Genetic relationships among ginger accessions based on AFLP
Transcription
Genetic relationships among ginger accessions based on AFLP
Jurnal 60 Bioteknologi Pertanian, Vol. 8, No. 2, 2003, pp. 60-68 S. Wahyuni et al. Genetic relationships among ginger accessions based on AFLP marker Kekerabatan antar nomor-nomor aksesi jahe berdasarkan marka AFLP S. Wahyuni1, D.H. Xu2, N. Bermawie1, H. Tsunematsu2, and T. Ban2 1 Indonesian Spices and Medicinal Crops Research Institute, Jalan Tentara Pelajar No. 3, Bogor 16111, Indonesia 2 Japan International Centre for Agrobiological Sciences (JIRCAS) ABSTRAK Jahe merupakan salah satu tanaman penting dari jenis temutemuan. Di Indonesia dikenal tiga tipe jahe, yaitu jahe merah, jahe besar, dan jahe kecil. Ketiga tipe jahe tersebut mempunyai bentuk, warna, aroma, dan komposisi kimia rimpang yang berbeda. Untuk mengetahui kekerabatan antartipe dan dalam tipe pada jahe, 28 nomor aksesi yang terdiri atas 22 aksesi jahe Indonesia dan masing-masing 3 aksesi jahe asal Afrika dan Jepang digunakan dalam penelitian ini. Total DNA diekstrak dari rimpang dengan metode cetyltrimethyl ammonium bromide (CTAB) kemudian dimurnikan menggunakan serbuk magnet. Amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) dilakukan mengikuti prosedur pada AFLP TM plant mapping kit (PE Applied Biosystem) dan hasil akhir polymerase chain reaction (PCR) dipisahkan pada 5% gel poliakrilamid dalam ABI 373 sequencer. Jumlah fragmen yang teramplifikasi pada setiap kombinasi primer AFLP ratarata mencapai 96 dengan kisaran 47-137 fragmen. Pengamatan dengan menggunakan 21 kombinasi primer menghasilkan 221 pita polimorfis. Dendrogram berdasar unweighted pair group methods of arithmetic average (UPGMA) dari semua nomor aksesi yang digunakan dapat diklasifikasikan menjadi tiga kelompok utama. Jahe merah secara genetik jauh dari jahe besar, tetapi mempunyai kekerabatan yang dekat dengan beberapa aksesi jahe kecil. Keragaman genetik dari jahe kecil (Ht = 0,25) lebih tinggi dari jahe besar (Ht = 0,08). [Kata kunci: Zingiber officinale, jahe, AFLP, keragaman genetik] ABSTRACT Ginger (Zingiber officinale Rosc.) is a rhizomatous perennial herb and one of the important crop of the genus Zingiber. There are three types of ginger in Indonesia, i.e. big ginger, small ginger, and red ginger. Their rhizomes differ in shape, color, aroma, and chemical composition. To understand the genetic relationships among the three types of ginger, 28 accessions consisted of 22 Indonesian cultivated ginger and 3 accessions each of African and Japanese commercial ginger were analyzed. Total DNA was extracted from rhizome using cetyltrimethyl ammonium bromide (CTAB) method then purified by magnetic beads. Amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) was carried out according to the protocol described in AFLP TM plant mapping kit (PE Applied Biosystem) and the final polymerase chain reaction (PCR) products were separated on 5% denatured polyacrylamide gel on an ABI 373 sequencer. The number of fragments produced by a primer combination of AFLP ranged from 47 to 137 with an average of 96. A total of 221 polymorphic bands were observed by using 21 selective primer combinations. Dendrogram based on unweighted pair group methods of arithmetic average (UPGMA) revealed that the gingers could be classified into three major clusters. The red ginger was genetically far from the big ginger, but close to some accessions of small ginger. There was no clear genetic differentiation between the small and big types of ginger. The genetic diversity of small ginger (Ht = 0.25) is higher than that of the big ginger (Ht = 0.08). [Keywords: Zingiber officinale, ginger, AFLP, genetic variation] INTRODUCTION Ginger (Zingiber officinale Rosc.) is a perennial rhizomatous herb of the family Zingiberaceae. Its origin is unknown, probably in tropical Asia and China (Purseglove et al. 1981). In Indonesia, gingers are grown in 13 provinces, but the main producing areas are Aceh, East Java, North Sumatra, West Java, Lampung, and Central Java. Ginger cultivation in these areas is considered to be beneficial. Ginger can be planted at the altitude up to 1,000 m asl, but the optimum condition for high yield is at 300-500 asl. Ginger is used worldwide as a cooking spice, condiment, and herbal remedy. It is the underground roots or rhizomes that are used for culinary and medicinal purposes. The Chinese have used ginger for at least 2,500 years as digestive aid, antinausea and rheumatism. In Malaysia and Indonesia, ginger is widely used as beverage such ginger tea to warm body. In Arabian medicine, ginger is considered as an aphrodisiac, while some African believe that eating ginger regularly will help repel mosquito. Nowadays, ginger is extensively cultivated in Asia and Africa, but 61 Genetic relationships among ginger accessions based on AFLP marker in commerce the main ginger exporting countries are China and India, which supplied almost 75% of the world annual requirement of over 18,000 tons of ginger. The major ginger importing countries are USA, Japan, Europe, and Middle East countries. Indonesian ginger has been described as two variants, i.e. white ginger (Zingiber officinale var. officinale) and red ginger (var. sunti) (Rugayah 1994), it is in agreement with Valeton classification (1918). Based on phenotyphic characters, Rostiana et al. (1990) distinguished ginger into three groups, i.e. big ginger, small ginger, and red ginger. Big ginger has big rhizome size, less pungent and less fibrous, average plant height 68.63 + 12.75 cm. Small ginger has smaller rhizome size, fibrous and pungent, plant height 49.16 + 7.29 cm, while red ginger has small rhizome size with red skin color, more pungent and more fibrous, plant height 48.23 + 14.05 cm, and has darker green leaves compared with two others. According to the usage, small ginger and red ginger are generally used for medicinal purposes and cooking spices, while big ginger is used for food, beverage, and cooking spices. De Guzman and Siemonsma (1999) reported that there are three types of ginger in Indonesia, namely (1) jahe badak = jahe gajah = jahe putih besar, (2) jahe merah = jahe sunti, and (3) jahe putih kecil = jahe emprit. Their rhizome differs in shape, color, aroma, and chemical composition, and all types can be considered as cultivars. Genetic diversity of ginger germplasm collected from several locations in Indonesia was low (Bermawie et al. 2001). Although they consisted of big, small and red gingers, morphologically they showed considerable phenotypic variations for many traits such as rhizome size, color, flesh color, flavor/pungency, yield, fiber, and rhizome chemical content. However, it is difficult to distinguish accessions within the group compared to accessions of different group. Therefore, the relationships between and within the groups of ginger have to be studied to pursue genetic improvement of ginger. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based methods for genetic diversity analyses have been developed, such as random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD), random fragment length polymorphism (RFLP), amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP), and inter simple sequence repeat (ISSR/SSR). Each technique is not only differed in principal, but also in the type and amount of polymorphism detected. AFLP technique is based on the selective PCR amplification of restriction fragments from a total digest of genomic DNA. The technique involves three steps: (1) restric- tion of the DNA and ligation of oligonucleotide adapters, (2) selective amplification of sets of restriction fragments, and (3) gel analysis of the amplified fragments (Vos et al. 1995). Typically, 50-100 restriction fragments are amplified and detected on denaturing polyacrylamide gel. AFLP has been recognized as a reliable and efficient DNA marker system (Vos et al. 1995). It has been proven the most efficient for estimating diversity in barley (Russel et al. 1997), provides detailed estimates of the genetic variation of papaya (Kim et al. 2002), and have been used to analyze the genetic diversity of various plants such as tea (Lai et al. 2001), eggplant (Mace et al. 1999), peach (Manubens et al. 1999), apple (Guolao et al. 2001), rapeseed (Lombard et al. 1999), wild radish (Man and Ohnishi 2002), and Musa sp. (Wong et al. 2001; Ude et al. 2002). Another marker system which can be used for genetic diversity analysis is ISSR. The use of this technique for genetic diversity analysis has been reported on tea (Lai et al. 2001; Mondal 2002), and Botrycum pumicola (Camacho and Liston 2001) The objective of this study was to understand the genetic relationships between and within the types of ginger by using AFLP marker. MATERIALS AND METHODS Plant materials A total of 22 accessions of cultivated ginger grown in Indonesia including small, red and big gingers were used as a material for analysis. More over 3 accessions of African ginger (Ivory Coast, Bouake) and 3 accessions of Japanese ginger were used as a test sample. The list of materials used were shown in Table 1. DNA extraction Total genomic DNA was extracted from rhizomes by using cetyltrimethyl ammonium bromide (CTAB) methods (Doyle and Doyle 1990). The DNA was then purified with silica beads (MagExtractor Plant Genome Kit, Toyobo. Co.) to obtain a better quality of DNA which appropriate for AFLP. A few sample of DNA obtained were loaded in 0.8% agarose gel, and λÉDNA were loaded too as a standard for estimation of the quantity and quality of the DNA. The gel was finally stained with ethidium bromide and viewed on the UV transiluminator light at gel documentation system. 62 S. Wahyuni et al. Table 1. Description of ginger accessions used in this study. Accession code A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z AA AB Origin Rhizome size Ina, West Java, Sukabumi Ina, West Java, Cianjur Ina, West Java, Garut Ina, West Java, Sumedang Ina, Central Java, Salatiga Ina, Central Java, Boyolali Ina, West Java, Sukabumi Ina, West Java, Cianjur Ina, West Java, Cisewu Ina, West Java, Sumedang Ina, West Java, Garut Ina, West Java, Maja Ina, West Java, Cianjur Ina, Central Java, Boyolali Ina, West Java, Wado Ina, West Java, Sukabumi Ina, Central Java, Boyolali Ina, Central Java, Salatiga Ina, West Java, Wado Ina, West Java, Bogor Ina, Papua, Manokwari Ina, Papua, Manokwari Ivory Coast, Africa Ivory Coast, Africa Ivory Coast, Africa Japan Japan Japan Big Big Big Big Big Big Small Small Small Small Small Small Small Small Small Small Small Small Big Big Small Small Big Small Big Small Small Big Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphism (AFLP) AFLP was carried out according to the protocol described in AFLP TM plant mapping (PE Applied Biosystems). Genomic DNA was digested with 5 units EcoRI and 1 unit MseI at 37oC for 6 hours, then ligated with 5 pmol EcoRI and 50 pmol MseI adaptor in a total volume of 20 µl by one weiss unit of T4 DNA ligase in a PCR core mix (dNTPs, MgCl2, PCR buffer, rTag polymerase; TOYOBO), then incubated for overnight at 16oC. Pre-amplification was performed in a total volume of 20 µl containing 3 µl DNA template, 0.125 µM EcoRI +A and MseI + C primers, 0.2 mM dNTPs, 0.4 unit rTag polymerase, 1.5 mM MgCl2 and 1x PCR buffer, and amplified on the thermocycler. The reaction condition was as follow: 25 cycles of 94 oC for 20 seconds, 56oC for 30 seconds and 72oC for 2 minutes; and one cycle of 60oC for 30 minutes. Pre-amplification product was then diluted ten times as template for selective amplification. It was carried out in a total volume of 20 ml consisted of 3 µl diluted pre-selective amplification product, 1 µl 10 pmol MseI and 1 µl 2 pmol EcoRI primer, 0.2 mM dNTPs, 1.5 mM MgCl2, 1x Rhizome color White White White White White White Red Red White White White White White White White White White White White White Red White White White White White White White Inner part color Yellowish cream Yellowish cream Yellowish cream Grayish cream Grayish cream Grayish cream Purple-red Light purple Yellowish cream Yellowish cream Yellowish cream Yellowish cream Yellowish cream Yellowish cream Yellowish cream Yellowish cream Yellowish cream Yellowish cream Grayish cream Light purple Yellowish cream Yellowish cream Grayish yellow Grayish cream Yellowish cream PCR buffer and 0.4 unit rTaq polymerase then performed on the following program: one cycle of denaturation at 94oC for 20 seconds, annealing at 65oC for 30 seconds and extension at 72oC for 2 minutes, followed by 8 cycles of a 1 oC decreasing annealing temperature per cycle, and 23 cycles of 94oC for 20 seconds, 65oC for 30 seconds and 72oC for 2 minutes and finally at 60 oC for 30 minutes. The final PCR products were separated on 5% denatured polyacrylamide gel and electrophoresed on ABI 373 sequencer (Perkins Elmer/Applied Biosystem, Foster, USA). Twenty one selective primer combinations were used in this study. Data scoring and analysis A band was considered polymorphic if it was present in at least one genotype and absent in the others. Each accession was scored for the present (1) or absent (0) of the polymorphic bands. Estimates of similarity were based on simple matching (SM) coefficient (Sokal and Michener 1958): Sij = a+d/a+b+c+d, where Sij is the similarity between two individuals (i and j), a is the 63 Genetic relationships among ginger accessions based on AFLP marker number of bands present both in i and j, b is the number of bands present in i and absent in j, c is the number of bands present in j and absent in i, and d is the number of bands absent both in i and j. The matrix of similarity was then clustered using unweighted pair group methods of arithmetic average (UPGMA) using NTSYS-pc version 2.1 (Exeter software). Diversity values were calculated for each locus as 1 - Σ pi 2 , where pi is the phenotypic frequency for each assay unit of AFLP primer combinations (Russell et al. 1997). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION AFLP analysis The bands produced by one primer combination with three E+nnn and M+nnnn of selective bases were ranging from 47 to 137 with an average of 96 bands (Table 2). Primer combinations of E-ATC/M-CAGA and AGA/CGGA perform the clearest amplified and polymorphic bands. Figure 1 shows an example of a gel image for the 28 accessions studied with the primer combination E-ATC/M-CAGA. A total of 221 polymorphic bands were obtained by AFLP analysis with the average of 10.5 polymorphic bands per primer combination or equal with 11.5%. Table 2. The amplified bands in ginger are generally not sharp and clear. It might be due to the large genome size of ginger (23,618 Mbp) (RBG Kew 2000). The achievement of polymorphic bands was relatively low (11.45%) compared with another plants such as 72.8% on wild radish (Man and Ohnishi 2002), 57.2% on apple (Goulao 2001), 42% on papaya (Kim et al. 2002), and 46.8% on barley (Russel et al. 1997). The genetic variation among 28 ginger accessions was estimated using pair-wise comparison of genetic similarity. The average pair-wise genetic similarity was 0.801, ranged from 0.527 to 0.992. About 37.3% of the pair-wise comparison among the ginger accessions exhibited genetic similarity greater than 0.90, and less than 16% showed genetic similarity 0.70. The most closely accessions sharing genetic similarity were big ginger D (accession collected from Wado, Sumedang, West Java) and E (accession collected from Salatiga, Central Java). Both of the places are the main production areas of ginger. Morphologically both accessions have similar performance. The lowest similarity was between small ginger K (accession collected from Garut, West Java) and Z (commercial ginger from Japan). The similarity matrix among the accessions is presented in Table 3. Number of polymorphic bands of ginger in each assay unit of AFLP. AFLP primer combination Number of amplified bands Number of polymorphic bands Percentage of polymorphic bands ACC/CAAG ACC/CAAC ACC/CAAT AAC/CACG AAC/CAAC AAC/CACA AAC/CAGA AAC/CAAT ATA/CAGA ATC/CGGA ATC/CGGT ATC/CTGA AGA/CAGA AGA/CTGA AGA/CGGA AGG/CATA AGG/CGGA AGG/CACG AAG/CAGA ACG/CAGA ACT/CAGA 96 105 83 120 92 105 123 130 80 75 79 90 135 111 92 47 86 62 106 60 137 12 4 14 12 4 23 8 11 14 10 12 16 12 17 7 5 8 8 9 9 6 12.50 3.81 16.86 10.00 4.35 21.90 6.50 8.46 17.50 13.3 15.19 17.78 8.89 15.32 7.61 10.64 9.30 12.90 8.33 15.00 4.38 96 60-137 10.523 4-23 Average Range 11.446 3.81-21.90 64 S. Wahyuni et al. l▼ Data point 2732 Size 285 bp Data point 2395 Size 250 bp l▼ Fig. 1. Gel image of AFLP of 28 ginger accessions produced by primer combination E-ATC/M-CAGA. The dendrogram based on UPGMA produced three major clusters (Fig. 2). The first cluster consisted of Japanese ginger, the second cluster consisted of all accessions of red and three accessions of small ginger, while the third cluster consisted of small ginger and big ginger. The correlation coefficient between the cophenetic matrix computed from the dendrogram and the original similarity matrix was 0.960 (t = 7.496, p = 1), suggesting very good fit of the three representations to the rough data value. Based on the cluster analysis, among red, small, and big types of ginger are not clearly defined. It is not in agreement with the common classification that distinguishes ginger into three types (big, small and red). In the second cluster, red ginger and some accessions of small ginger clustered together, while in the third cluster the small and big types of ginger are not well separated. Rhizome size and color were conspicious characters in ginger, but AFLP result showed that several accessions of small and big ginger were highly similar to each other genetically, and several accessions of small ginger genetically close to red ginger. The similar result was obtained in Musa sp. (Wong et al. 2001). Both Musa ssp. truncata and microcarpa have similar character which can be seen clearly in black pseudostem, but AFLP result showed that the two subspecies were genetically less similar to each other. Subspecies microcarpa (black stem with nonwaxy leaves) was genetically more similar to subspecies malaccensis (green stem with waxy leaves). These indicated that differences in morphological characters in ginger based on rhizome size 65 Genetic relationships among ginger accessions based on AFLP marker Table 3. Genetic similarity between 28 ginger accessions. A 1.000 0.954 0.946 0.925 0.934 0.946 0.701 0.698 0.929 0.693 0.693 0.905 0.917 0.909 0.781 0.905 B C D E F G H I J K L A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P 1.000 0.950 0.963 0.971 0.967 0.722 0.736 0.934 0.739 0.714 0.950 0.946 0.954 0.824 0.934 1.000 0.954 0.963 0.950 0.722 0.728 0.909 0.730 0.722 0.917 0.938 0.946 0.820 0.909 1.000 0.992 0.963 0.726 0.732 0.913 0.743 0.718 0.946 0.942 0.950 0.820 0.929 1.000 0.971 0.726 0.740 0.921 0.751 0.726 0.946 0.942 0.959 0.828 0.921 1.000 0.722 0.745 0.925 0.747 0.730 0.950 0.938 0.963 0.828 0.934 1.000 0.940 0.705 0.925 0.917 0.722 0.718 0.726 0.601 0.722 1.000 0.702 0.940 0.923 0.728 0.740 0.749 0.621 0.715 1.000 0.722 0.705 0.909 0.929 0.946 0.811 0.950 1.000 0.959 0.730 0.743 0.759 0.627 0.730 1.000 0.714 0.734 0.751 0.601 0.722 1.000 0.954 0.963 0.825 0.934 Q R S T U V W X Y Z AA AB A 0.913 0.871 0.921 0.913 0.672 0.697 0.876 0.867 0.880 0.643 0.676 0.871 B 0.917 0.909 0.943 0.950 0.701 0.718 0.916 0.896 0.884 0.680 0.722 0.909 C 0.884 0.884 0.943 0.917 0.710 0.710 0.903 0.896 0.834 0.656 0.689 0.892 D 0.913 0.913 0.947 0.929 0.714 0.722 0.898 0.892 0.855 0.676 0.718 0.913 E 0.913 0.913 0.947 0.929 0.714 0.722 0.898 0.892 0.855 0.676 0.718 0.913 F 0.925 0.917 0.961 0.942 0.710 0.726 0.898 0.896 0.867 0.680 0.714 0.917 G 0.705 0.714 0.719 0.714 0.913 0.913 0.673 0.701 0.647 0.544 0.552 0.680 H 0.719 0.719 0.730 0.719 0.885 0.902 0.677 0.698 0.643 0.562 0.570 0.694 I 0.942 0.892 0.943 0.934 0.693 0.693 0.898 0.896 0.900 0.656 0.705 0.884 J 0.739 0.730 0.732 0.722 0.896 0.896 0.690 0.710 0.656 0.535 0.560 0.705 K 0.739 0.730 0.728 0.714 0.905 0.896 0.673 0.701 0.647 0.527 0.535 0.680 L 0.925 0.934 0.965 0.950 0.710 0.718 0.912 0.905 0.876 0.689 0.722 0.925 M 1.000 0.975 0.820 0.946 0.929 0.929 0.961 0.963 0.722 0.730 0.929 0.917 0.880 0.685 0.718 0.921 N O P Q R S T U V W X M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z AA AB 1.000 0.845 0.954 0.938 0.938 0.978 0.963 0.730 0.730 0.929 0.925 0.880 0.693 0.734 0.929 1.000 0.820 0.785 0.833 0.832 0.811 0.588 0.579 0.826 0.798 0.725 0.584 0.605 0.790 1.000 0.934 0.917 0.952 0.959 0.710 0.710 0.898 0.905 0.884 0.656 0.705 0.900 1.000 0.942 0.943 0.925 0.685 0.710 0.876 0.880 0.900 0.656 0.705 0.892 1.000 0.939 0.917 0.685 0.701 0.876 0.888 0.851 0.672 0.697 0.909 1.000 0.961 0.715 0.711 0.934 0.921 0.890 0.693 0.719 0.939 1.000 0.718 0.718 0.929 0.921 0.892 0.672 0.714 0.925 1.000 0.934 0.690 0.730 0.643 0.556 0.564 0.701 1.000 0.690 0.705 0.668 0.548 0.581 0.710 1.000 0.942 0.881 0.681 0.717 0.934 1.000 0.871 0.710 0.734 0.938 Y 1.000 0.697 0.730 0.892 Z AA AB Y Z AA AB 1.000 0.859 0.722 1.000 0.763 1.000 66 S. Wahyuni et al. B. Sukabumi B. Cianjur B. Boyolali B. Sumedang B. Salatiga B. Garut S. Majalengka S. Cianjur S. Boyolali B. Wado B. Bogor S. Cisewu S. Sukabumi S. Boyolali S. Salatiga B. Africa S. Africa B. Japan S. Africa S. Wado R. Sukabumi R. Cianjur S. Sumedang S. Garut S. Papua R. Papua S. Japan S. Japan 0.66 0.74 0.83 0.91 0.99 Coefficient Fig. 2. Dendrogram of 28 ginger accessions generated by AFLP analysis; S = small ginger, B = big ginger, R = red ginger. and color are not always an indication of the similarity or difference in DNA marker (AFLP). The level of genetic variation among ginger accessions tested was low, revealed by diversity index value of only 0.22 from the AFLP data. This was comparable with clonally propagated species such Elymus repens, D = 0.33 (Szczepaniak et al. 2002) or Potentilla spp., D = 0.20 (Hansen et al. 2000). The low genetic variation of ginger was possibly caused by the mode of ginger propagation which is mostly propagated by rhizome. Ginger sometimes produced flower, but rarely beared fruit (Purseglove et al. 1981). By AFLP analysis, genetic variation within small ginger (Ht = 0.255) was broader compared with big ginger (Ht = 0.079). Big ginger was collected from 7 locations, while small ginger from 9 locations and mostly from West Java. The Sundanese (West Java tribe) call jahe badak (means big) for their garden plantation to distinguish it from the common ginger which run wild (Burkill 1935). Later big ginger is popular to the farmer and widely cultivated for export purposes. On the other hand small ginger is usually cultivated for domestic uses such a cooking spice and medicinal purpose. Farmer provided their own seed for small ginger, and trade over region sometimes for big ginger. It is more fare understandable why the diversity index of big ginger was lower than that of small ginger. Marker specific to accession There is no unique molecular marker band which can be used to distinguish red, small or big ginger. Not all primer pairs produced specific bands. The specific bands produced by certain primer combination were only detected on small ginger accessions collected from Wado (O) (Fig. 3). A specific band related to red ginger was also observed, but only one band, one primer combination and not a major band, so it was not reliably used for marker yet. Mostly unique bands were on red ginger included some accessions of small ginger (Table 4). Both the red and small types of ginger which have the same specific marker bands, morphologically have similar shape and size of rhizome and smaller compared to others. 67 Genetic relationships among ginger accessions based on AFLP marker 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Fig. 3. Specific molecular bands (arrow) of small ginger collected from Wado (15) with ATC/CAGA primer (lower) and ATC/ CGGA (upper). Table 4. Molecular marker bands specific to certain accession of ginger. Accession Red ginger and 3 accessions of small ginger Small ginger collected from Wado Red ginger Primer combinations Number of specific bands ATC/CGGA ATC/CGGT AGA/CTGA AGA/CGGA ATC/CTGA ATC/CAGA AAC/CACA ACC/CAAT ATC/CAGA AGG/CGGA ATC/CGGA AAC/CACA 2 1 4 2 2 1 2 4 1 2 3 1 CONCLUSION Based on AFLP marker, the 28 ginger accessions could be classified into three major clusters. The red ginger was genetically far from the big ginger, but close to Size (kb) 154.2; 223.2 81.53 80.4; 158.2; 183.8; 225 82; 292.4 68.9; 108.4. 108.1 248.8; 46. 279.4; 329.8; 331.9; 431.5. 285.5 113.4; 202.4 105; 108; 162.4 > 500 some accessions of small ginger. There was no clear genetic differentiation between the small and big types of ginger. The genetic diversity of small ginger (H = 0.25) is higher than that of the big ginger (Ht = 0.08). Specific molecular marker bands of small ginger accessions collected from Wado can be recognized. 68 S. Wahyuni et al. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial and technical support by JIRCAS (Japan International Centre for Agrobiological Sciences) for this research. REFERENCES Bermawie, N., S.F. Syahid, E.A. Hadad, Hobir, N. Ajijah, and D. Rukmana. 2001. Evaluation of adaptation of promising line of ginger on several agroecologycal conditions. Research Report. Research Institute for Spices and Medicinal Crops, Bogor. Burkill, I.H. 1935. A Dictionary of the Economic Products of the Malay Peninsula. Univ. Press. Oxford, London. Vol. II. 2401 pp. Camacho, F.J. and A. Liston. 2001. Population structure and genetic diversity of Botrychium pumicula (Ophioglossaceae) based on inter simple sequence repeats (ISSR). Amer. J. Bot. 88(6): 1065-1070. De Guzman, C.C. and J.S. Siemonsma. 1999. Plant Resources of South East Asia No. 13: Spices. Prosea, Bogor, Indonesia. 400 pp. Doyle, J.J. and J.L. Doyle. 1990. Isolation of plant DNA from fresh tissue. Focus 12(1): 13-15. Guolao, L., L. Cabrita, C.M. Oleiveira, and J.M. Leitao. 2001. Comparing RAPD and AFLP TM analysis in discrimination and estimation of genetic similarities among apple (Malus domestica Borkh.) cultivars. Euphytica 119: 259270. Hansen, K.T., R. Elven, and C. Brochman. 2000. Molecules and morphology in concert: Tests some hypotheses in arctic Potentilla (Rosaceae). Amer. J. Bot. 87: 1466-1479. Kim, M.S., P.H. Moore, F. Zee, M.M.M. Fitch, D.L. Steiger, R.M. Manshardt, R.E. Paull, R.A. Drew, T. Sekioka, and R. Ming. 2002. Genetic diversity of Carica papaya as revealed by AFLP markers. Genome 45: 503-512. Lai, J.A., W. Yang, and J.Y. Hsiao. 2001. An assessment of genetic relationships in cultivated tea clones and native wild tea in Taiwan using RAPD and ISSR markers. Bot. Bull. Acad. Sin. 42: 93-100. Lombard, V., C.P. Baril, P. Dubreuil, F. Blouet, and D. Zhang. 1999. Potential use of AFLP markers for the distinction of rapeseed cultivars. Proceeding of the 10 th International Rapeseed Congress, Canberra, Australia. Mace, E.S., R.N. Lester, and C.G. Gebhardt. 1999. AFLP analysis of genetic relationships among the cultivated eggplant, Solanum melongena L. and wild relatives (Solanaceae). Theor. Appl. Genet. 99: 626-633. Man, K.H. and O. Ohnishi. 2002. Genetic diversity and genetic relationships of East Asian natural populations of wild radish revealed by AFLP. Breed. Sci. 52: 79-88. Manubens, A., S. Lobos, Y. Jadue, M. Toro, R. Messina, M. Lladser, and D. Seelenfreund. 1999. DNA isolation and AFLP fingerprinting of nectarine and peach varieties (Prunus persica). Plant Mol. Biol. Rep. 17: 255-267. Mondal, T.K. 2002. Assessment of genetic diversity of tea (Camelia sinensis L. O. Kuntze) by inter-sequence repeated polymerase reaction. Euphytica 128: 307-315. Purseglove, J.W., E.G. Brown, C.L. Green, and S.R.J. Robbins. 1981. Spices. London and New York. pp. 447-531. Rostiana, O., A. Abdullah, Taryono, dan E.A. Hadad. 1990. Jenis-jenis tanaman jahe. Edisi Khusus Penelitian Tanaman Rempah dan Obat VII(1): 7-10. Rugayah. 1994. Taxonomic status of white and red ginger. Floribunda 1(14): 53-56. RBG Kew. 2000. Angiosperm C-value database: Zingiber officinale. Russel, J.R., J.D. Fuller, M. Macaulay, B.G. Hatz, A. Jahoor, W. Powell, and R. Waugh. 1997. Direct comparison of levels of genetic variation among barley accessions detected by RFLPs, AFLPs, SSRs and RAPDs. Theor. Appl. Genet. 95: 714-722. Sokal, R.R. and Michener. 1958. A statistical method for evaluating systematic relationships. Univ. Kans. Sci. Bull. 38: 1409-1438. Szczepaniak, M., C. Cieslak, and P.T. Bednarek. 2002. Morphological and AFLP variation of Elymus repens (L.) Gould (Poaceae). Cell. Mol. Biol. Lett. 7: 547-558. Ude, G., M. Pillay, D. Nwakanma, and A. Tenkouano. 2002. Genetic diversity in Musa acuminata Colla and Musa balbisiana Colla and some of their natural hybrids using AFLP markers. Theor. Appl. Genet. 104: 1246-1252. Valeton, T. 1918. New note of the Zingiberaceae of Java and Malaya. Bull. Jard. Bot. Buitenz. II(27): 128-148. Vos, P., R. Hogers, M. Bleeker, M. Reijans, T. Van de Lee, M. Hornes, A. Frijters, J. Pot, J. Peleman, M. Kuiper, and M. Zabeau. 1995. AFLP: a new tehnique for DNA finger printing. Nuc. Acids Res. 23(21): 4407-4414. Wong, C., R. Kiew, J.P. Loh, L.H. Gan, O. Set, S.K. Lee, S. Lum, and Y.Y. Gan. 2001. Genetic diversity of the wild banana Musa acuminata Colla in Malaysia as evidenced by AFLP. Annals Bot. 88: 1017-1025.