Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2023 Feb 8;18(2):e0280450. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0280450

Agro-morphological and genetic variability analysis in oat germplasms with special emphasis on food and feed

Raj Kumar 1,#, Smriti Varghese 1,#, Deepanshu Jayaswal 2,*, Kuldip Jayaswall 2,*, Kuldeep Yadav 1, Gaurav Mishra 1, R P Vyas 1, H C Singh 1, H G Prakash 1, Arvind Nath Singh 2, Sanjay Kumar 2
Editor: Tzen-Yuh Chiang3
PMCID: PMC9907803  PMID: 36753474

Abstract

The gaining attention of underutilized oat crops for both food and feed, mining of quality and yield related genes/QTLs from available germplasms of oat is need of the hour. The large family of grasses has a vast number of germplasms that could be harnessed for bio-prospecting. The selection of cross-compatible oat germplasms by molecular markers could be used for the introgression of the novel traits into the elite background of oats. The process needs a thorough study of genetic diversity to see the evolutionary relatedness among germplasms. Considering this, in the present study, the genetic diversity of 38 oat germplasms with 12 agro-morphological traits was carried out using 22 Inter Simple Sequence Repeat (ISSR) markers. We found a high level of polymorphism and 158 distinctive alleles; on average 7.18 alleles per primer, further, high-yielding genotypes were identified with the help of phenotypic data and genetic diversity was analyzed by using DNA fingerprint-based principal component analysis, UPGMA dendrogram. Among these 38 germplasms; eight were identified as superior under high grain yield (OS-424, OS-403, NDO-1101, OL-10, UPO-212, OS-405, OS-6, and OS-346) and another eight germplasms were identified as superior for the high fresh weight (for fodder purpose, NDO-711, RO-19, OL-14, OL-1760/OL-11, NDO-10, UPO-212, UPO-06-1, and RO-11-1). These results suggest that germplasms that are closely related (Cross-compatible) and have good potential for desirable traits could be used for varietal development by using marker-assisted selection.

Introduction

Oats hold the sixth rank in the world cereal production statistics after wheat, maize, rice, barley, and sorghum. The common oat (Avena sativa L.) is a cereal cum fodder crop grown primarily for its green fodder and grains. It is rich in antioxidants such as α-tocotrienol, α- tocopherol, avenanthramides, and total dietary fiber including the soluble fiber β-glucan [1]. Oat has gained much attention owing to its higher nutritional value, excellent health functions, and gluten-free property [2]. Grain quality and yield with several grain characteristics are routinely used to define milling quality [3]. Developing new oat varieties that combine high yield, β-glucan content and high great content is an obstacle, such that improvement in one trait tends to be accompanied by a reduction in others [4]. Oats face several biotic and abiotic constraints which drastically affect their fodder and grain yield. Serious diseases like crown rust [5], smut [6], stem rust [7], cold weather, low soil pH, and variation in nutrient and health conditions of the soil affect production of oats. Cultivars with an improved yield capability that can be also grown at higher elevations than the current climatic limits for arable agriculture could relieve some of the overgrazing pressures and destruction of forests. As the available land currently used for food production becomes scarce with the increasing population, and the need for greater food production increases, hence, more research is needed to develop special-purpose forage cultivars that fit specific end uses. There are few oat breeding programs where the primary objective is developing oats for forage, and very little work is underway to develop germplasm for conditions like the cool and high altitude regions found in the parts of the Himalayas. A point at issue is to consider the potential for quantum leaps in oat cultivar performance where the oat crop is a mandated food crop of an International Agriculture Research Centre, such as the International Center for Agricultural Research or the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center. It would provide potential spin-offs by providing the basis for smaller oat breeding operators to develop germplasm specifically for grain, forage and fodder uses, including lowering the temperature threshold at which oat germplasm can grow, and producing higher yields of forage and fodder for livestock uses in cool regions [8]. Biochemical markers were used to study genetic diversity and relationships before the 1980s when molecular markers were unknown. Furthermore, the discovery of molecular markers has simplified the examination of genetic variation. Since molecular markers are more trustworthy and accurate than other marker systems, they are widely employed for genetic diversity analyses, phylogenetic investigations, and cultivar identification. Genetic polymorphisms in the cultivated Avena sativa L. are very low as a result of continuous selective breeding for crop improvement, therefore marker-assisted selection (MAS) and marker-assisted breeding (MAB) could play a key role in the production of new varieties. Genetic diversity study using multiple molecular markers in diverse crops has been done efficiently for many years [913]. Montilla et al., 2013 [14], had studied the vast number of oat accessions by using simple sequence repeat (SSR) and expressed sequence tag (EST) molecular markers to see the relatedness and difference at the allelic level and classified them based on genetic distance. Among other molecular markers, Inter Simple Sequence Repeat markers are widely employed for genetic diversity study because they have various advantages over other markers, including being PCR-based, requiring no sequence information, distributing across the entire genome, using a tiny amount of template DNA, and being cost-effective. ISSR marker genotypic data, pedigree analysis, and other phenotypic data can all help with germplasm selection for future crop development through molecular breeding initiatives [15]. ISSR markers are dominant in nature; hence, phenotypes can be differentiated at each locus in the Mendelian pattern.

In contemplation of achieving the adequate production of crops, it is important to spot the superior genotypes for both fodder and grain yield. To precise the research work and speedup up the oat improvement program, the genomic study will be helpful to get a reliable result. Hence to identify higher-yielding germplasms and to introgress superior yield governing genes to ameliorate the existing varieties the present investigation was carried out containing 38 oat germplasms.

Material and methods

Analysis of agronomic morphological and yield traits

The present study was carried out using 38 oat germplasms sourced from Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh, India during the Rabi 2021 at Chandra Shekhar Azad University of Agriculture and Technology, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, India (S1 Table). The experimental material consisted of 38 germplasms that were sown in Randomized Block Design with three replications in timely sown (TS) condition. The entries were sown in a single row plot of (3 × 1) m2 area with inter and intra-row spacing of 30 cm and 5 cm, respectively. The observations were recorded on various quantitative characters viz. days to 50% flowering, plant height, tillers per plant, leaf per plant, leaf length, leaf width, fresh weight (for fodder purpose), leaf area index, dry weight, harvest index, and grain yield (for food purpose) (S2 Table). The emphasized traits of fresh weight and grain yield were observed at the climax stage of the plant. Three randomly selected plants in each row of each replication for all the characters were recorded under study. For all 38 genotypes, all character’s quantitative values in three replications were taken and statistical analysis was performed (S2 Table) and the mean quantitative value was used for the development of a heat map (S1A and S2A Figs) and correlation heat map matrix using Mev software (S1B and S2B Figs) for grain and fodder yield respectively.

DNA isolation

Fresh tender leaves of oats were collected from the agricultural field and DNA was isolated following the CTAB method of DNA isolation with minor modification [16]. The polyvinyl pyrrolidone K-30 and β-mercaptoethanol concentration were standardized for the procedure of DNA isolation. The quality of DNA was examined over 0.8% agarose gel using lambda uncut marker (Fermentas, Lithuania) and quantified by NanoDrop 2000 (Thermo Scientific, USA).

Amplification, validation, and polymorphic potential evaluation

Thirty-eight oat germplasms (S1 Table) were genotyped by 22 inter simple sequence repeat (ISSR) markers (Table 1) and a DNA fingerprint was developed (S3 Table). For all the PCR amplification (Fig 1), efficiency with 22 ISSR markers was analyzed in 25μL reaction volume with 20 ng of DNA template. The PCR program was initiated as described [17]. The amplified PCR products were separated on 1.5% agarose gel (Fig 1), and amplicon size was estimated based on a 100 bp DNA ladder (Genedirex) as a reference.

Table 1. List of primers and their amplification characteristics.

S. No. Locus name Primer sequence Annealing temperature (Tm) °C No. of alleles Approximate size range (bp)
1 UBC 807 AGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGT 50 6 350–1700
2 UBC 808 AGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGG 50 9 400–1200
3 UBC 809 AGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGG 50 6 400–1100
4 UBC 810 GAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAT 50 6 650–1250
5 UBC 811 GAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAC 50 6 650–1300
6 UBC 812 GAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAA 50 8 500–1200
7 UBC 815 CTCTCTCTCTCTCTCTG 50 7 450–1400
8 UBC 817 CACACACACACACACAA 50 7 700–1600
9 UBC 818 CACACACACACACACAG 50 7 700–1200
10 UBC 819 GTGTGTGTGTGTGTGTA 50 3 900–1300
11 UBC 820 GTGTGTGTGTGTGTGTT 50 8 600–1250
12 UBC 851 TCTCTCTCTCTCTCTCA 50 11 500–1600
13 UBC 824 TCTCTCTCTCTCTCTCG 50 12 400–1250
14 UBC 825 ACACACACACACACACT 50 9 700–1250
15 UBC 826 ACACACACACACACACC 50 5 500–1300
16 UBC 827 ACACACACACACACACG 50 8 200–1200
17 UBC 834 AGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGYT 50 9 300–1250
18 UBC 835 AGAGAGAGAGAGAGAGYC 50 6 400–900
19 UBC 840 GAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAYT 50 7 550–1900
20 UBC 841 GAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAYC 50 8 500–1500
21 UBC 842 GAGAGAGAGAGAGAGAYG 50 5 400–1200
22 UBC 856 ACACACACACACACACYA 50 5 500–1200

Fig 1. PCR amplification profile of 38 oat germplasms using UBC 826 Inter Simple Sequence Repeats (ISSRs) markers along with ladder.

Fig 1

Molecular data analysis

The ISSR markers amplification profiles were scored based on the presence (1) or absence (0) of bands across all individuals (S3 Table). The amplified products were categorized as monomorphic, polymorphic, and null alleles based on amplified bands. For all the oat germplasms, Unweighted Pair Group Method with Arithmetic Mean (UPGMA) dendrogram (Fig 2) and Principal Component Analysis (PCA) (Fig 3) based on Jaccard’s coefficient using DARwin6 (ver.) software [18] was constructed. The genetic structure of thirty-eight individuals of oat (Fig 4) was inferred using Bayesian algorithm-based STRUCTURE software (ver. 2.3.3) [19, 20].

Fig 2. Dendrogram of 38 Avena sativa L. based on 22 Inter Simple Sequence Repeats (ISSRs) markers.

Fig 2

Fig 3. Inter Simple Sequence Repeats (SSR) marker-based principal component analysis showing two-dimensional distributions of oat germplasms.

Fig 3

Fig 4. Bayesian model-based genetic clustering of 38 oat germplasms.

Fig 4

Results and discussion

Analysis of morphological and genetic diversity

In the present study, 38 oat germplasms were taken for observation and recording of morphological data viz. days to 50% flowering, plant height, tillers per plant, leaf per plant, leaf length, leaf width, fresh weight (for fodder purpose), leaf area (cm2), leaf area index, dry weight, harvest index, and grain yield. Among the recorded observed phenotypic traits, the grain yield and fresh weight have been taken for the selection of best-performing germplasms for food and feed purposes respectively. The statistical analysis was performed using phenotypic data to classify the oat germplasms (S2 Table). The highest grain weight was observed in OS-6 (27.33 grams) and the highest fresh weight was recorded in OL-14 (197.33). The detailed analysis of phenotypic data is available in S2 Table which can be referred to for data analysis.

In the present study 22 ISSRs have been used on 38 oat germplasms to see the genetic diversity among them. The UPGMA dendrogram (Fig 2) was constructed based on DNA fingerprinting. The relatedness between germplasms could be seen in the dendrogram and superior performing germplasm in terms of grain yield and fresh leaf weight could be selected. In Fig 2, the germplasms were clustered into two major groups i.e., I and II. Group, I have been divided into two subgroups IA and IB, further IA is subdivided into IAa and IAb. The number of alleles amplified ranged from 6–11 with size from 350-1900bp. Based on the allelic range, principal component analysis (PCA) was performed and the germplasms were grouped into 4 clusters (Fig 3). Further, the structure (Fig 4) was constructed based on genotypic data to see the relatedness among studied germplasms. Here, in Fig 4, 23 germplasms (9, 10, 13, 14, 8, 17, 7, 11, 12, 15, 16, 21, 22, 20, 23, 4, 6, 18, 19, 5, 3, 2, and 1; relative numbers represent the respective germplasm, S1 Table) out of 38 oat germplasms forms the first group, rest of the germplasms falls under the second group. The highest number of alleles was amplified by UBC 824 which can be considered the best marker among all studied ISSRs.

Bio-prospecting within oat germplasms by linking the molecular markers with desirable traits is of very potential importance [21]. The variability among oat germplasms could be harnessed to enhance crop productivity. Therefore, the molecular markers like ISSR markers could be used to exploit the genetic diversity of oats and selected desirable trait containing germplasms can be used for the marker-assisted breeding program. With this analysis i.e., dendrogram, PCA, and structure analysis, it is evident that the studied oat germplasms could be grouped based on genotyping using ISSR markers. The grain yield and fresh weight observed in the taken oat germplasm were influenced by both genotypic content and environment. The variable gradient of soil micronutrients especially potassium and copper play a very significant role in the oat and wheat grain yield [22, 23]. But many times, the nutrient gradient may also give false positive results. To avoid the influence of false positive results due to environmental effects, genotypic analysis was conducted to select the best-performing germplasm. Further, both the data were taken together to select the best germplasm. The relatedness among organisms and selection of desirable traits containing oat germplasms by phenotyping and genotyping could be used for crop improvement through marker-assisted selection.

Classification of high grain yield (for food purposes), high fresh weight (for fodder purposes) low grain yield, and low fresh weight based on phenotypic data

Among several agriculturally important traits concerned with food and feed, grain yield and fresh weight of oats are very crucial. Therefore, the present study was conducted to identify high grain yield and high fresh weight containing germplasms by correlating the phenotypic data with DNA fingerprint-based dendrogram (Fig 2), principal component analysis (Fig 3), and phenotypic data based heat map (S1A, S1B and S2A, S2B Figs). After careful analysis of phenotypic and genotypic data, we have identified eight oat germplasms (OS-424, OS-403, NDO-1101, OL-10, UPO-212, OS-405, OS-6, and OS-346) having high grain yield ranging from 16gm to 27.3 gm per plant (S1 Table, Fig 1A). Among these eight high grain yield germplasms, all showed a strong correlation with the eight individuals but they were negatively correlated with UPO-94 (low grain yield) (Fig 1B). The correlation heatmap matrix of the high-grain yield germplasms was further confirmed by a fingerprint-based dendrogram (Fig 2). Further, eight germplasms were identified as superior under high fresh weight (for fodder purposes) NDO-711, RO-19, OL-14, OL-1760/OL-11, NDO-10, UPO-212, UPO-06-1, and RO-11-1 ranging from 166gm to 197.33 gm per plant (S1 Table, S2A Fig). These eight high fresh weights germplasms, all showed a strong correlation with the eight individuals but they were negatively correlated with UPO-94 (low fresh weight) (S2b Fig). Further UPO-94 showed negative correlation with NDO-711, RO-19, OL-14, OL-1760/OL-11, NDO-11-1 germplasms. The correlation heatmap matrix (S2B Fig) of the high fresh weight germplasms was further confirmed by DNA fingerprint-based dendrogram (Fig 2) and heatmap data (S2A Fig). The phenotypic data taken on the open field depends on the various biotic and abiotic factors. These factors influence the observation values that ultimately affect the accuracy of the data. Here, the classification is based on morphological data that is highly influenced by environmental conditions and may be changed in the coming season. Hence, classification needs genotypic data based on DNA fingerprints to make sure that the phenotypic data is not environmentally biased.

Classification of high grain yield (for food purposes), high fresh weight (for fodder purposes) low grain yield, and low fresh weight based on genotypic data

The genotypic data collected based on the scoring of amplified PCR products were used to see the relatedness among the selected genotypes. Studies of genetic diversity enhance our precision to select the cross-compatible closely related but diverse in nature germplasms to improve overall crop productivity [24]. To classify the studied germplasm on the basis of genotypic data derived from molecular markers, the UPGMA dendrogram (Fig 2) was constructed the divides the total germplasms into two main clusters (cluster I and II) and two sub-clusters (IA and IB). Further, the subcluster IA was divided into IAa and IAb. The sub-cluster IA had 22 oat germplasms. The IAa and IAb contain high-yield germplasms along with low grain-yielding germplasms. Most of the germplasms of IAa and IAb including UPO-94 (low grain yield-16gm) have low grain yield germplasms except RO-19 and NDO-1101 of group IAa and OL-1802-1/OL-12, OL-1869-1/OL-13, OL-1804, OS-403, and OS-424 of group IAb (Fig 2). The cluster IB represented only one genotype JHO-822 and was characterized under low grain yielding germplasms. Further, the analysis discriminated the sub-cluster II into IIA and IIB. Cluster IIA represented thirteen germplasms. Interestingly, most of the germplasms of the cluster IIA showed high grain yield including UPO-212, JHO-2010-1, SKO-96, OS-346and OS-405 except OL-1802, NDO-10, OL-1876-2, CSAOFC-14-4, OL-1896, UPO-06-1, RO-11-1, and JHO-99-2 (Fig 2). The cluster IIB represented two germplasms OS-6 and OL-10 that were characterized by high grain yield. After correlating the morphological and genotypic data, we selected the high grain yield and high fresh weight oat germplasms. Further, the high trait contrasting germplasm were selected OS-6 (high grain yield, cluster-IIB) and UPO-94 (low grain yield, cluster- IAa), and OL-14 (Cluster-IAa, high fresh weight for fodder purpose) and UPO-94 (low fresh weight for fodder purpose, cluster- IAa) were selected based on DNA genotypic data.

The correlation of DNA fingerprint (S3 Table), heat map analysis (S1A and S2A Figs), and heatmap matrix (S1B and S2B Figs) revealed that the high grain yield germplasms OS-424, OS-403, NDO-1101, OL-10, UPO-212, OS-405, OS-6, and OS-346 and fresh weight germplasms NDO-711, RO-19, OL-14, OL-1760/OL-11, NDO-10, UPO-212, UPO-06-1, and RO-11-1germplasms were best germplasms which had more than 16-gram grain yield and 166.33-gram fresh weight compared to the low grain yielding and low fresh weight UPO-94 (9.56 and 65.33 gram respectively) germplasm.

Transformation and plotting of the abundance data using principal component analysis (PCA, Fig 3) separated the samples which reflected the variation of oat germplasms possibly due to photoperiod sensitivity and vernalization also suggested in other studies [25, 26]. Moreover, the PCA (Fig 3) and DNA fingerprint (Fig 1) analysis characterized the 38 oats genotypes into two sections. Germplasms under section I was categorized as high grain yield and high fresh weight while section II was under low grain yield and low fresh weight (Fig 3). The results of PCA followed by the confirmation of heat map (S1A and S2A Figs) and correlation heatmap matrix (S2A and S2B Fig) analyses revealed that OS-424, OS-403, NDO-1101, OL-10, UPO-212, OS-405, OS-6, and OS-346 were high grain yielding genotypes, and NDO-711, RO-19, OL-14, OL-1760/OL-11, NDO-10, UPO-212, UPO-06-1, and RO-11-1 displayed high fresh weight under section I (Fig 3). Further, low grain yield and low fresh weight yielding germplasms were grouped in section II (Fig 3). The germplasm UPO-94 was characterized under section II (Fig 3). It could be noted by the correlation of DNA genotype, PCA, heatmap, and correlation heatmap matrix that OS-424, OS-403, NDO-1101, OL-10, UPO-212, OS-405, OS-6, and OS-346 showed high grain yield, and NDO-711, RO-19, OL-14, OL-1760/OL-11, NDO-10, UPO-212, UPO-06-1, and RO-11-1genotypes showed high fresh weight as compared to UPO-94. Keeping these oat germplasms having desirable traits could be used for trait transfer via conventional breeding/marker-assisted backcross breeding programs [27]. Further, the selected germplasms will be analyzed in the future for the high palatability of grains and leaves.

After having a serious look at the available scientific literature on various Gramineae family crops [2830], the present study could be the first and novel report involving the ISSR markers for the characterization of high grain and fresh-weight yielding genotypes in oats. A set of 22 ISSRs have been used to expedite the molecular breeding of oats. The high cross-transferability and polymorphism of these ISSR markers further reveal their novelty [31]. Utilization of these novel ISSRs markers in diversity analysis and population structure characterization of 38 oat germplasms suggest their wider efficacy on a superior scale for molecular breeding studies in oats. Based on the DNA fingerprint analysis, the study revealed that 38 oats germplasms were highly diverse. Amongst these 38 germplasms; eight (OS-424, OS-403, NDO-1101, OL-10, UPO-212, OS-405, OS-6, and OS-346) were identified superior under high grain yield ranging from 16 gm to 27.3 whereas the other eight (NDO-711, RO-19, OL-14, OL-1760/OL-11, NDO-10, UPO-212, UPO-06-1, and RO-11-1) germplasms were identified superior under high fresh weight (for fodder purpose) ranging from 166 gm to 197.33 gm. These identified germplasms would act as breeding material for the introgression of high fresh weight and high grain yield traits into elite cultivars.

Supporting information

S1 Fig. a- Heat map depicting grain yield profile of 38 oat germplasms, b-Correlation heatmap matrix of grain yield profile of 38 oat germplasms.

(TIF)

S2 Fig. a-Heat map depicting fresh weight (for fodder purpose) profile of 38 oat germplasms, b-Correlation heatmap matrix of fresh weight (for fodder purpose) profile of 38 oat germplasms.

(TIF)

S1 Table. Description of the 38 germplasms used for the identification of high grain yielding and fresh weight (for fodder purpose) germplasms of oats.

(DOCX)

S2 Table. Performance of oat genotypes for 12 characters along with phenotypic and genotypic data analysis using statistical tools.

(DOCX)

S3 Table. DNA fingerprint of 38 oats with 22 ISSR markers.

(XLSX)

S1 Raw images

(PDF)

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Oliver RE, Obert DE, Hu G, Bonman JM, Jackson EW. Development of oat based markers from barley and wheat microsatellites. Genome.2010; 6: 458–71. doi: 10.1139/g10-021 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Gu Y, Qian X, Sun B, Ma S, Tian X, Wang X. Nutritional composition and physiochemical properties of oat flour sieving fractions with different particles size. LWT-Food Science and Technology. 2021; 154.112757. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Doehlert DC, McMullen MS, Jannnk JL, Panigrahi S, Gu Huanzhong, Riveland NR. Evaluation of oat kernel size uniformity. Crop Science.2004; 44.1178. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Yan W, Reid JF, Pageau D, Martin R. Genotype–by-environment interaction and trait associations in two genetic population of oat. Crop Science. 2016; 56(3).0678 [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Simons MD. Crown rust. In Diseases, distribution, epidemiology, and control. Academic Press.1985;131–172. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Haber S, Harder DE. Oat diseases and pathologic techniques. Oat science and technology. 1992; 1 (33):307–425. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Wallwork H. Cereal leaf and stem diseases. Grains Research and Development Corporation; 2000. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Stevens EJ, Armstrong KW, Bezar HJ, Griffin WB, Hampton JG. Fodder oats an overview. Fodder oats: a world overview.2004; 33: 11–18. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Ahmad F. Random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) analysis reveals genetic relationships among the annual Cicer species. Theoretical and Applied Genetics.1999; 98: 657–663. [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Schulman AH. Molecular markers to assess genetic diversity. Euphytica.2007;158(3): 313–321. [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Gill-Langarica HR, Muruaga-Martínez JS, Vargas-Vázquez ML, Rosales-Serna R, Mayek-Pérez N. Genetic diversity analysis of common beans based on molecular markers. Genetics and Molecular Biology.2011; 34(4); 595–605. doi: 10.1590/S1415-47572011005000056 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Bonman JM, Babiker EM, Cuesta‐Marcos A, Esvelt‐Klos K, Brown‐Guedira G, Chao S, et al. Genetic diversity among wheat accessions from the USDA National Small Grains Collection. Crop Science. 2015; 55(3): 1243–1253. [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Delfini J, Moda-Cirino V, dos Santos Neto J, Ruas PM, Sant’Ana GC, Gepts P, et al. Population structure, genetic diversity and genomic selection signatures among a Brazilian common bean germplasm. Scientific reports. 2021;11(1): 1–12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Montilla-Bascón G, Sánchez-Martín J, Rispail N, Rubiales D, Mur L, Langdon T, et al. Genetic diversity and population structure among oat cultivars and landraces. Plant molecular biology reporter. 2013;31(6):1305–14. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Rao LS, Rani PU, Deshmukh PS, Kumar PA, Panguluri SK. RAPD and ISSR fingerprinting in cultivated chickpea (Cicerarietinum L.) and its wild progenitor CicerreticulatumLadizinsky. Genetic resources and crop evolution.2007;54(6): 1235–1244. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Murray MG, Thompson WF. Rapid isolation of high molecular weight plant DNA. Nucleic acid research.1980;10(19):4321–5. doi: 10.1093/nar/8.19.4321 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Yadav G, Jayaswal D, Jayaswall K, Bhandawat A, Singh A, Tilgam J, et al. Identification and characterization of chickpea genotypes for early flowering and higher seed germination through molecular markers. Molecular Biology Reports. 2022; 8:1–8. doi: 10.1007/s11033-022-07410-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.PerrierX,Jacquemoud-ColletJP.2006.DARwinsoftware. http://Darwin.cirad.fr/Darwin.
  • 19.Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnelly P. Interference of population structure using miltilocus genotypes data. Genetics. 2000;155:945–959. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Falush D, Stephens M, Protchard JK. Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data: dominant markers and null alleles. Molecular ecology notes. 2007; 7(4):574–578. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2007.01758.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Ranjisha KR, Surendran K, Nair RA, Pillai PP. Bioprospecting of biodiversity for improvement of agronomic traits in plants. In Transgenic Technology Based Value Addition in Plant Biotechnology. Academic Press. 2020;1–24 [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Al-Yasari MNH. Potassium and nano-copper fertilization effects on morphological and production traits of oat (Avena sativa L.). SABRAO J. Breed. Genet. 2022; 54(3): 678–685. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Swailam MA, Mowafy SAE, El-Naggar NZA, Mansour E. Agronomic responses of diverse bread wheat genotypes to phosphorus levels and nitrogen forms in a semiarid environment. SABRAO J. Breed. Genet.2021;53: 592–608. [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Jayaswall K, Sharma H, Bhandawat A, Sagar R, Yadav VK, Sharma V, et al. Development of intron length poly-morphic (ILP) markers in onion (Allium cepa L.), and their cross-species transferability in garlic (A. sativum L.) and wild relatives. Genet Resour Crop Evol. 2019; 66(7):1379–1388 [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Sampson DR, Burrows VD. Influence of photoperiod, short–day vernalization, and cold vernalization on days to heading in avenaspecies and cultivars.Canadian Journal of Plant Science. 1972;52:471–482. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Locatelli B, Kanninen M, Brockhaus M, Colfer CP, Murdiyarso D, Santoso H. Facing an uncertain future: How forests and people can adapt to climate change. 2008;97 [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Shelenga TV, Kerv YA, Perchuk IN E, Solovyeva A, Khlestkina EK, G. Loskutov I, et al. The Potential of Small Grains Crops in Enhancing Biofortification Breeding Strategies for Human Health Benefit. Agronomy. 2021; 11(7):1420. [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Abdel-Lateif KS, Hewedy OA. Genetic diversity among Egyptian wheat cultivars using SCoT and ISSR markers. SABRAO J. Breed. Genet. 2018; 50: 36–45. [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Qulmamatova DE, Baboev SK, Buronov AK. Genetic variability and inheritance pattern of yield components through diallel analysis in spring wheat. SABRAO J. Breed. Genet. 2022; 54(1): 21–29. [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Helsel DG, Skrdla RK . Breeding for grain yield in oats (Avena sativa L.). SABRAO J. Breed. Genet. 1983; 15(2): 139–145. [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Al-Khayri JM, Mahdy EM, Taha HS, Eldomiaty AS, Abd-Elfattah MA, Abdel Latef AA, et al. Genetic and Morphological Diversity Assessment of Five Kalanchoe Genotypes by SCoT, ISSR and RAPD-PCR Markers. Plants. 2022;11(13):1722. doi: 10.3390/plants11131722 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Tzen-Yuh Chiang

23 Nov 2022

PONE-D-22-26734

Agro-morphological variability, population structure, and genetic diversity in oat germplasms with special emphasis on food and feed

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Jayaswal,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jan 07 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Tzen-Yuh Chiang

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability.

Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized.

Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access.

We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter.

3. PLOS ONE now requires that authors provide the original uncropped and unadjusted images underlying all blot or gel results reported in a submission’s figures or Supporting Information files. This policy and the journal’s other requirements for blot/gel reporting and figure preparation are described in detail at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-blot-and-gel-reporting-requirements and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-preparing-figures-from-image-files. When you submit your revised manuscript, please ensure that your figures adhere fully to these guidelines and provide the original underlying images for all blot or gel data reported in your submission. See the following link for instructions on providing the original image data: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-original-images-for-blots-and-gels.

 In your cover letter, please note whether your blot/gel image data are in Supporting Information or posted at a public data repository, provide the repository URL if relevant, and provide specific details as to which raw blot/gel images, if any, are not available. Email us at plosone@plos.org if you have any questions.

4. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information.

5. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Dear Editor

I have gone through paper entitled “Agro-morphological variability, population structure, and genetic diversity in oat germplasm with special emphasis on food and feed”.

Although, the several studies have been published on the same topic, nothing new in this paper. However, the paper is generally well organized, and the introduction gave a literature review of related topics, and summarized the methods proposed in this paper. In order to make the paper easy to understand, appropriate figures and tables were also given. Therefore, I think that the paper could be published in the Journal with some modifications.

Here my comments and suggestions:

• Still some grammatical errors are present, that should be removed before publication.

• Title should be more appropriate

• Key words are not appropriate

• Write full forms of all abbreviations at least once.

• Sampling and data recording is clear and significant.

• All Figures are poor and not clear, should be replace with clear and readable images.

• Also check all references in the text and reference list carefully some are missing from the list or not cited in the text.

• Most importantly, the discussion section needs to be strengthened to highlight the importance of the work.

For further justification of the study, kindly incorporate the below current review, please.

Al-Yasari MNH (2022). Potassium and nano-copper fertilization effects on morphological and production traits of oat (Avena sativa L.). SABRAO J. Breed. Genet. 54(3): 678-685. http://doi.org/10.54910/sabrao2022.54.3.20.

Abdel-Lateif KS, Hewedy OA (2018). Genetic diversity among Egyptian wheat cultivars using SCoT and ISSR markers. SABRAO J. Breed. Genet. 50: 36–45.

Qulmamatova DE, Baboev SK, Buronov AK (2022). Genetic variability and inheritance pattern of yield components through diallel analysis in spring wheat. SABRAO J. Breed. Genet. 54(1): 21-29. http://doi.org/10.54910/sabrao2022.54.1.3

Helsel DG, Skrdla RK (1983). Breeding for grain yield in oats (Avena sativa L.). SABRAO J. Breed. Genet. 15(2): 139-145.

Swailam MA, Mowafy SAE, El-Naggar NZA, Mansour E (2021). Agronomic responses of diverse bread wheat genotypes to phosphorus levels and nitrogen forms in a semiarid environment. SABRAO J. Breed. Genet. 53: 592-608. https://doi.org/10.54910/sabrao2021.53.4.4.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: PROF. DR. NAQIB Ullah KHAN

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Attachment

Submitted filename: PONE-D-2226734 - Comments.doc

PLoS One. 2023 Feb 8;18(2):e0280450. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0280450.r003

Author response to Decision Letter 0


23 Dec 2022

To,

The Editor

PLOS ONE

Please find enclosed our detailed responses to the reviewers’ and editor’s comments for the manuscript “Agro-morphological and genetic variability analysis in oat germplasms with special emphasis on food and feed”. The Editor’s and reviewer’s comments were very constructive and mainly concerned (1) Format, title and pictures quality MS, (2) References and the grammar. We appreciate the time and effort that you and the reviewers dedicated to providing feedback on our manuscript. We have dealt with all of the critical comments in full, and revised the manuscript. We hope that you agree that we have satisfactorily dealt with the reviewer’s comments in full.

Sincerely,

Deepanshu Jayaswal on behalf of all authors.

Response to Editor

Comment 1: A rebuttal letter that responds to each point rose by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

Response: The Response to Reviewers file has been attached.

Comment 2: A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

Response: 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes' with suggested comments has been attached.

Comment 3: An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

Response: Submitted as suggested.

Response to Journal Requirements

Comment 1: Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming.

Response: The whole manuscript has been considered as per the journal requirement and completed as per requirement.

Comment 2: In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available.

Response: The minimal data requirements have been provided in all the attached supplementary tables.

Comment 3: PLOS ONE now requires that authors provide the original uncropped and unadjusted images underlying all blot or gel results reported in a submission’s figures or Supporting Information files.

Response: We would like to ask for an apology for this. The student has taken the gel images and cropped without saving the original images. Therefore, we have all the images but in cropped version. For this we are in regret and can not produce the uncropped image. Meantime we will try to recover the images from the gel doc system where the images were taken.

Comment 4: Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly.

Response: Legends captions for all the figures and tables are given after references.

Comment 5: Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

Response: We have gone through the MS and checked for all references.

Response to Reviewers

Comment 1: Still some grammatical errors are present, that should be removed before publication.

Response: The authentic purchased software was used to rectify the grammatical mistekes.

Comment 1: Title should be more appropriate

Response: As the term diversity itself includes population structure analysis therefore, title has been modified to make it bit short. Agro-morphological and genetic variability analysis in oat germplasms with special emphasis on food and feed

Comment 2: Key words are not appropriate

Response: Keywords has been replaced by those which are involved many times in the MS and represent the research work.

Comment 3: Write full forms of all abbreviations at least once.

Response: Please accept our apology for such small but key mistakes. Now, we have corrected as per suggestion.

Comment 4: Sampling and data recording is clear and significant.

Response: We are highly grateful for appreciation.

Comment 5: All Figures are poor and not clear, should be replacing with clear and readable images.

Response: The entire pictures dpi has been upgraded up to 600 dpi to enhance the visibility.

Comment 6: Also check all references in the text and reference list carefully some are missing from the list or not cited in the text.

Response: We have carefully checked the total number of references given and their citations in the MS text and rectified as per necessity.

Comment 7: Most importantly, the discussion section needs to be strengthened to highlight the importance of the work.

Response: Discussion of each finding has been explained where needed as per suggestion.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Tzen-Yuh Chiang

3 Jan 2023

Agro-morphological and genetic variability analysis in oat germplasms with special emphasis on food and feed

PONE-D-22-26734R1

Dear Dr. Jayaswal,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Tzen-Yuh Chiang

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Yes, and as per previous review comments, the the article is well improved, and it can be published now, please,.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: PROF. DR. NAQIB Ullah KHAN

**********

Acceptance letter

Tzen-Yuh Chiang

27 Jan 2023

PONE-D-22-26734R1

Agro-morphological and genetic variability analysis in oat germplasms with special emphasis on food and feed

Dear Dr. Jayaswal:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Tzen-Yuh Chiang

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

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

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Fig. a- Heat map depicting grain yield profile of 38 oat germplasms, b-Correlation heatmap matrix of grain yield profile of 38 oat germplasms.

    (TIF)

    S2 Fig. a-Heat map depicting fresh weight (for fodder purpose) profile of 38 oat germplasms, b-Correlation heatmap matrix of fresh weight (for fodder purpose) profile of 38 oat germplasms.

    (TIF)

    S1 Table. Description of the 38 germplasms used for the identification of high grain yielding and fresh weight (for fodder purpose) germplasms of oats.

    (DOCX)

    S2 Table. Performance of oat genotypes for 12 characters along with phenotypic and genotypic data analysis using statistical tools.

    (DOCX)

    S3 Table. DNA fingerprint of 38 oats with 22 ISSR markers.

    (XLSX)

    S1 Raw images

    (PDF)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: PONE-D-2226734 - Comments.doc

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES