期刊文献

Discovery of wild tetraploid sweetpotatoes 收藏

野生四倍体sweetpotatoes的发现
摘要
Specimens in the germplasm collection at the U.S. Vegetable Laboratory, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) in Charleston, SC, were studied to examine phylogenetic relations of the tetraploid accessions inIpomoea sectionBatatas. This collection contains tetraploidsfrom a wide geographic range and most were tentatively identified by the collector asI. trifida. This study shows that corolla and sepal traits may be used to distinguish the tetraploidsfrom known specimens ofI. trifida (diploid) andI. batatas (hexaploid). All but one tetraploid accession examined (CH67.50) had corolla tubes and sepals shaped likeI. batatas and more closely resembled that species thanI. trifida. Use of corolla tube diameter allowed the hexaploidI. batatas and tetraploid accessions to be distinguished fromI. trifida because the corolla tubes were wider immediately above the calyx. Differences in sepal shape were quantified using the angle at the sepal apex. This angle was consistently obtuse in theI. batatas hexaploids and the tetraploids, but was acute in theI. trifida accessions. Due to similarities in sepal and corolla traits, these tetraploids should be reidentified as tetraploidI. batatas, a cytological race of the hexaploid I. batatas (the sweetpotato). Key WordsIpomoea sectionBatatasIpomoea trifidatetraploidssweetpotato
摘要译文
标本在U窼蔬菜实验室种质资源收集,在查尔斯顿,美国农业部(USDA)的美系,进行了研究,考察四倍体种质inIpomoea sectionBatatas的亲缘关系该集合包含tetraploidsfrom一个广泛的地理范围,大多数是通过初步收集asItrifida确定这项研究表明,花冠和萼片特征可以用来区分tetraploidsfrom称为标本ofItrifida(二倍体)andIbatatas(六倍体)所有,但一个四倍体加入检查(CH67有花冠管和萼片形likeIbatatas和更像是种thanItrifida花冠筒径的使用允许hexaploidIbatatas和四倍体种质加以区别fromItrifida因为花冠管是广泛的,立即上面花萼使用角度在萼片apexThis角度在萼片形状差异进行量化是theIbatatas六倍体和四倍体始终如一钝,但在兵卫急性三裂叶豚草accessionsDue在萼片和花冠的特征相似,这些四倍体应reidentified为tetraploidIbatatas,六倍体Ibatatas的细胞学比赛(甘薯)重点WordsIpomoea sectionBatatasIpomoea trifidatetraploidssweetpotato
Janice R. Bohac;Daniel F. Austin;Alfred Jones. Discovery of wild tetraploid sweetpotatoes[J]. Economic Botany, 1993,47(2): 193–201