Diversity and genetic structure of teak (Tectona grandis L.f) in its natural range using DNA microsatellite markers

Abstract

Teak (Tectona grandis L.f.) is considered to be an extraordinarily durable building timber with a worldwide reputation. Its widespread use has entailed the overexploitation of natural forests and a large reduction in natural diversity. Fifteen microsatellite markers were used to study the genetic variability and structure of 166 teak trees distributed over the whole natural area of teak. Analysis showed that in the teak natural area there were four main centers of genetic variability. Two clusters were in India and could be considered as main centers of genetic diversity in teak. The third cluster mainly consisting of populations in Thailand and Laos was genetically very distinct from the Indian populations but presented only half as much allelic variability. A fourth cluster from Central Laos showed even less genetic variability. The use of SSR markers for conservation of teak forest diversity is discussed.

Genetic resources of teak (Tectona grandis Linn. f.)—strong genetic structure among natural populations

“…Given the limited sample size applied by Fofana et al (2009) (166 genotyped individuals to sample the distribution area), it is interesting that their results in terms of general structure and diversity levels fit well with the findings in the present study as discussed below, and this in itself emphasises the presence of substantial and very distinct patterns of genetic diversity in teak. Fofana et al (2009), however, only comprised 17 provenances with only 1 population from the Indian semi-moist east coast (prov. 3034) and none from Myanmar.…”

“…Later studies using DNAbased markers such as RAPD (Nicodemus et al 2005;Parthiban et al 2005), AFLP (Shrestha et al 2005;Sreekanth et al 2012) and ISSR (Ansari et al 2012) have also been performed-but these studies have mainly focused on Indian teak (Nicodemus et al 2005;Parthiban et al 2005;Ansari et al 2012;Sreekanth et al 2012) or sampled a very limited number of populations and individuals (Shrestha et al 2005). Only the study by Fofana et al (2009) can easily be compared to our study because there is an overlap both in SSR markers and in some of the provenances. Fofana et al (2009) collected samples in the international provenance trials of teak established in Cote d'Ivoire and Ghana and part of the same seed collections which were the basis of the trials in Thailand used in the present study, resulting in an overlap of five provenances between the two studies.…”

“…Fofana et al (2009) collected samples in the international provenance trials of teak established in Cote d'Ivoire and Ghana and part of the same seed collections which were the basis of the trials in Thailand used in the present study, resulting in an overlap of five provenances between the two studies. Given the limited sample size applied by Fofana et al (2009) (166 genotyped individuals to sample the distribution area), it is interesting that their results in terms of general structure and diversity levels fit well with the findings in the present study as discussed below, and this in itself emphasises the presence of substantial and very distinct patterns of genetic diversity in teak. Fofana et al (2009), however, only comprised 17 provenances with only 1 population from the Indian semi-moist east coast (prov.…”

“…Genetic approaches have also been tested: Kjaer and Siegismund (1996) used allozyme markers to study landraces from Tanzania and Nicaragua, Fofana et al (2008) studied the likely origin of West African landraces based on simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers on trees sampled in African provenance trials and Verhaegen et al (2010) used the same markers to decide from where the teak growing in Africa and Indonesia has been introduced. Additional studies primarily focused on the genetic diversity of populations within the native range have been conducted using genetic markers (Kertadikara and Prat 1995b;Changtragoon and Szmidt 2000;Changtragoon 2001;Nicodemus et al 2005;Shrestha et al 2005;Fofana et al 2009;Sreekanth et al 2012). However, although representing valuable contributions, none of the studies mentioned here have covered the whole distribution area of teak; rather, they have often been based on a limited number of populations and/or trees.…”

Efficient and new method for Tectona grandis in vitro regeneration

“…Even with 81% half-sibs (Table 4), the coancestry coefficient was higher within progenies than expected for half-sib populations. Subsequently, genetic differences are expected between each seed given that teak presents high levels of heterozygosis (Fofana et al 2009). In addition, teak presents different levels of relatedness within progenies (Kertadikara and Prat 1995), affecting the variation in tissue regeneration between treatments (e.g., additives, dominant and epistatic effects) (Kielly and Bowley 1997).…”