Comparison of phenotypic and molecular marker-based classifications of hard red winter wheat cultivars

By H. Fufa, P. Stephen Baenziger, B. Beecher, Ismail M. Dweikat, R. Graybosch, K. Eskridge. Euphytica, 2005

269 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Environmental Chemistry, Plant Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d266617dd9f94117edba1c4cc219113324d9bf15

How researchers see this paper

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

In Plant Science

1. G. Eizenga
2. M. Sorrells
3. S. Chao
4. Wenjun Zhang
5. A. McClung
6. J. Dubcovsky
7. M. A. Rabbani
8. M. Masood

Citations in the corpus

• Improving Lives: 50 Years of Crop Breeding, Genetics, and Cytology (C‐1) (2006, methodology): “The value of genetic diversity estimates based on molecular markers is that they are believed to have better theoretical assumptions than many of the previous methods of genetic diversity (e.g., Almanza-Pinzon et al., 2003; Fufa et al., 2005).”
• Occurrence of Escherichia coli O157 in a river used for fresh produce irrigation in Nigeria. (2010, background): “Fufa et al. (2005) reported that the genetic diversity estimates based on seed storage protein were lowest because they were the major determinants of end-use quality, which is a highly selected trait.”
• Assessment of genetic diversity among Pakistani wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) advanced breeding lines using RAPD and SDS-PAGE (2010, background): “Fufa et al. (2005) reported that seed storage protein was the major determinant of end-use quality (a highly selected trait), and that genetic diversity estimates based on seed storage protein were, therefore, lowest.”
• Assessment of genetic diversity and relationship among a collection of US sweet sorghum germplasm by SSR markers (2008, unknown): “SSR markers have been extensively used in genetic diversity studies in many plants, including wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.; Fufa et al. 2005; Mahmood et al. 2004), pearl millet ( Pennisetum glaucum L.; Budak et al. 2003), sorghum (Casa et al. 2005; Smith et al. 2000), triticale ( X-Triticosecale Wit”
• Development of SSR-based sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) diversity research set of germplasm and its evaluation by morphological traits (2009, background): “Morphological traits or pedigree are important estimates of genetic diversity in crops but such information is usually found unrealistic and mostly influenced by environmental factors (Fufa et al. 2005; Alamnza-Pinzon et al. 2003).”
• Evaluation of Genetic Diversity and Genome‐wide Linkage Disequilibrium among U.S. Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) Germplasm Representing Different Market Classes (2007, background): “…(Kim and Ward, 1997; Paull et al., 1998), sequence tagged site (Chen et al., 1994), amplifi ed fragment length polymorphisms (Barrett et al., 1998; Manifesto et al., 2001), and simple sequence repeats (SSRs) (Huang et al., 2002; Fufa et al., 2005) have all been found suitable for diversity studies.”
• A Rice Diversity Panel Evaluated for Genetic and Agro‐Morphological Diversity between Subpopulations and its Geographic Distribution (2011, background): “Estimates based on pedigree are generally inflated and often unrealistic (Cox et al., 1986; Souza and Sorrells, 1989; Almanza-Pinzon et al., 2003; Fufa et al., 2005), while phenotypic observations can provide a reasonable representation of overall genetic performance if they are based on…”
• Characterization of wheat varieties by seed storageprotein electrophoresis (2007, background): “Fufa et al. (2005) reported that the genetic diversity estimates based on seed storage protein were lowest because they were the major determinants of end-use quality, which is 500 Afr.”