Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T21:05:32.392Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Tracing the remnants of medieval raspberries using molecular markers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2015

Vesna Novak ,
Anton Ivancic ,
Andrej Susek  and
Metka Sisko
Vesna Novak
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agriculture and Life Sciences, University of Maribor, Pivola 10, SI 2311 Hoce, Slovenia
Anton Ivancic
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agriculture and Life Sciences, University of Maribor, Pivola 10, SI 2311 Hoce, Slovenia
Andrej Susek
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agriculture and Life Sciences, University of Maribor, Pivola 10, SI 2311 Hoce, Slovenia
Metka Sisko*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agriculture and Life Sciences, University of Maribor, Pivola 10, SI 2311 Hoce, Slovenia
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Our investigation was based on a molecular study of the genetic relationships among raspberry genotypes collected around selected medieval castles, Carthusian monasteries and nearby villages. We assumed that the hypothetical medieval raspberry genotypes could be traced to isolated medieval settlements that used to be highly prosperous during the feudal era but were later abandoned. Some of these genotypes could have survived in natural conditions without seed multiplication for at least three centuries. The molecular genetic analysis was based on microsatellite data. A total of 155 alleles were detected at 18 microsatellite loci. The clustering method grouped the analysed genotypes into seven main clusters. The analyses indicated that the most probable medieval genotypes had been collected around the ruins of two abandoned Carthusian monasteries: Zice and Jurkloster. They were morphologically very similar, vigorous and primitive but obviously not wild genotypes. The plants could be more than 2.3 m high, the canes were medium waxy, the lower and upper parts of the canes were covered by sparse short spines, the mid part was more or less completely smooth, the fully developed leaves were 15–25 cm long and the inflorescences were loose. In addition, the flowers were relatively small, the fruit setting was poor and the fruits were small, ovoid to conical and more aromatic than those of modern cultivars.

Keywords

hypothetical medieval cultivarsmicrosatellitesRubus idaeus
Type
Research Article
Information
Plant Genetic Resources , Volume 14 , Issue 2 , June 2016 , pp. 149 - 156
Copyright
Copyright © NIAB 2015 

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

Bekkaoui, F, Mann, B and Schroeder, B (2003) Application of DNA markers for the identification and management of hybrid poplar accessions. Agroforestry Systems 59: 53–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beridze, T (1980) Properties of satellite DNAs of higher plants. Plant Science Letters 4: 325–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bozic, B (1969) Zgodovina slovenskega naroda (History of the Slovenian Nation). Ljubljana: Presernova druzba, pp. 24–75.Google Scholar
Castillo, NPF, Reed, BM, Graham, J, Fernandez, F and Bassil, NV (2010) Microsatellite markers for raspberry and blackberry. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science 135: 271–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dice, LR (1945) Measures of the amount of ecologic association between species. Journal of Ecology 26: 297–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doyle, JJ and Doyle, JL (1990) Isolation of plant DNA from fresh tissue. Focus 12: 13–15.Google Scholar
Eisen, JA, Goldstein, DB and Schlötterer, C (1999) Mechanistic basis for microsatellite instability. In: Goldstein, DB and Schlötterer, C (eds) Microsatellites: Evolution and Applications. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 34–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernandez, MP, Hernaiz, S and Ibanez, J (2008) Genetic characterization of Raspberry cultivars using molecular markers. Acta Horticulturae 777: 125–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gagliardi, R (1999) Itinerario in Carinzia, Stiria e Carniola (1485–1487). In: Biblioteca de, L'unicorno, vol. 1. Rome: Istituti Editoriali e Poligrafici Internazionali, p. 239.Google Scholar
Frankel, R and Galun, E (1977) Pollination mechanisms, reproduction and plant breeding. Berlin/Heidelberg/New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gestrin, F (1991) Slovenske dezele in zgodnji kapitalizem (Slovenian Lands and Early Capitalism). Ljubljana: Slovenska matica, pp. 37–285.Google Scholar
Graham, J and McNicol, RJ (1995) An examination of the ability of RAPD markers to determine the relationships within and between Rubus species. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 90: 1128–1132.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Graham, J, Iasi, L and Millam, S (1997) Genotype-specific regeneration from a number of Rubus cultivars. Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture 48: 167–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, J, Smith, K, Woodhead, M and Russel, J (2002) Development and use of simple sequence repeat SSR markers in Rubus species. Molecular Ecology 2,3: 250–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, J, Smith, K, MacKenzie, K, Jorgenson, L, Hackett, C and Powell, W (2004) The construction of a genetic linkage map of red raspberry (Rubus idaeus subsp. idaeus) based on AFLPs, genomic-SSR and EST-SSR markers. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 109: 740–749.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gruden, J (1912) Zgodovina slovenskega naroda (History of the Slovenian Nation). Klagenfurt: Druzba sv. Mohorja v Celovcu, pp. 5–35.Google Scholar
Hayns, AW (1906) Vereininung für Angewandte Botanik. Berlin: Gebrüder Borntraeger, pp. 4–5.Google Scholar
Hogg, J, Girard, A and Le Blévec, D (2001) Décor sculpté des premèires chartreuses, Les Chartreuses de la Provincia Burgundiae, aujourd'hui dans le département de l'Ain et l'Ordre des Chartreux. Salzburg: Analecta Cartusiana; pp. 271–296.Google Scholar
Hummer, K (2010) Rubus pharmacology: antiquity to the present. HortScience 45: 1587–1591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ilaunig, O and Vogrin, I (2006) Crni kriz pri Hrastovcu (The Black Cross). Lenart: Ma-Tisk, pp. 4–15.Google Scholar
Ivancic, A and Lebot, V (1999) Botany and genetics of the New Caledonian taro, Colocasia esculenta . Pacific Science (University of Hawaii) 53/3: 273–285.Google Scholar
Jacobus, M (1938) Kartuzijani in kartuzija Pleterje (Carthusians and the Chartreuse Pleterje). Zagreb: Bakrotisk; p. 124.Google Scholar
Jakic, I (2001) Sto gradov na Slovenskem (Hundred Castles of Slovenia). Ljubljana: Presernova druzba, pp. 10–135.Google Scholar
Jennings, DL (1988) Raspberries and Blackberries: Their Breeding, Diseases and Growth. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kodolitsch, G (1976) Murecker Kunstgeschichtlicher Stadtführer, herausgegeben anläßlich der Stadterhebungsfeier. Graz: Graz Leykam.Google Scholar
Leemans, JA and Nannenga, ET (1957) A Morphological Classification of Raspberry Varieties. Wageningen: Institut voor deVeredeling van Tuinbouwgewassen, p. 140.Google Scholar
Marshall, B, Harrison, RE, Graham, J, McNicol, JW, Wright, G and Squire, GR (2001) Spatial trends of phenotypic diversity between colonies of wild raspberry Rubus idaeus . New Phytologist 151: 671–682.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mojsisovics, A, Mojsvár, E, Hoernes, R, Molisch, H, Cisterich, D, August, C, Fritsch, K, Stummer-Traunfels, R and Ritter, E (1908) Naturwissenschaftlicher Verein fur Steiermark. Graz: Der Steiermark Universitätsbibliothek.Google Scholar
Perrier, JA, Samuelian, SK and Weber, CA (2005) Dissimilarity Analysis and Representation for Windows. DARwin V.5.0.158. Montpellier: CIRAD.Google Scholar
Ryabova, D (2007) Population evaluation in crop wild relatives for in situ conservation: a case study for raspberry Rubus idaeus L. in the Leningrad region, Russia. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 54: 973–980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saitou, N and Nei, M (1987) The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Molecular Biology and Evolution 4: 406–425.Google Scholar
Schlegel, G and Hogg, J (2004) Monasticon Cartusiense. Graz: Institut für Anglistik und Amerikanistik.Google Scholar
Sisko, M, Javornik, B, Siftar, A and Ivancic, A (2009) Genetic relationships among Slovenian pears assessed by molecular markers. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science 134: 97–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stafne, ET, Clark, JR, Weber, CA, Graham, J and Lewers, KS (2005) Simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers for genetic mapping of raspberry and blackberry. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science 130: 722–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stopar, I (2008) Najlepsi slovenski gradovi (The Most Beautiful Slovenian Castles). Ljubljana: Cankarjeva zalozba, pp. 57–62.Google Scholar
Tessier, C, David, J, This, P, Boursiquot, JM and Charrier, A (1999) Optimization of the choice of molecular markers for varietal identification in Vitis vinifera L. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 98: 171–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
USDA, ARS and National Genetic Resources Program(2014) Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN). Beltsville, MD: National Germplasm Resources Laboratory. (cited 22 May 2014). Available at http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgibin/npgs/html/desclist.pl?85.Google Scholar
Wagner, HW and Sefc, KM (1999) IDENTITY 1.0. Vienna: University of Agricultural Sciences, Centre for Applied Genetics.Google Scholar
Whitney, GG (1984) The reproductive biology of raspberries and plant-pollinator community structure. American Journal of Botany 71: 887–894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodhead, M, McCallum, S, Smith, LK, Cardle, L and Graham, ML (2008) Identification, characterisation and mapping of simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers from raspberry root and bud ESTs. Molecular Breeding 22: 555–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Novak supplementary material S1

Supplementary Tables

Download Novak supplementary material S1(File)
File 22.7 KB