* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Generation and Analysis of AFLP Data
Agarose gel electrophoresis wikipedia , lookup
Maurice Wilkins wikipedia , lookup
Comparative genomic hybridization wikipedia , lookup
DNA barcoding wikipedia , lookup
DNA sequencing wikipedia , lookup
Nucleic acid analogue wikipedia , lookup
Gel electrophoresis of nucleic acids wikipedia , lookup
Molecular evolution wikipedia , lookup
DNA supercoil wikipedia , lookup
Molecular Inversion Probe wikipedia , lookup
Non-coding DNA wikipedia , lookup
Molecular cloning wikipedia , lookup
Cre-Lox recombination wikipedia , lookup
Genomic library wikipedia , lookup
Molecular ecology wikipedia , lookup
Restriction enzyme wikipedia , lookup
Deoxyribozyme wikipedia , lookup
Generation and Analysis of AFLP Data ESPM 150/290: Biology, Ecology, and Genetics of Forest Diseases Laboratory Exercise April 1, 2010 Some Considerations in Choosing a Genotyping Method • What is the level of taxonomic resolution desired? (Populations? Species? Phyla?) – Comparison of distantly related individuals requires slowly evolving markers (e.g., protein-coding DNA or Amino Acid sequences) due to saturation of changes in quickly-evolving markers – Comparison of closely related individuals requires rapidly evolving markers (e.g., microsatellites or non-coding DNA sequences) • What is the level of genotypic resolution desired? – Dominant vs. codominant markers – Fine (e.g., nucleotide-level) data vs. coarse (e.g., fragment size) genomic scale – detailed information about one or a few loci vs. less-detailed information about more loci Some Considerations in Choosing a Genotyping Method • How much previous sequence knowledge is available? – DNA sequencing, microsatellite amplification, PCR-RFLP, etc. require previous sequence information so that PCR primers can be designed – AFLPs and RAPDs allow genetic fingerprinting when previous sequence knowledge is not available • What are the cost and labor constraints? – DNA sequencing is more costly than fragment analysis – Techniques requiring fluorescent labeling are generally more costly than techniques that don’t require labeling A review of PCR amplification Requirements: DNA template 2 oligonucleotides - Primers Nucleotides dATP, dCTP, dGTP, dTTP Taq polymerase 1. Double strand denaturation 2. Annealing of the primers 3’ 5’ 3. Elongation 5’ 3’ 5’ Restriction Enzymes • Found in bacteria • Cut DNA within the molecule (endonuclease) • Cut at sequences that are specific for each enzyme (restriction sites) • Leave either blunt or sticky ends, depending upon the specific enzyme Tobin & Dusheck, Asking About Life, 2nd ed. Copyright 2001, Harcourt, Inc. http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/R/RestrictionEnzymes.html Random Genomic Markers DNA sequence of suitable SNPs is not available Relatively inexpensive Scan the entire genome producing information on several variations in the same reaction RAPD Random Amplification of Polymorphic DNA AFLP Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphism AFLP Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphisms (Vos et al., 1995) Genomic DNA digested with 2 restriction enzymes: – EcoRI (6 bp restriction site) cuts infrequently – MseI(4 bp restriction site) cuts frequently GAATTC CTTAAG TTAA AATT Fragments of DNA resulting from restriction digestion are ligated with end-specific adaptors (a different one for each enzyme) to create a new PCR priming site Pre selective PCR amplification is done using primers complementary to the adaptor + 1 bp (chosen by the user) N N N N Selective amplification using primers complementary to the adaptor (+1 bp) + 2 bp NNN NNN NNN NNN AFLP OVERVIEW (VOS ET AL., 1995) Sample AFLP Gel AFLP Electropherogram Peak Height Fragment Size (bp) Source: Wikimedia Commons AFLP Fluorescent electrophoresis AFLP Data Map from Urbanelli et al. (2007) Rows: individuals Columns: alleles AFLP genotyping PCR amplification using primers corresponding to the new sequence If there are 2 new priming sites within 400 – 1600 bp there is amplification The result is: Presence or absence of amplification 1 or 0 Dominant marker: does not distinguish between heterozygote and homozygote Due mostly to SNPs but also to deletions/insertions Analysis of AFLP data Similarity (cluster analysis) NJ (Neighbor Joining) UPGMA (Unweighted Pair Group Method with Arithmetic mean) AMOVA (Analysis of Molecular Variance) Model-based Maximum likelihood Bayesian Example of a sequence distance matrix Image Source: http://media.wiley.com/CurrentProtocols/BI/bi0603/bi0603-fig-0002-1-full.gif Analysis of AFLP data Similarity (cluster analysis) NJ (Neighbor Joining) UPGMA (Unweighted Pair Group Method with Arithmetic mean) AMOVA (Analysis of Molecular Variance) Model-based Maximum likelihood Bayesian Example of a sequence distance matrix Image Source: http://media.wiley.com/CurrentProtocols/BI/bi0603/bi0603-fig-0002-1-full.gif AFLP Clustering Analysis Clustering Dendrogram Fragment Visualization Source: Wikimedia Commons AFLP Data Map with UPGMA dendogram from Urbanelli et al. (2007): “Distinguishing taxa in the Pleurotus eryngii (King Oyster Mushroom) complex using AFLPs” • 90 populations sampled • 94 AFLP loci scored Photos: (Top) The New York Times (Bottom L) Wikimedia Commons (Bottom R) http://steinpilz.up.seesaa.net Example Structure Output “Estimated population structure for 10 runs of structure using 1056 individuals from 52 human populations. Each graph represents the output of one run of structure. In each graph, each individual is represented by a vertical line, which is partitioned into 5 colors that represent its estimated membership fractions in K=5 clusters.” (Source: http://rosenberglab.bioinformatics.med.umich.edu/clumppExample.html) Rosenberg et al. (2002). Science 298: 2381-2385.