Testing of SSR markers for genotyping of sour and sweet cherry varieties from the genetic collection of the Federal Horticulture Center for Breeding, Agrotechnology and Nursery

Molecular methods are increasingly being used to determine the varietal affiliation of fruit crops. Genetic markers characterizing polymorphisms at the level of the entire genome are important for studying the genetic structure and characteristics of the breeding material. SSR markers remain popular due to their availability and possibility of comparison with data from different collections. In this work, we set out to evaluate the effectiveness of SSR markers to form their optimal set for genotyping sour and sweet cherry varieties. The selected SSR markers were tested using 14 sour cherry varieties (Prunus cerasus L.) (Assol, Bryunetka, Bulatnikovskaya, Belye Zhuravli, Chereshnevaya, Molodezhnaya, Novella, Pamyat Yenikeeva, Pamyat Evstratovu, Rastorguevskaya, Rusinka, Saniya, Silva, Vladimirskaya) and 13 sweet cherry varieties (P. avium (L.) L.) (Anons, Chermashnaya, Fatezh, Iput, Krasa Kubani, Krupnoplodnaya, Kutuzovka, Moskvoretskaya, Podarok Ryazani, Revna, Sinyavskaya, Uslada, Vasilisa) from the genetic collection of the Federal Horticulture Center for Breeding, Agrotechnology and Nursery. The conducted analysis of SSR markers based on statistical analysis allowed us to identify the most informative markers for sour cherry varieties. The PceGA34 marker demonstrated the highest informational value among all the parameters studied. In addition, the BPPCT005, BPPCT037, BPPCT039, CPPCT006, CPPCT022, EMPA001, EMPA003, EMPaS02, EMPaS06, EMPaS12, EMPaS14, and UDP98-412 markers showed a sufficient degree of informativeness for effective differentiation of cherry varieties. At the same time, the informativeness of EMPA002, EMPA005, EMPA017, and EMPaS01 markers was established to be insufficient. Regarding sweet cherry varieties, the BPPCT005 and EMPaS12 markers showed the greatest informational value for varietal identification. The BPPCT037, BPPCT039, CPPCT006, CPPCT022, EMPA001, EMPA005, EMPaS01, EMPaS02, EMPaS06, PceGA34, and UDP98-412 were also recognized as sufficiently informative for this purpose. At the same time, the EMPA002, EMPA003, EMPA017, and EMPaS14 markers were excluded from consideration due to their insufficient informational value.

1. Куликов И. М., Кудрявцев А. М., Марченко Л. А. и др. Полиморфизм микросателлитных локусов сортов вишни (Prunus cerasus L.) современной селекции Всероссийского селекционно-технологического института садоводства и питомниководства, Садоводство и виноградарство. 2018;5:5-9. DOI: 10.31676/0235-2591-2018-5-5-9.

2. Токмаков С. В., Супрун И. И., Ильницкая Е. Т. ДНК-маркерные технологии в изучении генетического разнообразия плодовых культур и винограда, Сборник трудов курчатовского геномного форума. Москва. 2023;17:103-104.

3. Barreneche T. et al. SSR-based analysis of genetic diversity and structure of sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.) from 19 countries in Europe, Plants. 2021;10(10):1983. DOI: 10.3390/plants10101983.

4. Guerrero Camacho B. I. et al. Genetic Diversity and Population Structure of Japanese Plum-Type (Hybrids of P. salicina) Accessions Assessed by SSR Markers, Agronome. 2021;11(9):1748. DOI: 10.3390/agronomy11091748.

5. Nzweundji J. G. et al. Genetic Differentiation and Population Structure of Threatened Prunus africana Kalm. in Western Cameroon Using Molecular Markers, Diversity. 2020;12(12):446. DOI:10.3390/d12120446.

6. Schuller E. et al. Autochthonous Austrian varieties of Prunus avium L. represent a regional gene pool, assessed using SSR and AFLP markers, Genes. 2021;12(3):322. DOI: 10.3390/genes12030322.

7. Testolin R. et al. SSR‐based DNA fingerprinting of fruit crops, Crop Science. 2023;63(2):390-459. DOI: 10.1002/csc2.20896.

8. Дулов М. И. Микросателлитное генотипирование для изучения генетического разнообразия и идентификации сортов вишни и черешни, Наука и образование: сохраняя прошлое, создаем будущее. 2020:121-133.

9. Ordidge M. et al. Towards a joint international database: Alignment of SSR marker data for European collections of cherry germplasm, Plants. 2021;10(6):1243. DOI: 10.3390/plants10061243.

10. Спивак В. В. Сравнение протоколов экстракции ДНК из растительного материала вишни обыкновенной и черешни, Плодоводство и ягодоводство России. 2025;80:25-36. DOI: 10.31676/2073-4948-2025-80-25-36.

11. Clarke J. B., Tobutt K. R. Development and characterization of polymorphic microsatellites from Prunus avium ‘Napoleon’, Molecular Ecology Notes.2003;3(4):578-580. DOI: 10.1046/j.1471-8286.2003.00517.x.

12. Vaughan S. P., Russell K. Characterization of novel microsatellites and development of multiplex PCR for large‐scale population studies in wild cherry, Prunus avium, Molecular Ecology Notes. 2004;4(3):429-431. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2004.00673.x.

13. Dirlewanger E. et al. Development of microsatellite markers in peach [Prunus persica (L.) Batsch] and their use in genetic diversity analysis in peach and sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.), Theoretical and applied genetics. 2002;105:127-138. DOI: 10.1007/s00122-002-0867-7.

14. Aranzana M. J. et al. Development and variability analysis of microsatellite markers in peach, Plant Breeding. 2002;121(1):87-92. DOI: 10.1046/j.1439-0523.2002.00656.x.

15. Downey S. L., Iezzoni A. F. Polymorphic DNA markers in black cherry (Prunus serotina) are identified using sequences from sweet cherry, peach, and sour cherry, Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science. 2000;125(1):76-80. DOI: 10.21273/JASHS.125.1.76.

16. Testolin R. et al. Microsatellite DNA in peach (Prunus persica L. Batsch) and its use in fingerprinting and testing the genetic origin of cultivars. Genome. 2000;43(3):512-520. DOI: 10.1139/g00-010.

17. Чесноков Ю. В., Артемьева А. М. Оценка меры информационного полиморфизма генетического разнообразия, Сельскохозяйственная биология. 2015;50(5):571-578. DOI: 10.15389/agrobiology.2015.5.571rus.