Research Article

Comparison of a retrotransposon-based marker with microsatellite markers for discriminating accessions of Vitis vinifera

Published: May 21, 2012
Genet. Mol. Res. 11 (2) : 1507-1525 DOI: 10.4238/2012.May.21.8

Abstract

Identification and knowledge concerning genetic diversity are fundamental for efficient management and use of grapevine germplasm. Recently, new types of molecular markers have been developed, such as retrotransposon-based markers. Because of their multilocus pattern, retrotransposon-based markers might be able to differentiate grapevine accessions with just one pair of primers. In order to evaluate the efficiency of this type of marker, we compared retrotransposon marker Tvv1 with seven microsatellite markers frequently used for genotyping of the genus Vitis (VVMD7, VVMD25, VVMD5, VVMD27, VVMD31, VVS2, and VZAG62). The reference population that we used consisted of 26 accessions of Vitis, including seven European varieties of Vitis vinifera, four North American varieties and hybrids of Vitis labrusca, and 15 rootstock hybrids obtained from crosses of several Vitis species. Individually, the Tvv1 and the group of seven SSR markers were capable of distinguishing all accessions except ‘White Niagara’ compared to ‘Red Niagara’. Using the Structure software, the retrotransposon marker Tvv1 generated two clusters: one with V. vinifera plus North American varieties and the other comprising rootstocks. The seven SSR markers generated five clusters: V. vinifera, the North American varieties, and three groups of rootstock hybrids. The percentages of variation explained by the first two components in the principal coordinate analysis were 65.21 (Tvv1) and 50.42 (SSR markers) while the Mantel correlation between the distance matrixes generated by the two types of markers was 42.5%. We conclude that the Tvv1 marker is useful for DNA fingerprinting, but it lacks efficiency for discrimination of structured groups.

Identification and knowledge concerning genetic diversity are fundamental for efficient management and use of grapevine germplasm. Recently, new types of molecular markers have been developed, such as retrotransposon-based markers. Because of their multilocus pattern, retrotransposon-based markers might be able to differentiate grapevine accessions with just one pair of primers. In order to evaluate the efficiency of this type of marker, we compared retrotransposon marker Tvv1 with seven microsatellite markers frequently used for genotyping of the genus Vitis (VVMD7, VVMD25, VVMD5, VVMD27, VVMD31, VVS2, and VZAG62). The reference population that we used consisted of 26 accessions of Vitis, including seven European varieties of Vitis vinifera, four North American varieties and hybrids of Vitis labrusca, and 15 rootstock hybrids obtained from crosses of several Vitis species. Individually, the Tvv1 and the group of seven SSR markers were capable of distinguishing all accessions except ‘White Niagara’ compared to ‘Red Niagara’. Using the Structure software, the retrotransposon marker Tvv1 generated two clusters: one with V. vinifera plus North American varieties and the other comprising rootstocks. The seven SSR markers generated five clusters: V. vinifera, the North American varieties, and three groups of rootstock hybrids. The percentages of variation explained by the first two components in the principal coordinate analysis were 65.21 (Tvv1) and 50.42 (SSR markers) while the Mantel correlation between the distance matrixes generated by the two types of markers was 42.5%. We conclude that the Tvv1 marker is useful for DNA fingerprinting, but it lacks efficiency for discrimination of structured groups.