Back to all available

Exploring the phenotypic diversity and core collection construction of Ziziphus jujuba var. spinosa featuring varying flower types

agricultural-science
biodiversity
plant-science
population-biology

Abstract

Background. Ziziphus jujuba var. spinosa is an ecologically valuable tree species. However, most investigations have concentrated on the leaves and fruits. There is insufficient focus on investigating the genetic diversity and morphological characteristics of wild jujube floral organs. This deficiency may hinder studies on their development, utilization, and conservation of genetic resources.

Methods. We investigated the floral traits of 205 sour jujube clones from 30 distinct geographic origins. Multivariate statistical methods were applied to analyze phenotypic characteristics, explore the sources of phenotypic variation, and determine patterns of geographical variation. Furthermore, a core collection specifically for floral organ research was established. These findings will contribute to evaluating the diversity of wild jujube resources.

Results. The results demonstrated significant diversity and variation in the floral organs of sour jujube. The average coefficient of variation for quantitative and qualitative traits was 25.30% and 37.85%, respectively, while the mean diversity index (H′) for quantitative traits (1.68) was higher than that for qualitative traits (0.81). Variation among provenances was the primary source of diversity, with the mean phenotypic differentiation coefficient for the quantitative traits of sour jujube reaching 71.32%. Size-related traits, including flower diameter, flower area, and flower disc diameter, were primarily influenced by temperature, exhibiting extremely significant positive correlations with the annual, January, and July average temperatures. Principal component analysis extracted six principal components, collectively accounting for 73.14% of the total variance. The 205 clones were classified into five breeding groups: A and B for small- and large-flowered ornamental varieties, C for high-yield potential, and E for nectar-rich types with large disc areas. A specialized core collection of 51 accessions for the study of floral organs was constructed using a stepwise clustering approach. This study systematically explored the variation patterns of floral organ phenotypic traits in sour jujube, providing valuable insights for the evaluation, genetic improvement, scientific management, and effective utilization of sour jujube germplasm resources.

Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].