Identification of RAPD markers, in situ DNA content and structural chromosomal diversity in some legumes of the mangrove flora of Orissa

Abstract

Randomly amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) markers, karyotypes and 4C DNA content were analyzed in five legume mangroves belonging to the sub-family Papilinoideae (Dalbergia spinosa, Derris heterophylla and D. indica) and Caesalpinioideae (Caesalpinia crista, Cynometra ramiflora) of the family Fabaceae to establish the genetic variability and phylogenetic affinities. Somatic chromosome numbers were reported for the first time in D. spinosa (2n = 20), C. ramiflora (2n = 26) and D. heterophylla (2n = 24) with reconfirmation of the somatic chromosome number in D. indica (2n = 22) and C. crista (2n = 24). Significant intergeneric and interspecific variation of 4C DNA content was observed and that varied from 8.970 pg in C. ramiflora to 28.730 pg in D. indica. From the RAPD analysis, the dendogram showed clustering of Caesalpinia crista and Cynomitra ramiflora into one group (81.80). In the second groups Derris indica and Derris heterophylla were more similar (83.10) than Dalbergia spinosa (85.80). Species-specific DNA markers (900 bp) obtained in D. spinosa from OPN15; 700 and 2000 bp in C. ramiflora from OPN4 and 400 and 800 bp in D. heterophylla and 500 bp DNA fragment in C. crista obtained from OPN-11 were found characteristic RAPD markers of these species. C. crista found more closer affinity to C. ramiflora of the sub-family Caesalpinioideae [genetic distance (1-F) = 0.847]. Derris indica showed closer genetic relation with D. heterophylla [genetic distance (1-F) = 0.856] than D. spinosa [genetic distance (1-F) = 0.876] where Derris and Dalbergia belongs to the sub-family Papilionoideae. By employing these markers the present study has helped to resolve the relationship between the taxonomically diverse leguminous mangroves and study their ability to coexist with mangroves that would shed light on the evolution of mangroves from terrestrial species.

Karyomorphology of Caesalpinia Species (Caesalpinioideae: Fabaceae) from Caatinga and Mata Atlantica Biomes of Brazil

“…ex Hook.) Benth., Caesalpinia yucatanensis Greenm, and Caesalpinia decapetala (Roth) Alston - (Lewis, 1998); iii) the 2n = 24 was confirmed in C. gilliessi; the 2n = 24 and n = 12 were reported in Caesalpinia paraguariensis (D.Parodi) Burkart and Caesalpinia mimosifolia Griseb (Cangiano & Bernardello, 2005); iv) the 2n = 24 also was reported in Caesalpinia crista L. (Jena et al, 2004) and Caesalpinia violaceae (Mill.) Standl.…”

Karyomorphology and karyotype asymmetry in the South American Caesalpinia species (Leguminosae and Caesalpinioideae)

“…Most of the data are derived from cytogenetic studies carried out following the same methodological procedures (five species described in the previous section and five species analyzed by Rodrigues et al, 2012). As for Caesalpinia crista L., measurements were collected from karyograms available in the literature, whereas the values were standardized based on the HLL calculated by Jena et al (2004). With regard to the other three species, measurements were directly taken from the respective ideograms in previous results (Cangiano and Bernardello, 2005).…”

“…In spite of previous reports on tetraploid populations of C. bracteosa with 2n = 48 (Alves and Custódio, 1989), this variation was not found in this study, probably because the only population samples were made up of diploid individuals. Among Caesalpinioideae, the diploid chromosome number is variable, and species with 2n = 20, 24, 26, and 28 were already described (Jena et al, 2004;Souza and Benko-Iseppon, 2004;Biondo et al, 2005). However, in spite of the taxonomic diversity of Caesalpinia, the variations in regard to 2n = 24 only refer to euploids, suggesting a value of n = 12.…”

“…The analysis of meiotic chromosomes should be performed in order to better characterize the peculiarities of the polyploidy that was found in some species. Among the 140 species of Caesalpinia L., the chromosome number is known for only 22 species (14.6%) (Atchison, 1951;Goldblatt, 1981;Alves and Custódio, 1989;Kumari and Bir, 1989;Beltrão and Guerra, 1990;Lewis, 1998;Jena et al, 2004;Cangiano and Bernardello, 2005;Rodrigues et al, 2012), making the need for more studies on this group clear in order to better distinguish this trait in the diverse genera of Caesalpinioideae.…”

“…s.l., comprises approximately 140 species with morphological characteristics that are very similar to each other (Lewis, 1998;Gasson et al, 2009). Caesalpinioideae has great interspecific and intraspecific variability in the number of chromosomes, and many species have diploid or an unknown chromosome number (Beltrão and Guerra, 1990;Jena et al, 2004;Biondo et al, 2005, Rodrigues et al, 2012. Taxonomic studies support the hypothesis that Caesalpinioideae is a non-natural group comprising paraphyletic tribes (Tucker and Douglas, 1994;Käss and Wink, 1996;Doyle et al, 1997Doyle et al, , 2000Herendeen, 2000;Bruneau et al, 2001;Kajita et al, 2001).…”