The development and use of microsatellite markers for genetic analysis and plant breeding with emphasis on bread wheat

By Rajeev K. Varshney. Euphytica, 2000

986 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Genetics, Plant Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4f7e2a66a828bede1bfd2cb07f6b41652e054e80

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Genetics

1. Rajeev K. Varshney
2. A. Singh
3. B. Singh
4. M. Sorrells
5. A. Graner
6. A. Börner
7. R. Aggarwal
8. T. Mahendar

In Plant Science

1. Rajeev K. Varshney
2. A. Börner
3. R. Aggarwal
4. A. Graner
5. M. Sorrells
6. R. Saxena
7. D. Mackill
8. B. Collard

Citations in the corpus

• Marker-Assisted Plant Breeding: Principles and Practices (2015, background): “It is possible to use a single capillary or gel lane for the analysis of up to 16 different SSR loci by taking advantage of both differential fluorescence labeling and differences in the lengths of PCR products (Gupta and Varshney 2000; de Vienne et al. 2003).”
• Microsatellite diversity in tetraploid Gossypium germplasm: assembling a highly informative genotyping set of cotton SSRs (2006, background): “Within recent years, microsatellites have become one of the most powerful genetic markers in biology, with potential applications for plant breeding programmes (Gupta and Varshney 2000).”
• Single Nucleotide Polymorphism–based Genetic Diversity in the Reference Set of Peanut (Arachis spp.) by Developing and Applying Cost‐Effective Kompetitive Allele Specific Polymerase Chain Reaction Genotyping Assays (2013, background): “The SSR markers, which are known for their high polymorphism information content (PIC) and resourcefulness as molecular tools (Gupta and Varshney, 2000), have enabled discrimination and assessment of genetic variation in peanut germplasm revealing very low to moderate levels of polymorphism in culti”
• Genic microsatellite markers in plants: features and applications. (2005, methodology): “Comparative account on genic and genomic microsatellite markers A comparative analysis of genomic SSRs and genic SSRs reveals advantages to both; however, because of lower polymorphism, EST-SSRs are not as efficient as genomic SSRs for distinguishing the closely related genotypes (for references, se”
• A preliminary genetic analysis of fibre traits and the use of new genomic SSRs for genetic diversity in jute (2008, background): “The trinucleotide repeats were most abundant, and among the different repeats, (T)n and (AAG)n were the most frequent, a feature that is in agreement with earlier studies (Gupta et al. 1996; Cardle et al. 2000; Gupta and Varshney 2000; Kumpatla and Mukhopadhyay 2005).”
• Cultivar identification and genetic fingerprinting of temperate fruit tree species using DNA markers (2002, methodology): “Microsatellite markers or SSRs (Litt & Luly, 1989) are currently becoming the preferred technique for the molecular characterisation of different plant species ( Gupta & Varshney, 2000 ).”
• Comparative assessment of EST-SSR, EST-SNP and AFLP markers for evaluation of genetic diversity and conservation of genetic resources using wild, cultivated and elite barleys (2007, positive): “Furthermore, if two or more than two SNPs are in the range of pyrosequencing, assaying of those SNPs at the Pyrosequencing platform facilitates analysis of haplotypes, which are more informative than individual SNPs for genetic diversity studies [15,19,27].”
• Comparative Assessment of SSR and AFLP Markers for Evaluation of Genetic Diversity and Conservation of Fig, Ficus carica L., Genetic Resources in Tunisia (2011, background): “expected due to the unique mechanism responsible for generating SSR allelic diversity by replication slippage (Varshney et al. 2005; Gupta and Varshney 2000), whereas the basis of AFLP polymorphism are single nucleotide mutations and insertions/deletions (Ridout and Donini 1999; Rafalski 2002).”
• Novel SSR Markers for Polymorphism Detection in Pigeonpea (Cajanus spp.) (2010, methodology): “Among different types of molecular markers, microsatellite or simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers have been proven the markers of choice for application in molecular breeding (Gupta and Varshney 2000).”
• Marker-assisted selection: an approach for precision plant breeding in the twenty-first century (2008, background): “The most widely used markers in major cereals are called simple sequence repeats (SSRs) or microsatellites (Gupta et al. 1999; Gupta & Varshney 2000).”
• Microsatellite markers: an overview of the recent progress in plants (2011, background): “The sequences flanking the microsatellite motifs in the genome are conserved within the particular species and often across the species within a genus and even across related genera (Gupta and Varshney 2000).”
• In silico analysis on frequency and distribution of microsatellites in ESTs of some cereal species. (2002, positive): “Consequently, they have been used extensively not only for mapping SSR loci in many cereal species, but also for tagging a number of genes and for diversity studies in these crops [3].”
• Assessment of genetic diversity in the USDA and CIP-FAO international nursery collections of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) using microsatellite markers (2007, background): “Molecular markers provide unique and effective tools for evaluating and characterizing plant genetic diversity in a way that is unaffected by the environment (Gupta and Varshney, 2000).”
• Application of SSR markers for molecular characterization of hybrid parents and purity assessment of ICPH 2438 hybrid of pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millspaugh] (2010, background): “Since SSR markers are co-dominant (Gupta and Varshney 2000), they can be used for identification of both homozygotes and heterozygotes at a particular marker locus.”