文献类型：期刊文献

中文题名：17种桤木属植物的亲缘关系研究及模糊种鉴定

英文题名：Relationships of 17 Alnus and Identifying Uncertain Species

作者：饶龙兵[1] 杨汉波[1] 郭洪英[2] 段红平[3] 陈益泰[1]

第一作者：饶龙兵

机构：[1]中国林科院亚热带林业研究所;[2]四川林业科学研究院;[3]云南农业大学

年份：2015

卷号：35

期号：4

起止页码：528-534

中文期刊名：植物研究

外文期刊名：Bulletin of Botanical Research

收录：CSTPCD;;北大核心:【北大核心2014】；CSCD:【CSCD2015_2016】；

基金：十二五国家科技支撑项目桤木育种专题:抗逆生态树种桤木新品种选育技术研究(2012BAD01B0604);中央级公益性科研院所基本科研业务费专项资金资助(RISF2013010)

语种：中文

中文关键词：桤木属;亲缘关系;AFLP;形态学

外文关键词：Alnus ; genetic relationship ; AFLP; morphology

分类号：S792.14

摘要：利用AFLP分子标记结合形态学指标,采用UPGMA法进行聚类分析,对桤木属17个种57份材料进行了亲缘关系研究及一个模糊种鉴定。结果表明:7对引物扩增出369条带,其中346个多态位点,多态位点百分率为93.77%;根据AFLP标记位点聚类分析,在相似系数为0.782时,17种桤木属植物可分为4类,第一类为日本桤木(Alnus japonica);第二类为绿桤木(A.viridis)、意大利桤木(A.cordata)、欧洲桤木(A.glutinosa)、模糊种、四川桤木(A.cremastogyne)、江南桤木(A.trabeculosa)、斑点桤木(A.incana ssp.rugosa)、东北亚灰桤木(A.hirsuta)、台湾桤木(A.formosana)、日本特有桤木(A.firma)和裂叶桤木(A.sinuata);第三类为灰桤木(A.incana)、红桤木(A.rubra)及薄叶桤木(A.tenifolia);第四类喜马拉雅灰桤(A.nitida)和尼泊尔桤木(A.nepalensis)。根据形态学聚类分析,在距离为1.4时可分为三类,意大利桤木(A.cordata)单独为一类;日本桤木(A.japonica)、台湾桤木(A.formosana)、喜马拉雅灰桤木(A.nitida)、江南桤木(A.trabeculosa)和东北亚灰桤木(A.hirsuta);第三类包括模糊种、灰桤木(A.incana)、斑点桤木(A.incana ssp.rugosa)、裂叶桤木(A.sinuata)、红桤木(A.rubra)、欧洲桤木(A.glutinosa)、绿桤木(A.viridis)、四川桤木(A.cremastogyne)、薄叶桤木(A.tenuifolia)和尼泊尔桤木(A.nepalensis)。经形态特征和AFLP分析鉴定模糊种为欧洲桤木。形态学聚类与AFLP聚类结果基本一致,但仍存在一定的差异,说明桤木属植物遗传背景丰富,种的分子分类地位和形态学分类地位具有一定的差异。
We analyzed the genetic relationships of 17 Alnus, identified the uncertain species by AFLP markers and morphology data, and used UPGMA in clustering analysis. Seven primers were selected to conduct AFLP- PCR, and 369 DNA bands were obtained including 346 bands ofpolymorphism with93.77% of polymorphic bands. All these plants could be divided into four groups by AFLP cluster analysis ： the first group was consisted of A. japonica ; the second group was consisted of A. viridis, A. cordata, A. glutinosa, uncertain species, A. cremastogyne, A. trabeculosa, A. incana ssp. rugosa, A. hirsuta, A. for mosana, A. firma and A. sinuata ; the third group was consisted of A. incana, A. rubra and A. tenifolia;the fourth group was consisted of A. nitida and A. nepalensis. All these plants could be divided into three groups by morphology data： A. cordatawas the first group ; the second group was consisted of A. japonica, A. formosana , A. nitida , A. hirsuta , A. trabeculosa ; the third group was consisted of A. nepalensis, A. incana, uncertain species, A. incana ssp. rugosa, A. rubra, A. glutinosa, A. viridis, A. fima, A. tenifolia, A. sinuata and A. cremastogyne. The uncertain species was A. glutinosaby morphological and AFLP analysis. The results of morphological cluster analysis and AFLP cluster analysis were similar, but also had some difference, that is, Alnus hadvarious genetic background, and there were some differencesbetween the status of molecular and morphological classification between Alnus species.