Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Genetika Rus 2007 Gavrilenko
Genetika Rus 2007 Gavrilenko
1–6
ÉÖçÖíàäÄ êÄëíÖçàâ
ìÑä 635.21: 631.527.52: 575.13
1
2 ɇ‚ËÎÂÌÍÓ Ë ‰.
‡ ·
M 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 M 1 2 3 4 5
W
8
7
6
400 Ô.Ó T
‚ „
M 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 M
α
0
1 0
500 Ô.Ó
β 1500 Ô.Ó
ÒÚ‚ÂÌÌ˚ı ÒÓÚÓ‚ ÔÓ Ò‡‚ÌÂÌ˲ Ò Á‡Û·ÂÊÌ˚ÏË Solanum L. [8], Û ÒÓÚÓ‚ ·˚ÎË Ó·Ì‡ÛÊÂÌ˚ ÚÓθÍÓ
·˚Î ‚ 2 ‡Á‡ ÌËÊ (4.8 Ë 11.6% ÒÓÓÚ‚ÂÚÒÚ‚ÂÌÌÓ) ÚË ‡ÎÎÂÎfl (α, β Ë 0). ç‡ÍÓ̈, Û ÒÓÚÓ‚ ÔËÒÛÚ-
(Ú‡·Îˈ‡). ÒÚ‚Ó‚‡ÎË ‰‚ ‡ÎÎÂÎfl ÎÓÍÛÒ‡ atp6 ÏÚÑçä (0 Ë 1), ‚
ÚÓ ‚ÂÏfl Í‡Í Û ËÁÛ˜ÂÌÌ˚ı ‚ˉӂ – ÚË ‡ÎÎÂÎfl (0, 1
Ë 2) [8]. çÂÓ·ıÓ‰ËÏÓ ÓÚÏÂÚËÚ¸, ˜ÚÓ „ÛÔÔ˚ ÓÚ˜Â-
éÅëìÜÑÖçàÖ ÒÚ‚ÂÌÌ˚ı Ë Á‡Û·ÂÊÌ˚ı ÒÓÚÓ‚ ÒÚ‡ÚËÒÚ˘ÂÒÍË ÌÂ
èÓÎÛ˜ÂÌÌ˚ ÂÁÛθڇÚ˚ Û͇Á˚‚‡˛Ú ̇ ÌÂÁ̇- ‡Á΢‡ÎËÒ¸ ÔÓ ˜‡ÒÚÓÚ‡Ï ‚ÒÚ˜‡ÂÏÓÒÚË ‡ÎÎÂÎÂÈ
˜ËÚÂθÌ˚È ÛÓ‚Â̸ ÔÓÎËÏÓÙËÁχ Ó„‡ÌÂθÌ˚ı ËÁÛ˜ÂÌÌ˚ı ÎÓÍÛÒÓ‚ ıÎ- Ë ÏÚÑç: ‚ Ó·ÂËı „ÛÔÔ‡ı
Ñçä Û ÒÂÎÂ͈ËÓÌÌ˚ı ÒÓÚÓ‚ ͇ÚÓÙÂÎfl. èÓ‰‡‚- ÔÂӷ·‰‡˛˘ËÏ ·˚Î „‡ÔÎÓÚËÔ I (Ú‡·Îˈ‡).
Îfl˛˘Â ˜ËÒÎÓ ÒÓÚÓ‚ (91 ËÁ 98 ËÁÛ˜ÂÌÌ˚ı, ËÎË
92.9%) ÓÚÌÓÒËÎËÒ¸ Î˯¸ Í ‰‚ÛÏ „‡ÔÎÓÚËÔ‡Ï (I Ë è˘ËÌ˚ ÔÂӷ·‰‡ÌËfl Û ÒÂÎÂ͈ËÓÌÌ˚ı ÒÓ-
II), ËÁ ÌËı 62 ÒÓÚ‡ (63.3%) ËÏÂÎË Ó‰ËÌ Ë ÚÓÚ Ê ÚÓ‚ “ÍÛθÚÛÌÓ„Ó” ÚËÔ‡ ˆËÚÓÔ·ÁÏ˚ („‡ÔÎÓÚËÔ I)
“ÍÛθÚÛÌ˚È” ÚËÔ ˆËÚÓÔ·ÁÏ˚ („‡ÔÎÓÚËÔ I). Ó·˙flÒÌflÂÚ ‡Ì‡ÎËÁ Ëı Ó‰ÓÒÎÓ‚Ì˚ı [6]. ä‡Í ·˚ÎÓ
ÓÚϘÂÌÓ ‚˚¯Â, ·ÓΠ1000 ÒÂÎÂ͈ËÓÌÌ˚ı ÒÓÚÓ‚
ëÚÂÔÂ̸ „ËÒÚËÛÂÏÓ„Ó ÔÓÎËÏÓÙËÁχ Û ÔÓËÒıÓ‰flÚ ÓÚ ÒÓÚ‡ Early Rose, fl‚Îfl˛˘Â„ÓÒfl ÒÂ-
ÒÓÚÓ‚ ͇ÚÓÙÂÎfl, ‚˚fl‚ÎÂÌ̇fl ‚ ̇ÒÚÓfl˘ÂÈ ‡·Ó- fl̈ÂÏ ÒÓÚ‡ Garnet Chili, ÔÓËÁ‚Ó‰ÌÓ„Ó ÒÓÚ‡
ÚÂ, Ó͇Á‡Î‡Ò¸ Á̇˜ËÚÂθÌÓ ÌËÊÂ, ˜ÂÏ ËÁÏÂ̘Ë- Rough Purple Chili – Ô‰ÔÓÎÓÊËÚÂθÌÓ ˜ËÎËÈÒÍÓ-
‚ÓÒÚ¸ ÚÂı Ê ˆËÚÓÔ·ÁχÚ˘ÂÒÍËı ÎÓÍÛÒÓ‚, ӷ̇- „Ó ‡·ÓË„ÂÌÌÓ„Ó Ó·‡Áˆ‡ (ËÌÚÓ‰Û͈Ëfl Éۉ˘‡
ÛÊÂÌ̇fl ‡ÌÂÂ Û ‚ˉӂ Ó‰‡ Solanum L. [8]. í‡Í, 1853 „.), Ëϲ˘Â„Ó “ÍÛθÚÛÌ˚È” ÚËÔ ˆËÚÓÔ·Á-
ÂÒÎË Û ÒÓÚÓ‚ ͇ÚÓÙÂÎfl ‚˚fl‚ÎÂÌ˚ ÚÓθÍÓ ÚË Ï˚. ùÚÓÚ Ê ÚËÔ ˆËÚÓÔ·ÁÏ˚ ËÏÂÂÚ ÔÓ‰‡‚Îfl˛˘ÂÂ
‡ÎÎÂÎfl Ô·ÒÚˉÌÓ„Ó ÎÓÍÛÒ‡ trnG/trnR (6, 7, 8), ÚÓ Û ˜ËÒÎÓ ˜ËÎËÈÒÍËı ‡·ÓË„ÂÌÌ˚ı ÒÓÚÓ‚ S. tuberos-
ËÁÛ˜ÂÌÌ˚ı ‚ˉӂ Ó‰‡ Solanum L. ӷ̇ÛÊÂÌ˚ ‚Ó- um subsp. tuberosum [10, 15, 22].
ÒÂϸ ‡ÎÎÂÎÂÈ ˝ÚÓ„Ó ÎÓÍÛÒ‡ (1–8) [8]. Ä̇Îӄ˘ÌÓ,
Û ÒÓÚÓ‚ ͇ÚÓÙÂÎfl ·˚ÎË ‚˚fl‚ÎÂÌ˚ ÚÓθÍÓ ‰‚‡ àÁÛ˜ÂÌË ˆËÔÓÍÌ˚ı „˷ˉӂ, ÔÓÎÛ˜ÂÌÌ˚ı
‡ÎÎÂÎfl Ô·ÒÚˉÌÓ„Ó ÎÓÍÛÒ‡ atpE (í Ë W), ‡ Û ‚ˉӂ ‚ ÏÂÊ- Ë ‚ÌÛÚ˂ˉӂ˚ı (c S. tuberosum subsp. an-
‰‡ÌÌ˚È ÎÓÍÛÒ ·˚Î Ô‰ÒÚ‡‚ÎÂÌ ˜ÂÚ˚¸Ïfl ‡ÎÎÂÎfl- digena) ÒÍ¢˂‡ÌËflı ˜ËÎËÈÒÍËı Ó·‡ÁˆÓ‚, ‚˚-
ÏË [8]. àÁ ‚ÓÒ¸ÏË ‡ÎÎÂÎÂÈ ÏËÚÓıÓ̉ˇθÌÓ„Ó ÎÓ- fl‚ËÎÓ ÔÓÎÓÊËÚÂθÌÓ ‚ÎËflÌË “ÍÛθÚÛÌÓ„Ó” ÚË-
ÍÛÒ‡ rps10, ‚˚fl‚ÎÂÌÌ˚ı ̇ÏË Û ‚ˉӂ Ó‰‡ Ô‡ ˆËÚÓÔ·ÁÏ˚ ̇ ÛÓʇÈÌÓÒÚ¸ ‡ÒÚÂÌËÈ, Ò Ó‰ÌÓÈ
ÒÚÓÓÌ˚ [23, 24], Ë Ë̉ÛÍˆË˛ Ô˚θˆÂ‚ÓÈ ÒÚÂËθ- ê‰ÍË Ê „‡ÔÎÓÚËÔ˚ ÒÚ‡Ó‰‡‚ÌËı ÒÓÚÓ‚ Ò‚fl-
ÌÓÒÚË Û ÒÙÓÏËÓ‚‡‚¯ËıÒfl „˷ˉӂ, Ò ‰Û„ÓÈ Á‡Ì˚ Ò ‰Û„ËÏË ÌÂÁ‡‚ËÒËÏ˚ÏË ËÌÚÓ‰Û͈ËflÏË ÌÂ-
[25, 26]. ùÚË Í‡˜ÂÒÚ‚‡ ˜ËÎËÈÒÍË ‡·ÓË„ÂÌÌ˚ ӉÒÚ‚ÂÌÌ˚ı Ó·‡ÁˆÓ‚ ˛ÊÌÓ‡ÏÂË͇ÌÒÍÓ„Ó Í‡-
ÒÓÚ‡ S. tuberosum subsp. tuberosum, Ú‡Í ÊÂ Í‡Í Ë ÚÓÙÂÎfl. ç‡ÔËÏÂ, ÒÓÚ Paul Wagner („‡ÔÎÓÚËÔ
ÒÓÚ Early Rose, Ô‰‡‚‡ÎË ‚ÒÂÏ Ò‚ÓËÏ ÔÓÚÓÏÍ‡Ï VI) ÔÓÎÛ˜ËÎ ˆËÚÓÔ·ÁÏÛ ÔÓ Ï‡ÚÂËÌÒÍÓÈ ÎËÌËË ÓÚ
ÔÓ Ï‡ÚÂËÌÒÍÓÈ ÎËÌËË [25, 26]. èÓ˝ÚÓÏÛ ÔË ÒÓ- ÒÓÚ‡ Industrie, ‚ÓÒıÓ‰fl˘Â„Ó ÔÓ Ï‡ÚÂËÌÒÍÓÈ ÎË-
Á‰‡ÌËË ‚˚ÒÓÍÓÛÓʇÈÌ˚ı ÒÓÚÓ‚ Ô‰ÔÓ˜ÚËÚÂθ- ÌËË Í Erste von Nassengrund – ÒÓÚÛ ÒÚ‡ÓÈ ÍÓÌÚË-
ÌÓ ·˚ÎÓ ËÒÔÓθÁÓ‚‡Ú¸ Early Rose ‚ ͇˜ÂÒڂ χÚÂ- ÌÂÌڇθÌÓ-‚ÓÔÂÈÒÍÓÈ „ÛÔÔ˚, ·ÂÛ˘ÂÈ Ò‚Ó ̇-
ËÌÒÍÓÈ ÙÓÏ˚, ‡ ÔÓÎÛ˜ÂÌÌ˚ ‚ ÒÍ¢˂‡ÌËflı Ò ˜‡ÎÓ ÓÚ S. tuberosum subsp. andigena ËÁ Ô‚˚ı ËÒ-
Early Rose ‡ÒÚÂÌËfl ӷ·‰‡ÎË ÒÚÂËθÌÓÈ Ô˚θ- Ô‡ÌÒÍËı ËÌÚÓ‰Û͈ËÈ 1580–1600 „„. [6]. ëÚ‡˚È
ˆÓÈ Ë ÔÓ˝ÚÓÏÛ ÏÓ„ÎË ‚ ‰‡Î¸ÌÂȯÂÏ ËÒÔÓθÁÓ‚‡Ú¸- ÒÓÚ Flourball, Ëϲ˘ËÈ „‡ÔÎÓÚËÔ VII, ·ÎËÁÓÍ Í
Òfl ÚÓθÍÓ ‚ ͇˜ÂÒÚ‚Â ÊÂÌÒÍÓ„Ó Ó‰ËÚÂÎfl. í‡ÍËÏ „ÛÔÔ Daber – ·ÓΠ‡ÌÌÂÈ ËÌÚÓ‰Û͈ËË 1830-ı
Ó·‡ÁÓÏ, ˝ÙÙÂÍÚ˚ “ÍÛθÚÛÌÓ„Ó” ÚËÔ‡ ˆËÚÓÔ·Á- „Ó‰Ó‚. чÌÌ˚È ÒÓÚ ÙÂÚËÎÂÌ Ë ËÒÔÓθÁÓ‚‡ÎÒfl ‚
Ï˚ ̇ ÛÓʇÈÌÓÒÚ¸ ‡ÒÚÂÌËÈ Ë ÒÚÂËθÌÓÒÚ¸ ÒÍ¢˂‡ÌËflı ÔÂËÏÛ˘ÂÒÚ‚ÂÌÌÓ Ò ÓÚˆÓ‚ÒÍÓÈ ÒÚÓ-
Ô˚θˆ˚ „˷ˉӂ fl‚ËÎËÒ¸ Ô˘ËÌÓÈ ¯ËÓÍÓ„Ó ÓÌ˚ [6], ÔÓ˝ÚÓÏÛ ÒÂ‰Ë ÒÓ‚ÂÏÂÌÌÓ„Ó ÒÓÚËÏÂÌ-
‡ÒÔÓÒÚ‡ÌÂÌËfl ‰‡ÌÌÓ„Ó ÚËÔ‡ ˆËÚÓÔ·ÁÏ˚ ÒÂ‰Ë Ú‡ Â„Ó ˆËÚÓÔ·Áχ Ì ÔÓÎۘ˷ ¯ËÓÍÓ„Ó ‡ÒÔÓ-
ÒÂÎÂ͈ËÓÌÌ˚ı ÒÓÚÓ‚ ͇ÚÓÙÂÎfl. ÒÚ‡ÌÂÌËfl.
Ä̇ÎËÁ Ó‰ÓÒÎÓ‚Ì˚ı ÒÓÚÓ‚ Ò “‰ËÍËÏË” ÚËÔ‡- tuberosum L. subsp. andigena Hawkes) evaluated by
ÏË ˆËÚÓÔ·ÁÏ („‡ÔÎÓÚËÔ˚ II Ë III) Ë Â‰ÍËı „‡ÔÎÓ- chloroplast and nuclear DNA markers // Genome. 2005.
ÚËÔÓ‚ (IV–VIII) ÔÓ͇Á‡Î, ˜ÚÓ ÔÓ Ï‡ÚÂËÌÒÍÓÈ ÎË- V. 48. P. 55–64.
ÌËË Ú‡ÍË ÒÓÚ‡ Ó·˚˜ÌÓ ‚ÓÒıÓ‰flÚ Í „˷ˉ‡Ï 12. Hosaka K. Who is the mother of the potato? – restriction
S. tuberosum subsp. tuberosum Ò Ó‰ÌËÏ ËÎË ÌÂÒÍÓθ- endonuclease analysis of chloroplast DNA of cultivated
ÍËÏË ÍÛθÚÛÌ˚ÏË Ë/ËÎË ‰ËÍËÏË ‚ˉ‡ÏË: S. tubero- potatoes // Theor. Appl. Genet. 1986. V. 72. P. 606–618.
sum subsp. andigena (Paul Wagner), S. acaule (Alaska 13. Lossl A., Adler N., Horn R. et al. Chondriome-type char-
acterization of potato: mt α, β, γ, ε and novel plastid-mi-
Frostless), S. demissum (ÇÂÒÂÎÓ‚ÒÍËÈ 2–4, ç‚ÒÍËÈ, tochondrial configurations in somatic hybrids // Theor.
ÄË̇, ÅflÌÒ͇fl ÌÓ‚ËÌ͇) Ë fl‰ÓÏ ‰Û„Ëı. ÅÓθ- Appl. Genet. 1999. V. 98. P. 1–10.
¯ËÌÒÚ‚Ó ÒÓÚÓ‚ Ò “‰ËÍËÏ” ÚËÔÓÏ ˆËÚÓÔ·ÁÏ˚ ·˚- 14. Hosaka K. T-type chloroplast DNA in Solanum tubero-
ÎË ÒÓÁ‰‡Ì˚ Á‡ ÔÓÒΉÌË 40 ÎÂÚ, ÍÓ„‰‡ ‚ ÒÂÎÂ͈ËË sum L. ssp. tuberosum was conferred from some popula-
͇ÚÓÙÂÎfl Òڇ· ¯ËÓÍÓ ËÒÔÓθÁÓ‚‡Ú¸Òfl ÏÂÊ‚Ë- tions of S. tarijense Hawkes // Amer. J. Potato Res.
‰Ó‚‡fl „˷ˉËÁ‡ˆËfl. é‰Ì‡ÍÓ, Í‡Í ÛÊ ÓÚϘ‡ÎÓÒ¸ 2003. V. 80. P. 21–32.
‚˚¯Â, ˜ËÒÎÓ ‰ËÍËı ‚ˉӂ, ÒÔÓÒÓ·Ì˚ı ÒÍ¢˂‡Ú¸- 15. Hosaka K., Hanneman R.E. The origin of the cultivated
Òfl Ò ‚ÓÁ‰ÂÎ˚‚‡ÂÏ˚Ï Í‡ÚÓÙÂÎÂÏ, ˜ÂÁ‚˚˜‡ÈÌÓ potato based on chloroplast DNA // Theor. Appl. Genet.
Ó„‡Ì˘ÂÌÓ ËÁ-Á‡ ·‡¸ÂÓ‚ ÌÂÒÓ‚ÏÂÒÚËÏÓÒÚË. ê‡Ò- 1988. V. 76. P. 172–176.
¯ËÂÌ˲ „ÂÌÂÚ˘ÂÒÍÓ„Ó ‡ÁÌÓÓ·‡ÁËfl ÒÓÚÓ‚ 16. Powell W., Baird E., Duncan N., Waugh R. Chloroplast
͇ÚÓÙÂÎfl, ‚ ÚÓÏ ˜ËÒÎÂ Ë ÔÓ ˆËÚÓÔ·ÁχÚ˘ÂÒÍËÏ DNA variability in old and recently introduced potato
Ù‡ÍÚÓ‡Ï, ÏÓ„ÛÚ ÒÔÓÒÓ·ÒÚ‚Ó‚‡Ú¸ ÒÓ‚ÂÏÂÌÌ˚ cultivars // Ann. Appl. Biol. 1993. V. 123. P. 403–410.
ÏÂÚÓ‰˚ ·ËÓÚÂıÌÓÎÓ„ËË, ‚ ˜‡ÒÚÌÓÒÚË, ÏÂÚÓ‰˚ ÒÓ- 17. Prowan J., Powell W., Dewar H. et al. An extreme cyto-
plasmic bottleneck in the modern European cultivated
χÚ˘ÂÒÍÓÈ „˷ˉËÁ‡ˆËË ‡ÒÚÂÌËÈ [27]. potato (Solanum tuberosum) is not reflected in decreased
ꇷÓÚ‡ ‚˚ÔÓÎÌÂ̇ ÔË ÔÓ‰‰ÂÊÍ êîîà levels of nuclear diversity // Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. 1999.
(„‡ÌÚ ‹ 06-04-08352 ). V. 266. P. 633–639.
18. Waugh R., Glendinning D.R., Dunkan N., Powell W.
Chloroplast DNA variation in European potato culti-
ëèàëéä ãàíÖêÄíìêõ vars// Potato Res. 1990. V. 33. P. 505–513.
1. Hawkes J.G. The Potato, Evolution, Biodiversity and 19. Wienand U., Feix G. Zein specific restriction enzyme
Genetic Resources. L.: Belhaven, 1990. 260 p. fragments of maize DNA // FEBS Letters. 1980. V. 116.
2. Davidse L.C., Henken J., van Dalen A. et al. Nine years P. 14–16.
of practical experience with phenylamide resistance in 20. Bryan G.J., McNicoll J., Ramsay G. et al. Polymorphic
the Netherlands // Netherlands J. Plant Pathol. 1989. simple sequences repeat markers in chloroplast genomes
V. 95. P. 197–213. of Solanaceous plants // Theor. Appl. Genet. 1999.
3. Mendoza H.A., Haynes F.L. Genetic relationship among V. 99. P. 859–867.
potato cultivars grown in the United States // Hort- 21. ã‡ÍËÌ É.î. ÅËÓÏÂÚËfl. å.: Ç˚Ò¯. ¯ÍÓ·, 1980.
science. 1974. V. 9. P. 328–330. 294 Ò.
4. Ross H. Potato Breeding – problems and perspectives. 22. ò‚‡˜ÍÓ ç.Ä., ÄÌÚÓÌÓ‚‡ é.û., äÓÒÚË̇ ã.à., ɇ‚-
Berlin: Paul Parey, 1986. 132 p. ËÎÂÌÍÓ í.Ä. èÓÎËÏÓÙËÁÏ fl‰ÂÌÓÈ Ë ˆËÚÓÔ·Á-
5. Salaman R.N. The history and the social influence of the χÚ˘ÂÒÍËı Ñçä Û ‡·ÓË„ÂÌÌ˚ı ˜ËÎËÈÒÍËı ÒÓÚÓ‚
potato // Revised impression / Ed. Hawkes J.G. Cam- S. tuberosum ssp. tuberosum // ëÓ‚ÂÏÂÌÌÓÂ ÒÓÒÚÓfl-
bridge (U.K): Cambridge Univ. Press, 1985. ÌËÂ Ë ÔÂÒÔÂÍÚË‚˚ ‡Á‚ËÚËfl ÒÂÎÂ͈ËË Ë ÒÂÏÂÌÓ-
6. äÓÒÚË̇ ã.à. Ç˚‰ÂÎÂÌË ËÒıÓ‰ÌÓ„Ó Ï‡Ú¡· ‚Ó‰ÒÚ‚‡ ͇ÚÓÙÂÎfl (Í 75-ÎÂÚ˲ Ççààäï ËÏ. Ä.É.
‰Îfl ÒÂÎÂ͈ËË Í‡ÚÓÙÂÎfl ̇ ÓÒÌÓ‚Â „Â̇ÎÓ„ËË. ãÓı‡). ÇÓÔÓÒ˚ ͇ÚÓÙÂ΂ӉÒÚ‚‡. å.: àÁ‰-‚Ó
ëè·: àÁ‰-‚Ó Çàê, 1992. 106 Ò. Ççààäï, 2006. ë. 205–211.
7. ÅÛ‰ËÌ ä. á., ɇ‚ËÎÂÌÍÓ í. Ä. ÉÂÌÂÚ˘ÂÒÍË ÓÒÌÓ- 23. Maris B. Analysis of an incomplete diallele cross among
‚˚ ÓÚ‰‡ÎÂÌÌÓÈ „˷ˉËÁ‡ˆËË Í‡ÚÓÙÂÎfl // ÉÂÌÂÚË- three ssp. tuberosum varieties and seven long-day adapt-
͇. 1994. í. 30. ‹ 10. ë. 1413–1422. (Budin K., ed ssp.andigena clones of the potato // Euphytica. 1989.
Gavrilenko T. Genetic basis of remote hybridization in V. 41. P.163–182.
potato (Review) // Rus. J. Genetics. 1994. V. 30. ‹ 10. 24. Plaisted R.L. Utilization of germplasm in breeding pro-
P. 1225–1233. grammes – use of cultivated tetraploids// Prospect for the
8. ÄÌÚÓÌÓ‚‡ é.û., ɇ‚ËÎÂÌÍÓ í.Ä. èÓÎËÏÓÙËÁÏ potato in the developing worlds. Lima (Peru): Intern. Po-
ÔÓÒΉӂ‡ÚÂθÌÓÒÚÂÈ Ó„‡ÌÂθÌ˚ı Ñçä ‚Ë‰Ó‚ tato Centre, 1972. 23 p.
͇ÚÓÙÂÎfl // ùÍÓÎӄ˘ÂÒ͇fl „ÂÌÂÚË͇. 2006. í. IV. 25. Grun P. Cytoplasmic sterilities that separate the group
ë. 3–10. Tuberosum cultivated potato from its putative tetraploid
9. Lossl A., Gotz M., Braun A., Wenzel G. Molecular markers ancestor // Evolution. 1973. V. 27. P. 633–643.
for cytoplasm in potato: male sterility and contribution of 26. Grun P., Ochoa C., Capage D. Evolution of cytoplasmic
different plastid-mitochondrial configurations to starch factors in tetraploid cultivated potatoes // Amer. J. Bot.
production // Euphytica. 2000. V. 116. P. 221–230. 1977. V. 64 P. 412–420.
10. Sukhotu T., Kamijima O., Hosaka K. Nuclear and chlo- 27. ÄÌÚÓÌÓ‚‡ é.û., ɇ‚ËÎÂÌÍÓ í.Ä. ü‰ÂÌÓ-ˆËÚÓ-
roplast DNA differentiation in Andean potatoes // Ge- Ô·ÁχÚ˘ÂÒÍË ‚Á‡ËÏÓÓÚÌÓ¯ÂÌËfl Û ÒÓχÚ˘ÂÒÍËı
nome. 2004. V. 47. P. 46–56. „˷ˉӂ Ó‰‡ Solanum L. // ëÚÛÍÚÛ‡ Ë ˝ÍÒÔÂÒÒËfl
11. Sukhotu T., Kamijima O., Hosaka K. Genetic diversity of ÏËÚÓıÓ̉ˇθÌÓ„Ó „ÂÌÓχ ‡ÒÚÂÌËÈ. àÍÛÚÒÍ,
the Andean tetraploid cultivated potato (Solanum 2006. ë. 5–10.
Abstract