1022-7954/02/3809- $27.00 © 2002
Russian Journal of Genetics, Vol. 38, No. 9, 2002, pp. 1104–1108. Translated from Genetika, Vol. 38, No. 9, 2002, pp. 1298–1303.
Original Russian Text Copyright © 2002 by Kochieva, Ryzhova, Khrapalova, Pukhalskyi.
is among the most
important crops. Wild tomato species are widely used
in breeding, mostly as a source of genes determining
resistance to biotic or abiotic stresses.
Although the genus
includes a few
species, its taxonomy is still questionable and phylog-
eny has not been completely established . The earli-
est of the current classiﬁcations based on morphologi-
cal characters has been proposed by Muller .
According to this author, the genus
sists of six botanic species and six additional subspe-
cies and variants, which are divided into two subgenera,
including species with green inedible
including species with pig-
mented edible fruits. Rick  proposed a classiﬁcation
based on the crossability and the type of reproductive
system. In this classiﬁcation, nine tomato species are
divided into three major groups: self-pollinators (
ense, L. pimpinellifolium, L. parviﬂorum, L. cheesma-
), facultative cross-pollinators
), and cross-pollinators (
L. hirsutum, L. peruvianum
) species. However, several
variants can be
classed as facultative self-pollinators, and several
variants, as self-pollinators or facultative cross-pol-
According to a classiﬁcation proposed by Khrapal-
ova , the genus
comprises ten species.
By several morphological characters and primarily fruit
color and shape,
L. hirsutum, L. peruvianum, L. glandu-
losum, L. chilense, L. chmielewskii,
have been assigned to the subgenus
L. cheesmanii, L.
24 varieties and 59 subvarieties of semicultivated and
cultivated tomato are distinguished.
is referrred to a separate subgenus,
In the present work, we have chosen the classiﬁca-
tion by Khrapalova to select members of the genus
in order to analyze their genetic polymor-
phism and phylogenetic relationships with the use of
For molecular genome analysis, we selected 53
(Tourn.) Mill. forms from the collection
of the Vavilov All-Russia Institute of Plant Industry.
Species of the subgenus
(L.) Mill. (var.
C.H. Mull. and var.
(Dun.) Rick et Lamm,
Rick et al., and
Rick et al. Species of the
(Hook.) C.H. Mull.,
(Dun.) Alef., var.
(Willd.) Brezh., var.
Brezh., and var.
(Pasq.) Brezh.), and ten tomato culti-
vars, which obtained from All-Russia Research Insti-
tute for breeding of Vegetable Cultures (VNIISSOK)
(Lesnoi Gorodok, Moscow oblast). Samples of
vianum, L. parviﬂorum, L. pimpinellifolium, L. chees-
Using RAPD for Estimating Genetic Polymorphism
in and Phylogenetic Relationships among Species
of the Genus
E. Z. Kochieva
, N. N. Ryzhova
, I. A. Khrapalova
, and V. A. Pukhalskyi
Vavilov Institute of General Genetics, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 119991 Russia;
fax: (095)135-12-89; e-mail: email@example.com
Vavilov All-Russia Institute of the Plant Industry, Russian Academy of Agricultural Sciences, St. Petersburg, 190000 Russia;
Received January 8, 2001
—RAPD genome analysis of 53 species and cultivars of the genus
revealed their high genetic polymorphism (Tourn.) Mill., based on which their phylogenetic relationships were
inferred. In total, 248 polymorphic DNA fragments were ampliﬁed. Intraspeciﬁc polymorphism was maximum
and minimum (9%) in
In general, genome divergence among cross-
pollinating tomato species was substantially higher than in self-pollinating species. An UPGMA dendrogram
constructed from the RAPD patterns was consisted with the
phylogeny inferred from the molec-
ular data of RFLP, ISSR, and microsatellite analyses and with a classiﬁcation based on morphological charac-
ters. The relationships of taxa within the genus