International Journal of Horticulture, 2015, Vol.5, No.21, 1-45
32
taxonomists to rapidly sort specimens and by highlighting divergent taxa that may represent new species. DNA
barcoding will deliver species-level resolution in 95% to 97% of cases (Hebert et al., 2004b; Janzen et al., 2005;
Ward et al., 2005). A DNA barcode is not just any DNA sequence—it is a rigorously standardized sequence of a
minimum length and quality from an agreed-upon gene, deposited in a major sequence database, and attached to a
voucher specimen whose origins and current status are recorded. Despite the potential benefits of DNA barcoding
to both the practitioners and users of taxonomy, it has been controversial in some scientific circles (Wheeler, 2004;
Will and Rubinoff, 2004; Ebach and Holdrege, 2005; Will et al., 2005). By contrast, DNA barcodes—by
themselves—are never sufficient to
describe
new species.
It is clear that all techniques have positive and important role in characterization. TLC technique is very simple
and it can be utilized for solving taxonomic problems, identification of hybrid at the seedling stage and also for
identification of mutant varieties.
RAPD markers have numerous advantages. The analysis is rapid, simple, and does not involve radioactive
material. Selecting the right sequence for the primer is very important because different sequences will produce
different band patterns and possibly allow for a more specific recognition of individual strains. On the other hand,
the RAPD technique is highly sensitive to reaction conditions, dominant in nature, and does not usually enable
detection of a single locus (Williams et al., 1991; Mohan et al., 1997; Yang and Korban, 1996). Hence this marker
is not useful, for example, in markerassisted breeding programs. The only disadvantage of using RFLPs for
characterization of genetic resources is the cost of material and labour. However, RAPD will make the use of
molecular markers more convenient and more economic. During the last several years, molecular markers are
being utilized for the genetic improvement of a wide range of horticultural crops. Among the major traits targeted
for improvement programs are, disease resistance, fruit yield and quality, tree shape, floral characteristics, cold
hardiness, and dormancy. Today, markers are being used for germplasm characterization, genetic mapping, gene
tagging, and gene introgression from exotic species. DND bar coding for identifying plants is an exciting area for
future.
Acknowledgement
Thanks are due to The Director, CSIR-National Botanical Research Institute, Lucknow, India for providing the facilities.
References
Akagi H., Yokozeki Y., Inagaki A., Nakamura A., and Fujimura T., 1996, A co-dominant DNA marker closely linked to the rice nuclear restorer gene,
Rf-1
,
identified with inter-SSR fingerprinting, Genome,39(6): 1205-1209
Mid: 8983188
Alston R.E., and Turner B.L., 1963, Natural hybridization among four species of Baptisia (Leguminosae), Amer. J. Bot., 50(2): 159-173
Anand L., 2000, Molecular markers and their application in horticultural crops,In: Biotechnology in Horticultural and Plantation Crops, (Chadha K.L.,
Ravindran P.N., Sahijram L., (Eds.), Malhotra Publishing House, New delhi, India, pp. 120-137
Anastassopoulos E., and Keil M., 1996, Assessment of natural and induced genetic variation in Alstroemeria using random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD)
markers, Euphytica, 90(2): 235-244
Anderson W.R., and Fairbanks D.J., 1990, Molecular marker: Important tools for plant genetic resource characterization, Diversity, 17(8):101-111
Anonymous, 1983, United States Plant Variety Protection Act of December 24, 1970, (84 Stat.1542) (7 U.S.C. 23 21 Et. Seq.), Regulations and Rules of
Practice
Anonymous, 1998, ‘TRIPS and the legal protection of plants’, Editorial, Biotechnology and Development Monitor, 34: 1-4
Anonymous, 2002, Framing rules for operationalisung The Orotection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Right Act: Recommendations of a Scientist group.
National Academy of Agricultural Sciences, NASC Complex, Pusa, New Delhi
Arachichi D.G.R., Henny R.J., Guy C.L., and Li Q.B., 2001, DNA fingerprinting to identify nine Anthurium pot plant cultivars and examine their genetic
relationship, HortScience, 36(4): 758-760
Armstrong J., Gibbs A.J., Peakall B., and Weiller G., 1998, The RAPDistance package
Arús P., 2000, Molecular markers for ornamental breeding, Acta Hort., 508: 91-98
Ayangar R.K., 1963, Cytological basis of sterility is
Polianthes tuberosa
Linn. Proc, 50
th
Indian Sci. cong. Part III section Vi (Bot.) Abst. No., 247: 444-445
Babcock E.B., 1947, The genus Crepis-The taxonomy, phylogeny, distribution and evolution of Crepis Univ Calif Publ Bot., 21: 1-197
Bakker F.T., Culham A., Pankhurst C.E., and Gibby M., 2000, Mitochondrial and chloroplast DNA-based phylogeny of
Pelargonium
(Geraniaceae), Amer. J.
