGGCATCTGATTG
 
 
 
 
 
8
MULSSR69F
CAATATTACCACCCTCAC
GF101963
294
TC
56.8
Perfect
 
MULSSR69R
GAAATGGTTTGCATCC
 
 
 
 
 
9
M2SSR1F
CTCTCGAGAAAGCCATCA
GF107867
217
CA
50
Perfect
 
M2SSR1R
GGTTGTCAAGTAGGACCG
 
 
 
 
 
10
M2SSR5F
GCTCAGATTCGGTCATGG
GF109684
186
TC
50
Perfect
 
M2SSR5R
CTGCTTCATGGTATCAGAGCAAGG
 
 
 
 
 
11
M2SSR12F
GCGACCATTCAACAGAACCA
GF107890
270
AG
50
Perfect
 
M2SSR12R
GTGTTGTGGTTACTGGTTCC
 
 
 
 
 
12
M2SSR13F
GTGTGTTGAGTGTAGCGGC
GF107891
154
GT
58
Perfect
 
M2SSR13R
CGACGAAGATAACGACACGAC
 
 
 
 
 
13
M2SSR19aF
GAAGAGCTCGCTACAAGG
GF107894
178
TTTTC
51.5
Perfect
 
M2SSR19aR
GAAAGGCATGCTGCTCATG
 
 
 
 
 
14
M2SSR20F
CTAGAGAATCTTGGGCGATCC
GF107896
230
TC
55
Perfect
 
M2SSR20R
ACCGAGCGCTAGTTGTCAG
 
 
 
 
 
15
M2SSR21F
GTTGCTGTGTGCTTGTGG
GF107897
247
TG
45
Perfect
 
M2SSR21R
ACACAACACGTCAACCCAGA
 
 
 
 
 
16
M2SSR53F
GTTGCTGAGCGTGGTGATAG
GF109658
172
AG
50
Perfect
 
M2SSR53R
ACGACACGCACACACGTC
 
 
 
 
 
17
M2SSR65F
GGCTGATAATCGCAATGC
GF107874
173
AGG
51.5
Perfect
 
M2SSR65R
GCGTGCCCACGTAGGAAG
 
 
 
 
 
18
M2SSR67F
CGAGAAATTCCGACTCCATGGTC
GF107901
158
CTC
55
Perfect
 
M2SSR67R
CCGGTGGTAGTGTTGCAAGAG
 
 
 
 
 
19
M2SSR68F
AATTCCGACTCCATGGTCAG
GF107902
211
TCT
51.5
Perfect
 
M2SSR68F
TTCCGGTGGTAGTGTTGC
 
 
 
 
 
20
M2SSR93F
ATAGCCGATTTTGCAGGC
GF107877
243
CTCC
50
Perfect
 
M2SSR93R
GAAATTCCGACTCCATGGTC
 
 
 
 
 
21
M2SSR94bF
ATTAGCCGTGCATCTCTGG
GF107909
295
ACTA
55
Perfect
 
M2SSR94bR
CGATCACTTTCATGATCCGGG
 
 
 
 
 
22
M2SSR102F
GAGCAAGGTTTCTGAACCC
GF107910
203
AAG
51.5
Perfect
 
M2SSR102R
CTCAGCAGTCGTCTGAGG
 
 
 
 
 
23
M2SSR121F
CGATCTGAAAGATGTCGTGC
GF107913
210
CAC
45
Perfect
 
M2SSR121R
GCAACCGTCGTTCTCAGC
 
 
 
 
 
24
Mul3SSR1F
CGGAAAGGGTCATGTTG
KF030980
150
AAAT
53
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR1R
CTGTCGTTATTGAGAGAGCAGG
 
 
 
 
 
25
Mul3SSR2F
GCTAGCAGATCCCACC
KF030981
261
CT, GAGACC
53
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR2R
CAGCTCCTCTTCCACAAGC
 
 
 
 
 
26
Mul3SSR4F
GGAGCAGTCAATCTCTTG
KF030982
314
(ATATAC)CAC(TA)
50
interrupted
 
Mul3SSR4R
CTGGGGTTCAAACTAAGCTC
 
 
 
 
 
27
Mul3SSR6F
GAGAGGTCGCCCCTTAG
KF030983
335
GT
51.5
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR6R
GCCTCACAGGAGAACACC
 
 
 
 
 
28
Mul3SSR7F
CCATGGCTCTTTTGGTC
KF030984
198
CTG
48.5
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR7R
GCAGAATCCAGCTTTTTGG
 
 
 
 
 
29
Mul3SSR9F
GACCAGCCATGAGCCTAC
KF030985
378
GT, GA
51.5
Compound
 
Mul3SSR9R
GGTTCACAACCACAATCTCC
 
 
 
 
 
30
Mul3SSR14F
GGCGGTTTAGGAATATAGC
KF030986
227
AG
47.5
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR14R
CCAAAACGAGAAGAACG
 
 
 
 
 
31
Mul3SSR16F
CTAGTAGCAGATCACCAC
KF030987
207
A, AAAAG
49.5
Compound
 
Mul3SSR16R
CGGTCTCTCCCTAATCC
 
 
 
 
 
32
Mul3SSR17 F
GTCTTGCACTAGGAGAGG
KF030988
345
GT
50.5
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR17R
CTCACAGGAGAACACCACC
 
 
 
 
 
33
Mul3SSR19F
CCAAGTCCTCCTCCAG
KF030989
172
GAA
50
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR19R
GTTTTGTGACTTGCCG
 
 
 
 
 
34
Mul3SSR20F
CTAGCAGATCGTGGCATTG
KF030990
252
(CT)TTCTCTAT(CT)
51
interrupted
 
Mul3SSR20R
CTCCGCCCAAAATATCACAC
 
 
 
 
 
35
Mul3SSR21F
CATCGCAAATAGGTGTGG
KF030991
239
TC
52.5
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR21R
GGCAGTGAGAGCAAGGAG
 
 
 
 
 
36
Mul3SSR23F
GCTAGCAGATCCCAAG
KF030992
224
TGCCAC, TCT
53.5
Compound
 
Mul3SSR23R
CGAAACCCGCATTCATTC
 
 
 
 
 
37
Mul3SSR24F
GCTCTTGTTGACACTGGC
KF030993
225
TC
51
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR24R
CCGATTGTTTAAGGCC
 
 
 
 
 
38
Mul3SSR25F
GAGCCTTGTTCACCAC
KF030994
155
AAG
50
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR25R
GGTCAACTTTCATGCC
 
 
 
 
 
39
Mul3SSR26F
GGTATGAGAGCTTCGCAC
KF030995
202
(TC)G(TC)
52
interrupted
 
Mul3SSR26R
GTCTCGGGAACAACAGC
 
 
 
 
 
40
Mul3SSR28F
GGATCTTGCCATCTAGTGTG
KF030996
112
TA,TG
53.5
Compound
 
Mul3SSR28R
GCAGAATCATAGAGGACC
 
 
 
 
 
41
Mul3SSR31F
GATCCACTTCCACTCCCAG
KF030997
382
GTC, TTC
52
Compound
 
Mul3SSR31R
GGACGCATGAGGTTTTAGG
 
 
 
 
 
42
Mul3SSR33F
CTCCCGGATAAAAGACAACC
KF030998
390
GAA
48.5
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR33R
CCTTGCTCATCATCATCG
 
 
 
 
 
43
Mul3SSR34F
CATTTTCCTCCTGACC
KF030999
221
GA
53
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR34R
CAGTCCACGTCAGTTTC
 
 
 
 
 
44
Mul3SSR36F
GCAGAATCCCGGAGAAGAG
KF031000
329
GAA
53
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR36R
GCAGAATCCCCTGTTTGG
 
 
 
 
 
45
Mul3SSR41F
CATCGCTCGTTTTCGCATC
KF031001
251
CTT
49
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR41R
CACTAGCCCCTGCACC
 
 
 
 
 
46
Mul3SSR43F
CTCTGGAGTACAAGAACCG
KF031002
345
GAA
49.5
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR43R
GGCACGATCCCAATCAAG
 
 
 
 
 
47
Mul3SSR44F
CGCGTATTTCGGATTTCC
KF031003
238
CT, CA
52
Compound
 
Mul3SSR44R
GCTAGCAGAATCCCATC
 
 
 
 
 
48
Mul3SSR49F
CAACATCAACACCGATCACC
KF031004
140
TCA
52
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR49R
GCAGAATCCCACCAACATC
 
 
 
 
 
49
Mul3SSR50F
CTAGCAGATCCACCAAACC
KF031005
161
CTT
53
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR50R
GTTGTTGTACTCTCGCACG
 
 
 
 
 
50
Mul3SSR52F
CAGATCCCATACACAAAGCC
KF031006
391
TTTTTC
51.5
interrupted
 
Mul3SSR52R
GTGAGAGAACCCGAGAAG
 
 
 
 
 
51
Mul3SSR53F
CAGCTATGACCATGATTACGCC
KF031007
124
AAAAC
50.5
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR53R
GGACCCTTGATGGCATTG
 
 
 
 
 
52
Mul3SSR64F
GACGAAAACCGATGAAGAGG
KC408230
380
ATGAGC
47.9
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR64R
GACCGGTAAAACCACACACC
 
 
 
 
 
53
Mul3SSR65F
CTGGAGTACAAGAACCGCAAC
KC408231
220
GAA
53.8
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR65R
GCCCTCCACCATTGAACTAAG
 
 
 
 
 
54
Mul3SSR66F
GCGAATGATGAAAACGGAGAGG
KC408232
262
TTTTA
52.8
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR66R
GCGGTTAGTTGCCTAGTTGG
 
 
 
 
 
55
Mul3SSR67F
ATACCACGTTCCGGTGTG
KC408233
304
GT, GA
52.8
Compound
 
Mul3SSR67R
CATACCGTGCCCCAACTTAC
 
 
 
 
 
56
Mul3SSR70F
GAAGAGGGGAGAGGGAGAGA
KC408236
187
AAATAA
54.1
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR70R
CAACCAGGATCCAAATAGAAGC
 
 
 
 
 
57
Mul3SSR71F
GGATACTACCTGTTTGGTTGCTG
KC408237
360
AAAT, GAA
54.5
Compound
 
Mul3SSR71R
ATTCCCTCCTCAACGAC
 
 
 
 
 
58
Mul3SSR72F
CATCCTTCGAATCCAAGAGC
KC408238
231
(AG)TTTACCCAAAGAAT(AG)
50.8
interrupted
 
Mul3SSR72R
CGAGAGGAAATCCTCACAGC
 
 
 
 
 
59
Mul3SSR73F
GGGGAGGTAGCTGATGTGTC
KC408239
318
TA, TATT
49.1
Compound
 
Mul3SSR73R
AGCATGCCCTTCCATATCAC
 
 
 
 
 
60
Mul3SSR74F
CCCATTGAGGGTTTTGTGAG
KC408240
407
AG, GTGAGC
54.8
Compound
 
Mul3SSR74R
ATGTGAGCTCGGGATTTGAC
 
 
 
 
 
61
Mul3SSR75F
CAGGTTGAACGCCCATTACTC
KC408241
102
CT, TCA, TC
47.9
compound
 
Mul3SSR75R
GTGCAGAATGTCAGTATGCG
 
 
 
 
 
62
Mul3SSR77F
ACTCCGCCTGAAGAACGAAG
KC408243
254
AGA
54.8
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR77R
TAGCAGAATCCCCTGTTTGG
 
 
 
 
 
63
Mul3SSR80F
GAGCCGTTTGATTTCCGTC
KC408245
158
CT
47.9
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR80R
CAACGGTCGGTGAAAAAGC
 
 
 
 
 
64
Mul3SSR91F
CATGAACCGTTGGATCACAG
KC408246
277
AG
54.8
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR91R
ATCCCAGATCCCAAATACCC
 
 
 
 
 
65
Mul3SSR93F
CAGCCAATGCACTTTTAACG
KC408248
343
AC
49.1
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR93R
GTGGAGCTTCTGTTGAGC
 
 
 
 
 
66
Mul3SSR94F
CCCTCATGTGTTCCATCTACC
KC408249
198
AAAACAA
52.8
perfect
 
Mul3SSR94R
CAGAATCACAGCCGAGGAAG
 
 
 
 
 
67
Mul3SSR95F
GATCATCGTGCCAATAAGCC
KC408250
209
AG
52.8
perfect
 
Mul3SSR95R
TAAGAGCTGAGAGGGGAAGC
 
 
 
 
 
68
Mul3SSR97F
TCCACCACTGAACCAAATC
KC408358
292
GAA
50.8
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR97R
ATTAGGGTTGTGACGACGAC
 
 
 
 
 
69
Mul3SSR98F
ACGACAATGCTGTCGTCTTG
KC408252
286
TG
55.2
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR98R
CGATTCGGAAAGCAAACCAAAC
 
 
 
 
 
70
Mul3SSR99F
AGGCAAAGGAGCAGGATG
KC408253
272
TTC
58.5
perfect
 
Mul3SSR99R
GTGGTCACTGCAAAAAGC
 
 
 
 
 
71
Mul3SSR101F
TGAGCCAAGACAAGGAGACA
KC408255
330
AC
50.8
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR101R
AGCTAGCAGAATCCCCTTGA
 
 
 
 
 
72
Mul3SSR102F
TTGGTTGCTGAGAAATGCAG
KC408256
230
AAAT, GAA
55.4
Compound
 
Mul3SSR102R
TTGTCGATGGAAAACACGAC
 
 
 
 
 
73
Mul3SSR103F
GGTCAGATCAGTTTCGTTGC
KC408257
258
AG
53.3
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR103R
GTAAGAGCTGAGAGGGGAAG
 
 
 
 
 
74
Mul3SSR104F
GAAGAGCCGACAAAGAATGG
KC408258
225
ATGAGC, GCAGAGAA
53.3
Compound
 
Mul3SSR104R
GGAATGCTTGACCTTTGACC
 
 
 
 
 
75
Mul3SSR105F
GCAGAATCCCAAGTTAATGCC
KC408259
254
TCT, TGCCAC
57.1
Compound
 
Mul3SSR105R
CCTCATAGAGTACAGGAACCG
 
 
 
 
 
76
Mul3SSR108F
TCTGCCATGGATGCGTGC
KC408262
215
CCTCT, TC, TC
54.1
Compound
 
Mul3SSR108R
GACAGAAACCCGGCAGAAG
 
 
 
 
 
77
Mul3SSR114F
GCAACTCTGCCTTGTTTTC
KC408266
106
AG
58.5
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR114R
TGGTGCCTTAGACCAGAC
 
 
 
 
 
78
Mul3SSR116F
GATTTTCAGCGCATGGTTC
KC408267
382
TTTTA, AATA
58.5
Compound
 
Mul3SSR116R
CCAAGGAAGGTGAAATCC
 
 
 
 
 
79
Mul3SSR118F
CATGAACCGTTGGATCACAG
KC408269
277
AG
53.3
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR118R
ATCCCAGATCCCAAATACCC
 
 
 
 
 
80
Mul3SSR122F
GGTGATGGGCTTTTGATG
KC408273
219
ATC
51.7
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR122R
GTTGGATCTGAGGAGGGTC
 
 
 
 
 
81
Mul3SSR124F
GGGTGCCAAGGAAAGGA
KC408275
228
TCTTTC
54.8
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR124R
AGAGAGATTCGGCAAAACC
 
 
 
 
 
82
Mul3SSR125F
CTTTGATGATGCTTCCTCTGC
KC408276
261
CTT, CTA
54.1
Compound
 
Mul3SSR125R
GTGCACGGAATTTGCTACTG
 
 
 
 
 
83
Mul3SSR126F
GGATGCTATTGCCTAAAGTG
KC408277
199
AAAAG, AAAAGA
52.8
Compound
 
Mul3SSR126R
GCAGAATCAGAAGTGTTGTCC
 
 
 
 
 
84
Mul3SSR127F
CGATTGCCACATGTTCAGAC
KC408278
309
AC
52.8
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR127R
GGCAGACCCGATAAGCAGTA
 
 
 
 
 
85
Mul3SSR131F
ACTGTGCTTCGTGGAGTTG
KC408279
305
CT, TCA
55.4
Compound
 
Mul3SSR131R
GAGAGCTTCGAGAGGGAGG
 
 
 
 
 
86
Mul3SSR135F
GATCATCACAAAAAGGCTGG
KC408282
137
TC
55.4
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR135R
GATTGCCGACACTCGTATC
 
 
 
 
 
87
Mul3SSR141F
TTGGTGCACTTGCCAAAC
KC408286
336
TTTGTT, T
52.8
Compound
 
Mul3SSR141R
TCACCTCGCATAGACCAC
 
 
 
 
 
88
Mul3SSR142F
GCAGAATCCCAAACTTGAGAG
KC408287
213
(AG)AAGCTGAAAATGGGGTGT(AG)
54.5
interrupted
 
Mul3SSR142R
CACAGTTAGCATCACCATGTC
 
 
 
 
 
89
Mul3SSR143F
TGCCACCTTCTCCAATATG
KC408288
151
TTA
54.5
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR143R
CGGGAATCGGGATTAAG
 
 
 
 
 
90
Mul3SSR144F
GATATGGGAACAAGGGCACTG
KC408289
284
CATCAC, ACT
54.5
Compound
 
Mul3SSR144R
CTGTTTGATGAAGCCATGATG
 
 
 
 
 
91
Mul3SSR145F
CCTTCTTCCCCATACCCAC
KC408290
165
TCA
50.4
perfect
 
Mul3SSR145R
CATTTCGGAAGCTTGTCCA
 
 
 
 
 
92
Mul3SSR146F
CAACCGATTACATGGTGTGG
KC408291
256
CT
50.4
perfect
 
Mul3SSR146R
TTCCGCAGCAAGCTTTAC
 
 
 
 
 
93
Mul3SSR148F
AGGCAATGACAAACGGAAG
KC408293
156
CAA
45.1
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR148R
GCAACCACTTCTGTGTGAGC
 
 
 
 
 
94
Mul3SSR149F
TGTCTCTTGGTCAGCGTCTC
KC408294
280
(AC)TATACATTCGT(AC)
54.8
interrupted
 
Mul3SSR149R
CATTTCCCAGAAAGCCACTTC
 
 
 
 
 
95
Mul3SSR150F
TCCTGTCTTAGATCGCAACG
KC408295
226
TTTTA, AAG
54.8
Compound
 
Mul3SSR150R
GGTGGCAGGGATTAATGAG
 
 
 
 
 
96
Mul3SSR151F
GAGTTTGCAGCCTCAGTATGG
KC408296
196
GT, T
54.8
Compound
 
Mul3SSR151R
CGTGCTTGGAGTAAGGGAAG
 
 
 
 
 
97
Mul3SSR152F
TCTCTGTCTGCGCATCAATC
KC408297
189
TC
54.5
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR152R
GCAGAATCCCGATTTTACAG
 
 
 
 
 
98
Mul3SSR153F
GGGCATTGTATTGTCCAAGC
KC408298
302
TTA
51.7
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR153R
GAGTAGCCGACATAAATCAGC
 
 
 
 
 
99
Mul3SSR155F
ACCCTAAATTGGGACGGAAG
KC408300
105
AAG
54.5
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR155R
CGATTTCTACGAATGCCAGAC
 
 
 
 
 
100
Mul3SSR156F
CCCACCCAATCACAATAACC
KC408301
190
GAA
 
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR156R
GTCAACTCCCGAGCTCAC
 
 
 
 
 
101
Mul3SSR159F
CCCAGTTGGGGTTGAGTTG
KC408304
108
TTC
51.7
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR159R
CCTGTCTTGGAGAGGAGAAC
 
 
 
 
 
102
Mul3SSR160F
CCCTCTCTCTCGTCGTTCTC
KC408305
171
CTT
54.8
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR160R
CCCACTCAACCCGTTTTATG
 
 
 
 
 
103
Mul3SSR161F
TGCATGTACTGGATGATGTG
KC408306
166
TGAAG
54.8
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR161R
CTTTGGCTGTAGAAGCACG
 
 
 
 
 
104
Mul3SSR163F
CAGATCTTCTCTCTTGCTCC
KC408308
221
CT, CA
54.5
Compound
 
Mul3SSR163R
GTATGTTTGCTTCACGGCTC
 
 
 
 
 
105
Mul3SSR164F
CGGCGGTGGAGAAACAAAG
KC408309
393
GA, AAAG, AAAAAG
54.8
Compound
 
Mul3SSR164R
GTGAACCCCTGTCTTGGATG
 
 
 
 
 
106
Mul3SSR166F
AAGAGAACAGTGGCCGTC
KC408311
222
ATCACC
54.8
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR166R
AGGGAAAGGCAAGACTAGGG
 
 
 
 
 
107
Mul3SSR167F
CCTTCTTCCCCATACCCAC
KC408312
190
TCA
49.1
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR167R
CACATTTCGGAAGCTTGTCC
 
 
 
 
 
108
Mul3SSR168F
CCCTTTAATCCTCTGCCTG
KC408313
267
AC
50.4
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR168R
GCTGATACTTGGGGTTGG
 
 
 
 
 
109
Mul3SSR169F
CCAGTTGGGGTTGAGTTGTAAC
KC408314
107
TTC
54.8
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR169R
CCTGTCTTGGAGAGGAGAACC
 
 
 
 
 
110
Mul3SSR170F
TAGCTAGCAGATCCCTAC
KC408315
241
GT
49.1
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR170R
GGATTTCGTCGCAACCAT
 
 
 
 
 
111
Mul3SSR171F
GGAGGGGTTTTCCTTGAC
KC408316
168
GAA
51.7
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR171R
CGAAGTGGTGCTCTTCAC
 
 
 
 
 
112
Mul3SSR172F
GCTAGGCTAAAGCCTGGAAG
KC408317
140
TGGATA
54.5
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR172R
TAGTTCCGGTGACCAACTCC
 
 
 
 
 
113
Mul3SSR173F
TCCCGGAACAATCTTATGG
KC408318
304
CTT, CTA
54.5
Compound
 
Mul3SSR173R
CCCTAGTGCACCTTCATTTC
 
 
 
 
 
114
Mul3SSR174F
AGCGGTTTCTTGTGAGCAG
KC408319
371
A, TTC
54.8
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR174R
CATAGTTTGGGCCCGTTTAG
 
 
 
 
 
115
Mul3SSR175F
GGAAAAGAAAGGGGGAATCAG
KC408320
127
GT
54.8
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR175R
GTCTCCTTTTGGGGATACCA
 
 
 
 
 
116
Mul3SSR177F
CACGTACGCAACTTTTTCC
KC408322
329
AG
49.1
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR177R
GTGAGGCTTGACCTGAATG
 
 
 
 
 
117
Mul3SSR178F
CAGAGGAGGATATGACATTATCAAC
KC408323
202
TC
49.1
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR178R
CAAACAGAATCCCACACACG
 
 
 
 
 
118
Mul3SSR179F
CCAGTTGGGGTTGAGTTGTAAC
KC408324
107
TTC
50.4
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR179R
CCTGTCTTGGAGAGGAGAACC
 
 
 
 
 
119
Mul3SSR180F
TCGCCACAATCTTTCACTTG
KC408325
335
TCA, TCT
54.8
Compound
 
Mul3SSR180R
GCGGAGGAATTTTCCATC
 
 
 
 
 
120
Mul3SSR181F
CTCTGACATTGGCAAGAAAGC
KC408326
282
TTC
51.7
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR181R
GAGGAACGGCAATAAGAGG
 
 
 
 
 
121
Mul3SSR183F
GATCAGGAGAGGAAGGAG
JX258829
150
AGA
52.8
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR183R
CTGTCAAAACCAGCCTTG
 
 
 
 
 
122
Mul3SSR184F
CATTCCTGGTGTCAGCCT
JX258830
163
(TC)T(TC)
51.7
interrupted
 
Mul3SSR184R
CAGATCGGCACCAATAGT
 
 
 
 
 
123
Mul3SSR185F
AGAGAGCAACCACGGGAAG
JX465665
336
AAAAAG
52.8
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR185R
GTGAACCCCTGTCTTGGA
 
 
 
 
 
124
Mul3SSR187F
GGACATTTCACAACCCTG
JX465667
324
AAT, CT, AGA
53.8
Compound
 
Mul3SSR187R
AACTGCAAGTTGGCACAG
 
 
 
 
 
125
Mul3SSR190F
AGCTGGGTGGAGGATTG
JX465669
283
AC, GCAC
54.8
Compound
 
Mul3SSR190R
CCACCTCTGCAAGGATTG
 
 
 
 
 
126
Mul3SSR191F
CGAATGCATAGAGGGAGAGC
JX465670
386
AAAAC
50.4
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR191R
CACTTGAGGGTTCATTCAGC
 
 
 
 
 
127
Mul3SSR192F
GACCTACTTCTCGAACAGTAAC
JX465671
198
AAAAC
54.8
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR192R
CTTGAGGGTTCATTCAGC
 
 
 
 
 
128
Mul3SSR193F
GCTAGTTCCATCGCCCATAG
JX465672
358
TTGA, TG
51.7
Compound
 
Mul3SSR193R
GCATCAGATAAAGCAGGTG
 
 
 
 
 
129
Mul3SSR197F
GGTGAAAGTTCGTGTGAGTCC
JX465674
186
TCT, TC
54.8
Compound
 
Mul3SSR197R
TCAGCAACTAGAGTGACTTTG
 
 
 
 
 
130
Mul3SSR199F
CTCAGGTACGCTGTGCTG
JX465675
238
TC
54.8
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR199R
GACTCAAAGCACATGCCAAG
 
 
 
 
 
131
Mul3SSR201F
CCATTGAGGGTTTTGTGAG
JX465677
406
GA, GTGAGC
54.8
Compound
 
Mul3SSR201R
ATGTGAGCTCGGGATTTGAC
 
 
 
 
 
132
Mul3SSR202F
CCCTCTCGATCATCACC
KC408332
230
TTC
49.1
Compound
 
Mul3SSR202R
CGGAGACGTAGATGCCC
 
 
 
 
 
133
Mul3SSR203F
GACCGTAGGAGAGAGTGC
KC408333
442
T, G, CG
54.8
Compound
 
Mul3SSR203R
GGATACCCGCTAAACCCAC
 
 
 
 
 
134
Mul3SSR205F
GCAGTTCCGAATCACGAAATAGG
KC408335
216
TTTA
49.1
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR205R
CAAGGCGAGGTAAACACC
 
 
 
 
 
135
Mul3SSR214F
GTGGAACAGGGAGCCAGTCT
KC408344
297
GGGCG, GAG, GAGGA
54.8
Compound
 
Mul3SSR214R
CATGCACGTCTCACTCCAC
 
 
 
 
 
136
Mul3SSR229F
CCTTATAGCCGATTTTGCAGGC
KC408354
247
TCT
54.8
Perfect
 
Mul3SSR229R
GAAATTCCGACTCCATGGTC
 
 
 
 
 
137
Mul3SSR230F
CGGGTGAGCTGGTTTGTTTC
KC408355
298
GT, TG
50.4
Compound
  Mul3SSR230R CAGCCCCACAATCCCTACT          

Development of genomic SSR markers

Although DNA sequences harboring microsatellite regions were captured using specific probes, primers could not be designed to all the sequences. In instances where the repeat stretch was less than 15 nucleotides or in situations where the repeat regions were close to the ends of the sequences, primers were not designed. Thus, out of the 1094 genomic clones sequenced, 222 primer pairs could be developed (Table 1). The web-based program, Primer3 (http://bioinfo.ebc.ee/mprimer3/), was adopted to design primers to the identified regions with more than 15 nucleotide repeats so as to amplify at least 150 bp fragments. The pre-cloning enrichment strategy captured specific genomic regions that were complementary to the microsatellite probes used. Thus, this approach enhanced the success of identifying specific loci that were unique in the genome. Of the set of 222 primer pairs developed, 137 (61.71%) showed locus specific amplification reiterating the advantages of the pre-cloning enrichment strategy in discovering microsatellite regions [17,30,42,43]. These locus specific markers detected 232 microsatellite motifs that could be classified into interrupted and compound repeat types (Table 2). Of these repeat types, 86 (37.1%) were DNR, 73 (31.5%) TNR, 19 (8.2%) TtNR, 27 (11.6%) PNR and 27 (11.6%) were HNR types (Figure 1). These genomic SSR markers developed for mulberry have been deposited in the NCBI GenBank database and the details of all the locus specific primers are given in Table 2.

Isolation and characterization of genic microsatellites

A set of 2391 stress specific EST sequences obtained by subjecting K2, a leading mulberry variety [19-21], was examined for the presence of repeat motifs and 800 sequences were found to contain a total of 1155 genic microsatellite regions (Table 1). Of these, 254 sequences were found to contain more than one microsatellite locus. Mono nucleotide repeats were the most common among the sequences (Figure 1) followed by tri and hexa-repeat motifs (28.3% and 38.3% respectively). Among the factors that cause the generation of repeat sequences in the genome, replication slippage is often considered as the major mechanism. Though, this is a random phenomenon, the slippage in genic regions occurs in repeats of three bases clubbed with frame shift mutations which suppresses non-triplet repeats resulting in the abundance of TNR and HNR motifs [44-46]. A total of 180 compatible microsatellite regions were identified represented by 136 primer pairs (Figure 1). A significant 87.5% of these were perfect while 5.8% were interrupted and 6.6% were compound repeats (Table 3).

Table 3.

Details of the genic (EST) SSR markers developed for mulberry

Sl no Primer name Primer sequence GenBank-ID Amplicon size Repeat motif Ta (0°C) Repeat type
1
MESTSSR10F
CATTGCACATTGCAGGTAGC
GT629469.1
237
GTT
52.8
Perfect
 
MESTSSR10R
CGGCCATCCAAAATGTTGTTC
 
 
 
 
 
2
MESTSSR13F
TCTATCTCAACCGGAAGTCC
GT628644.1
230
(CAAAAG)G(AAAATA)
54.8
interrupted
 
MESTSSR13R
CCAATTTGCTCGTCTTATGC
 
 
 
 
 
3
MESTSSR14F
CGGCCACAGGTACTTTC
GT628768.1
202
TTGATT
50.4
Perfect
 
MESTSSR14R
GGCAGCGATTTAGGATTGG
 
 
 
 
 
4
MESTSSR20F
CGCAAGTGTCTCAACTG
GT629110.1
200
TGA
49.1
Perfect
 
MESTSSR20R
GGAACGGATGGAGTAAG
 
 
 
 
 
5
MESTSSR23F
GGCCCAAACTCCATAGC
ES448350.1
202
TAC
50.4
Perfect
 
MESTSSR23R
CCGCCAATTCTAGACCAATG
 
 
 
 
 
6
MESTSSR26F
CGTGATTACCTTCGGATTGG
ES448391.1
219
AGCTGG
57.9
Perfect
 
MESTSSR26R
CCAACCCAGTAGACCCAGTG
 
 
 
 
 
7
MESTSSR27F
CCAACATTATCCGGAACACC
ES448394.1
266
CGG
54.8
Perfect
 
MESTSSR27R
GGTAAAGCCATCCGTTGC
 
 
 
 
 
8
MESTSSR28F
GCCCAGTTTCCCACAGAA
ES448403.1
217
ATA
47.9
Perfect
 
MESTSSR28R
GGATGGTTTGTGCGTGC
 
 
 
 
 
9
MESTSSR31F
CACCAATTAAAAGCGCAGTG
ES448813.1
204
GA
57.9
Perfect
 
MESTSSR31R
CTTTGTGGTTGGCTCGTG
 
 
 
 
 
10
MESTSSR35F
CGTTTTCCGCTTCAGAGAG
ES448478.1
206
AG
54.8
Perfect
 
MESTSSR35R
GCCGATATCCTCCTTTCCTC
 
 
 
 
 
11
MESTSSR37F
CAAAAGCGGTTTGGAATAGC
ES448476.1
245
(CTTTC) CTCC(T)
54.8
interrupted
 
MESTSSR37R
CCTCAACACAAAACCCACC
 
 
 
 
 
12
MESTSSR40F
GAATCCTACAAGGGAGC
ES449069.1
215
AAAAT
52.8
Perfect
 
MESTSSR40R
CATACAAGGATGCCCACC
 
 
 
 
 
13
MESTSSR41F
GGTCGACAAGAGGTAATC
ES449022.1
121
AAAAG
56.7
Perfect
 
MESTSSR41R
GAAGGCACCGAAGAGAAC
 
 
 
 
 
14
MESTSSR42F
CAAGAGGTAATCCGTTC
ES448502.1
254
AG
54.8
Perfect
 
MESTSSR42R
CGTTGTTAGCAGGAGC
 
 
 
 
 
15
MESTSSR46F
GCCCATGTTTGCGGAG
ES449184.1
200
AG
56.7
Perfect
 
MESTSSR46R
GGATTTTTCTGTCTGGGTG
 
 
 
 
 
16
MESTSSR47F
GACTGCGGGAGAACAG
ES448510.1
220
CTC
54.8
Perfect
 
MESTSSR47R
GTTCACCGAGGCTGAGAG
 
 
 
 
 
17
MESTSSR48F
GTTGTGGTGGTTGTTGC
ES448516.1
201
TC
56.7
Perfect
 
MESTSSR48R
CCTTCACTTTCTCGCC
 
 
 
 
 
18
MESTSSR49F
CTTCGACGCCTTCTGCG
ES448598.1
184
GAAGA
56.7
Perfect
 
MESTSSR49R
GAGCGTCTCGAAGCAGTTG
 
 
 
 
 
19
MESTSSR50F
GCCGGCATGTACGGATA
ES448967.1
235
CCTAAC
54.8
Perfect
 
MESTSSR50R
GTAAAAGTTTCGCCCCAGG
 
 
 
 
 
20
MESTSSR51F
CCTAGGGTTTCCTTCGCTTC
ES448621.1
223
GCG
54.8
Perfect
 
MESTSSR51R
CGCTTAGGCTCCTTCCTC
 
 
 
 
 
21
MESTSSR52F
CTTCGTTACGCTCGCTATG
ES448640.1
261
TATTTT
56.7
Perfect
 
MESTSSR52R
CCTTCTCTCAAGAATACTGG
 
 
 
 
 
22
MESTSSR53F
GGCCAACATGTACGGATAG
ES449078.1
203
CCTAAC
56.7
Perfect
 
MESTSSR53R
CGCCAGGTACAACAAGAAG
 
 
 
 
 
23
MESTSSR56F
CATTGCGTTCCTTGAG
ES448442.1
220
ATCATG
58.8
Perfect
 
MESTSSR56R
GGAGCCAAGACTCCTAAG
 
 
 
 
 
24
MESTSSR59F
GAGCTCCGACGACCAC
ES448462.1
236
TCATGA
54.8
Perfect
 
MESTSSR59R
GCGTCTCGACGTGAGAAATAAC
 
 
 
 
 
25
MESTSSR61F
CCATAGCCTCAACGTTTC
ES448534.1
239
AAAAAC
54.8
Perfect
 
MESTSSR61R
CGCTCACGTCCGTATC
 
 
 
 
 
26
MESTSSR66F
GGAAAATTCATCCCCCAAGC
ES448761.1
258
TTTTTG
53.8
Perfect
 
MESTSSR66R
CGATGAGAAGCTCAAGGAG
 
 
 
 
 
27
MESTSSR67F
GTGCTCGTAGCTTTGATGG
ES448763.1
215
ATCGCC
54.8
Perfect
 
MESTSSR67R
GCGAAGGAGAAGGAGGAGAG
 
 
 
 
 
28
MESTSSR73F
CTCAAGCTATGCATCCAACGC
ES448909.1
237
CT
52.8
Perfect
 
MESTSSR73R
CCACTTCGAGAGCTTCG
 
 
 
 
 
29
MESTSSR74F
CCATGGCTGAGCACGAG
ES448909.1
238
GAA, GAG
52.8
compound
 
MESTSSR74R
GAGCTCCAGTGTTCCTC
 
 
 
 
 
30
MESTSSR76F
GATCCAGAACTCCCAAACC
ES448912.1
209
CTCCGT
50.4
Perfect
 
MESTSSR76R
GGTAATCCGAGTTCGAGACG
 
 
 
 
 
31
MESTSSR77F
CCATAGCCTCAACGTTTC
ES448915.1
238
AAAAAC
52.8
Perfect
 
MESTSSR77R
CGCTCACGTCCGTATC
 
 
 
 
 
32
MESTSSR78F
GCACTCTCAAACAAATCCTC
ES448921.1
242
AAGTGG
52.8
Perfect
 
MESTSSR78R
CGTTTGGAAACGGCTACTTC
 
 
 
 
 
33
MESTSSR79F
CCCATAGCCTCAACGTTTC
ES448926.1
221
AAAAAC
45.9
Perfect
 
MESTSSR79R
CGACAACAACCGTCAAGTC
 
 
 
 
 
34
MESTSSR85F
GTCATCTATGTCGGGTGGTC
ES448670.1
310
ATACAT
55.4
Perfect
 
MESTSSR85R
CATGGAGCGTTTGTTGTGTG
 
 
 
 
 
35
MESTSSR99F
GGCCAACATGTACGGATAG
ES448967.1
203
CCTAAC
50.4
Perfect
 
MESTSSR99R
CGCCAGGTACAACAAGAAG
 
 
 
 
 
36
MESTSSR108F
GGCTCTGAATGTCCGAGAAG
ES448289.1
246
GAGTTG
50.4
Perfect
 
MESTSSR108R
GGGTGGTAGATTTGGCAC
 
 
 
 
 
37
MESTSSR109F
CTCACGTCCGTATCATCG
ES448314.1
244
TTTGTT
50.4
Perfect
 
MESTSSR109R
CCATTCCCATAGCCTCAAC
 
 
 
 
 
38
MESTSSR111F
CATCTATGTCGGGTGGTCG
ES449122.1
299
AAAT
45.9
Perfect
 
MESTSSR111R
CTATGCACAACAGGCTGC
 
 
 
 
 
39
MESTSSR113F
GCCTCCCATTATGCACTATG
ES449132.1
206
AAAACA
52.8
Perfect
 
MESTSSR113R
CGGATCTTCCAGGCTC
 
 
 
 
 
40
MESTSSR115F
CAGGAATCAGAGCCAGAGC
ES448647.1
398
AAAAAC
53.8
Perfect
 
MESTSSR115R
CTGGACCATGTGGAAGC
 
 
 
 
 
41
MESTSSR117F
CATTATCCGGAACACCAGACG
ES448396.1
247
CGG
53.8
Perfect
 
MESTSSR117R
GCTAAGAACCTCGCTCG
 
 
 
 
 
42
MESTSSR121F
CACGTCCGTATCATCGG
ES449197.1
244
TTTGTT
52.8
Perfect
 
MESTSSR121R
CCATTCCCATAGCCTCAAC
 
 
 
 
 
43
MESTSSR129F
GATTACTCCAACCAACTCC
ES449040.1
223
AAAACC
52.8
Perfect
 
MESTSSR129R
CAAGGGGGCTAGGAAG
 
 
 
 
 
44
MESTSSR123F
CATCTATGTCGGGTGGTCG
ES448449.1
240
CT
52.8
Perfect
 
MESTSSR123R
GTGTTTGCTGGACTTTGC
 
 
 
 
 
45
MESTSSR126F
CACCGATGAGCCCTGGTC
ES448693.1
200
TTC
52.8
Perfect
 
MESTSSR126R
GCACAATCCATCCCAAGTG
 
 
 
 
 
46
MESTSSR127F
CCAACATTATCCGGAACACC
ES448594.1
285
CGG
52.8
Perfect
 
MESTSSR127R
CCTGGACGGAAGAAGTGG
 
 
 
 
 
47
MESTSSR131F
CCTCATTGCGTTCCTTGAG
ES448442.1
225
ATA, ATCATG
54.1
compound
 
MESTSSR131R
CTGATTTGGGAGCCAAGAC
 
 
 
 
 
48
MESTSSR132F
CTATGTCGGGTGGTCG
GT735086.1
473
TTTTCC
54.1
Perfect
 
MESTSSR132R
CATACCGTCGGAGATGC
 
 
 
 
 
49
MESTSSR136F
CCATTCCCATAGCCTC
ES449178.1
244
AAAAAC
50.5
Perfect
 
MESTSSR136R
CGTCCGTATCATCGG
 
 
 
 
 
50
MESTSSR134F
GGTTGTTGTCGAATCCG
ES448600.1
208
TTTGTT
55.4
Perfect
 
MESTSSR134R
GTACAAACCGAACGGGAAC
 
 
 
 
 
51
MESTSSR135F
CCTCATTGCGTTCCTTG
ES448442.1
219
ATCATG
54.1
Perfect
  MESTSSR135R CCGGTGAGGTGATTGG          

It appears that the forces causing tandem repeats such as mutation, replication slippage etc., occurred more frequently in non-coding regions than the genic regions [22,45,47]. It is also possible that the lethal mutations in genic regions would subsequently eliminate the genotype while the sequence variations in non-coding regions of the genome would persist, resulting in the observation of higher frequency of sequence variations in the non-coding genomic regions. Accordingly, more numbers of repeat regions were found on the genomic regions (82%) while 48% were found in the genic regions. A large number of clones with more than 15bp of repeat motifs were found among the markers developed. Results revealed that the frequency of such markers was more in the non-coding regions of the mulberry genome than the genic regions [25]. The presence of longer repeats in the genome may have an evolutionary advantage leading to differences in the ability to adapt to new environments [48,49].

Validation of genomic and genic SSR markers

The genic and genomic SSR markers were validated using four contrasting genotypes of Morus alba that were chosen based on variations in certain physiological traits [50] and seven different mulberry species (all belonging to the genus Morus) (Table 4). Of the 222 genomic and 136 genic SSR markers screened, 137 (62%) genomic and 51 (37%) genic SSR markers showed single locus amplification in all the Morus species as well as genotypes of Morus alba (Table 5). Further, genomic SSRs exhibited greater levels of polymorphism compared with the genic SSR markers. Such phenomenon has also been reported in other plant species [51]. Of the 188 markers examined, 87 (46.2%) detected heterozygosity in the mulberry genotypes and species with a maximum of 1.00 for markers MulSSR39, Mul3SSR26 Mul3SSR91 and Mul3SSR135, (Additional file 1). Around 41% of the genic markers also detected heterozygosity among the mulberry genotypes and species (Additional file 1). SSR markers are highly suited for mapping even in cross pollinated species because of their ability to detect heterozygosity. The markers developed in this study also detected significant levels of heterozygosity in mulberry species and genotypes.

Table 4.

Various mulberry species (A), mulberry genotypes (B) and other related species (C) for characterizing SSR markers

S.No Genotypes Family Origin Ploidy  
1
M. alba
Moraceae
Japan
2n = 28
A
2
M. assambola
Moraceae
-
-
3
M. exotica
Moraceae
Zimbabwe
-
4
M. indica
Moraceae
India
2n = 28
5
M. lavigata
Moraceae
India
2n = 3× = 42
6
M. macroura
Moraceae
-
-
7
M. multicaulis
Moraceae
China
2n = 28
8
Dudia white
Moraceae
India
-
B
9
Himachal Local
Moraceae
India
-
10
MS3
Moraceae
India
-
11
UP105
Moraceae
India
-
12
Artocarpus heterophyllus (Jackfruit)
Moraceae
Asia
2n = 56
C
13
Ficus bengalensis (Banyan)
Moraceae
South Asia
-
14 Ficus carica (Fig) Moraceae South Asia 2n = 26

(Note: All species belong to family Moraceae).

Table 5.

Markers developed for mulberry and their transferability to related species

SSR type Locus specific Monomorpic in Morus spp Monomorpic in all species Polymorphic in Morus spp Primers transferable to other species Transferability
Jackfruit Ficus Fig
Genomic
137
12
1
125 (91.24%)
107 (78.10%)
96 (70.07%)
64 (46.71%)
64 (46.71%)
Genic
51
12
6
39 (76.47%)
42 (82.35%)
39 (76.47%)
21 (41.17%)
22 (43.13%)
Total 188 24 7 164 (87.23%) 149 (79.25%) 135 (71.80%) 85 (45.21%) 86 (45.74%)

Variations in the genic regions, though less frequent, would have a greater possibility of having a direct role in altering the phenotype of an organism [52]. The variability obtained for the SSR markers across mulberry species and genotypes was analyzed using Power Marker version 3.25 and the results are summarized in Table 6. A total of 936 alleles were obtained from 188 markers of which 164 (87%) were polymorphic among the mulberry species and genotypes. These markers revealed an allelic diversity ranging from 1 to 17 with an average of 4.97 alleles per marker locus (Figure 2/Table 6). Earlier reports on allelic diversity of mulberry SSR markers had revealed an average of 4.9 [18], 5.1 [53] and 18.6 [17] alleles per locus. This allelic diversity can be effectively used for various applications ranging from diversity, evolutionary history and QTL mapping of complex traits in mulberry.

Table 6.

Genetic diversity and polymorphic information revealed by markers developed in mulberry and related species

Samples Range Genetic diversity No. of alleles Heterozygosity PIC
All species and genotypes
Min
0.0799
2
0.000
0.0767
 
Max
0.9464
22
0.9091
0.9438
 
Mean
0.5969
5.47
0.1830
0.5592
Morus species only
Min
0.0000
1
0.000
0.0000
 
Max
0.9339
17
1.0000
0.9299
 
Mean
0.5860
4.97
0.1881
0.5431
Other related species
Min
0.0000
2
0.0000
0.0000
 
Max
0.8333
6
1.0000
0.8102
  Mean 0.4090 2.57 0.0532 0.3457

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Gel image generated by the MultiNA for different Mulberry species, genotypes and other related species. All species and genotypes belong to family Moraceae. (a) Morus species, (b) Mulberry genotypes and (c) other related species.

While most of the markers developed in the study amplified the genomic DNA of all mulberry species and genotypes, a few also included private or rare alleles. For instance, Mul3SSR153 only could amplify a few particular mulberry species (M. lavigata, M. assambola) and a mulberry genotype (Dudia white). Such private/rare alleles have great utility in establishing the genetic authenticity of a particular species and/or genotype in germplasm characterization as well as in genetic screening experiments [54].

Most of the genic and genomic SSR markers developed in this study were highly informative with an average PIC value of 0.543 which ranged from 0.000 to 0.929 among mulberry species and genotypes (Table 6). Percentage of variation explained by the principal component analysis also revealed that 41% of the markers were effective in discriminating the variation among the mulberry species and genotypes confirming their efficiency in detecting genetic variations even among closely related varieties.

Two mulberry genotypes viz., Dudia white and UP105 were identified as contrasting lines differing in root traits and WUE in earlier studies [50]. These lines were crossed and a F1 segregating population was developed. Of the 188 markers examined, 94 genomic and 22 genic markers were found to be polymorphic between these two parents. These polymorphic markers would be a very useful genomic resource for constructing a genetic linkage map for mulberry. This work is in progress and when done would lead to the determination of the linkage between markers and their position on mulberry linkage groups.

In the present investigation, we report a large number of genic and genomic SSR markers that can be exploited to examine the diversity among mulberry genotypes and species. However, the relevance of the marker system would increase if they are transferable to other species.

Transferability of the SSR markers to other related species

The transferability of the mulberry SSR markers was examined using three species belonging to the family Moraceae viz.,Ficus (F.bengalensis), Fig (F. carica), and Jackfruit (A. heterophyllus) (Table 4). Of all the markers evaluated 78% (107) genomic and 82% genic (42) markers showed locus specific amplification in at least one of the three species studied (Table 5). Around 30% of the markers were transferable to all the three species. Of the 107 genomic and 42 genic markers, 70% and 76% were transferable to jackfruit. The transferability of these markers was relatively low in Fig and Ficus, which ranged between 41 to 46% (Table 5). It can be perceived that the genic regions of related genomes would be more conserved than the non-coding regions and hence would have higher transferability [55]. These markers would be highly useful for genome mapping and comparative genomics in mulberry and other closely related species belonging to Moraceae.

Several reports confirm the molecular relatedness of mulberry with a few other plant species belonging to the family Moraceae[56,57]. Thus, the effective transferability of both genic and genomic SSR markers to these species can be expected. In this context, the present study is significant as a large proportion of the mulberry markers were found to be effectively transferable to these closely related species of family Moraceae.

Diversity analysis

Genetic diversity among the mulberry and three closely related species from the family Moraceae was analyzed using the 188 locus specific markers. We used two clustering algorithms viz., Unweighted Neighbor Joining (NJ) and factorial analysis (FA) to group the species and genotypes. The results of genetic relationships among the species and mulberry genotypes based on NJ and FA is presented in Figures 3 and 4. Both the algorithms were congruent and grouped the species and genotypes into four clusters. A. heterophyllus, F. bengalensis and F. carica segregated into a distinct cluster (I) while other mulberry species and genotypes clustered separately (II, III and IV). It was interesting to note that Dudia white clustered along with M. lavigata and M. assambola, while all other mulberry species and genotypes grouped into clusters III and IV. Though the dendrogram in Figure 3 indicates clusters III and IV as different, based on the boot strap values, these clusters could be considered as not significantly distinct. Therefore it is apparent that all the mulberry genotypes and species share common alleles except the genotype Dudia white and mulberry species M. lavigata and M. assambola.The diversity structure represented by the factorial analysis also indicated a similar grouping pattern for the mulberry species and genotypes (Figure 4). Though Dudia white is often considered as a genotype of M. alba, there is no firm molecular evidence for its origin.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Genetic diversity analysis of mulberry species, genotypes and three related species using both genomic and genic microsatellite markers. Ficus (Ficus bengalensis), Fig (Ficus carica) and Jackfruit (Artocarpus heterophyllus) were the closely related species examined for the transferability of microsatellite markers developed. All species and genotypes belong to family Moraceae.

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Factorial analysis for grouping of mulberry species, genotypes and three related species using genomic and genic SSR markers. Ficus (Ficus bengalensis), Fig (Ficus carica) and Jackfruit (Artocarpus heterophyllus) were the closely related species examined for the transferability of microsatellite markers developed. All species and genotypes belong to family Moraceae.

The genetic relatedness of the 14 species and genotypes is explained in the Table 7. Based on the dissimilarity matrix Fig and UP105 showed maximum dissimilarity (93.8%) and Fig and Ficus showed the least (38%). Among the mulberry species and genotypes, the minimum genetic dissimilarity (44.4%) was observed between M. alba and M. exotica and highest dissimilarity of 74.7% was found between Dudia white and UP105. These two genotypes significantly differed in physiological traits such as root length and water use efficiency [50].

Table 7.

Dissimilarity matrix of mulberry and other related species tested for transferability of genic and genomic SSR markers

Accessions Mulberry species
Mulberry genotypes
Related species
M. Lavigata M. indica M. assambola M. macroura M. multicaulis M. exotica M. alba Himachal Local UP105 Dudia white MS3 Jackfruit Ficus Fig
M. lavigata
1
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
M.indica
0.602
1
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
M.assambola
0.535
0.629
1
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
M.macroura
0.615
0.544
0.641
1
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
M.multicaulis
0.620
0.578
0.647
0.590
1
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
M.exotica
0.608
0.527
0.634
0.550
0.584
1
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
M.alba
0.576
0.495
0.602
0.518
0.552
0.444
1
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Himachal local
0.662
0.620
0.689
0.632
0.597
0.626
0.594
1
 
 
 
 
 
 
UP105
0.682
0.640
0.708
0.652
0.616
0.645
0.613
0.582
1
 
 
 
 
 
Dudia white
0.625
0.668
0.651
0.680
0.686
0.673
0.641
0.728
0.747
1
 
 
 
 
MS3
0.630
0.587
0.656
0.600
0.564
0.593
0.561
0.581
0.600
0.695
1
 
 
 
Jackfruit
0.734
0.753
0.760
0.765
0.771
0.758
0.727
0.813
0.832
0.799
0.780
1
 
 
Ficus
0.833
0.852
0.859
0.864
0.870
0.857
0.825
0.912
0.931
0.898
0.879
0.704
1
 
Fig 0.840 0.859 0.867 0.871 0.877 0.865 0.833 0.919 0.938 0.905 0.886 0.711 0.380 1

Overall, the diversity analysis clearly indicates that the markers reported in this study are very well conserved across the taxa and can be effectively utilized to study the genetic relationship among varieties, genotypes and species of Moraceae.

Conclusion

Considering the commercial importance of mulberry and the complexity of trait based breeding, a focused molecular breeding strategy needs to be evolved for the genetic enhancement of this crop. Lack of sufficient genomic resources such as SSR markers has been one of the major constraints. We report a total of 188 robust locus specific SSR markers generated by analyzing 3485 genic and genomic sequences of mulberry genome. The markers developed were highly efficient in characterizing seven different mulberry species and four contrasting genotypes of Morus alba L. These markers also exhibited extensive transferability to other related species belonging to the family Moraceae viz., Ficus (Ficus bengalensis), Fig (Ficus carica) and Jackfruit (Artocarpus heterophyllus). The markers displayed high levels of polymorphic information content (PIC) and heterozygosity, enhancing the opportunities of using these markers in diversity analysis as well as for tagging QTLs governing complex agronomic and physiological traits. All the markers developed have been deposited in NCBI/EMBL database and are publicly available.

Methods

Plant materials and DNA extraction

Two strategies were adopted for the generation of genomic resources of microsatellite markers for mulberry. Microsatellite motifs in the genomic regions were identified by adopting the pre-cloning enrichment strategy using the genomic DNA isolated from a mulberry genotype Dudia white. Similarly, a stress expressed sequence tag (EST) was analyzed to identify microsatellite motifs in genic regions of mulberry genome. Details of the methodology adopted are described below.

Pre-cloning enrichment strategy for the construction of genomic library and mining of microsatellite motifs

The SSR enriched genomic library was constructed by a modified method of Saghaimaroof et al. [58]. Four micrograms of high quality genomic DNA was extracted from a genotype, Dudia white. This genotype was identified based on the extensive phenotyping carried out with a diverse set of mulberry germplasm [50]. The genomic DNA was digested by blunt-end generating restriction endonuclease, RsaI (MBI Fermentas, USA). This restriction reaction generated a large number of approximately 500–1000 base pair fragments. The ligation of Super SNX linkers, consisting of a Super SNX 24-mer (5’-GTTT AAGGCCTAGCTAGCAGAATC-3’) and a phosphorylated 28-mer (5’- pGATTCTGCTAGCTAGGCCTTAAACAAAA-3’) to the blunt termini of restriction fragments was performed for 2 hours at 37°C. To ensure linker ligation, 10 μl of digested and ligated product was pre-amplified using 1.5 μl of Super SNX24 Forward primer (10 μM), 150 μM of dNTPs, 2 mM MgCl2, 1 unit of Taq DNA polymerase and 25 μg/ ml of BSA in a volume of 25 μl. Self-ligation of the linkers was avoided by adding 1 unit of the restriction enzyme, XmnI. PCR amplification was carried out with a program consisting ofan initial DNA denaturation step of 95°C for 2 min followed by 20 cycles of: DNA denaturation step at 95°C for 20 s, primer annealing cycle with the appropriate temperature for specific primer pairs for 20s and a DNA extension cycle of 72°C for 2 mins. A final elongation step of 72°C for 10 min was performed to ensure complete amplification of the fragments. All PCR amplifications were carried out using an Eppendorf Master Cycler (Eppendorf, Hamburg). An aliquot of the amplicons was resolved on a 1.2% agarose gel to check the success of linker ligation.

The restriction digested and linker-ligated DNA fragments were captured by hybridizing with biotinylated microsatellite oligonucleotides (Sigma Aldrich): [CA]17, [AG]16, [AGC]8, [AGG]8, [ACGC]5, [ACCT]8, [AAC]14, [ATC]14 and [AAG]14. The enrichment of microsatellites was carried out in 50 μL reaction volume containing 25 μL 2× hybridization solution (12× Sodium saline citrate, 0.2% SDS), 10 μL equimolar biotinylated microsatellite oligos and 2 μg of linker ligated DNA. The hybridization of the microsatellite harboring genomic DNA fragments with the biotinylated microsatellite probes was facilitated by a touchdown temperature PCR consisting of 99 cycles of 95°C/5 min, 70°C/5 sec, 68.8°C/5 sec, 68.6°C/5 sec with step down of 0.2°C for every 5 sec until it reaches 50°C. The temperature in the tubes was then maintained at 50°C for 10 min. Subsequently, a program consisting of 20 cycles of 49.5°C/5 sec with step down of 0.5°C every 5 sec until it reaches 40°C/5 sec and finally held at 15°C.

The touchdown PCR conditions facilitate the microsatellite probes to hybridize with complimentary DNA repeat fragments (i.e., expectantly long prefect repeats) when the reaction mixture is at or near the microsatellite probes melting temperature. Hybridized fragments were selectively isolated using Streptavidin coated paramagnetic beads (Roche, Mannheim, Germany). Enriched DNA fragments were amplified with super SNX24 primers and purified using PCR purification column (Sigma, USA). The purified enriched products were ligated to pTZ57R/T vector (MBI Fermentas, USA) using T4-DNA ligase overnight at 16°C. The ligated genomic inserts were cloned in competent E. coli DH5α host cells and grown over night at 37°C. The transformed colonies were confirmed by performing PCR using M13 universal primers (3 μM), 100 μM dNTPs, 2 mM MgCl2, 1 U Taq DNA polymerase and 1X PCR buffer, at an annealing temperature of 58°C for 30 cycles. PCR products of the recombinant clones were purified using PCR-purification column (Sigma, USA) and sequenced using M13 forward and reverse primers on ABI 3700 sequencer.

Development of EST library to identify genic microsatellite markers

A stress transcriptome was developed by extracting the total mRNA from the leaves of water stressed and well watered mulberry plants. A widely adopted mulberry variety, K2 was used for this purpose. A modified guanidiumisothiocyanate protocol [59] was adopted to isolate total RNA from mature leaf tissue. Total messenger RNA (mRNA) was then isolated from 1 mg of total RNA using mRNA isolation kit (Promega). The mRNA was reverse transcribed to develop cDNA and the ESTs have been isolated [19]. These EST sequences were used in this investigation to develop genic SSR markers.

SSR marker development

Initially, the sequences were analyzed to identify unique and non-redundant libraries of genic and genomic regions for designing primers. The nucleotide sequences were analyzed using the Clustal-W, an on-line toolto determine the complemetarity between pairs of sequences. The non-redundant sequences were analyzed with “Mreps” software (http://bioinfo.lifl.fr/mreps/mreps.php) to identify sequences containing microsatellite motifs. The analysis revealed the presence of a single nucleotide base being the repeat motif (mono nucleotide repeat – MNR) to as high as regions with more than six bases (long nucleotide repeat – LNR). The MNR and LNR sequences were omitted from further analysis and primers were designed only the sequences with repeat motifs of two nucleotides (di-nucleotide repeats – DNR) and six nucleotides (hexa-nucleotide repeats – HNR). Primer3, also online software was used for designing appropriate primers [60]. The quality of primers was determined using the FAST PCR program and only those primers that would amplify a fragment in the range of 150 and 450 base pairs of template DNA were selected. Synthesis of these primers was outsourced to Bioserve India Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad). Each of the primer pairs was standardized for their locus specific amplification using the genomic DNA of Dudia white as a template. Gradient-PCR was carried out in a total volume of 15 μL containing 2 ng of DNA template, 1× Taq buffer, 2 mM MgCl2, 0.2 mM dNTPs, 1 U Taq DNA polymerase (MBI Fermentas, USA) and 3 μM each of forward and reverse primers. Amplification was performed in a epGradient Master cycler (Eppendorf, Hamburg)with the following PCR conditions: DNA denaturation at 95°C for 5 min followed by 30 cycles of 95°C for 1 min, primer annealing temperatures ranging between 45-65°C for 45 s (depending on the Ta for each primer pair) and a DNA extension step of 72°C for 45 s and a final extension step at 72°C for 8 min. The details of the primer sequences, their annealing temperatures, expected amplicon size etc. are summarized in Table 2 and Table 3. The amplified products were resolved on 3% agarose gels. Only those primer pairs that produced unambiguous single band amplification alone were considered for the development of SSR markers in mulberry. This stringency ensured the development of robust SSR markers in mulberry which can be effectively used for diversity analysis as well as for constructing genetic linkage maps. Only such markers were further used for validation.

Validation of markers

Each of the markers was examined for their ability in amplifying the genomic DNA from other mulberry species and genotypes. Genomic DNA was extracted from seven distinct mulberry species and four contrasting genotypes of mulberry using a modified CTAB method [61]. These four genotypes were selected based on the extensive phenotyping of a set of 295 germplasm accessions for the variability in root traits and water use efficiency. Thus, the four genotypes represent contrast for these highly relevant drought adaptive traits. The list of the mulberry species and genotypes are given in Table 4. The template DNA from the different mulberry species and genotypes were amplified using each of the primers for genic and genomic microsatellite markers. The PCR conditions followed are same as that adopted for gradient PCR, explained above. All the amplified products were analyzed on microchip based electrophoresis system MultiNA (Shimadzu biotech, Japan) and the highest peak detected by the fragment analyzer was scored for the presence of the expected band for each primer pair. The polymorphism data was scored and used for the determination of polymorphic information content (PIC) for each marker as per Liu and Muse [62], Observed heterozygosity and allele diversity were computed using the Power Marker 3.25 software [62]. The most appropriate locus specific marker competent to divulge the variation among the species and genotypes was determined by principle component analysis (PCA).

Genetic diversity and cross species transferability

It is well known that there would be significant levels of sequence homology between closely related species and hence, there would be a possibility of a specific SSR marker detecting a similar locus in other related species. Establishment of the transferability of markers to other related species is therefore important while developing locus specific marker systems. The transferability of these markers was examined in three closely related species belonging to the family Moraceae, namely Ficus (F. bengalensis), Fig (F. carica) and Jackfruit (A. heterophyllus) (Table 4).

The percentage of transferability of the markers was calculated for each species by determining the presence of target loci to the total number of loci analyzed. The allelic diversity data obtained for all the microsatellite loci amplified were used to compute the genetic dissimilarity using DARwin v.5.0 program [63]. The dissimilarity matrix was further used to group the species according to their genetic relatedness based on Unweighted Neighbor Joining method and factorial analysis.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interest.

Supplementary Material

Additional file 1

Marker-wise details of the gene diversity, heterozygosity and PIC values tested using mulberry species and genotypes.

Click here for file (109.9KB, xlsx)

Contributor Information

Balachandran Mathithumilan, Email: mathibbb@gmail.com.

Niteen Narharirao Kadam, Email: niteenphysiology9173@gmail.com.

Jyoti Biradar, Email: biradar.jyoti11@gmail.com.

Sowmya H Reddy, Email: owmyahreddy@yahoo.co.in.

Mahadeva Ankaiah, Email: amdeva2007@gmail.com.

Madhura J Narayanan, Email: jnmadhura@gmail.com.

Udayakumar Makarla, Email: udayakumar_m@yahoo.com.

Paramjit Khurana, Email: paramjitkhurana@hotmail.com.

Sheshshayee Madavalam Sreeman, Email: msheshshayee@hotmail.com.

Acknowledgement

This work was carried out with the financial support from Department of Biotechnology (DBT), Government of India to MSS which is sincerely acknowledged (File No: Grant/DBT/CSH/GIA/1395/2010-11. We also wish to thank the Departments of Sericulture and Horticulture, UAS, Bangalore for kindly providing the samples of mulberry and other related species, respectively. We acknowledge the technical inputs and suggestions by Dr. T.K. Narayanaswamy, Professor of Sericulture.

References

  1. Kshama G, Mahanta JC, Deole AL, Kantharaju BM. Raw silk production: 2007–08. Indian Silk. 2008;13:43–44. [Google Scholar]
  2. Khurana P, Checker VG. The advent of genomics in mulberry and perspectives for productivity enhancement. Plant Cell Rep. 2011;13:825–838. doi: 10.1007/s00299-011-1059-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Zietjiewicz E, Rafalski A, Labuda D. Genome fingerprinting by simple sequence repeat (SSR) – anchored polymerase chain reaction amplification. Genomics. 1994;13:176–183. doi: 10.1006/geno.1994.1151. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Prevost A, Wilkinson MJ. A new system of comparing PCR primers applied to ISSR fingerprinting of potato cultivars. Theor Appl Genet. 1999;13:107–112. doi: 10.1007/s001220051046. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  5. Gepts P. The use of molecular and biochemical markers in crop evolution studies. Evol. Biol. 1993;13:51–94. [Google Scholar]
  6. Mathithumilan B, Dandin SB. Genetic analysis of diploid and colchi-tetraploid mulberry (Morus indica and Morus alba) by molecular and morphological markers. Int J Plant Breed. 2008;13:58–64. [Google Scholar]
  7. Vijayan K, Chatterjee SN. ISSR profiling of Indian cultivars of mulberry (Morus spp.) and its relevance to breeding programs. Euphytica. 2003;13:53–63. doi: 10.1023/A:1023098908110. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  8. Vijayan K, Srivastava PP, Awasthi AK. Analysis of phylogenetic relationship among five mulberry (Morus) species using molecular markers. Genome. 2004;13:439–448. doi: 10.1139/g03-147. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Awasthi AK, Nagaraja GM, Naik GV, Sriramana K, Thangavelu K, Nagaraju J. Genetic diversity and relationships in mulberry (Genus Morus) as revealed by RAPD and ISSR marker assays. BMC Genet. 2004;13:1–18. doi: 10.1186/1471-2156-5-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Beckmann JS, Soller M. Toward a unified approach to genetic mapping of eukaryotes based on sequence tagged microsatellite sites. Bio Tech. 1990;13:930–932. doi: 10.1038/nbt1090-930. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Tautz D, Renz M. Simple sequences are ubiquitous repetitive components of eukaryotic genomes. Nucl Acid Res. 1984;13:4127–38. doi: 10.1093/nar/12.10.4127. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Bhat PR, Krishnakumar V, Hendre PS, Rajendrakumar P, Varshney RK, Aggarwal RK. Identification and characterization of expressed sequence tags-derived simple sequence repeats markers from robusta coffee variety ‘CxR’ (an interspecific hybrid of Coffea canephora x Coffeacongensis) Mol Ecol Notes. 2005;13:80–83. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2004.00839.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  13. McCouch SR, Teytelman L, Xu Y, Lobos KB, Clare K, Walton M, Fu B, Maghirang R, Li Z, Xing Y, Zhang Q, Kono I, Yano M, Fjellstrom R, De Clerck G, Schneider D, Cartinhour S, Ware D, Stein L. Development and Mapping of 2240 New SSR Markers for Rice (Oryza sativa L.) DNA Res. 2002;13:199–207. doi: 10.1093/dnares/9.6.199. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Abbott AG, Sosinski BM, Gannavarapu LD, Hager LE, Beck GJ, King CD, Ryder S, Rajapakse WV, Baird RE, Ballard. Characterization of microsatellite markers in peach (Prunuspersica (L.) Batsch) Theor Appl. Genet. 2000;13:421–428. doi: 10.1007/s001220051499. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  15. Mookerjee S, Guerin J, Collins G, Ford C, Sedgley M. Paternity analysis using microsatellite markers to identify pollen donors in an olive grove. Theor Appl Genet. 2005;13:1174–1182. doi: 10.1007/s00122-005-0049-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Giraldo E, Viruel MA, Opez-Corrales ML, Hormaza JI. Characterization and cross-species transferability of microsatellites in the common fig (Ficus carica L.) J Hort Sci Biotechnol. 2005;13:217–224. [Google Scholar]
  17. Aggarwal RK, Udaykumar D, Hendre PS, Sarkar A, Singh LI. Isolation and characterization of six novel microsatellite markers for mulberry (Morus indica) Mol Ecol Notes. 2004;13:477–479. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2004.00718.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  18. Zhao W, Miao X, Jia S, Pan Y, Huang Y. Isolation and characterization of microsatellite loci from the mulberry, Morus L. Plant Science. 2005;13:519–525. doi: 10.1016/j.plantsci.2004.09.020. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  19. Khurana P, Khurana JP, Ravi V, Lal S. Repertoire of leaf expressed sequence tags (ESTs) and partial characterization of stress-related and membrane transporter genes from mulberry(Morus indica L.) Tree Genet Genomes. 2009;13(2):359–374. doi: 10.1007/s11295-008-0192-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  20. Gulyani V, Khurana P. Identification and expression profiling of drought-regulated genes in mulberry (Morus sp.) by suppression subtractive hybridization of susceptible and tolerant cultivars. Tree Genet Genomes. 2011;13:725–738. doi: 10.1007/s11295-011-0369-3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  21. Checker VG, Saeed B, Khurana P. Analysis of expressed sequence tags from mulberry (Morus indica) roots and implications for comparative transcriptomics and marker identification. Tree Genet Genomes. 2012;13:1437–1450. doi: 10.1007/s11295-012-0531-6. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  22. Li Y, Korol AB, Fahima T, Beiles A, Nevo E. Microsatellites within genes: structure, function, and evolution. Mol Biol Evol. 2004;13:991–1007. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msh073. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Lagercrantz U, Ellegren H, Andersson L. The abundance of various polymorphic SSR motifs differs between plants and vertebrates. Nucl Acid Res. 1993;13:1111–1115. doi: 10.1093/nar/21.5.1111. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Morgante M, Olivieri AM. PCR-amplified SSRs as markers in plant genetics. Plant J. 1993;13:175–182. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-313X.1993.tb00020.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Wang Z, Weber JL, Zhong G, Tanksley SD. Survey of plant short tandem DNA repeats. Theor Appl Genet. 1994;13:1–6. doi: 10.1007/BF00222386. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Liu BH. Statistical Genomics: In Linkage Mapping and QTL Analysis. Boca Raton: CRC Press, FA; 1997. [Google Scholar]
  27. Edwards KJ, Barker JHA, Daly A, Jones C, Karp A. Microsatellite libraries enriched for several microsatellite sequences in plants. Biotechniques. 1996;13:758–760. doi: 10.2144/96205bm04. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Zane L, Bargelloni L, Patarnello T. Strategies for microsatellite isolation: a review. Mol Ecol. 2002;13:1–16. doi: 10.1046/j.0962-1083.2001.01418.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Ferguson ME, Burow MD, Schultz SR, Bramel PJ, Paterson AH, Kresovich S, Mitchell S. Microsatellite identification and characterization in peanut (A. hypogaea L.) Theor Appl Genet. 2004;13:1064–1070. doi: 10.1007/s00122-003-1535-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. He G, Meng R, Newman M, Gao G, Pittman RN, Prakash CS. Microsatellites as DNA markers in cultivated peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) BMC Plant Biol. 2003;13:3–9. doi: 10.1186/1471-2229-3-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Jung S, Abbott A, Jesudurai C, Tomkins J, Main D. Frequency, type, distribution and annotation of simple sequence repeats in Rosaceae ESTs. Funct Integr Genomics. 2005;13:136–143. doi: 10.1007/s10142-005-0139-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Aggarwal RK, Hendre PS, Varshney RK, Bhat PR, Krishna kumar V, Singh L. Identification, characterization and utilization of EST-derived genic microsatellite markers for genome analyses of coffee and related species. Theor Appl Genet. 2007;13:359–372. doi: 10.1007/s00122-006-0440-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Feng SP, Li WG, Huang HS, Wang JY, Wu YT. Development, characterization and cross-species/genera transferability of ESTSSR markers for rubber tree (Hevea brasiliensis) Mol Breed. 2009;13:85–97. doi: 10.1007/s11032-008-9216-0. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  34. Nicot N, Chiquet V, Gandon B, Amilhat L, Legeai F, Leroy P, Bernard M, Sourdille P. Study of simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers from wheat expressed sequence tags (ESTs) Theor Appl Genet. 2004;13:800–805. doi: 10.1007/s00122-004-1685-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Gao LF, Tang JF, Li HW, Jia JZ. Analysis of microsatellites in major crops assessed by computational and experimental approaches. Mol Breed. 2003;13:245–261. doi: 10.1023/A:1026346121217. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  36. Moretzsohn MC, Leoi L, Proite K, Guimaraes PM, Leal-Bertioli SCM, Gimanes MA, Martin WS, Valls JFM, Grattapaglia D, Bertioli D. A microsatellite based, gene-rich linkage map for the AA genome of Arachis (Fabaceae) Theor Appl Genet. 2005;13:1060–1071. doi: 10.1007/s00122-005-0028-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Gimenes MA, Hosino AA, Barbosa AVG, Palmieri DA, Lopes CR. Characterization and transferability of microsatellite markers of cultivated peanut (Arachis hypogaea) BMC Plant Biol. 2007;13:9. doi: 10.1186/1471-2229-7-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Butcher PA, Decroocq S, Gray Y, Moran GF. Development, inheritance and cross-species amplification of microsatellite markers from Acacia mangium. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2000;13:1282–1290. doi: 10.1007/s001220051608. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  39. De Wiel CV, Arens P, Vosman B. Microsatellite retrieval in lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.) Genome. 1998;13:139–150. doi: 10.1139/g98-119. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Cuc LM, Mace ES, Crouch JH, Quang VD, Long TD, Varshney R. Isolation and characterization of novel microsatellite markers and their application for diversity assessment in cultivated groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) BMC Plant Biol. 2008;13:55. doi: 10.1186/1471-2229-8-55. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Weber JL. Informativeness of human (dC-dA)n (dG-dT)n polymorphism. Genomics. 1990;13:524–530. doi: 10.1016/0888-7543(90)90195-Z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Hopkins MS, Casa AM, Wang T, Mitchell SE, Dean RE, Kochertgandkresovich S. Discovery and characterization of polymorphic simple sequence repeats (SSRs) in peanut. Crop Sci. 1999;13:1243–1247. doi: 10.2135/cropsci1999.0011183X003900040047x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  43. Scotti I, Vendramin GG, Matteotti LS, Scarponi C, Sari-Gorla M, Binelli G. Postglacial recolonization routes for Piceaabies K. in Italy as suggested by the analysis of sequence-characterized amplified region (SCAR) markers. Mol Ecol. 2000;13:699–708. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-294x.2000.00911.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Cordeiro GM, Casu R, McIntyre CL, Manners JM, Henry RJ. Microsatellite markers from sugarcane (Saccharum spp.) ESTs cross transferable to Erianthus and Sorghum. Plant Sci. 2001;13:1115–1123. doi: 10.1016/S0168-9452(01)00365-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Metzgar D, Bytof J, Wills C. Selection against frame shift mutations limits microsatellite expansion in coding DNA. Genome Research. 2000;13:72–80. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Morgante M, Hanafey M, Powell W. Microsatellites are preferentially associated with non-repetitive DNA in plant genomes. Nat. Genet. 2002;13:194–200. doi: 10.1038/ng822. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Wang Y, Kang M, Huang M. Microsatellite Loci Transferability in Chestnut. J Amer Soc Hort Sci. 2008;13:692–700. [Google Scholar]
  48. Marcotte EM, Pellegrini M, Yeates TO, Eisenberg D. A census of protein repeats. J Mol Biol. 1999;13:151–160. doi: 10.1006/jmbi.1999.3136. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Wren JD, Forgacs E, Fondon JW, Pertsemlidis A, Cheng SY. Repeat polymorphisms within gene regions: Phenotypic and evolutionary implications. Am J Human Genet. 2000;13:345–356. doi: 10.1086/303013. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Vinoda KS. Identification of QTLs conditioning water use efficiency and associated traits in mulberry though marker assisted selection. PhD thesis; 2010. [Google Scholar]
  51. Varshney RK, Graner A, Sorrells ME. Genic microsatellite markers in plants: Features and applications. Tren biotech. 2005;13:48–55. doi: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2004.11.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Grattapaglia D, Plomion C, Krist M, Sedroff R. Genomics of growth traits in forest tress. Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2009;13:1–9. doi: 10.1016/j.pbi.2008.12.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Zhao WG, Zhou ZH, Miao XX, Zhang Y, Wang SB, Huang JH, Xiang H, Pan YL, Huang YP. A comparison of genetic variation among wild and cultivated Morus species (Moraceae: Morus) as revealed by ISSR and SSR markers. Biodiv Conserv. 2007;13:275–290. [Google Scholar]
  54. Kalinowski ST. Counting alleles with rarefaction: private alleles and hierarchical sampling designs. Conser Genet. 2004;13:539–543. [Google Scholar]
  55. Gupta PK, Rustgi S, Sharma S, Singh R, Kumar N, Balyan HS. Transferable EST-SSR markers for the study of polymorphism and genetic diversity in bread wheat. Mol Genet Genomics. 2003;13:315–323. doi: 10.1007/s00438-003-0921-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Datwyler SL, Weiblen GD. On the origin of the Fig: Phylogenetic relationships of Moraceae from NDHF sequences. Am J Bot. 2004;13:767–777. doi: 10.3732/ajb.91.5.767. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Leitch IJ, Chase MW, Bennett MD. Phylogenetic analysis of DNA C-values provides evidence for a small ancestral genome size in flowering plants. Annal Bot. 1998;13:85–94. [Google Scholar]
  58. Saghaimaroof MA, Solima KM, Jorgenson RA, Allard RW. Ribosomal DNA spacer-length polymorphisms in barley: Mendelian inheritance, chromosomal location, and population dynamics. Proceed Nat Acad Sci. 1984;13:8014–8018. doi: 10.1073/pnas.81.24.8014. USA. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. Chomczynski P, Sacchi N. Single-step method of RNA isolation by acid guanidiniumthiocyanate-phenol-chloroform extraction. Anal Biochem. 1987;13:156–9. doi: 10.1006/abio.1987.9999. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. Rozen S, Skaletsky H. Primer3 on the WWW for general users and for biologist programmers. Met Mol Biol. 2000;13:365–386. doi: 10.1385/1-59259-192-2:365. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. Ausubel FM, Brent R, Kingston RE, Moore DD, Seidmann JG, Smith JA, Struhl E. (Eds): Current protocols in molecular biology. Vol. 13. New York: John Wiley and Sons; 2003. [Google Scholar]
  62. Liu K, Muse SV. Power Marker: an integrated analysis environment for genetic marker analysis. Bioinformatics. 2005;13:2128–2129. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bti282. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Perrier X, Flori A, Bonnot F. In: In Genetic diversity of cultivated tropical plants. Hamon P, Seguin M, Perrier X, Glaszmann JC, editor. Enfield: Science Publishers, Montpellier; 2003. Data analysis methods; pp. 43–76. [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Additional file 1

Marker-wise details of the gene diversity, heterozygosity and PIC values tested using mulberry species and genotypes.

Click here for file (109.9KB, xlsx)

Articles from BMC Plant Biology are provided here courtesy of BMC

RESOURCES