Identification of essentially derived varieties with molecular markers: An approach based on statistical test theory and computer simulations

Theoretical and Applied Genetics

Volumn 111, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 598-608

  Heckenberger, M ^b   Bohn, M ^a   Frisch, M ^b   Maurer, H P ^b   Melchinger, A E ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HOHENHEIM   (Germany)

Author keywords

Computer simulation; Essentially derived varieties; Genetic similarity; Intellectual propert; Molecular markers; Parental contribution

Indexed keywords

BIOMARKERS; CHROMOSOMES; GENETIC ENGINEERING; PARAMETER ESTIMATION; POPULATION STATISTICS; RELIABILITY;

CHROMOSOME NUMBERS; GENETIC PARAMETERS; GENETIC SIMILARITIES; MOLECULAR MARKERS;

MOLECULAR BIOLOGY;

ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CROSS BREEDING; GENE; GENETIC MARKER; GENETIC RECOMBINATION; GENETIC SELECTION; GENETIC VARIABILITY; GENETICS; INBREEDING; PHENOTYPE; WHEAT;

COMPUTER SIMULATION; CROSSES, GENETIC; GENES, PLANT; GENETIC MARKERS; INBREEDING; MODELS, GENETIC; PHENOTYPE; RECOMBINATION, GENETIC; SELECTION (GENETICS); TRITICUM; VARIATION (GENETICS);

EID: 23944501067     PISSN: 00405752     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00122-005-2052-2     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. ASSINSEL (1999) Essential derivation and dependence. Practical information. http://www.worldseed.org/Position_papers/derive.htm
2. 2 populations. Theor Appl Genet 102:986-992
3. Bernardo R, Romero-Severson J, Ziegle J, Hauser J, Joe L, Hookstra G, Doerge RW (2000) Parental contribution and coefficient of coancestry among maize inbreds: pedigree, RFLP, and SSR data. Theor Appl Genet 100:552-556
4. Dillmann C, Charcosset A, Goffinet B, Smith JSC, Dattée Y (1997) Best linear unbiased estimator of the molecular genetic distance between inbred lines. Advances in biometrical genetics. In: Krajewski P, Kaczmarek Z (eds) Proceedings of the tenth meeting of the EUCARPIA section biometrics in plant breeding, 14-16 May 1997, Poznan, Poland, pp 105-110
5. Dreher K, Khairallah M, Ribaut JM, Morris M (2003) Money matters (I): costs of field and laboratory procedures associated with conventional and marker-assisted maize breeding at CIMMYT. Mol Breed 11:221-234
6. Dreisigacker S, Zhang P, Warburton ML, Van Ginkel M, Hoisington D, Bohn M, Melchinger AE (2004) SSR and pedigree analyses of genetic diversity among CIMMYT wheat lines targeted to different megaenvironments. Crop Sci 44:381-388
7. Dubreuil P, Dufour P, Krejci E, Causse M, Devienne D, Gallais A, Charcosset A (1996) Organization of RFLP diversity among inbred lines of maize representing the most significant heterotic groups. Crop Sci 36:790-799
8. Eeuwijk FAv, Baril CP (2001) Conceptual and statistical issues related to the use of molecular markers for distinctness and essential derivation. Acta Hortic 546:35-53
9. Eeuwijk FAv, Law JR (2004) Statistical aspects of essential derivation, with illustrations based on lettuce and barley. Euphytica 137:129-137
10. Efron B (1982) The bootstrap, the jackknife, and other resampling plans. SIAM, Philadelphia
11. Foulley JL, Hill WG (1999) On the precision of estimation of genetic distance. Genet Sel Evol 31:457-464
12. Frisch M, Bohn M, Melchinger AE (2000) Plabsim: software for simulation of marker-assisted backcrossing. J Hered 91:86-87
13. Haldane JBS (1919) The combination of linkage values, and the calculation of distances between loci of linked factors. J Genet 8:299-309
14. Heckenberger M, Bohn M, Melchinger AE (2005) Identification of essentially derived varieties obtained from biparental crosses of homozygous lines. I. SSR data from maize inbreds. Crop Sci 45:1132-1140
15. International Seed Federation (2002) ISF view on intellectual property. International Seed Federation, Chicago
16. Kosambi DD (1944) The estimation of map distances from recombination values. Ann Eugen 12:172-175
17. Lombard V, Baril CP, Dubreuil P, Blouet F, Zhang D (2000) Genetic relationships and fingerprinting of rapeseed cultivars by AFLP: consequences for varietal registration. Crop Sci 40:1417-1425
18. Malécot G (1948) Les mathematiques de l'heredité. Masson & Cies, Paris
19. Maurer HP, Melchinger AE, Frisch M (2004) Plabsoft: software for simulation and data analysis in plant breeding. Proceedings of the 17th Eucarpia General Congress, 8-11 September 2004, Tulln, Austria, pp 359-362
20. Melchinger AE (1993) Use of RFLP markers for analysis of genetic relationships among breeding materials and prediction of hybrid performance. In: Buxton DR, et al (ed) International Crop Science I. CSSA, Madison, pp 621-628
21. Morris M, Dreher K, Ribaut JM, Khairallah M (2003) Money matters (I): costs of maize inbred line conversion schemes at CIMMYT using conventional and marker-assisted selection. Mol Breed 11:235-247
22. Reif JC, Xia XC, Melchinger AE, Warburton ML, Hoisington DA, Beck D, Bohn M, Frisch M (2004) Genetic diversity determined within and among CIMMYT maize populations of tropical, subtropical, and temperate germplasm by SSR markers. Crop Sci 44:326-334
23. Rogers JS (1972) Measures of genetic similarity and genetic distance. Studies in genetics VII. Univ Texas Publ 7213:145-153
24. Smith JSC, Smith OS, Bowen SL, Tenborg RA, Wall SJ (1991) The description and assessment of distance between inbred lines of maize: III. A revised scheme for the testing of distinctiveness between inbred lines utilizing DNA RFLPs. Maydica 36:213-226
25. Tivang JG, Nienhuis J, Smith OS (1994) Estimation of sampling variance of molecular marker data using the bootstrap procedure. Theor Appl Genet 89:259-264
26. UPOV (1978) International convention for the protection of new varieties of plants, http://www.upov.int/en/publications/conventions/1978/content.htm
27. UPOV (1991) International convention for the protection of new varieties of plants, http://www.upov.int/en/publications/conventions/1991/content.htm
28. 1-derived inbreds. Crop Sci 40:659-665