Genotyping-by-sequencing approaches to characterize crop genomes: choosing the right tool for the right application

被引:170
|
作者
Scheben, Armin
Batley, Jacqueline
Edwards, David [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Western Australia, Sch Plant Biol, Perth, WA, Australia
关键词
Breeding; Genomics; genotyping-by-sequencing; reduced-representation sequencing; whole-genome resequencing; MARKER-ASSISTED SELECTION; HYBRID ERROR-CORRECTION; WIDE ASSOCIATION; DE-NOVO; LINKAGE MAP; NUCLEOTIDE POLYMORPHISM; AGRONOMIC TRAITS; COMPLEX TRAITS; EXOME CAPTURE; RNA-SEQ;
D O I
10.1111/pbi.12645
中图分类号
Q81 [生物工程学(生物技术)]; Q93 [微生物学];
学科分类号
071005 ; 0836 ; 090102 ; 100705 ;
摘要
In the last decade, the revolution in sequencing technologies has deeply impacted crop genotyping practice. New methods allowing rapid, high-throughput genotyping of entire crop populations have proliferated and opened the door to wider use of molecular tools in plant breeding. These new genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS) methods include over a dozen reduced-representation sequencing (RRS) approaches and at least four whole-genome resequencing (WGR) approaches. The diversity of methods available, each often producing different types of data at different cost, can make selection of the best-suited method seem a daunting task. We review the most common genotyping methods used today and compare their suitability for linkage mapping, genomewide association studies (GWAS), marker-assisted and genomic selection and genome assembly and improvement in crops with various genome sizes and complexity. Furthermore, we give an outline of bioinformatics tools for analysis of genotyping data. WGR is well suited to genotyping biparental cross populations with complex, small- to moderate-sized genomes and provides the lowest cost per marker data point. RRS approaches differ in their suitability for various tasks, but demonstrate similar costs per marker data point. These approaches are generally better suited for de novo applications and more cost-effective when genotyping populations with large genomes or high heterozygosity. We expect that although RRS approaches will remain the most cost-effective for some time, WGR will become more widespread for crop genotyping as sequencing costs continue to decrease.
引用
收藏
页码:149 / 161
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Use of Pseudo-reference Genomes to Improve Genotyping-by-sequencing of Taro (Colocasia esculenta)
    Wolfgruber, Thomas
    Helmkampf, Martin
    Kantar, Michael
    Bellinger, M. Renee
    Miyasaka, Susan
    Shintaku, Michael
    HORTSCIENCE, 2016, 51 (09) : S269 - S269
  • [22] A Guide to WCM Choosing the Right Tool for You
    Gingras, Jarrod
    ECONTENT, 2013, 36 (09) : 4 - 5
  • [23] INVESTMENT CRITERIA - CHOOSING RIGHT TOOL FOR JOB
    THORNEYC.WT
    OPERATIONAL RESEARCH QUARTERLY, 1968, 19 (04) : 472 - &
  • [24] CHOOSING THE RIGHT SIGNAL-INTEGRITY TOOL
    KELLEY, R
    ELECTRONIC DESIGN, 1995, 43 (19) : 78 - &
  • [25] Choosing the right centrifuge for your application
    Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., 275 Aiken Rd., Asheville, NC 28804, United States
    Am Lab, 2008, 1 (28-29):
  • [26] Choosing the Right Genotyping Array: More than just Coverage
    Broer, L.
    Clemens, E.
    Zolk, O.
    Verkerk, A.
    Zehnhoff-Dinnesen, A. am
    Lanvers-Kaminsky, C.
    Langer, T.
    van den Heuvel-Eibrink, M.
    Uitterlinden, A.
    PEDIATRIC BLOOD & CANCER, 2016, 63 : S209 - S209
  • [27] A Guide to WCM Choosing the Right Tool for You
    Gingras, Jarrod
    ECONTENT, 2012, 35 (02) : 30 - 31
  • [28] Choosing the right centrifuge for your application
    Goodman, Tammy
    AMERICAN LABORATORY, 2008, 40 (01) : 28 - +
  • [29] Application of Population Sequencing (POPSEQ) for Ordering and Imputing Genotyping-by-Sequencing Markers in Hexaploid Wheat
    Edae, Erena A.
    Bowden, Robert L.
    Poland, Jesse
    G3-GENES GENOMES GENETICS, 2015, 5 (12): : 2547 - 2553
  • [30] A targeted genotyping-by-sequencing tool (Rapture) for genomics-assisted breeding in oat
    Wubishet A. Bekele
    Asuka Itaya
    Brian Boyle
    Weikai Yan
    Jennifer Mitchell Fetch
    Nicholas A. Tinker
    Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 2020, 133 : 653 - 664