Fingerprinting by amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) and barcoding by three plastidic markers in the genus Wolffiella Hegelm

• Published in: Plant systematics and evolution 2018-03, Vol.304 (3), p.373-386
• Main Authors: Bog, Manuela, Landrock, Maria F., Drefahl, Diana, Sree, K. Sowjanya, Appenroth, Klaus-J.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Biomedical and Life Sciences; Life Sciences; Original Article; Plant Anatomy/Development; Plant Ecology; Plant Sciences; Plant Systematics/Taxonomy/Biogeography
• ISSN: 0378-2697; 1615-6110; 2199-6881
• DOI: 10.1007/s00606-017-1482-z

Amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) fingerprinting and three different plastidic DNA regions (rpl16, rps16, atpF-atpH) were used to investigate species identity in the genus Wolffiella. For this purpose, clones (67 in total) belonging to all ten species were selected. Almost all the species were represented by more than one clone. The fingerprinting technique, AFLP, clearly distinguished the species, W. caudata, W. gladiata, W. neotropica, W. rotunda, and W. welwitschii. Apart from confirming the molecular identity of these five species, the plastidic markers could delineate two additional species, W. hyalina and W. denticulata, although the conclusion concerning the latter is restricted by the availability of only one clone. The efficiency of the plastid-derived markers in identifying the number of species-specific clusters followed the sequence rps16 > rpl16 > atpF-atpH. The species W. lingulata, W. oblonga, and W. repanda could not be identified by any of the molecular methods presented here, but could be strictly defined on a morphological basis. In several clones, high amounts of genetic admixtures between different species were detected. Further, simulation studies demonstrated that these clones are genetic hybrids. This might be one of the obstacles in molecular identification of species in the genus Wolffiella.