Identification of Prosopis juliflora and Prosopis - Universidad Pública ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

10Figure 4. (a) Amplification of the marker L01 520 , specific to the P. juliflora–pallida complex, usingoligonucleotide L01 as primer and the DNAs purified from all accessions analysed in this paper astemplates. Note the absence of this marker in Lv., Vlt., Gl., and Ch. (b) Southern hybridisation ofthe cloned marker L01 520 used as probe on membranes containing the amplification products usingL01 as oligonucleotide primer and the genomic DNA from all accessions analysed in this paper astemplates. Lane names as Figure 1.Analysis of the similarity and clustering of Prosopis speciesThe RAPD profiles of the different Prosopis accessions were evaluated todetermine the degree of relatedness among them using numerical taxonomytechniques. Molecular markers present in two accessions were considered asshared markers only if they are of similar size. The clustering was performedusing 18 primers on seven accessions each from a different species. The numberof fragments amplified by each oligonucleotide in each sample was speciesspecificbut the average number of RAPD markers per sample was 120 (data notshown). The total number of bands per sample as well as the number of bandsshared in each pair-wise comparison (data not shown) allowed the constructionof a similarity matrix (Table 3) using the Nei and Li similarity index. The lowestsimilarity (0.09) resulted from the pair-wise comparison between an Old WorldProsopis species (P. cineraria, section Prosopis) and the rest of the accessions(section Algarobia), while the highest value (0.73) resulted from both the pairwisecomparisons P. glandulosa–laevigata and P. juliflora–pallida.Data from the similarity matrix were used to group the species using theUPGMA method (Figure 5). The cluster analysis revealed two major clusters;
11Table 3.Matrix of similarity among the Prosopis species studied.P. pallida(Tr)P. juliflora(Hnd)P. laevigata P. velutina P. glandulosa P. chilensis P. cinerariaP. pallida(Trujillo)P. juliflora 0.73(Honduras)P. laevigata 0.48 0.51P. velutina 0.47 0.53 0.71P. glandulosa 0.47 0.55 0.73 0.71P. chilensis 0.42 0.39 0.40 0.41 0.42P. cineraria 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09one formed by P. juliflora and P. pallida (similarity 0.73), and a second comprisingthe North America species, P. laevigata, P. glandulosa and P. velutina(0.71). When the P. juliflora–pallida cluster was compared with the NorthAmerica cluster, the similarity value was 0.50. The similarity value betweenP. chilensis and the large cluster formed by P. laevigata, P. glandulosa,P. velutina, P. juliflora and P. pallida was 0.40. The North American cluster(P. laevigata, P. glandulosa and P. velutina) showed similarity values of 0.53and 0.47, respectively, when compared with P. juliflora (Honduras) andP. pallida (Trujillo) (data not shown). When P. chilensis was compared withP. juliflora (Honduras) and P. pallida (Trujillo) the similarity values were 0.40and 0.42, respectively.Figure 5. Dendrogram showing the estimates of the percentage of similarity among the Prosopisspecies studied. The Nei similarity index (Nei and Li 1979) and the UPGMA clustering algorithm(Sneath and Sokal 1973) were used.
Page 2: 2species are sympatric in each cent
Page 7 and 8: 7presence or absence of each marker
Page 9: 9Figure 3. Amplification of the mar
Page 13 and 14: Pasiecznik et al. (2001) noted simi
Page 15 and 16: of pod coloration. Burkart (1976) n

Identification of Prosopis juliflora and Prosopis - Universidad Pública ...

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

Delete template?

Save as template?