Comparison of different nuclear DNA markers for estimating intraspecific genetic diversity in plants

By H. Nybom. Molecular Ecology, 2004

1,888 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Genetics, Plant Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/755bf039f3a956755b80c22bbf36308bfe72d3f3

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. P. Meirmans
2. R. Petit
3. W. Durka
4. S. Michalski
5. A. Hampe
6. G. Vendramin
7. Jean Bousquet
8. A. Bucharova

In Plant Science

1. P. Meirmans
2. R. Petit
3. W. Durka
4. S. Michalski
5. G. Vendramin
6. A. Hampe
7. A. Bucharova
8. Nigel Maxted

Citations in the corpus

• Inferring the past from the present phylogeographic structure of North American forest trees : seeing the forest for the genes (2009, background): “However, these life history and ecological traits only explained about 35% of the total nuclear genetic variation (Hamrick and Godt 1996; Nybom 2004).”
• Gap analysis: a tool for complementary genetic conservation assessment (2008, background): “Other gene banks, such as the National PGR Laboratory in the Philippines, Asian Vegetable Research and Development Centre in Taiwan and the National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources in India, also have large collections of cultivated material (FAO, 1998).”
• Modelling exploration of the future of European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) under climate change—Range, abundance, genetic diversity and adaptive response (2010, background): “In comparison to other organisms, trees have a relatively high level of genetic variation (Hamrick and Godt, 1990; Nybom, 2004).”
• Comparative organization of chloroplast, mitochondrial and nuclear diversity in plant populations. (2005, methodology): “Previous comparisons have shown some discrepancy between estimates of subdivision based on different nuclear markers for a given species (e.g. Nybom 2004) but no systematic bias has been reported (Vandewoestijne & Baguette 2002; Nybom 2004).”
• Inter-simple sequence repeat (ISSR) markers: are we doing it right? (2015, background): “Of course, the concerns raised are valid and should be dealt with as best as possible: dominance produces less genetic information content per locus compared to co-dominant markers, but could be compensated by using a higher number of loci (Nybom 2004; Cavers et al. 2005; Kremer et al. 2005).”
• Microsatellite markers: an overview of the recent progress in plants (2011, background): “STMS markers are locus specific co-dominant markers used for a variety of plant breeding purposes (Nybom 2004).”
• 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, neutral): “Comparison of different marker systems (especially AFLP and SSR) for diversity and population structure in several plant species frequently revealed incongruent diversity estimates for different types of markers ([40,41] and references cited therein).”
• Genetic differentiation within multiple common grassland plants supports seed transfer zones for ecological restoration (2017, background): “Specieslevel differentiation ranged between FST = 0 04 and 0 25, a range expected based on reviews of dominant marker diversity (Nybom 2004; Reisch & Bernhardt-R€omermann 2014), with lowest values in the wind-pollinated grass (Arrhenatherum), intermediate levels in insect-pollinated outcrossing…”
• Worldwide genotyping of castor bean germplasm (Ricinus communis L.) using AFLPs and SSRs (2008, background): “Our assessment of genetic diversity in a worldwide collection of castor bean germplasm found relatively low levels of genetic diversity, as compared to levels of genetic diversity found in 307 different plant studies (including angiosperms and gymnosperms) for which dominant (AFLP, RAPD, and ISSR) a”
• Assessing population structure: FST and related measures (2011, background): “For example, a strong relationship between the FST values and dispersal mode and other life history traits has repeatedly been found across many plant species (Hamrick & Godt 1996; Nybom 2004, Meirmans et al. in preparation).”
• The role of genotypic diversity in determining grassland community structure under constant environmental conditions (2007, background): “Furthermore, communities of herbaceous plants with ruderal life histories that can show resilience (Grime 2001) might also be typified by populations that have low levels of genetic diversity (Hamrick et al. 1992; Nybom 2004).”