EST versus Genomic Derived Microsatellite Markers for Genotyping Wild and Cultivated Barley

By K. Chabane, G. Ablett, G. Cordeiro, J. Valkoun, Robert J. Henry. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution, 2005

131 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/51d2a024a653703daa20cba70ce58307ebdc6d38

How researchers see this paper

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

In Genetics

In Plant Science

Citations in the corpus

Importance of Genetic Diversity Assessment in Crop Plants and Its Recent Advances: An Overview of Its Analytical Perspectives (2015, background): “Gene banks need to include different characteristics in their screening processes and their collections need to be comprehensive, including what are now considered minor crops, and that may come with huge impact on food baskets.”
Methods for Development of Microsatellite Markers: An Overview (2014, unknown): “Moreover, EST-SSR markers exhibit less polymorphism and are less efficient in distinguishing closely related individuals (Cho et al., 2000; Gupta et al., 2003; Chabane et al., 2005) because of greater DNA sequence conservation in transcribed or coding regions (Rungis et al.”
An overview of molecular marker methods for plants (2006, unknown): “Furthermore, the EST-SSR markers have been reported to have lower rate of polymorphism compared to the SSR markers derived from genomic libraries (Cho et al., 2000; Scott et al., 2000; Eujayl et al., 2002; Chabane et al., 2005).”
EST-derived SSR markers in Jatropha curcas L.: development, characterization, polymorphism, and transferability across the species/genera (2011, methodology): “The EST-based markers have been successfully used in several species, such as barley (Thiel et al. 2003; Chabane et al. 2005), wheat (Zhang et al.”
Genic microsatellite markers in plants: features and applications. (2005, background): “Several studies have found that genic SSRs are useful for estimating genetic relationship (Table 3), and at the same time provide opportunities to examine functional diversity in relation to adaptive variation [35,40] .I n comparison to genomic SSRs, genic SSRs revealed less polymorphism (low polymo”