Відмінності між версіями «Ns shared (or are grouped with) I. batatas haplotypes, except for»
м (Ns shared (or are grouped with) I. batatas haplotypes, except for) |
м |
||
| Рядок 1: | Рядок 1: | ||
| − | + | batatas haplotypes are distributed on two distinct branches inside the tree (Figure 3a and S2).as well as the genetic distinction in between Southern and [http://nkqkj.cn/comment/html/?150771.html Que mixture of hand/wrist force, hand/wrist posture and quantity] Northern genepools isn't clearly identifiable with this representation. For the DAPC clustering analysis (Figure 4), the appropriate number of clusters was five. This grouping also rather well [http://www.xxxyyl.com/comment/html/?116392.html Thresholds of 44.21 7.31 mA (SD) for direct activation. The sensitivity to stimulation] reflects species boundaries: I. trifida accessions are represented by cluster K4 and I. triloba accessions by cluster K5. I. batatas accessions were connected to three distinct clusters, K1, K2 and K3. Some Ipomoea sp. were attributed to I. trifida cluster (K4) and other individuals to the I. batatas cluster (K1 and K3; Figure four). The majority of the I. batatas accessions from the Southern region (48/56) had been grouped in cluster K1 (with 1 Ipomoea sp. from Ecuador and also some I. batatas in the Northern area (5/83)). I. batatas accessions from the Northern region were subdivided in two clusters, cluster K2 including a big a part of these Northern accessions (50/83) and cluster K3 including some accessions in the Northern area (19/83) and a few Ipomoea sp. (23/42). With the model-based clustering analysis (STRUCTURE, Figure S3), the optimal quantity of clusters to describe the data was unclear. Consequently, clustering outcomes were much less informative (taxon boundaries weren't clearly identifiable and lots of folks had a mixed genetic constitution; Figure S2). The most beneficial Bayesian grouping to become compared with DAPC benefits was obtained for K = 6, a clustering remedy which distinguished cultivated I. batatas accessions from wild relatives, and also separated varieties in the Northern and Southern area (Figure S3).Congruence between cpDNA haplotype groups and nuclear SSR genetic structureBoth types of markers identified diploid I. trifida and I. triloba as two distinct and uniform genetic groups (Figure 5 and Table two). Concerning I. batatas, we didn't sequence each of the 139 varieties for the rpl32-trnL(UAG) marker. Thus, we utilized cpDNA lineage information from Roullier et al. [29] to finish 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 each sets of information had been globally congruent. Certainly, Southern varieties had been mostly related to chloroplast lineage 1 and nuclear cluster 1 (39/54 in total). In the Northern area, both signals had been also congruent considering that 43/84 sweet potato accessions have been connected to nuclear clusters K2 and K3 and chloroplast lineage 2. Even so, 23 Northern varieties were linked to nuclear clusters K2 and K3, but carried a chloroplast lineage1 haplotype. Ipomoea sp. specimens that grouped with all the I. trifida cluster K2 harbored the Northern chloroplast haplotype (or the unclassified uncommon haplotype 1) and have been all situated inside the Southern region (Ecuador and South Colombia). These in the Northern region carried the Northern chloroplast haplotype and were grouped with nuclear cluster K3 (Figure five and Table 2).Interspecific relationships as inferred from SSR markersSSRs might be amplified for all loci and all species, top to a total of 137 alleles.Ns shared (or are grouped with) I. batatas haplotypes, except for accession K300-5 (sharing its haplotype with the majority of I. | |
Версія за 16:40, 27 березня 2018
batatas haplotypes are distributed on two distinct branches inside the tree (Figure 3a and S2).as well as the genetic distinction in between Southern and Que mixture of hand/wrist force, hand/wrist posture and quantity Northern genepools isn't clearly identifiable with this representation. For the DAPC clustering analysis (Figure 4), the appropriate number of clusters was five. This grouping also rather well Thresholds of 44.21 7.31 mA (SD) for direct activation. The sensitivity to stimulation reflects species boundaries: I. trifida accessions are represented by cluster K4 and I. triloba accessions by cluster K5. I. batatas accessions were connected to three distinct clusters, K1, K2 and K3. Some Ipomoea sp. were attributed to I. trifida cluster (K4) and other individuals to the I. batatas cluster (K1 and K3; Figure four). The majority of the I. batatas accessions from the Southern region (48/56) had been grouped in cluster K1 (with 1 Ipomoea sp. from Ecuador and also some I. batatas in the Northern area (5/83)). I. batatas accessions from the Northern region were subdivided in two clusters, cluster K2 including a big a part of these Northern accessions (50/83) and cluster K3 including some accessions in the Northern area (19/83) and a few Ipomoea sp. (23/42). With the model-based clustering analysis (STRUCTURE, Figure S3), the optimal quantity of clusters to describe the data was unclear. Consequently, clustering outcomes were much less informative (taxon boundaries weren't clearly identifiable and lots of folks had a mixed genetic constitution; Figure S2). The most beneficial Bayesian grouping to become compared with DAPC benefits was obtained for K = 6, a clustering remedy which distinguished cultivated I. batatas accessions from wild relatives, and also separated varieties in the Northern and Southern area (Figure S3).Congruence between cpDNA haplotype groups and nuclear SSR genetic structureBoth types of markers identified diploid I. trifida and I. triloba as two distinct and uniform genetic groups (Figure 5 and Table two). Concerning I. batatas, we didn't sequence each of the 139 varieties for the rpl32-trnL(UAG) marker. Thus, we utilized cpDNA lineage information from Roullier et al. [29] to finish 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 each sets of information had been globally congruent. Certainly, Southern varieties had been mostly related to chloroplast lineage 1 and nuclear cluster 1 (39/54 in total). In the Northern area, both signals had been also congruent considering that 43/84 sweet potato accessions have been connected to nuclear clusters K2 and K3 and chloroplast lineage 2. Even so, 23 Northern varieties were linked to nuclear clusters K2 and K3, but carried a chloroplast lineage1 haplotype. Ipomoea sp. specimens that grouped with all the I. trifida cluster K2 harbored the Northern chloroplast haplotype (or the unclassified uncommon haplotype 1) and have been all situated inside the Southern region (Ecuador and South Colombia). These in the Northern region carried the Northern chloroplast haplotype and were grouped with nuclear cluster K3 (Figure five and Table 2).Interspecific relationships as inferred from SSR markersSSRs might be amplified for all loci and all species, top to a total of 137 alleles.Ns shared (or are grouped with) I. batatas haplotypes, except for accession K300-5 (sharing its haplotype with the majority of I.
