Hi dears;
SNPs or SSR markers: which ones is appropriate in terms of both data value and economic aspect to surveying of population genetic?
Dear Saeed
SSRs are highly polymorphic, inherited co-dominantly and they are easily reproducible and traceable with simple screening requirements. However, SNPs are rapidly replacing SSRs as the DNA marker of choice for applications in plant breeding and genetics because they are more abundant, stable, amenable to automation, efficient, and increasingly cost-effective.
I suggest you read these two articles, which compare the SSR and SNP markers.
Dear Dr. Miri;
So many thanks for your accountability.
Yours sincerely;
Saeed
Hi,
If there are microsatellites already developed for the species you are going to study, it might be easier (and probably less costly) to obtain results and compare with previous studies.
If not, I would recommend SNPs because you can have a more detailed picture of the genetic structure as several thousand loci can be analyzed. You may also obtain information on selection drivers as some SNPs might be linked to adaptive genes.
Best Regards
Dear Saeed,
Microsatellite markers would be appropriate, and quite inexpensive for discriminating between cultivars.
During the last two decades, simple sequence repeats (SSRs, also known as microsatellites) and single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) have become the most popular molecular markers for describing genetic variation in natural populations of a wide range of organisms with different biology.
Dear Walid,
Hi, thanks for your valuable comments.
Regards,
Saeed
Dear Ricardo,
Hi, I'm so thankful for your comments and participate in this discussion.
Yours sincerely,
Saeed
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Correction