Genetic difference between normal and leave chlorosis Cinnamomum camphora detected by ISSR analysis

CHEN Xiangbo,ZHANG Deshun,BI Qingsi,FU Huinan

Journal of Nanjing Forestry University (Natural Sciences Edition) ›› 2012, Vol. 36 ›› Issue (01) : 33-37.

PDF(1723218 KB)
PDF(1723218 KB)
Journal of Nanjing Forestry University (Natural Sciences Edition) ›› 2012, Vol. 36 ›› Issue (01) : 33-37. DOI: 10.3969/j.jssn.1000-2006.2012.01.007

Genetic difference between normal and leave chlorosis Cinnamomum camphora detected by ISSR analysis

  • CHEN Xiangbo1,ZHANG Deshun2*,BI Qingsi3,FU Huinan3
Author information +
History +

Abstract

By using ISSR markers, genetic variation among 60 normal and leaf chlorosis Cinnamomum camphora trees in Shanghai were detected. A total of 63 legible bands were amplified. Among which, 61 bands exhibit polymorphic. The percentage of polymorphic loci was 96.8 %. UPGMA cluster analysis showed that, trees of the two phenotypes could be categorized into different groups, which indicated that genetic differentiation existing between the two phenotypes. Subsequently, the possibility of breeding resistant clone to leaf chlorosis in C.camphora was discussed.

Cite this article

Download Citations
CHEN Xiangbo,ZHANG Deshun,BI Qingsi,FU Huinan. Genetic difference between normal and leave chlorosis Cinnamomum camphora detected by ISSR analysis[J]. Journal of Nanjing Forestry University (Natural Sciences Edition). 2012, 36(01): 33-37 https://doi.org/10.3969/j.jssn.1000-2006.2012.01.007

References

[1]祁承经,汤庚国.树木学:南方本[M]. 北京:中国林业出版社, 2005.
[2]于永忠.香樟树黄化病成因及综合防治技术[J].农业科技信息:现代园林,2006(6):81-82.
[3]孙国强,李胜华,夏希纳. “绿亨铁王”防治香樟黄化病药效分析[J].中国森林病虫,2001(增刊):19-21.
[4]陈超燕.樟树黄化病发生原因及其致病机理研究[D]. 合肥:安徽农业大学, 2005.
[5]Doyle J. DNA protocols for plantsCTAB total DNA isolation[C]// Hewitt G M, Johnston A. Molecular Techniques in Taxonomy.Berlin: Springer,1991:283-293.
[6]冯杰,陈香波,李毅,等.香樟ISSR-PCR反应体系的正交优化[J].中南林业科技大学学报, 2007,27(6):44-48.
[7]Rohlf F J.NTSYSpc. Numerical Taxonomy and Multivariate Analysis System, Version 2.1.Exeter Software[Z]. New York: Setauket,2000.
[8]马国瑞,石伟勇,李春九,等.土壤条件引起柑桔和樟树缺铁黄化症的研究[J].浙江农业学报, 1991,3(2):79-85.
[9]任华东,姚小华,孙银祥,等.樟树种源苗期生物量变异及其综合评价[J]. 林业科学研究, 2000,13(1):80-85.
[10]姚小华.樟树遗传变异与选择的研究[D]. 株洲:中南林学院, 2002.
[11]宋爱云,陈辉,董林水. RAPD分子标记在鉴定香樟优选株与普通株中的应用[J].应用与环境生物学报, 2003,9(3):263-265.
[12]冯杰,陈香波,李毅,等.香樟不同种源耐碱性研究[J].浙江林业科技,2007, 27(4):21-24,28.
[13]吴平,印丽萍,张立平,等.植物营养分子生理学[M].北京:科学出版社, 2001.
[14]易翠林,王贺,张福锁,等. 黄瓜、番茄和大豆对缺铁胁迫适应性反应的差异[J]. 植物生态学报, 1998, 22(6):559-565.
[15]Yi Y, Guerinot M L. Genetic evidence that induction of root Fe(Ⅲ) chelate reductase activity is necessary for iron uptake under iron deficiency[J]. Plant J,1996,10:835-844.
[16]李振侠.铁胁迫对苹果砧木生理生化特性的影响[D].保定:河北农业大学, 2003.
[17]刘海星,张德顺,商侃侃,等.不同黄化程度樟树叶片的生理生化特性[J].浙江林学院学报,2009, 26(4):479-484.
PDF(1723218 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

Sections
Recommended
The full text is translated into English by AI, aiming to facilitate reading and comprehension. The core content is subject to the explanation in Chinese.

/