Mining of haplotype-based expressed sequence tag single nucleotide polymorphisms in citrus

Publication Overview
TitleMining of haplotype-based expressed sequence tag single nucleotide polymorphisms in citrus
AuthorsChen C and Gmitter FG.
TypeJournal Article
Journal NameBMC Genomics
Volume14
Year2013
Page(s)746
CitationChen C and Gmitter FG. Mining of haplotype-based expressed sequence tag single nucleotide polymorphisms in citrus. BMC Genomics. 2013. 14: 746.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), the most abundant variations in a genome, have been widely used in various studies. Detection and characterization of citrus haplotype-based expressed sequence tag (EST) SNPs will greatly facilitate further utilization of these gene-based resources. RESULTS: In this paper, haplotype-based SNPs were mined out of publicly available citrus expressed sequence tags (ESTs) from different citrus cultivars (genotypes) individually and collectively for comparison. There were a total of 567,297 ESTs belonging to 27 cultivars in varying numbers and consequentially yielding different numbers of haplotype-based quality SNPs. Sweet orange (SO) had the most (213,830) ESTs, generating 11,182 quality SNPs in 3,327 out of 4,228 usable contigs. Summed from all the individually mining results, a total of 25,417 quality SNPs were discovered - 15,010 (59.1%) were transitions (AG and CT), 9,114 (35.9%) were transversions (AC, GT, CG, and AT), and 1,293 (5.0%) were insertion/deletions (indels). A vast majority of SNP-containing contigs consisted of only 2 haplotypes, as expected, but the percentages of 2 haplotype contigs varied widely in these citrus cultivars. BLAST of the 25,417 25-mer SNP oligos to the Clementine reference genome scaffolds revealed 2,947 SNPs had "no hits found", 19,943 had 1 unique hit / alignment, 1,571 had one hit and 2+ alignments per hit, and 956 had 2+ hits and 1+ alignment per hit. Of the total 24,293 scaffold hits, 23,955 (98.6%) were on the main scaffolds 1 to 9, and only 338 were on 87 minor scaffolds. Most alignments had 100% (25/25) or 96% (24/25) nucleotide identities, accounting for 93% of all the alignments. Considering almost all the nucleotide discrepancies in the 24/25 alignments were at the SNP sites, it served well as in silico validation of these SNPs, in addition to and consistent with the rate (81%) validated by sequencing and SNaPshot assay. CONCLUSIONS: High-quality EST-SNPs from different citrus genotypes were detected, and compared to estimate the heterozygosity of each genome. All the SNP oligo sequences were aligned with the Clementine citrus genome to determine their distribution and uniqueness and for in silico validation, in addition to SNaPshot and sequencing validation of selected SNPs.
Features
This publication contains information about 25,417 features:
Feature NameUniquenameType
trifloliata_62695_contig2903_p295_AGtrifloliata_62695_contig2903_p295_AGgenetic_marker
trifloliata_62695_contig2903_p432_AGtrifloliata_62695_contig2903_p432_AGgenetic_marker
trifloliata_62695_contig2903_p456_GAtrifloliata_62695_contig2903_p456_GAgenetic_marker
trifloliata_62695_contig2903_p528_CGtrifloliata_62695_contig2903_p528_CGgenetic_marker
trifloliata_62695_contig2904_p1621_ACtrifloliata_62695_contig2904_p1621_ACgenetic_marker
trifloliata_62695_contig2904_p1917_CTtrifloliata_62695_contig2904_p1917_CTgenetic_marker
trifloliata_62695_contig2904_p361_AGtrifloliata_62695_contig2904_p361_AGgenetic_marker
trifloliata_62695_contig2915_p155_GTtrifloliata_62695_contig2915_p155_GTgenetic_marker
trifloliata_62695_contig2915_p363_TCtrifloliata_62695_contig2915_p363_TCgenetic_marker
trifloliata_62695_contig2915_p394_ATtrifloliata_62695_contig2915_p394_ATgenetic_marker
trifloliata_62695_contig2915_p450_GAtrifloliata_62695_contig2915_p450_GAgenetic_marker
trifloliata_62695_contig2915_p484_GAtrifloliata_62695_contig2915_p484_GAgenetic_marker
trifloliata_62695_contig2915_p791_CTtrifloliata_62695_contig2915_p791_CTgenetic_marker
trifloliata_62695_contig2916_p150_GTtrifloliata_62695_contig2916_p150_GTgenetic_marker
trifloliata_62695_contig2929_p358_TCtrifloliata_62695_contig2929_p358_TCgenetic_marker
trifloliata_62695_contig2929_p421_TAtrifloliata_62695_contig2929_p421_TAgenetic_marker
trifloliata_62695_contig2939_p100_C-trifloliata_62695_contig2939_p100_C-genetic_marker
trifloliata_62695_contig2939_p362_GCtrifloliata_62695_contig2939_p362_GCgenetic_marker
trifloliata_62695_contig2939_p579_CAtrifloliata_62695_contig2939_p579_CAgenetic_marker
trifloliata_62695_contig2939_p712_TGtrifloliata_62695_contig2939_p712_TGgenetic_marker
trifloliata_62695_contig2942_p1323_TGtrifloliata_62695_contig2942_p1323_TGgenetic_marker
trifloliata_62695_contig2942_p1419_CTtrifloliata_62695_contig2942_p1419_CTgenetic_marker
trifloliata_62695_contig2942_p203_CTtrifloliata_62695_contig2942_p203_CTgenetic_marker
trifloliata_62695_contig2942_p906_TCtrifloliata_62695_contig2942_p906_TCgenetic_marker
trifloliata_62695_contig2942_p954_TCtrifloliata_62695_contig2942_p954_TCgenetic_marker

Pages

Stocks
This publication contains information about 23 stocks:
Stock NameUniquenameType
Alemow pepadaAlemow pepadaaccession
Amakusa tangorAmakusa tangoraccession
Carrizo CitrangeCarrizo Citrangeaccession
ClementineClementineaccession
CleopatraCleopatraaccession
Etrog 861-S1Etrog 861-S1accession
Fortune tangorFortune tangoraccession
Hassaku mandarinHassaku mandarinaccession
Hayata mandarinHayata mandarinaccession
Kankitsu Chukanbohon Nou 6 Gou tangorKankitsu Chukanbohon Nou 6 Gou tangoraccession
MexicanMexicanaccession
Orah tangorOrah tangoraccession
Palestine sweet limePalestine sweet limeaccession
PonkanPonkanaccession
Rangur limeRangur limeaccession
Rixiangxia mandarinRixiangxia mandarinaccession
Rough LemonRough Lemonaccession
Satsuma mandarinSatsuma mandarinaccession
summer orangesummer orangeaccession
Sweet OrangeSweet Orangeaccession
Swingle citrumeloSwingle citrumeloaccession
Tahiti limeTahiti limeaccession
Trifoliate orangeTrifoliate orangeaccession
Properties
Additional details for this publication include:
Property NameValue
URLhttp://bmcgenomics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2164-14-746