THESIS

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2.2 Ploidy levels determination The histogram obtained after flow cytometric analysis was reported in Figure 13 to 18. The DNA content of S00022 accession of S. melongena was used as internal reference standard for the estimation of nuclear genome size in this studied. The expected for genome size accession S00022 was diploid (2n). The other Solanum accessions and their interspecific hybrids were measured with reference to the accession S00022 of S. melongena. The genome sizes of various Solanum species showed significant differences (Figure 13 to 18). S. melongena (2n), S. torvum (2n) and S. americanum (2n) had the small genome size, while S. villosum (4n) had genome size bigger than S. melongena, S. torvum and S. americanum but still smaller than S. nigrum (6n). As expected, the hexaploid (6n) species had more nuclear DNA than tetraploid (4n) and diploid (2n) species. Significant differences in DNA content between cultivated and wild species have been found in some other plant such as Capsicum annuum and C. baccatum (Bennett and Smith, 1976), Piper nigrum, P. betle and P. longum (Samuel et al., 1986), Glycine species (Yamamoto and Nagato, 1984) and rice species (Martinez et al. 1994). 105 The histogram of flow cytometer showed the DNA content of their nuclei. In case of S. melongena genome size was expected to be diploid. Genome sizes of all accessions of S. melongena are shown to be diploid (Figure 13). The interspecific hybrids of S. melongena and its wild relative was showed in Figure 13, which the histrogram of hybrids between S. melongena x S. torvum from S00625 x S00429 and S00809 x S00429, the hybrids between S. melongena x S. villosum from S00809 x S00860 and their parents. This figure represented the result of the hybrid from S00625 x S00429 and S00809 x S00429 had same level ploidy with their parents. This due to S. melongena and S. torvum are diploid species when both species were crossed, the hybrids should be diploid. This results confirm that both hybrids are true intertspecific hybrids. In contrast the hybrid between S. melongena x S. villosum (S00809 x
S00860) showed a same ploidy level with female parent (S. melongena) which indicates that the hybrids were not true hybrids. S. torvum has the expected diploid genome size but the histrogram of accession S00429 genome size was not showed clearly (Figure 13). It might be the leaf sample was too old. These due to the mature organs were usually heavily loaded with polysaccharides, calcium oxalate crystals and other metabolites which decrease the purity of intact nuclei. These contaminants, such as calcium oxalate crystals, have smaller diameters than the nuclei and were difficult to remove by the small-pore-size of nylon mesh (167 µm) used in this protocols. On disruption, cytoplasmic compounds come into contact with nuclei and pose a major obstacle to the purity of nuclei. These contaminants accelerate the degradation of nuclei, increase the viscosity of the samples, and block the fluidic system of the flow cytometer (Lee and Lin, 2005). S. americanum with diploid expected genome size, there is no significant differences among accessions of these species (Figure 15). The histrogram of hybrids within S. americanum and their parents has shown the intermediate between content of their parents. All of histrogram from the intraspecific hybrids showed the same ploidy levels with their parents. This indicates that the intraspecific hybrids within S. americanum are true hybrids due to S. americanum is diploid species. 106 S. villosum has tetraploid expected genome size, the genome size of accessions belong to S. villosum were significant differences. The histrogram of S00854 (Figure 16), TS002600 (Figure 17) and S00860 (Figure 18) show that S00854 and S00860 had the same genome size and bigger than the genome size of TS002600. This indicated the variation of different genotype within S. villosum. However, the differences of genome sizes found can be interpreted as unstable tetraploid. Likewise Martinez et al. (1994), who found the differences of genome sizes of accessions of rice in tetraploid species (Oryza rideyi).
Page 1:
THESIS GENETIC DIVERSITY IN THE SOU
Page 5 and 6:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to ex
Page 7 and 8:
LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1 Ninety
Page 9 and 10:
LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 Selec
Page 11 and 12:
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued) Figure
Page 13 and 14:
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued) Appendi
Page 15 and 16:
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS cm = centimet
Page 17 and 18:
Asian Vegetable Research and Develo
Page 19 and 20:
OBJECTIVES 1. To characterize using
Page 21 and 22:
campanulate, rotate or copular, mos
Page 23 and 24:
Moreover, genetic diversity has an
Page 25 and 26:
Therefore, germplasm characterizati
Page 27 and 28:
some degree from each other and the
Page 29 and 30:
Interspecific hybrids between wild
Page 31 and 32:
Moreover, lines of S. melongena sho
Page 33 and 34:
(qualitative) traits. The cluster a
Page 35 and 36:
Plots of the clustering statistics
Page 37 and 38:
Table 1 (Continued) Temporary No. S
Page 39 and 40:
2. Genetic relationships of Solanum
Page 41 and 42:
pollen grains from randomly selecte
Page 43 and 44:
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION In this stud
Page 45 and 46:
Furthermore, TS02950 collected in C
Page 47 and 48:
distinct from those species. Fruit
Page 49 and 50:
yellow and globose. While, TS001447
Page 51 and 52:
Table 4 Identification of 43 access
Page 53 and 54:
Table 5 Re-identification of 5 acce
Page 55 and 56:
accessions, hence, considered to ha
Page 57 and 58:
Figure 1 Selected items from PROC U
Page 59 and 60:
Table 7 Correlation coefficients sc
Page 61 and 62:
N a m e o f V a r i a b l e o r C l
Page 63 and 64:
1.2.2 Cluster analysis I. Ratio sca
Page 65 and 66:
P S E U D O F S T A T I S T I C Sto
Page 67 and 68:
C U B I C C L U S T E R I N G C R I
Page 69 and 70: Table 9 Accessions number of Solanu
Page 71 and 72: Table 9 (Continued) Cluster Subclus
Page 73 and 74: Stratifying the accessions into 10
Page 75 and 76: (single fruit). It has also the wid
Page 77 and 78: were collected in Laos, while S. ma
Page 79 and 80: II. Nominal traits (qualitative tra
Page 81 and 82: Table 11 (Continued) Nominal traits
Page 83 and 84: The similarity coefficient values (
Page 85 and 86: (3 accessions). Subclaster A is cha
Page 87 and 88: 8 6 4 Figure 7 Cluster analysis of
Page 89 and 90: Table 12 (Continued) Cluster Subclu
Page 91 and 92: However, the determination of the m
Page 93 and 94: This result is in agreement with th
Page 95 and 96: herbicide (atrazine) resistant trai
Page 97 and 98: 3) Cross - compatibility among S. a
Page 99 and 100: when the larger-flowered species we
Page 101 and 102: Table 14 Interspecific crossability
Page 103 and 104: Table 15 Interspecific crossability
Page 105 and 106: Table 17 Intra- and interspecific c
Page 107 and 108: Table 18 (Continued) Cross combinat
Page 109 and 110: A B C D E F G H Figure 8 The hybrid
Page 111 and 112: Figure 10 F1 hybrid plant from S. m
Page 113 and 114: Confirmation of interspecific hybri
Page 115 and 116: However, pollen fertility of the in
Page 117 and 118: Table 19 The pollen fertility of F1
Page 119: Table 21 (Continued) Species Access
Page 123 and 124: Moreover, an accurate determination
Page 125 and 126: S. americanum (S00269) (2n) S. amer
Page 127 and 128: S. villosum (S00854) (4n) S. villos
Page 129 and 130: S. villosum (S00860) (4n) S. villos
Page 131 and 132: Moreover, the crosses between S. am
Page 133 and 134: S. melongena (S00625) S. melongena
Page 135 and 136: S. melongena (S00809) F1 S. villosu
Page 137 and 138: S. americanum (S00861) S. americanu
Page 139 and 140: S. americanum (S00269) S. americanu
Page 141 and 142: S. villosum (TS02600) F1 S. villosu
Page 143 and 144: S. villosum (S00854) F1 S. american
Page 145 and 146: S. nigrum (TS02930) F1 S. americanu
Page 147 and 148: 132 For the interspecific crossing
Page 149 and 150: S. nigrum). For the interspecific c
Page 151 and 152: , and M. Ahmand.1989. Morphological
Page 153 and 154: 138 Collonnier, C., I. Fock, V. Kas
Page 155 and 156: and J.A. Chweya. 1997. Black Nights
Page 157 and 158: and . 1988b. Organelle composition
Page 159 and 160: Laban, J.C.G. 2003. Genetic Diversi
Page 161 and 162: spinous Solanums. Theoret. Appl. Ge
Page 163 and 164: Singh, J. and M. Rai. 2005. Eggplan
Page 165 and 166: APPENDICES 150
Page 167 and 168: SEEDLING DATA AVRDC-GRSU CHARACTERI
Page 169 and 170: S300 Leaf blade tip angle 1 = Very
Page 171 and 172:
S530 Fruit length/breadth ratio 1 =
Page 173 and 174:
S640 Fruit calyx length (N=10) ____
Page 175 and 176:
Appendix Table A1 Characterization
Page 177 and 178:
Appendix Table A1 (Continued) Tempo
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Appendix Table A4 List of morpholog
Page 203 and 204:
Appendix Figure A2 Morphological ch
Page 205 and 206:
Appendix Figure A8 Morphological ch
Page 207 and 208:
Appendix B Identification of specie
Page 209 and 210:
Moments N 91 Sum Weights 91 Mean 7.
Page 211 and 212:
Moment N 91 Sum Weights 91 Mean 101
Page 213 and 214:
Moments N 91 Sum Weights 91 Mean 10
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
show all

THESIS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?