JEB logo

Journal of Environmental Biology

pISSN: 0254-8704 ; eISSN: 2394-0379 ; CODEN: JEBIDP

About Journal
    Home
    Editor in Chief
    Editorial Board
    Reviewer Panel
    Publication Policies
    Guidelines for Editors
    Guidelines for Reviewers
    Abstracting and Indexing
    Subscription and Payments
    Contact Journal
 
Read Journal
    Current Issue
    Journal Archives
 
For Authors
    Guidelines for Authors
    Terms and Conditions
    Fees and Payments
    Track Paper Status
 
Announcements
    JEB Awards
 

Google Search the Journal web-site:


    Abstract - Issue Mar 2015, 36 (2)                                     Back


nstantaneous and historical temperature effects on a-pinene

Genetic diversity of wild and cultivated genotypes of pigeonpea through RAPD and SSR markers

 

 

Babasaheb C. Walunjkar*, Akarsh Parihar, Nirbhay Kumar Singh and L.D. Parmar

C.P. College of Agriculture, S.D. Agricultural University, S.K. Nagar-385 506, India

*Corresponding Author E-mail: baba.walunjkar@gmail.com

 

 

Publication Data

Paper received:

14 June 2013

 

Revised received:

22 December 2013

 

Accepted:

22 February 2014

 

Abstract

Eight wild and four cultivated pigeonpea genotypes were subjected to RAPD and microsatellite analysis, with 40 primers each. Out of these, eight RAPD and five SSR primers were found polymorphic. RAPD primers showed 100% polymorphism and produced a total of 517 DNA fragments, whereas SSR primers produced 67 fragments and they too showed 100% polymorphism. The RAPD markers revealed highest similarity co-efficient of 0.93 (GT-100 and ICPL-87), whereas the highest similarity co-efficient obtained with SSR markers was 1.00 (GTH-1 and GT-100). Average PIC value obtained with RAPD and SSR were 0.90 and 0.18, respectively. The arithmetic mean heterozygosity and marker index were 0.90 and 22.47 respectively with RAPD marker, whereas the corresponding values for SSR markers were 0.18 and 33.66. Moreover, the four wild genotypes (Cajanus scarabaeoides, Rhyncosia rufescence, Cajanus cajanifolius and Rhyncosia canna) and the four cultivars (GTH-1, GT-100, ICPL-87 and GT-1) grouped distinctly in the same subgroups of the dendrograms obtained with both RAPD and SSR analysis. Therefore, the findings of SSR supplement and validate the results obtained with RAPD analysis. ??   

 

 Key words

Cluster analysis, Fingerprinting, Microsatellites, Random primers, Redgram 

 

 

Copyright ? 2015 Triveni Enterprises. All rights reserved. No part of the Journal can be reproduced in any form without prior permission. Responsibility regarding the authenticity of the data, and the acceptability of the conclusions enforced or derived, rest completely with the author(s).