+ All Categories
Home > Science > The Hardwood Genomics Database: Current Status and Future Directions after Four Years of Development

The Hardwood Genomics Database: Current Status and Future Directions after Four Years of Development

Date post: 15-Jul-2015
Category:
Upload: mestato
View: 59 times
Download: 4 times
Share this document with a friend
Popular Tags:
17
Comparative Genomics of Hardwood Tree Species http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org Comparative Genomics of Hardwood Tree Species http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org The Hardwood Genomics Database: Current Status and Future Directions after Four Years of Resource Development Meg Staton
Transcript
Page 1: The Hardwood Genomics Database: Current Status and Future Directions after Four Years of Development

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

The Hardwood Genomics Database: Current Status and Future Directions after Four Years

of Resource Development

Meg Staton

Page 2: The Hardwood Genomics Database: Current Status and Future Directions after Four Years of Development

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Fagaceae.org

Page 3: The Hardwood Genomics Database: Current Status and Future Directions after Four Years of Development

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Comparative Genomics of Environmental Stress Responses in North American Hardwoods

• February 1, 2011 – January 31, 2015

• Creating genomic resources for hardwood trees

• Current and increasingly devastating forest threats: invasive pests and pathogens, climate change

• Enable population, evolutionary and conservation genetics

Page 4: The Hardwood Genomics Database: Current Status and Future Directions after Four Years of Development

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Page 5: The Hardwood Genomics Database: Current Status and Future Directions after Four Years of Development

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Tulip Poplar

Sweetgum

Honeylocust

Northern Red Oak

Black Walnut

Sugar Maple

Blackgum

Green Ash

Page 6: The Hardwood Genomics Database: Current Status and Future Directions after Four Years of Development

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Transcriptome Sequencing

Species # Libraries Raw Data Transcripts

Green Ash 55 85Gb 107,611

Northern Red Oak

23 41Gb 51,662

Black Walnut 31 41Gb 78,834

Black Gum 16 6Gb 55,630

Honeylocust 5 2Gb 56,845

Tulip Poplar 28 5Gb 53,346

Sweetgum 43 20Gb 127,406

Sugar Maple 67 29Gb 128,406

TOTAL 268 229Gb 659,740

TranscriptAndAnalysisModules

Page 7: The Hardwood Genomics Database: Current Status and Future Directions after Four Years of Development

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Full Sibling Mapping Populations

Host Species No. Seedlings

Honeylocust 226+ half sibs (149 full sibs so far)

Northern Red Oak 339 full sibs (confirmed)

Black Walnut 323 full sibs (confirmed)

Tulip Poplar 212 full sibs (controlled cross)

Green Ash* 328 full sibs (controlled cross)

Replicated at different locations

Page 8: The Hardwood Genomics Database: Current Status and Future Directions after Four Years of Development

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Genetic Map Construction

• Northern Red Oak

• Black walnut

• Honeylocust

• Tulip poplar

• Green ash

Page 9: The Hardwood Genomics Database: Current Status and Future Directions after Four Years of Development

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Phenotyping

• Phenotyping in 2013, 2014– leafing date

– bud burst

– leaf morphology

– leaf N content

• Future phenotyping– stomatal density

– insect defoliation

– marcescence

*http://w3.pierroton.inra.fr/CartoChene/index.php?page=pheno_caracter

Page 10: The Hardwood Genomics Database: Current Status and Future Directions after Four Years of Development

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

General thoughts on Tripal and trees

Page 11: The Hardwood Genomics Database: Current Status and Future Directions after Four Years of Development

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Trees – Special Genomic/Genetic Characters

• The special case of the conifers - Giant genomes– Pinerefseq Project (David

Neale, Jill Wegrzyn)

– 19Gb douglas fir

– 22Gb loblolly pine

– 33.5Gb sugar pine

• High heterozygosity

• Ontology expansion, pathway maps expansion

Page 12: The Hardwood Genomics Database: Current Status and Future Directions after Four Years of Development

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Trees improvement/conservation

• Less traditional breeding– Long generation time

– Lots of space

– Difficult – not domesticated, tall

• Less clonal propagation –labor intensive

• Whole genome selection– Improved selection

• Association genetics

Eckert et al 2010 Patterns of populationstructure and environmental associations to aridity across therange of loblolly pine

Page 13: The Hardwood Genomics Database: Current Status and Future Directions after Four Years of Development

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Trees as part of forest ecosystems

• Landscape genomics

– GIS, maps

– Phenotype x genotype x environment

• Broader perspectives

– Ecosystem services

– Microbial associations

– Similar to ecological model plants

• Herbarium samples are being obtained for all parent trees

• vouchers will be deposited at the Dunn-Palmer Herbarium at MU

• imaged and uploaded to the TROPICOS website

Zach MurrellSERNEC -Southeastern Regional Network of Expertise and Collections

iDigBio

Page 14: The Hardwood Genomics Database: Current Status and Future Directions after Four Years of Development

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

CartograTree

Page 15: The Hardwood Genomics Database: Current Status and Future Directions after Four Years of Development

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Page 16: The Hardwood Genomics Database: Current Status and Future Directions after Four Years of Development

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Page 17: The Hardwood Genomics Database: Current Status and Future Directions after Four Years of Development

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

Comparative Genomics of

Hardwood Tree Species

http://www.hardwoodgenomics.org

NSF Advisory Board

Penn State University

John Carlson, PI

Teodora Best, Research Associate

Nicole Zembower, Technician

Di Wu, PhD Student

Nick Wheeler, Manager

University of Notre Dame

Jeanne Romero-Severson, Co-PI

Dan Borkowski, PhD Student

Arpita Konar, PhD Student

Andrea Noakes, PhD Student

Lauren Fiedler, Technician

Olivia Choudhary

Michigan Tech University

Oliver Gailing, Co-PI

Sandra Owusu, PhD Student

Sudhir Khodwekar, PhD Student

University Tennessee

Scott Schlarbaum, Co-PI

Ami Sharp, Research AssociateJason Hogan, Research AssociateJames Simons, Research Associate

Margaret Staton, Bioinformatics,

Jack Davitt, Research Associate

Nathan Henry, Research Associate

Thomas Lane, Research Associate

University of Missouri

Mark Coggeshall, Co-PI

Christopher Heim, MS student

Clemson University

Haiying Liang, Co-PI

Chris Saski, Director of CUGI

Tatyana Zhebentyayev, Research Associate

Ketia Shumaker, Co-PI

Bert AbbottSteve DiFazioRobert MangoldRon SederoffDoug Soltis


Recommended