Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2017 Feb;15(2):149-161.
doi: 10.1111/pbi.12645.

Genotyping-by-sequencing approaches to characterize crop genomes: choosing the right tool for the right application

Affiliations
Review

Genotyping-by-sequencing approaches to characterize crop genomes: choosing the right tool for the right application

Armin Scheben et al. Plant Biotechnol J. 2017 Feb.

Abstract

In the last decade, the revolution in sequencing technologies has deeply impacted crop genotyping practice. New methods allowing rapid, high-throughput genotyping of entire crop populations have proliferated and opened the door to wider use of molecular tools in plant breeding. These new genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS) methods include over a dozen reduced-representation sequencing (RRS) approaches and at least four whole-genome resequencing (WGR) approaches. The diversity of methods available, each often producing different types of data at different cost, can make selection of the best-suited method seem a daunting task. We review the most common genotyping methods used today and compare their suitability for linkage mapping, genomewide association studies (GWAS), marker-assisted and genomic selection and genome assembly and improvement in crops with various genome sizes and complexity. Furthermore, we give an outline of bioinformatics tools for analysis of genotyping data. WGR is well suited to genotyping biparental cross populations with complex, small- to moderate-sized genomes and provides the lowest cost per marker data point. RRS approaches differ in their suitability for various tasks, but demonstrate similar costs per marker data point. These approaches are generally better suited for de novo applications and more cost-effective when genotyping populations with large genomes or high heterozygosity. We expect that although RRS approaches will remain the most cost-effective for some time, WGR will become more widespread for crop genotyping as sequencing costs continue to decrease.

Keywords: Breeding; Genomics; genotyping-by-sequencing; reduced-representation sequencing; whole-genome resequencing.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Abe, A. , Kosugi, S. , Yoshida, K. , Natsume, S. , Takagi, H. , Kanzaki, H. , Matsumura, H. et al. (2012) Genome sequencing reveals agronomically important loci in rice using MutMap. Nat. Biotechnol. 30, 174–178. - PubMed
    1. Akhunov, E . (2016) Population‐scale functional and structural diversity of the wheat genome revealed by transcriptome and exome sequencing. In Plant and Animal Genome XXIV Conference, San Diego, CA, USA, January 8‐13, 2016. https://pag.confex.com/pag/xxiv/webprogram/Paper19884.html.
    1. Alexander, R.P. , Fang, G. , Rozowsky, J. , Snyder, M. and Gerstein, M.B. (2010) Annotating non‐coding regions of the genome. Nat. Rev. Genet. 11, 559–571. - PubMed
    1. Ali, O.A. , O'Rourke, S.M. , Amish, S.J. , Meek, M.H. , Luikart, G. , Jeffres, C. and Miller, M.R. (2016) RAD capture (Rapture): flexible and efficient sequence‐based genotyping. Genetics, 202, 389–400. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Allen, A.M. , Barker, G.L. , Wilkinson, P. , Burridge, A. , Winfield, M. , Coghill, J. , Uauy, C. et al. (2013) Discovery and development of exome‐based, co‐dominant single nucleotide polymorphism markers in hexaploid wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Plant Biotechnol. J. 11, 279–295. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms