Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T21:41:21.755Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phylogenetic relationships among New Mexico Astragalus mollissimus varieties and Oxytropis species by restriction fragment analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Sanjeev Kulshreshtha ,
Rebecca Creamer  and
Tracy M. Sterling
Sanjeev Kulshreshtha
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, Plant Pathology, and Weed Science, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM 88003
Tracy M. Sterling
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, Plant Pathology, and Weed Science, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM 88003
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The phylogenetic relationships within two major locoweed genera, Astragalus and Oxytropis, and among varieties of woolly loco found in New Mexico were analyzed by comparing their chloroplast rpoC1 and rpoC2 gene sequences. Nucleic acids from locoweed species and varieties collected from different geographical locations in New Mexico were amplified using specific primer sets and subjected to restriction fragment analyses. Identity of the amplicons was confirmed by determining the 5′-end sequences from pea and woolly loco var. matthewsii. The amplified sequences from all samples were digested with 16 different restriction enzymes. Presence or absence of individual restriction fragments was scored as binary characters and used to develop a similarity coefficient matrix for cladistic analyses to determine the phylogenetic relationships. The target sequence was conserved, yielding 7% polymorphic data. Oxytropis species were monophyletic and, as expected, formed a clade distinct from Astragalus. The average similarity coefficient among woolly loco varieties was very high (0.9733), but the varieties still separated into three different clades. The phylogenetic relationship among woolly loco varieties coincided with their geographic distribution but was unrelated to insect feeding preference.

Keywords

Woolly loco, Astragalus mollissimus Torr. ASAMLpea, Pisum sativum L. ‘Alaska’Biological controlmolecular phylogenypolymerase chain reactionrestriction fragment analysesrandom fragment length polymorphismrpoC
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 52 , Issue 6 , December 2004 , pp. 984 - 988
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Allison, C. D. 1984. Locoweeds and Livestock Poisoning. NM Cooperative Extension Service Pub. 400. Las Cruces, NM: New Mexico State University. B-15.Google Scholar
Asmussen, C. B. and Liston, A. 1998. Chloroplast DNA characters, phylogeny, and classification of Lathyrus (Fabaceae). Am. J. Bot 85:387–401.Google Scholar
Banks, J. A. and Birky, C. W. Jr. 1985. Chloroplast DNA diversity is low in a wild plant, Lupinus texensis . Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci 82:6950–6954.Google Scholar
Barneby, R. C. 1964. Atlas of North American Astragalus . Mem. N Y Bot. Gard 13:1–1188.Google Scholar
Barneby, R. C. 1989. Oxytropis . Pages 176–184 in Barneby, R. C. ed. Intermountain Flora, Vascular Plants of the Intermountain West, USA. Volume 3, Part B, Fabales. New York: New York Botanical Garden.Google Scholar
Delgado-Salinas, A., Turley, T., Richman, A., and Lavin, M. 1999. Phylogenetic analysis of the cultivated and wild species of Phaseolus (Fabaceae). Syst. Bot 24:438–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dong, T. T. X., Ma, X. Q., Clarke, C., Song, Z. H., Ji, Z. N., Lo, C. K., and Tsim, K. W. K. 2003. Phylogeny of Astragalus in China: molecular evidence from the DNA sequences of 5S rRNA spacer, ITS, and 18S rRNA. J. Agric. Food Chem 51:6709–6714.Google Scholar
Fox, W. E., Allred, K. W., and Roalson, E. H. 1998. A guide to common locoweeds and milkvetches of New Mexico. New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM: Agriculture Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service Cir. 557. 95 p.Google Scholar
Gauthier, P., Lumaret, R., and Bedecarrats, A. 1997. Chloroplast-DNA variation in the genus Lotus (Fabaceae) and further evidence regarding the maternal parentage of Lotus corniculatus L. Theor. Appl. Genet 95:629–636.Google Scholar
Holden, A. N. G. and Mahlberg, P. G. 1992. Application of chemotaxonomy of leafy spurges (Euphorbia spp.) in biological control. Can. J. Bot 70:1529–1536.Google Scholar
Hou, Y. and Sterling, T. M. 1995. Isozyme variation in broom snakeweed (Gutierrezia sarothrae). Weed Sci 43:156–162.Google Scholar
Lavin, M. and Marriott, H. 1997. Astragalus molybdenus s.l. (Leguminosae): higher taxonomic relationships and identity of constituent species. Syst. Bot 22:199–217.Google Scholar
Liston, A. 1992a. Isozyme systematics of Astragalus sect. Leptocarpi subsect. Californici (Fabaceae). Syst. Bot 17:367–379.Google Scholar
Liston, A. 1992b. Variation in the chloroplast genes rpoC1 and rpoC2 of the genus Astragalus (Fabaceae): evidence from restriction site mapping of a PCR-amplified fragment. Am. J. Bot 79:953–961.Google Scholar
Liston, A. and Wheeler, J. A. 1994. The phylogenetic position of the genus Astragalus (Fabaceae): evidence from the chloroplast genes rpoC1 and rpoC2. Biochem. Syst. Ecol 22:377–388.Google Scholar
Luo, M-C., Hwu, K-K., and Huang, T-C. 2000. Taxonomic study of Taiwan Astragalus based on genetic variation. Taxon 49:35–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milligan, B. G. 1989. Purification of chloroplast DNA using hexadecyltrimethylammonium bromide. Plant Mol. Biol. Rep 7:144–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Onwukaeme, N. D. and Rowen, M. G. 1992. Jatrophane and lathyrane diterpenoid esters from North American leafy spurge seed. Phytochemistry 31:3479–3482.Google Scholar
Pfister, J. A., Panter, K. E., Gardner, D. R., Stegelmeier, B. L., Ralphs, M. H., Molyneux, R. J., and Lee, S. T. 2001. Alkaloids as anti-quality factors in plants on western U.S. rangelands. J. Range Manag 54:447–461.Google Scholar
Ralphs, M. H., Graham, D., Molyneux, R. J., and James, L. F. 1993. Seasonal grazing of locoweed by cattle in northeastern New Mexico. J. Range Manag 46:416–420.Google Scholar
Reyes-Vera, I., Hubstenberger, J., and Barrow, J. 2004. Hyperhydricity reversal and clonal mass propagation of four-wing saltbush [Atriplex canescens (Pursh) Nutt]. cultivated in vitro. In Vitro Cell. Dev. Biol. Plant. 40:55-A.Google Scholar
Sanderson, M. J. 1991. Phylogenetic relationships within North American Astragalus (Fabaceae). Syst. Bot 16:414–430.Google Scholar
Sanderson, M. J. and Doyle, J. J. 1993. Phylogenetic relationships in North American Astragalus (Fabaceae) based on chloroplast DNA restriction site variation. Syst. Bot 18:395–408.Google Scholar
Shinozaki, K., Ohme, M., and Tanaka, M. et al. 1986. The complete nucleotide sequence of the tobacco chloroplast genome: its gene organization and expression. Eur. Mol. Biol. Org. J 5:2043–2049.Google Scholar
Soltis, D. E., Soltis, P. S., and Milligan, B. G. 1992. Intraspecific chloroplast DNA variation: systematic and phylogenetic implications. Pages 117–146 in Soltis, D. E., Soltis, P. S., and Doyle, J. J. eds. Molecular Systematics of Plants. New York: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Thompson, D. C., Knight, J. L., Sterling, T. M., and Murray, L. W. 1995. Preference for specific varieties of woolly locoweed by a specialist weevil, Cleonidius trivittatus (Say). Southwest. Entomol 20:325–333.Google Scholar
Welsh, S. L. 1978. Astragalus in Utah flora: Fabaceae. Great Basin Nat 38:232–306.Google Scholar
Wojciechowski, M. F., Sanderson, M. J., and Hue, J-M. 1999. Evidence on the monophyly of Astragalus (Fabaceae) and its major subgroups based on nuclear ribosomal DNA ITS and chloroplast DNA trnL intron data. Syst. Bot 24:409–437.Google Scholar