Abstract
Among the 400 soybean (Glycine max) landraces, we selected 3 tolerant (KAS150-9, KAS160-15, and KAS170-9) and 3 susceptible lines (KAS160-14, KAS160-20, and KAS201-6-1) by the survival percentage and injury scores. Susceptible lines showed decrease in chlorophyll content and increase in glucose and malondialdehyde (MDA) contents under waterlogging stress, while tolerant lines did not change significantly. For AFLP analysis, 8 EcoRI (+3) and 8 MseI (+3) primers used in 32 primer combinations generated a total of 2 566 bands with a mean of 80 bands per primer combination, of which 1 117 (43.5 %) were clearly polymorphic between the tolerant and susceptible lines. A genetic similarity coefficient, based on cluster analysis using an unweighted pair grouping method of average (UPGMA), was 0.79 for the tolerant group, while the susceptible landraces were genetically less related, with a genetic similarity coefficient of 0.17. The 10 reproducible polymorphic PCR products present in the 3 tolerant or susceptible lines were sequenced and converted into sequence tagged site (STS) markers. These STS primer sets were designated GmWT01-GmWT06 and GmWS01-GmWS04. Two STS primer sets, GmWT06 and GmWS02, generated a single monomorphic PCR product identical in size to the original AFLP fragments. For the broad application of these STS markers in marker-assisted selection (MAS) for soybean genotypes tolerant to waterlogging stress, two developed STS markers are being evaluated with putative waterlogging tolerant mutant lines induced by γ-radiation in soybean mutation breeding programs.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 7
Claim · model-written summary
Susceptible soybean lines showed a decrease in chlorophyll content under waterlogging stress.
- Taxon
- soybean
Glycine maxe2 - Material
- KAS160-14, KAS160-20, and KAS201-6-1e2
- Treatment
- waterlogging stresse1
- Outcome
- chlorophyll contente1
- Direction
- decreasee1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Susceptible lines showed decrease in chlorophyll content and increase in glucose and malondialdehyde (MDA) contents under waterlogging stress, while tolerant lines did not change significantly”
e2“Among the 400 soybean (Glycine max) landraces, we selected 3 tolerant (KAS150-9, KAS160-15, and KAS170-9) and 3 susceptible lines (KAS160-14, KAS160-20, and KAS201-6-1) by the survival percentage and injury scores”
Claim · model-written summary
Susceptible soybean lines showed an increase in glucose and malondialdehyde (MDA) contents under waterlogging stress.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe2
- Material
- KAS160-14, KAS160-20, and KAS201-6-1e2
- Treatment
- waterlogging stresse1
- Outcome
- glucose and malondialdehyde (MDA) contentse1
- Direction
- increasee1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Susceptible lines showed decrease in chlorophyll content and increase in glucose and malondialdehyde (MDA) contents under waterlogging stress, while tolerant lines did not change significantly”
e2“Among the 400 soybean (Glycine max) landraces, we selected 3 tolerant (KAS150-9, KAS160-15, and KAS170-9) and 3 susceptible lines (KAS160-14, KAS160-20, and KAS201-6-1) by the survival percentage and injury scores”
Claim · model-written summary
Tolerant soybean lines did not change significantly in chlorophyll, glucose or MDA contents under waterlogging stress.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe2
- Material
- KAS150-9, KAS160-15, and KAS170-9e2
- Treatment
- waterlogging stresse1
- Outcome
- contentse1
- Direction
- did not change significantlye1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Susceptible lines showed decrease in chlorophyll content and increase in glucose and malondialdehyde (MDA) contents under waterlogging stress, while tolerant lines did not change significantly”
e2“Among the 400 soybean (Glycine max) landraces, we selected 3 tolerant (KAS150-9, KAS160-15, and KAS170-9) and 3 susceptible lines (KAS160-14, KAS160-20, and KAS201-6-1) by the survival percentage and injury scores”
Claim · model-written summary
Of 2 566 AFLP bands, 1 117 (43.5 %) were clearly polymorphic between the tolerant and susceptible soybean lines.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe2
- Material
- tolerant and susceptible linese3
- Outcome
- clearly polymorphice3
- Value
- 43.5 %e3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“Among the 400 soybean (Glycine max) landraces, we selected 3 tolerant (KAS150-9, KAS160-15, and KAS170-9) and 3 susceptible lines (KAS160-14, KAS160-20, and KAS201-6-1) by the survival percentage and injury scores”
e3“For AFLP analysis, 8 EcoRI (+3) and 8 MseI (+3) primers used in 32 primer combinations generated a total of 2 566 bands with a mean of 80 bands per primer combination, of which 1 117 (43.5 %) were clearly polymorphic between the tolerant and susceptible lines”
Claim · model-written summary
The genetic similarity coefficient of the tolerant soybean group was 0.79.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe2
- Material
- tolerant groupe4
- Outcome
- genetic similarity coefficiente4
- Value
- 0.79e4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“Among the 400 soybean (Glycine max) landraces, we selected 3 tolerant (KAS150-9, KAS160-15, and KAS170-9) and 3 susceptible lines (KAS160-14, KAS160-20, and KAS201-6-1) by the survival percentage and injury scores”
e4“A genetic similarity coefficient, based on cluster analysis using an unweighted pair grouping method of average (UPGMA), was 0.79 for the tolerant group, while the susceptible landraces were genetically less related, with a genetic similarity coefficient of 0.17”
Claim · model-written summary
The genetic similarity coefficient of the susceptible soybean landraces was 0.17.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe2
- Material
- susceptible landracese4
- Outcome
- genetic similarity coefficiente4
- Value
- 0.17e4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“Among the 400 soybean (Glycine max) landraces, we selected 3 tolerant (KAS150-9, KAS160-15, and KAS170-9) and 3 susceptible lines (KAS160-14, KAS160-20, and KAS201-6-1) by the survival percentage and injury scores”
e4“A genetic similarity coefficient, based on cluster analysis using an unweighted pair grouping method of average (UPGMA), was 0.79 for the tolerant group, while the susceptible landraces were genetically less related, with a genetic similarity coefficient of 0.17”
Claim · model-written summary
Two STS primer sets, GmWT06 and GmWS02, generated a single monomorphic PCR product identical in size to the original AFLP fragments in soybean.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe2
- Gene
- GmWT06 and GmWS02e5
- Outcome
- single monomorphic PCR producte5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“Among the 400 soybean (Glycine max) landraces, we selected 3 tolerant (KAS150-9, KAS160-15, and KAS170-9) and 3 susceptible lines (KAS160-14, KAS160-20, and KAS201-6-1) by the survival percentage and injury scores”
e5“Two STS primer sets, GmWT06 and GmWS02, generated a single monomorphic PCR product identical in size to the original AFLP fragments”
The same questions in other papers
flooding · physiology: pigments · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 papers →flooding · physiology: oxidative · Glycine max (soybean)Results agree
10 papers in the same direction as this paper
- negative
- negative
- negative
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.