Ns shared (or are grouped with) I. batatas haplotypes, except for

trifida accessions are represented by Peptides (Figs. 4D, 4E). The CE-specific cytotoxic T cell responses (granzyme cluster K4 and I. These from the Northern area carried the Northern chloroplast haplotype and were grouped with nuclear cluster K3 (Figure five and Table two).Interspecific relationships as inferred from SSR markersSSRs might be amplified for all loci and all species, leading to a total of 137 alleles. The number of alleles NA, rarefied allelic richness Ar, and anticipated heterozygosity He, were comparable in I. trifida, I.Ns shared (or are grouped with) I. batatas haplotypes, except for accession K300-5 (sharing its haplotype with most of I. trifida accessions). It need to also be noted that I. batatas haplotypes are distributed on two distinct branches in the tree (Figure 3a and S2).and also the genetic distinction between Southern and Northern genepools isn't clearly identifiable with this representation. For the DAPC clustering analysis (Figure four), the appropriate number of clusters was five. This grouping also very nicely reflects species boundaries: I. trifida accessions are represented by cluster K4 and I. triloba accessions by cluster K5. I. batatas accessions have been related to 3 different clusters, K1, K2 and K3. Some Ipomoea sp. had been attributed to I. trifida cluster (K4) and other people to the I. batatas cluster (K1 and K3; Figure four). The majority of the I. batatas accessions in the Southern area (48/56) have been grouped in cluster K1 (with a single Ipomoea sp. from Ecuador as well as some I. batatas in the Northern region (5/83)). I. batatas accessions in the Northern region have been subdivided in two clusters, cluster K2 like a big a part of these Northern accessions (50/83) and cluster K3 including some accessions in the Northern region (19/83) and some Ipomoea sp. (23/42). With all the model-based clustering evaluation (STRUCTURE, Figure S3), the optimal number of clusters to describe the information was unclear. Consequently, clustering benefits were less informative (taxon boundaries weren't clearly identifiable and lots of folks had a mixed genetic constitution; Figure S2). The most effective Bayesian grouping to become compared with DAPC outcomes was obtained for K = 6, a clustering option which distinguished cultivated I. batatas accessions from wild relatives, as well as separated varieties in the Northern and Southern area (Figure S3).Congruence amongst cpDNA haplotype groups and nuclear SSR genetic structureBoth kinds of markers identified diploid I. trifida and I. triloba as two distinct and uniform genetic groups (Figure five and Table two). Regarding I. batatas, we did not sequence all the 139 varieties for the rpl32-trnL(UAG) marker. Hence, we made use of cpDNA lineage details from Roullier et al. [29] to complete our dataset. As described in Roullier et al. [29], i) nuclear markers reflect a stronger phylogeographic signal than chloroplast markers but ii) phylogeographic patterns revealed by both sets of data have been globally congruent. Indeed, Southern varieties had been mostly related to chloroplast lineage 1 and nuclear cluster 1 (39/54 in total). Inside the Northern area, both signals had been also congruent considering the fact that 43/84 sweet potato accessions had been related to nuclear clusters K2 and K3 and chloroplast lineage two. Nonetheless, 23 Northern varieties were associated to nuclear clusters K2 and K3, yet carried a chloroplast lineage1 haplotype. Ipomoea sp. specimens that grouped with the I.