Horticultural Science and Technology. 31 August 2017. 465-479
https://doi.org/10.12972/kjhst.20170050

ABSTRACT


MAIN

  • Introduction

  • Materials and Methods

  •   Plant Materials

  •   Primer Design for the Fluidigm SNP Type Assays

  •   DNA Extraction

  •   Specific Target Amplification

  •   SNP Type Assay

  •   Scoring of SNPs

  •   Analysis of HRM Markers

  • Results and Discussion

  •   Development of the SNP Type Assays

  •   Application of SNP Type Assays to Pepper Cultivars and Breeding Lines

서언

Chili pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) is one of the most important vegetable crops in Korea (Lee et al., 2004). However, annual production and cultivation has gradually declined due, in part, to pepper diseases that usually occur in the summer season.

Major pepper diseases include Phytophthora root rot (Phytophthora capsici; Liu et al., 2014), anthracnose (Colletotrichum scovillei and C. truncatum, formerly C. acutatum and C. capsici, respectively;Mahasuk et al., 2016), powdery mildew (Leveillula taurica; Lefebvre et al., 2003), bacterial wilt (Ralstonia solanacearum; Mimura et al., 2009), bacterial spot (Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatora; Truong et al., 2011), Cucumber mosaic virus (CMV; Eun et al., 2016), Pepper mild mottle virus (PMMoV; Yang et al., 2012), Tomato spotted wilt virus (TSWV; Kim et al., 2017), and Pepper mottle virus (PepMoV; Kim et al., 2011, 2017). These diseases are difficult to control, even with the use of agrichemicals. Therefore, pepper varieties with multiple resistance are highly desired. In addition, higher levels of pungency are also desired by the pepper processing industry (Lee et al., 2016a). The pungency of chili pepper is related to the content of capsaicinoids such as capsaicin and dihydrocapsaicin (Aza-González et al., 2011).

Molecular markers are widely used to improve the efficiency of plant breeding programs, to construct genetic linkage maps, and to detect genes or quantitative trait loci (QTL) controlling specific traits (Collard et al., 2005; Collard and Mackill, 2008; Xu and Crouch, 2008). Marker-assisted selection (MAS) and marker-assisted backcrossing (MABC) are commonly used to improve the efficiency of selection in plant breeding. MAS involves foreground selection of a target trait or traits of interest, while MABC involves background selection of overall genomic regions in BC generations (Collard and Mackill, 2008). MAS and MABC can reduce the breeding period and the number of generations needed in a breeding program compared to conventional phenotypic selection because codominant markers allow breeders to distinguish between homozygotes and heterozygotes and to detect early the desired traits in seeds or seedlings without having to grow the plants to maturity or inoculate them.

Several molecular markers have been developed in pepper for disease resistance and capsaicinoids content. Two dominant markers, OpD04-717-SCAR and P5-SNAP, for the detection of a major QTL, Phyto.5.2, for resistance to P. capsici have been reported (Quirin et al., 2005), and codominant markers M3-CAPS and Phyto5NBS1-HRM for the trait have also been developed (Lee et al., 2012; Liu et al., 2014). The markers CaR12.2M1-CAPS and CcR9M1-SCAR have been linked to the major QTLs for resistance to C. scovillei and C. truncatum, respectively (Lee et al., 2010, 2011). Bacterial spot resistance genes (Bs2 and Bs3) have been cloned in pepper (Tai et al., 1999b; Römer et al., 2007), and gene-based codominant markers 14F/14R and 25-1 for Bs2 and PR-Bs3 for Bs3 were subsequently developed (Römer et al., 2010; Truong et al., 2011). Three SNP markers, CaTmint3HRM, CaT1616BAC, and 240H02sp6, were identified and linked to a single dominant gene, Cmr1, that controls CMV resistance (Kang et al., 2010). Two CAPS markers, pvr1-R1 and pvr1-R2, were developed to detect pvr1 and pvr12 alleles for potyvirus resistance in C. chinense accessions (Yeam et al., 2005). Pvr4 and Tsw genes have also been cloned: Pvr4 is a potyvirus resistance gene originating from C. annuum ‘CM334’ and Tsw is a TSWV resistance gene from C. chinense accessions ‘PI159236’ and ‘PI152225’(Kim et al., 2017). Markers 61786 and NB575m were found to cosegregate with the Pvr4 and Tsw genes, respectively. In addition, high-resolution DNA melting (HRM) markers linked to the QTLs responsible for high capsaicin and dihydrocapsaicin content in C. chinense ‘Bhut Jolokia’ have been developed (Lee et al., 2016a). Many other trait-linked markers have been reported in pepper. Therefore, high-throughput screening methods are needed for the simplified and costeffective analysis of multiple molecular markers in a single reaction.

Remarkable technological achievements have occurred over the past few decades in the field of DNA sequencing and SNP genotyping, including next-generation sequencing (NGS) and high-throughput SNP genotyping (Varshney et al., 2009; Kumar et al., 2012; Poland and Rife, 2012; Thomson, 2014). High-throughput SNP genotyping is particularly useful in crop breeding (Thomson, 2014). Molecular markers can be rapidly developed for SNPs, which are the most abundant polymorphisms with unlimited nucleotide variations between individual organisms, even within the same species (Rafalski, 2002). Moreover, analysis of SNP markers is accurate, rapid, and inexpensive.

Several high-throughput SNP genotyping platforms have been reported, including: Illumina Infinium iSelect HD array, Affymetrix Axiom array, Douglas Array Tape, Fluidigm dynamic arrays, restriction-enzyme-based genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS), and amplicon sequencing (Thomson, 2014). Among them, Fluidigm dynamic arrays adopt a flexible, PCR-based SNP platform using a nanofluidic integrated fluid circuit (IFC; Wang et al., 2009). There are three different types of Fluidigm dynamic arrays: a 48.48 dynamic array, which yields 2,304 data points with 48 samples and 48 markers, as well as 96.96 and 192.24 dynamic arrays, which yield 9,216 and 4,608 data points, respectively (Wang et al., 2009; Thomson, 2014). This system can save both resources and time by reducing the reaction volumes to 7-10 nL and producing 2,304-9,216 data points within 2-4 hours (Thomson, 2014), while 384- and 96-well PCR systems require 5-20 μL of the reaction volumes per well and it takes 4-8 days to produce the same number of data points with the PCR systems.

In this study, we developed SNP type assays linked to disease resistance or capsaicinoids content for use in Fluidigm 192.24 dynamic arrays that could simultaneously analyze 24 SNP markers. The CAPS, SCAR, and SNP markers previously developed in chili pepper were successfully converted into the Fluidigm SNP type assays.

Materials and Methods

Plant Materials

Three populations (PG, CHB-F3, and JN-F5) were used to develop the SNP type assays. The PG population consisted of 51 Capsicum accessions including six species (C. annuum, C. baccatum, C. chinense, C. frutescens, C. pubescens, and C. chacoense), which were obtained from the National Agrobiodiversity Center, Rural Development Administration, Republic of Korea (Table 2; http://genebank.rda.go.kr/). The CHB-F3 population was made up of 48 individuals originating from a cross of C. annuum ‘A1’ × C. annuum ‘2602’, which was used for QTL analysis of CMVP1 resistance (Table 3; Eun et al., 2016). The JN-F5 population consisted of 50 individuals of an F5 single seed descent (SSD) population derived from a cross of C. annuum ‘NB1’ × C. chinense ‘Bhut Jolokia’, which was used for QTL analysis of capsaicinoids content (Table 4; Lee et al., 2016a). In addition, 33 commercial cultivars, 30 breeding lines, and 7 genetic sources for pepper were used for validation of the newly developed SNP type assays (Tables 5 and 6).

Primer Design for the Fluidigm SNP Type Assays

The following target sequence criteria were employed to design primers for the SNP type assays. Length of the target sequences: a minimum of 60 bp (including both upstream and downstream of the target SNP site) and a maximum of 250 bp. For SNPs, only one SNP was present in the target sequence. For insertions/deletions (In/Dels), the length of the In/Del was shorter than 10 bp. The G/C content of the target sequence was < 65%. A total of 43 primers were designed using D3 Assay Design (https://d3.fluidigm.com/; Fluidigm, South San Francisco, CA, USA). Primer information is listed in Table 1. Each assay consisted of three types of primers: a specific target amplification (STA) primer, a locus-specific (LS) primer, and an allelespecific (AS) primer (Wang et al., 2009).

DNA Extraction

Genomic DNA was prepared from fresh leaves using the miniprep method described by Eun et al. (2016). The DNA concentration was measured using a BioDrop μLITE (BioDrop UK Ltd., Cambridge, UK) and adjusted to 50 ng·μL-1. The DNA was used for the SNP type assays and HRM analysis.

Specific Target Amplification

Before performing the SNP type assay, specific target amplification (STA), which is used to enrich the amplicon including the targeted SNP sequences, was performed to increase the probability of success of the SNP type assay (Wang et al., 2009). First, a 10× STA primer pool was prepared comprising a mixture of 2 μL of STA primer for each of the 24 markers, 2 μL of LS primer for each of the 24 markers, and 304 μL of DNA suspension buffer (Teknova, Holister, CA, USA). For each of the 191 samples, STA was executed using a LightCycler 96 Real-Time PCR (Roche, Basel, Switzerland) in a total volume of 5 μL per reaction, which contained 2.5 μL of master mix (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany), 0.5 μL of the 10× STA primer pool, 0.75 μL of PCR-certified water, and 1.25 μL of genomic DNA with the following PCR profile: pre-denaturation for 900 s at 95°C followed by 14 cycles of a 2-step amplification of 15 s at 95°C and 240 s at 60°C. Then, 3 μL of amplified product was diluted in 97 μL of PCR-certified water and then used for the SNP type assay.

SNP Type Assay

To perform the SNP type assays using the 192.24 IFC, the assay mix and sample mix were prepared. The assay mix contained 1.2 μL of PCR-certified water, 2 μL of 2× assay loading reagent, and 0.8 μL of the assay pre-mix, which was comprised of 3 μL of each AS primer, 8 μL of each LS primer, and 29 μL of DNA suspension buffer (Teknova, Holister, CA, USA). The sample pre-mix contained 540 μL of 2× Fast Probe Master Mix (Biotium, Fremont, CA, USA), 54 μL of SNP type 20× sample loading reagent, 18 μL of SNP type 60× reagent, 6.48 μL of 50× ROX dye (Invitrogen, Waltham, MA, USA), and 11.52 μL of PCRcertified water. Subsequently, the sample mix was prepared by mixing 1.9 μL of each STA product and 2.6 μL of the sample pre-mix in each well of two 96-well plates. Finally, 3 μL of each sample mix and 3 μL of each assay mix were loaded into 192 sample inlets and 24 assay inlets of the 192.24 IFC, respectively.

The SNP type assays were performed in series using three machines, the IFC controller RX (Fluidigm, South San Francisco, CA, USA), the IFC cycler (Fluidigm, South San Francisco, CA, USA), and the EP1 system (Fluidigm, South San Francisco, CA, USA) according to the manufacturer’s instructions (Wang et al., 2009).

Scoring of SNPs

In each SNP type assay, two types of fluorescence, FAM (red, Y axis) and HEX (green, X axis), were analyzed and each fluorescence was linked to each SNP (Table 1). Using Fluidigm SNP genotyping analysis version 4.1.3 (Fluidigm, South San Francisco, CA, USA), three different genotypes (A, H, and B) were identified: A and B refer to a specific homozygous SNP; H refers to a heterozygous SNP (Fig. 1).

Analysis of HRM Markers

HRM analysis was performed using a LightCycler 96 Real-Time PCR machine (Roche, Basel, Switzerland). The reaction solution for HRM analysis was prepared and PCR reactions were performed according to Lee et al. (2016b). High-Resolution Melt software version 1.1 (Roche, Basel, Switzerland) was used to analyze the marker types of HRM. HRM marker information was derived from the references in Table 1.

Table 1. List of Fluidigm SNP type assays used in this study and relevant information.http://static.apub.kr/journalsite/sites/kshs/2017-035-04/N0130350409/images/Table_KSHS_35_04_09_T1.jpg

zR, red (FAM dye); G, green (HEX dye).

yR, resistant; S, susceptible; H, allele for high capsaicinoid content; L, allele for low capsaicinoid content; pvr2 123457 indicates pvr2 1, pvr2 2, pvr2 3, pvr2 4, pvr2 5, or pvr2 7.

Results and Discussion

Development of the SNP Type Assays

A total of 43 primer sets were designed for the SNP type assays and 20 assays were clearly analyzed via classification into three or two groups (Fig. 1). In Fig. 1, red, green, and blue points indicate XX (fluorescence of only FAM dye), YY (only HEX dye), and XY (both FAM and HEX dyes) marker types, respectively. The marker type of each SNP type assay was divided into resistant (R), heterozygous (H), or susceptible (S) types for disease resistance, and high (H), heterozygous (M), or low (L) types for capsaicinoids content (Fig. 1and Table 1). The 20 successful SNP type assays are listed in Table 1, which includes the name of the original genes or QTLs for capsaicinoids content (qcap3.1, qcap6.1, qdhc2.1, and qdhc2.2) and for resistance to diseases such as Phytophthora root rot (Phyto.5.2), anthracnose (CcR9 and CaR12.2), powdery mildew (Ltr4.1 and Ltr4.2), bacterial spot (Bs2), CMV (Cmr1), TMV (L4), and potyvirus (pvr1 and pvr2). A total of 5 192.24 ICFs were analyzed using the 43 primer sets and the three segregating populations (Tables 2, 3, and 4). The 20 successful SNP type assays showed clear results that were polymorphic in at least one population (Fig. 1and Table 1). In addition, 11 assays were compared with the corresponding original HRM markers to determine whether the marker types cosegregated (Tables 2, 3, and 4).

Two SNP type assays, M3-2 (Fig. 1A) and M3-3 (Fig. 1B), were converted from the M3-CAPS marker tightly linked to Phyto.5.2, a major QTL for resistance to root rot caused by P. capsici (Table 1, A1, and A2; Quirin et al., 2005; Lee et al., 2012). These assays revealed that the resistance allele was widely distributed among domesticated Capsicum species except for C. annuum (Table 2, A1 and A2). Thus, the resistance of the five domesticated species should be analyzed via inoculation with P. capsici because the resistance allele originated from C. annuum accessions, including ‘CM334’, ‘PI201232’, ‘PI201234’, and ‘AC2258’ (Liu et al., 2014). The marker types for the M3-2 assay were perfectly matched with those of the previously developed M3-HRM marker in two segregating populations, CHB-F3 and JN-F5 (Tables 3 and 4, A1), while the M3-3 assay revealed only one recombinant in the CHB-F3 population (Tables 3 and 4, A2). Therefore, the M3-2 assay can be used to select Phytophthora root rot resistance because it cosegregated perfectly with the M3-HRM marker.

Three assays, CcR9 (Fig. 1C), CA09g12180 (Fig. 1D), and CA09g19170 (Fig. 1E), were derived from the CcR9M1-SCAR marker to detect CcR9, a major QTL for resistance to anthracnose caused by C. truncatum (Table 1, A3, A4, and A5), while two assays, CA12g17210 (Fig. 1F) and CA12g19240 (Fig. 1G), originated from the CaR12.2M1-CAPS marker to select CaR12.2, a major QTL for resistance to anthracnose caused by C. scovillei (Table 1, A6 and A7; Lee et al., 2011). These assays showed that resistance alleles only appeared in C. baccatum and C. chacoense (Table 2, A3-A5). Resistance was already known to be present in C. baccatum, including ‘PBC80’, ‘PBC81’, ‘Cbp’, and ‘PI594137’(Park et al., 2009). However, the resistance of C. chacoense has not been analyzed with inoculation assays, and thus needs to be examined. The marker types of the CA12g17210 and CA12g19240 assays perfectly coincided with those of the CA12g17210-HRM and CA12g19240-HRM markers, respectively, in the CHB-F3 and JN-F5 populations (Table 2, A6; Table 3, A6 and A7).

Fig. 1.

Scatter plots of 20 SNP type assays. R, resistant; S, susceptible; H, heterozygous for A-O, high capsaicinoid content allele for P-T; L, low capsaicinoid content allele.

Table 2. Marker types of 18 SNP type assays and two HRM markers in 51 pepper accessions including six Capsicum specieshttp://static.apub.kr/journalsite/sites/kshs/2017-035-04/N0130350409/images/Table_KSHS_35_04_09_T2.jpg
Table 2. Continued.http://static.apub.kr/journalsite/sites/kshs/2017-035-04/N0130350409/images/Table_KSHS_35_04_09_T2_1.jpg

zR, resistant; S, susceptible; H, heterozygous for A1-A14, high capsaicinoid content allele for A16-A20; L, low capsaicinoid content allele.

yA1, M3-2; A2, M3-3; A3, CcR9; A4, CA09g12180; A5, CA09g19170; A6, CA12g17210; A7, CA12g19240; A8, Ltr4.1-40344; A9, Ltr4.2-56301; A10, Ltr4.2- 585119; A11, Bs2; A12, Cmr1-2; A13, L4; A14, pvr1; A15, pvr2-123457; A16, qcap3.1-40134; A17, qcap6.1-299931; A18, qcap6.1-589160; A19, qdhc2.1-1335057; A20, qdhc2.2-43829.

Three assays, Ltr4.1-40344 (Fig. 1H), Ltr4.2-56301 (Fig. 1I), and Ltr4.2-585119 (Fig. 1J), were developed to identify two QTLs, Ltr4.1 and Ltr4.2, for powdery mildew resistance, which were derived from C. baccatum ‘PBC81’(Table 1, A8, A9, and A10; Yoon, 2003). Like the anthracnose resistance assays, the resistance marker types of these assays were also specific to accessions of C. baccatum and C. chacoense (Table 2, A8-A10).

The Bs2 (Fig. 1K) assay was based on the Bs2 gene conferring resistance to most Xanthomonas campestris pv vesicatora races including 0, 1, 2, 3, 7, and 8 (Table 1, A11; Stall et al., 2009; Truong et al., 2011). The resistance marker type of this assay was found only in C. chacoense accessions (Table 2, A11). This result was supported by Tai et al. (1999a) who described Bs2 resistance from a wild species of pepper, C. chacoense ‘PI260435’.

The Cmr1-2 (Fig. 1L) assay was derived from the CaTm-int3-HRM marker closely linked to Cmr1, a dominant resistance gene against CMVKorean and CMVFNY strains (Table 1, A12; Kang et al., 2010). The resistance marker type of this assay was widely distributed throughout Capsicum spp. except for C. baccatum and C. chacoense (Table 2, A12), and its segregation pattern was the same as that of the CaTm1-HRM marker in the CHB-F3 and JN-F5populations (Tables 3 and 4, A12). Therefore, this assay can be used to select the Cmr1 gene.

The L4 (Fig. 1M) assay was developed to select L4 alleles resistant to most pathotypes including ToMV (P0), PaMMV (P0) and P1), and PMMoV (P1.2 and P1.2,3) (Table 1, A13; Tomita et al., 2011). Similar to the Bs2 gene, the resistance marker type of the L4 assay was present only in C. chacoense accessions (Table 2, A13). This result was consistent with the findings of Boukema (1984) who reported that L4 resistance was found in C. chacoense accessions ‘PI260429’ and ‘SA185’.

Two assays, pvr1 (Fig. 1N) and pvr2-123457 (Fig. 1O), were created to detect pvr1 and pvr2 genes, respectively, which were allelic and encoded an eIF4E protein, but originated from different genetic resources: pvr1 from C. chinense and pvr2 from C. annuum and C. frutescens (Table 1, A14 and A15; Kang et al., 2005; Charron et al., 2008). A resistant marker type of the pvr1 assay was mainly distributed in C. chinense accessions (Table 2, A14), while that of the pvr2-123457 assay was found in C. annuum and C. frutescens accessions (Table 2, A15). The pvr2-123457 assay was based on a specific SNP of potyvirus-resistance genes, pvr21, pvr22, pvr23, pvr24, pvr25, and pvr27 (Charron et al., 2008).

Table 3. Comparison of marker types between the SNP type assays and HRM markers in the CHB-F3 population.http://static.apub.kr/journalsite/sites/kshs/2017-035-04/N0130350409/images/Table_KSHS_35_04_09_T3.jpg

zA1, M3-2; A2, M3-3; A6, CA12g17210; A7, CA12g19240; A12, Cmr1-2.

yR, resistant; S, susceptible; H, heterozygous.

Five assays, qcap3.1-40134 (Fig. 1P), qcap6.1-299931 (Fig. 1Q), qcap6.1-589160 (Fig. 1R), qdhc2.1-1335057 (Fig. 1S), and qdhc2.2-43829 (Fig. 1T), were linked to four QTLs, qcap3.1 and qcap6.1 for capsaicin content and qdhc2.1 and qdhc2.2 for dihydrocapsaicin content, which were identified in C. chinense ‘Bhut Jolokia’(Table 1, A16-A20; Lee et al., 2016a). The qcap6.1- 589160 assay was specific to only C. chinense accessions, while the other four assays were widely polymorphic in five Capsicum species, with the exception of C. annuum (Table 2, A16-A20). This result implied that the QTL qcap6.1 might have a greater effect on capsaicinoid content than the other three QTLs. In addition, linkage analysis in the JN-F5 population showed that the four assays cosegregated with corresponding HRM markers (Table 4, A16, A17, A18, and A20). This result suggests that the assays can be used to detect corresponding QTLs.

Application of SNP Type Assays to Pepper Cultivars and Breeding Lines

Successful SNP type assays were performed on 33 commercial cultivars, 30 breeding lines, and 7 genetic sources of chili pepper (Tables 5 and 6). Only five assays, M3-2 (A1), M3-3 (A2), Cmr1-2 (A12), pvr2-123457 (A15), and qcap3.1-40134 (A16), exhibited polymorphic results for the 33 commercial cultivars (Table 5). All cultivars except for ‘Geumsugangsan’,‘Nokkwang’, and ‘Matkwang’ were Phytophthora-resistant varieties. The results of M3-2 and M3-3 assays were consistent with the resistance phenotypes except for those of ‘Gangcheolhong’, ‘Ganghantopstar’, and ‘PR Chengyang’, which might have developed with another resistance gene(s) unrelated to the Phyto.5.2 gene because the M3-CAPS marker was perfectly matched with the resistance in the C. annuum resources including ‘AC2258’, ‘CM331’, ‘CM334-INRA’, ‘CM334-KBU’, ‘PBC602’, ‘YCM334’, ‘PI201234’, ‘PBC280’, and ‘PBC495’(Table 5, A1 and A2; Lee et al. 2012). A comparison of the assays with M3-HRM markers showed that the M3-3 assay was more accurate than the M3-2 assay, which had one recombinant (‘Meetinggochudaemok’). The other three polymorphic assays, Cmr1-2, pvr1-123457, and qcap3.1-40134, indicated that cultivars with the resistance marker type might have CMV and potyvirus resistance and that cultivars having the high capsaicinoid content marker type might be more pungent (Table 5, A12, A15, and A16). In an analysis of pepper breeding lines, 9 assays demonstrated polymorphic results among the cultivars (Table 6). Resistance marker types of three assays, Ltr4.1-40344 (A8), Ltr4.2-56301 (A9), and Ltr4.2-585119 (A10), were present in PM breeding lines that were resistant to powdery mildew (Table 6, A8, A9, and A10). In the analysis of the 7 genetic sources, a C. chinense accession, ‘Bhut Jolokia’, one of the world’s hottest peppers, had all high capsaicinoid content marker types on the five capsaicinoid content assays (Table 6, A16-A20; Lee et al., 2016a). Six anthracnose-resistant C. baccatum accessions, including ‘PBC81’ and ‘PI594137’, had all of the resistance marker types for the three anthracnose resistance assays (Table 6, A3, A4, and A5; Park et al., 2009).

Fluidigm dynamic arrays, a high-throughput SNP genotyping method, include three formats for IFCs: 96 samples × 96 SNPs, 48 samples × 48 SNPs, or 192 samples × 24 SNPs. They can be used with three types of assays: TaqMan, KASP, or SNP type assays (Wang et al., 2009; Thomson, 2014). In this study, we used Fluidigm dynamic arrays for the first time for foreground selection of targeted genes or QTLs in pepper by combining 192.24 IFCs with SNP type assays to analyze 24 SNP markers at a time. This system can save both resources and time by reducing the reaction volume and producing 4,608 data points at a time (Wang et al., 2009). Of the 43 primer sets designed, 20 SNP type assays were successfully developed (Fig. 1 and Table 1). The accuracy of 11 assays was confirmed by comparing with the corresponding original HRM markers (Tables 2, 3, 4, and 5). These results suggest that the newly developed SNP type assays can be used in place of the original markers. The other 9 assays also need to be compared to original markers using polymorphic populations to confirm their accuracy. These SNP type assays will be useful in molecular breeding programs for developing new pepper varieties resistant to multiple diseases and with increased pungency.

Table 4. Comparison of marker types between the SNP type assays and HRM markers in the JN-F5 population.http://static.apub.kr/journalsite/sites/kshs/2017-035-04/N0130350409/images/Table_KSHS_35_04_09_T4.jpg

zA1, M3-2; A2, M3-3; A6, CA12g17210; A12, Cmr1-2; A16, qcap3.1-40134; A17, qcap6.1-299931; A18, qcap6.1-589160; A19, qdhc2.1-1335057; A20, qdhc2.2-43829.

yR, resistant; S, susceptible; H, heterozygous for A1, A2, A6, A12, high capsaicinoid content allele for A16-A20; L, low capsaicinoid content allele.

Table 5 . Marker types of 17 SNP type assays and an M3-HRM marker in 33 commercial pepper cultivars.http://static.apub.kr/journalsite/sites/kshs/2017-035-04/N0130350409/images/Table_KSHS_35_04_09_T5.jpg

zA1, M3-2; A2, M3-3; A3, CcR9; A4, CA09g12180; A5, CA09g19170; A8, Ltr4.1-40344; A9, Ltr4.2-56301; A10, Ltr4.2-585119; A12, Cmr1-2; A13, L4; A14, pvr1;A15, pvr2-123457; A16, qcap3.1-40134; A17, qcap6.1-299931; A18, qcap6.1-589160; A19, qdhc2.1-1335057; A20, qdhc2.2-43829.

yR, resistant; S, susceptible; H, heterozygous for A1-A15, high capsaicinoid content allele for A16-A20; L, low capsaicinoid content allele.

Table 6 . Marker types of 17 SNP type assays in 30 breeding lines and 7 genetic sources for pepper.http://static.apub.kr/journalsite/sites/kshs/2017-035-04/N0130350409/images/Table_KSHS_35_04_09_T6.jpg

zA1, M3-2; A2, M3-3; A3, CcR9; A4, CA09g12180; A5, CA09g19170; A8, Ltr4.1-40344; A9, Ltr4.2-56301; A10, Ltr4.2-585119; A12, Cmr1-2; A13, L4; A14, pvr1;A15, pvr2-123457; A16, qcap3.1-40134; A17, qcap6.1-299931; A18, qcap6.1-589160; A19, qdhc2.1-1335057; A20, qdhc2.2-43829.

yR, resistant; S, susceptible; H, heterozygous for A1-A15, high capsaicinoid content allele for A16-A20; L, low capsaicinoid content allele

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the “Cooperative Research Program for Agriculture Science & Technology Development (Project No. PJ011 14501 and PJ01114502)” of the Rural Development Administration, Republic of Korea.

References

1
Aza-González C, Núñez-Palenius HG, Ochoa-Alejo N (2011) Molecular biology of capsaicinoid biosynthesis in chili pepper (Capsicum spp.). Plant Cell Rep 30:695-706. doi:10.1007/s00299-010-0968-8
2
Boukema IW (1984) Resistance to TMV in Capsicum chacoense Hunz. is governed by allele of the L-locus. Capsicum Newsl 3:47-48
3
Charron C, Nicolai M, Gallois JL, Robaglia C, Moury B, Palloix A, Caranta C (2008) Natural variation and functional analyses provide evidence for co-evolution between plant eIF4E and potyviral VPg. Plant J 54:56-68. doi:10.1111/j.1365-313X.2008.03407.x
4
Collard BCY, Jahufer MZZ, Brouwer JB, Pang ECK (2005) An introduction to markers, quantitative trait loci (QTL) mapping and markerassisted selection for crop improvement: The basic concepts. Euphytica 142:169-196. doi:10.1007/s10681-005-1681-5
5
Collard BCY, Mackill DJ (2008) Marker-assisted selection: an approach for precision plant breeding in the twenty-first century. Phil Trans R Soc B 363:557-572. doi:10.1098/rstb.2007.2170
6
Eun MH, Han JH, Yoon JB, Lee J (2016) QTL mapping of resistance to the Cucumber mosaic virus P1 strain in pepper using a genotyping-by-sequencing analysis. Hortic Environ Biotechnol 57:589-597. doi:10.1007/s13580-016-0128-3
7
Kang BC, Yeam I, Frantz JD, Murphy JF, Jahn MM (2005) The pvr1 locus in Capsicum encodes a translation initiation factor eIF4E that interacts with Tobacco etch virus VPg. Plant J 42:392-405. doi:10.1111/j.1365-313X.2005.02381.x
8
Kang WH, Hoang NH, Yang HB, Kwon JK, Jo SH, Seo JK, Kim KH, Choi D, Kang BC (2010) Molecular mapping and characterization of a single dominant gene controlling CMV resistance in peppers (Capsicum annuum L.). Theor Appl Genet 120:1587-1596. doi:10.1007/s00122-010-1278-9
9
Kim HJ, Han JH, Kim S, Lee HR, Shin JS, Kim JH, Cho J, Kim YH, Lee HJ, Kim BD, Choi D (2011) Trichome density of main stem is tightly linked to PepMoV resistance in chili pepper (Capsicum annuum L.). Theor Appl Genet 122:1051-1058. doi:10.1007/s00122-010-1510-7
10
Kim SB, Kang WH, Huy HN, Yeom SI, An JT, Kim S, Kang MY, Kim HJ, Jo YD, Ha Y, Choi D, Kang BC (2017) Divergent evolution of multiple virus-resistance genes from a progenitor in Capsicum spp. New Phytologist 213:886-899. doi:10.1111/nph.14177
11
Kumar S, Banks TW, Cloutier S (2012) SNP discovery through next-generation sequencing and its application. Int J Plant Genomics 831460. doi:10.1155/2012/831460
12
Lee J, Do JW, Yoon JB (2011) Development of STS markers linked to the major QTLs for resistance to the pepper anthracnose caused by Colletotrichum acutatum and C. capsici. Hortic Environ Biotechnol 52:596-601. doi:10.1007/s13580-011-0178-5
13
Lee J, Hong JH, Do JW, Yoon JB (2010) Identification of QTLs for resistance to anthracnose to two Colletotrichum species in pepper. J Crop Sci Biotechnol 13:227-233. doi:10.1007/s12892-010-0081-0
14
Lee J, Park SJ, Hong SC, Han JH, Choi D, Yoon JB (2016a) QTL mapping for capsaicin and dihydrocapsaicin content in a population of Capsicum annuum ‘NB1’ x Capsicum chinense ‘Bhut Jolokia’. Plant Breeding 135:376-383. doi:10.1111/pbr.12355
15
Lee SH, Lee JB, Kim SM, Choi HS, Park JW, Lee JS, Lee KW, Moon JS (2004) The incidence and distribution of viral diseases in pepper by cultivation types. Res Plant Dis 10:231-240. doi:10.5423/RPD.2004.10.4.231
16
Lee WP, Lee J, Han JH, Kang BC, Yoon JB (2012) Validity test for molecular markers associated with resistance to Phytophthora root rot in chili pepper (Capsicum annuum L.). Korean J Hortic Sci Technol 30:64-72. doi:10.7235/hort.2012.11112
17
Lee YR, Yoon JB, Lee J (2016b) A SNP-based genetic linkage map of Capsicum baccatum and its comparison to the Capsicum annuum reference physical map. Mol Breeding 36:61. doi:10.1007/s11032-016-0485-8
18
Lefebvre V, Daubèze AM, Rouppe van der Voort J, Peleman J, Bardin M, Palloix A (2003) QTLs for resistance to powdery mildew in pepper under natural and artificial infections. Theor Appl Genet 107:661-666. doi:10.1007/s00122-003-1307-z
19
Liu WY, Kang JH, Jeong HS, Choi HJ, Yang HB, Kim KT, Choi D, Choi GJ, Jahn M, Kang BC (2014) Combined use of bulked segregant analysis and microarrays reveals SNP markers pinpointing a major QTL for resistance to Phytophthora capsici in pepper. Theor Appl Genet 127:2503-2513. doi:10.1007/s00122-014-2394-8
20
Mahasuk P, Struss D, Mongkolporn O (2016) QTLs for resistance to anthracnose identified in two Capsicum sources. Mol Breed 36:10. doi:10.1007/s11032-016-0435-5
21
Mimura Y, Kageyama T, Minamiyama Y, Hirai M (2009) QTL analysis for resistance to Ralstonia solanacearum in Capsicum accession ‘LS2341’. J Jpn Soc Hort Sci 78:307-313. doi:10.2503/jjshs1.78.307
22
Park SK, Kim SH, Park HG, Yoon JB (2009) Capsicum germplasm resistant to pepper anthracnose differentially interact with Colletotrichum isolates. Hortic Environ Biotechnol 50:17-23
23
Poland JA, Rife TW (2012) Genotyping-by-sequencing for plant breeding and genetics. Plant Genome 5:92-102. doi:10.3835/ plantgenome2012.05.0005
24
Quirin EA, Ogundiwin EA, Prince JP, Mazourek M, Briggs MO, Chlanda TS, Kim KT, Falise M, Kang BC, Jahn MM (2005) Development of sequence characterized amplified region (SCAR) primers for the detection of Phyto.5.2 , a major QTL for resistance to Phytophthora capsici Leon. in pepper. Theor Appl Genet 110:605-612. doi:10.1007/s00122-004-1874-7
25
Rafalski A (2002) Applications of single nucleotide polymorphisms in crop genetics. Curr Opin Plant Biol 5:94-100. doi:10.1016 /S1369-5266(02)00240-6
26
Römer P, Hahn S, Jordan T, Strauβ T, Bonas U, Lahaye T (2007) Plant pathogen recognition mediated by promoter activation of the pepper Bs3 resistance gene. Science 318:645-648. doi:10.1126/science.1144958
27
Römer P, Jordan T, Lahaye T Identification and application of a DNA-based marker that is diagnostic for the pepper (Capsicum annuum) bacterial spot resistance gene Bs3. Plant Breeding 129:737-740. doi:10.1111/j.1439-0523.2009.01750.x
28
Stall RE, Jones JB, Minsavage GV (2009) Durability of resistance in tomato and pepper to Xanthomonads causing bacterial spot. Annu Rev Phytopathol 47:265-284. doi:10.1146/annurev-phyto-080508-081752
29
Tai T, Dahlbeck D, Stall RE, Peleman J, Staskawicz BJ (1999a) High-resolution genetic and physical mapping of the region containing the Bs2 resistance gene of pepper. Theor Appl Genet 99:1201-1206. doi:10.1007/s001220051325
30
Tai TH, Dahlbeck D, Clark ET, Gajiwala P, Pasion R, Whalen MC, Stall RE, Staskawicz BJ (1999b) Expression of the Bs2 pepper gene confers resistance to bacterial spot disease in tomato. Proc Natl Acad Sci 96:14153-14158. doi:10.1073/pnas.96.24.14153
31
Thomson MJ (2014) High-throughput SNP genotyping to accelerate crop improvement. Plant Breeding Biotech 2:195-212. doi:10.9787/ PBB.2014.2.3.195
32
Tomita R, Sekine KT, Mizumoto H, Sakamoto M, Murai J, Kiba A, Kikichi Y, Suzuki K, Kobayashi K (2011) Genetic basis for the hierarchical interaction between Tobamovirus spp. and L resistance gene alleles from different pepper species. Mol Plant Microbe Interact 24:108-117. doi:10.1094/MPMI-06-10-0127
33
Truong HTH, Kim KT, Kim S, Cho MC, Kim HR, Woo JG (2011) Development of gene-based markers for the Bs2 bacterial spot resistance gene for marker-assisted selection in pepper (Capsicum spp.). Hortic Environ Biotechnol 52:65-73. doi:10.1007/ s13580-011-0142-4
34
Varshney RK, Nayak SN, May GD, Jackson SA (2009) Next-generation sequencing technologies and their implications for crop genetics and breeding. Trends Biotechnol 27:522-530. doi:10.1016/j.tibtech.2009.05.006
35
Wang J, Lin M, Crenshaw A, Hutchinson A, Hicks B, Yeager M, Berndt S, Huang WY, Hayes RB, Chanock SJ, Jones RC, Ramakrishnan R (2009) High-throughput single nucleotide polymorphism genotyping using nanofluidic Dynamic Arrays. BMC Genomics 10:561. doi:10.1186/1471-2164-10-561
36
Xu Y, Crouch JH (2008) Marker-assisted selection in plant breeding: from publications to practice. Crop Sci 48:391-407. doi:10.2135/ cropsci2007.04.0191
37
Yang HB, Liu WY, Kang WH, Kim JH, Cho HJ, Yoo JH, Kang BC (2012) Development and validation of L allele-specific markers in Capsicum. Mol Breeding 30:819-829. doi:10.1007/s11032-011-9666-7
38
Yeam I, Kang BC, Lindeman W, Frantz JD, Faber N, Jahn MM (2005) Allele-specific CAPS markers based on point mutations in resistance alleles at the pvr1 locus encoding eIF4E in Capsicum. Theor Appl Genet 112:178-186. doi:10.1007/s00122-005-0120-2
39
Yoon JB (2003) Identification of genetic resources, interspecific hybridization and inheritance analysis for breeding pepper (Capsicum annuum) resistant to anthracnose. PhD Diss., Seoul National Univ., Seoul, Korea
페이지 상단으로 이동하기