• Cicero Ellis posted an update 9 months, 1 week ago

    It need to also be noted that I. batatas haplotypes are distributed on two distinct branches in the tree (Figure 3a and S2).plus the genetic distinction between Southern and Northern genepools is not clearly identifiable with this representation. For the DAPC clustering analysis (Figure 4), the proper variety of clusters was 5. This grouping also really effectively reflects species boundaries: I. trifida Title Loaded From File accessions are represented by cluster K4 and I. triloba accessions by cluster K5. I. batatas accessions have been associated to three different clusters, K1, K2 and K3. Some Ipomoea sp. have been attributed to I. trifida cluster (K4) and other people for the I. batatas cluster (K1 and K3; Figure four). Most of the I. batatas accessions in the Southern area (48/56) had been grouped in cluster K1 (with one particular Ipomoea sp. from Ecuador and also some I. batatas from the Northern region (5/83)). I. batatas accessions in the Northern region had been subdivided in two clusters, cluster K2 which includes a large part of these Northern accessions (50/83) and cluster K3 which includes some accessions from the Northern region (19/83) and some Ipomoea sp. (23/42). With all the model-based clustering evaluation (STRUCTURE, Figure S3), the optimal quantity of clusters to describe the information was unclear. Consequently, clustering results have been much less informative (taxon boundaries were not clearly identifiable and several individuals had a mixed genetic constitution; Figure S2). The most effective Bayesian grouping to be compared with DAPC outcomes was obtained for K = six, a clustering option which distinguished cultivated I. batatas accessions from wild relatives, and also separated varieties from the Northern and Southern region (Figure S3).Congruence among 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 applied cpDNA lineage data 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 were globally congruent. Indeed, Southern varieties have been mostly associated to chloroplast lineage 1 and nuclear cluster 1 (39/54 in total). Within the Northern region, both signals were also congruent since 43/84 sweet potato accessions were associated to nuclear clusters K2 and K3 and chloroplast lineage 2. However, 23 Northern varieties had been connected to nuclear clusters K2 and K3, yet carried a chloroplast lineage1 haplotype. Ipomoea sp. specimens that grouped with the I. trifida cluster K2 harbored the Northern chloroplast haplotype (or the unclassified rare haplotype 1) and were all located within the Southern area (Ecuador and South Colombia). Those from the Northern area carried the Northern chloroplast haplotype and have been grouped with nuclear cluster K3 (Figure 5 and Table two).Interspecific relationships as inferred from SSR markersSSRs may very well be amplified for all loci and all species, top to a total of 137 alleles. The amount of alleles NA, rarefied allelic richness Ar, and expected heterozygosity He, have been similar in I. trifida, I.