Individual Differences in Personality Predict How People Look at Faces

Determining the ways in which personality traits interact with contextual determinants to shape social behavior remains an important area of empirical investigation. The specific personality trait of neuroticism has been related to characteristic negative emotionality and associated with heightened attention to negative, emotionally arousing environmental signals. However, the mechanisms by which this personality trait may shape social behavior remain largely unspecified.We employed eye tracking to investigate the relationship between characteristics of visual scanpaths in response to emotional facial expressions and individual differences in personality. We discovered that the amount of time spent looking at the eyes of fearful faces was positively related to neuroticism.This finding is discussed in relation to previous behavioral research relating personality to selective attention for trait-congruent emotional information, neuroimaging studies relating differences in personality to amygdala reactivity to socially relevant stimuli, and genetic studies suggesting linkages between the serotonin transporter gene and neuroticism. We conclude that personality may be related to interpersonal interaction by shaping aspects of social cognition as basic as eye contact. In this way, eye gaze represents a possible behavioral link in a complex relationship between genes, brain function, and personality

Location of chlorogenic acid biosynthesis pathway and polyphenol oxidase genes in a new interspecific anchored linkage map of eggplant

© Gramazio et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2014. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated

Testimonial Injustice and Vulnerability: A Qualitative Analysis of Participation in the Court of Protection

This article explores participation in Court of Protection (COP) proceedings by people considered vulnerable. The paper is based on original data obtained from observing COP proceedings and reviewing COP case files. It is argued that the observed absence of the subject of proceedings is a form of testimonial injustice, that is, a failure to value a person in their capacity as a giver of knowledge. The issue of competence to give evidence is considered but it is argued that it is not the formal evidential rules that prohibit a vulnerable adult from giving evidence. Instead, it is the result of a persistent assumption that they are inherently vulnerable and therefore lack credibility as a knowledge giver. This assumption results in the voices of vulnerable adults being routinely absent from legal proceedings. It is argued that having a voice in the courtroom is essential and has a number of intrinsic and instrumental benefits. The paper concludes with a discussion about the implications of the research, including the current trend towards the increased use of special measures, and recommends a presumption in favour of the subject of COP proceedings giving evidence

SILEX: a fast and inexpensive high-quality DNA extraction method suitable for multiple sequencing platforms and recalcitrant plant species

[EN] Background The use of sequencing and genotyping platforms has undergone dramatic improvements, enabling the generation of a wealth of genomic information. Despite this progress, the availability of high-quality genomic DNA (gDNA) in sufficient concentrations is often a main limitation, especially for third-generation sequencing platforms. A variety of DNA extraction methods and commercial kits are available. However, many of these are costly and frequently give either low yield or low-quality DNA, inappropriate for next generation sequencing (NGS) platforms. Here, we describe a fast and inexpensive DNA extraction method (SILEX) applicable to a wide range of plant species and tissues. Results SILEX is a high-throughput DNA extraction protocol, based on the standard CTAB method with a DNA silica matrix recovery, which allows obtaining NGS-quality high molecular weight genomic plant DNA free of inhibitory compounds. SILEX was compared with a standard CTAB extraction protocol and a common commercial extraction kit in a variety of species, including recalcitrant ones, from different families. In comparison with the other methods, SILEX yielded DNA in higher concentrations and of higher quality. Manual extraction of 48 samples can be done in 96 min by one person at a cost of 0.12 euro/sample of reagents and consumables. Hundreds of tomato gDNA samples obtained with either SILEX or the commercial kit were successfully genotyped with Single Primer Enrichment Technology (SPET) with the Illumina HiSeq 2500 platform. Furthermore, DNA extracted fromSolanum elaeagnifoliumusing this protocol was assessed by Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), obtaining a suitable size ranges for most sequencing platforms that required high-molecular-weight DNA such as Nanopore or PacBio. Conclusions A high-throughput, fast and inexpensive DNA extraction protocol was developed and validated for a wide variety of plants and tissues. SILEX offers an easy, scalable, efficient and inexpensive way to extract DNA for various next-generation sequencing applications including SPET and Nanopore among others.This research has been funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 677379 (Linking genetic resources, genomes and phenotypes of Solanaceous crops; G2P-SOL). David Alonso is grateful to Universitat Politecnica de Valencia for a predoctoral (PAID-01-16) contract under the Programa de Ayudas de Investigacion y Desarrollo initiative. Mariola Plazas is grateful to Generalitat Valenciana and Fondo Social Europeo for a postdoctoral grant (APOSTD/2018/014). Pietro Gramazio is grateful to Japan Society for the Promotion of Science for a Postdoctoral Grant (P19105, FY2019 JSPS Postdoctoral Fellowship for Research in Japan (Standard)). The Spanish Ministerio de Educacion, Cultura y Deporte funded a predoctoral fellowship granted to Edgar Garcia-Fortea (FPU17/02389).Vilanova Navarro, S.; Alonso-Martín, D.; Gramazio, P.; Plazas Ávila, MDLO.; García-Fortea, E.; Ferrante, P.; Schmidt, M.... (2020). SILEX: a fast and inexpensive high-quality DNA extraction method suitable for multiple sequencing platforms and recalcitrant plant species. Plant Methods. 16(1):1-11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13007-020-00652-yS111161Scheben A, Batley J, Edwards D. Genotyping-by-sequencing approaches to characterize crop genomes: choosing the right tool for the right application. Plant Biotechnol J. 2017;15:149–61.Jung H, Winefield C, Bombarely A, Prentis P, Waterhouse P. Tools and strategies for long-read sequencing and de novo assembly of plant genomes. Trends Plant Sci. 2019;24:700–24.Elshire RJ, Glaubitz JC, Sun Q, Poland JA, Kawamoto K, Buckler ES, Mitchell SE. A robust, simple genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS) approach for high diversity species. PLoS ONE. 2011;6:e19379.Baird NA, Etter PD, Atwood TS, Currey MC, Shiver AL, Lewis ZA, Selker EU, Cresko WA, Johnson EA. Rapid SNP discovery and genetic mapping using sequenced RAD markers. PLoS ONE. 2008;3:e3376.Scaglione D, Pinosio S, Marroni F, Centa E, Fornasiero A, Magris G, Scalabrin S, Cattonaro F, Taylor G, Morgante M. Single primer enrichment technology as a tool for massive genotyping: a benchmark on black poplar and maize. Ann Bot. 2019;124:543–51.Barchi L, Acquadro A, Alonso D, Aprea G, Bassolino L, Demurtas O, Ferrante P, Gramazio P, Mini P, Portis E, Scaglione D, Toppino L, Vilanova S, Díez MJ, Rotino G, Lanteri S, Prohens J, Giuliano G. Single primer enrichment technology (SPET) for high-throughput genotyping in tomato and eggplant germplasm. Front Plant Sci. 2019;10:1005.Vaillancourt B, Buell CR. High molecular weight DNA isolation method from diverse plant species for use with Oxford Nanopore sequencing. bioRxiv. 2019;1:783159.Anderson CB, Franzmayr BK, Hong SW, Larking AC, van Stijn TC, Tan R, Moraga R, Faville M, Griffiths A. Protocol: a versatile, inexpensive, high-throughput plant genomic DNA extraction method suitable for genotyping-by-sequencing. Plant Methods. 2018;14:75.Rana MM, Aycan M, Takamatsu T, Kaneko K, Mitsui T, Itoh K. Optimized nuclear pellet method for extracting next-generation sequencing quality genomic DNA from fresh leaf tissue. Methods Protoc. 2019;2:54.Doyle JJ, Doyle JL. Isolation of plant DNA from fresh tissue. Focus. 1990;12:13–5.Healey A, Furtado A, Cooper T, Henry RJ. Protocol: a simple method for extracting next-generation sequencing quality genomic DNA from recalcitrant plant species. Plant Methods. 2014;10:21.Martínez-González CR, Ramírez-Mendoza R, Jiménez-Ramírez J, Gallegos-Vázquez C, Luna-Vega I. Improved method for genomic DNA extraction for Opuntia Mill. (Cactaceae). Plant Methods. 2017;13:82.Barbier FF, Chabikwa TG, Ahsan MU, Cook SE, Powell R, Tanurdzic M, Beveridge C. A phenol/chloroform-free method to extract nucleic acids from recalcitrant, woody tropical species for gene expression and sequencing. Plant Methods. 2019;15:62.Souza DC, Teixeira TA. A simple and effective method to obtain high DNA quality and quantity from Cerrado plant species. Mol Biol Rep. 2019;46:4611–5.Kovačević N. Magnetic beads based nucleic acid purification for molecular biology applications. Sample preparation techniques for soil, plant, and animal samples. In: Micic M, editor. Springer Protoc Handb. 2016;53–67.Martin SL, Parent JS, Laforest M, Page E, Kreiner JM, James T. Population genomic approaches for weed science. Plants. 2019;8:354.Zhou Y, Zhang Y, He W, Wang J, Peng F, Huang L, Zhao S, Deng W. Rapid regeneration and reuse of silica columns from PCR purification and gel extraction kits. Sci Rep. 2018;8:12870.Park HJ, Cho H, Jung HS, Cho BH, Lee MY. Development of a DNA isolation device using poly(3,4-dihydroxy-l-phenylalanine)-coated swab for on-site molecular diagnostics. Sci Rep. 2019;9:8144.Boom R, Sol CJ, Salimans MM, Jansen CL, Wertheim-van Dillen PM, van der Noordaa J. Rapid and simple method for purification of nucleic acids. J Clin Microbiol. 1990;28:495–503.Carter MJ, Milton ID. An inexpensive and simple method for DNA purifications on silica particles. Nucleic Acids Res. 1993;21:1044.Carvalho J, Puertas G, Gaspar J, Azinheiro S, Diéguez L, Garrido-Maestu A, Vázquez M, Barros-Velázquez J, Cardoso S, Padro M. Highly efficient DNA extraction and purification from olive oil on a washable and reusable miniaturized device. Anal Chim Acta. 2018;1020:30–40.Branton D, Deamer D, Quick J, Loman NJ. DNA extraction strategies for nanopore sequencing. Nanopore Seq. World Sci. 2019;1:91–105.Cheng H, Zhang K, Libera J, De La Cruz M, Bedzyk M. Polynucleotide adsorption to negatively charged surfaces in divalent salt solutions. Biophys J. 2016;90:1164–74.Shi B, Shin Y, Hassanali A, Singer S. DNA Binding to the Silica Surface. J Phys Chem B. 2015;119:11030–40.Katevatis C, Fan A, Klapperich CM. Low concentration DNA extraction and recovery using a silica solid phase. PLoS ONE. 2017;12:e0176848.Green MR, Sambrook J. Isolation and quantification of DNA. Cold Spring Harb Protoc. 2018;2018:403–14.Toole K, Roffey P, Young E, Cho K, Shaw T, Smith M, Blagojevic N. Evaluation of commercial forensic DNA extraction kits for decontamination and extraction of DNA from biological samples contaminated with radionuclides. Forensic Sci Int. 2019;302:109867.Piskata Z, Servusova E, Babak V, Nesvadbova M, Borilova G. The quality of DNA isolated from processed food and feed via different extraction procedures. Molecules. 2019;24:1188.Xia Y, Chen F, Du Y, Liu C, Bu G, Xin Y, Boye L. A modified SDS-based DNA extraction method from raw soybean. Biosci Rep. 2019;39:2.Akkurt M. Comparison between modified DNA extraction protocols and commercial isolation kits in grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.). Genet Mol Res. 2012;11:2343–51.Marsal G, Baiges I, Canals JM, Zamora F, Fort F. A Fast, efficient method for extracting DNA from leaves, stems, and seeds of Vitis vinifera L. Am J Enol Vitic. 2011;62:376–81.Abdel-Latif A, Osman G. Comparison of three genomic DNA extraction methods to obtain high DNA quality from maize. Plant Methods. 2017;13:1.Huang J, Ge X, Sun M. Modified CTAB protocol using a silica matrix for isolation of plant genomic DNA. Biotechniques. 2000;28:432–4.Rogstad SH. Plant DNA extraction using silica. Plant Mol Biol Report. 2012;21:463.Li J-F, Li L, Sheen J. Protocol: a rapid and economical procedure for purification of plasmid or plant DNA with diverse applications in plant biology. Plant Methods. 2010;6:1.Li J-F, Sheen J. DNA purification from multiple sources in plant research with homemade silica resins. Humana Press. 2012;862:53–9.Vandeventer PE, Lin JS, Zwang TJ, Nadim A, Johal MS, Niemz A. Multiphasic DNA adsorption to silica surfaces under varying buffer, pH, and ionic strength conditions. J Phys Chem B. 2012;116:5661–70.Boesenberg-Smith KA, Pessarakli MM, Wolk DM. Assessment of DNA yield and purity: an overlooked detail of PCR troubleshooting. Clin Microbiol Newsl. 2012;34:1–6.Emaus MN, Clark KD, Hinners P, Anderson JL. Preconcentration of DNA using magnetic ionic liquids that are compatible with real-time PCR for rapid nucleic acid quantification. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2018;410:4135–44.Dumschott K, Schmidt MHW, Chawla HS, Snowdon R, Usadel B. Oxford Nanopore sequencing: new opportunities for plant genomics? J Exp Bot. 2020;eraa263Knapp S, Sagona E, Carbonell AKZ, Chiarini F. A revision of the Solanum elaeagnifolium clade (Elaeagnifolium clade; subgenus Leptostemonum, Solanaceae). PhytoKeys. 2017;84:1–104.García-Fortea E, Gramazio P, Vilanova S, Fita A, Mangino G, Villanueva G, Arrones A, Knapp S, Prohens J, Plazas M. First successful backcrossing towards eggplant (Solanum melongena) of a New World species, the silverleaf nightshade (S. elaeagnifolium), and characterization of interspecific hybrids and backcrosses. Sci Hort. 2019;246:563–73.Ihaka R, Gentleman R. R: a language for data analysis and graphics. J Comput Graph Stat. 1996;5:3299–314.Wickham H. ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2016.Ponti G, Maccaferri M, Manfredini M, Kaleci S, Mandrioli M, Pellacani G, Ozben T, Depenni R, Bianchi G, Pirola G, Tomasi A. The value of fluorimetry (Qubit) and spectrophotometry (NanoDrop) in the quantification of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) in malignant melanoma and prostate cancer patients. Clin Chim Acta. 2018;479:14–9.Lakshmi R, Baskar V, Ranga U. Extraction of superior-quality plasmid DNA by a combination of modified alkaline lysis and silica matrix. Anal Biochem. 1999;272:109–12.Taylor JI, Hurst CD, Davies MJ, Sachsinger N, Bruce IJ. Application of magnetite and silica–magnetite composites to the isolation of genomic DNA. J Chromatogr A. 2000;890:159–66.Prodělalová J, Rittich B, Španová A, Petrová K, Beneš MJ. Isolation of genomic DNA using magnetic cobalt ferrite and silica particles. J Chromatogr A. 2004;1056:43–8.Shan Z, Jiang Y, Guo M, Bennett JC, Li X, Tian H, Oakes K, Zhang, Zhou Y, Huang Q, Chen H. Promoting DNA loading on magnetic nanoparticles using a DNA condensation strategy. Colloids Surfaces B Biointerfaces. 2015;125:247–54.Greco M, Sáez C, Brown M, Bitonti M. A simple and effective method for high quality co-extraction of genomic DNA and total RNA from low biomass Ectocarpus siliculosus, the model brown alga. PLoS ONE. 2014;9:e96470.Schrader C, Schielke A, Ellerbroek L, Johne R. PCR inhibitor – occurrence, properties and removal. J Appl Microbiol. 2012;113:1014–26.Demeke T, Adams RP. The effects of plant polysaccharides and buffer additives on PCR. Biotechniques. 1992;12:332–4.Asami DK, Hong YJ, Barrett DM, Mitchell AE. Comparison of the total phenolic and ascorbic acid content of freeze-dried and air-dried marionberry, strawberry, and corn grown using conventional, organic, and sustainable agricultural practices. J Agric Food Chem. 2003;51:1237–41.Schmidt M, Vogel A, Denton A, Istace B, Wormit A, van de Geest H, Bolger M, Alseekh S, Maß J, Pfaff C, Schurr U, Chetelat R, Maumus F, Aury J, Koren S, Fernie A, Zamir D, Bolger A, Usadel B. De novo assembly of a new Solanum pennellii accession using nanopore sequencing. Plant cell. 2017;29:2336–48

Coding SNPs analysis highlights genetic relationships and evolution pattern in eggplant complexes

[EN] Brinjal (Solanum melongena), scarlet (S. aethiopicum) and gboma (S. macrocarpon) eggplants are three Old World domesticates. The genomic DNA of a collection of accessions belonging to the three cultivated species, along with a representation of various wild relatives, was characterized for the presence of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) using a genotype-by-sequencing approach. A total of 210 million useful reads were produced and were successfully aligned to the reference eggplant genome sequence. Out of the 75,399 polymorphic sites identified among the 76 entries in study, 12,859 were associated with coding sequence. A genetic relationships analysis, supported by the output of the FastSTRUCTURE software, identified four major sub-groups as present in the germplasm panel. The first of these clustered S. aethiopicum with its wild ancestor S. anguivi; the second, S. melongena, its wild progenitor S. insanum, and its relatives S. incanum, S. lichtensteinii and S. linneanum; the third, S. macrocarpon and its wild ancestor S. dasyphyllum; and the fourth, the New World species S. sisymbriifolium, S. torvum and S. elaeagnifolium. By applying a hierarchical FastSTRUCTURE analysis on partitioned data, it was also possible to resolve the ambiguous membership of the accessions of S. campylacanthum, S. violaceum, S. lidii, S. vespertilio and S. tomentsum, as well as to genetically differentiate the three species of New World Origin. A principal coordinates analysis performed both on the entire germplasm panel and also separately on the entries belonging to sub-groups revealed a clear separation among species, although not between each of the domesticates and their respective wild ancestors. There was no clear differentiation between either distinct cultivar groups or different geographical provenance. Adopting various approaches to analyze SNP variation provided support for interpretation of results. The genotyping-by-sequencing approach showed to be highly efficient for both quantifying genetic diversity and establishing genetic relationships among and within cultivated eggplants and their wild relatives. The relevance of these results to the evolution of eggplants, as well as to their genetic improvement, is discussed.This work has been funded in part by European Unions Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under grant agreement No 677379 (G2P-SOL project: Linking genetic resources, genomes and phenotypes of Solanaceous crops) and by Spanish Ministerio de Economia, Industria y Competitividad and Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (grant AGL2015-64755-R from MINECO/FEDER). Funding has also been received from the initiative "Adapting Agriculture to Climate Change: Collecting, Protecting and Preparing Crop Wild Relatives", which is supported by the Government of Norway. This last project is managed by the Global Crop Diversity Trust with the Millennium Seed Bank of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew and implemented in partnership with national and international gene banks and plant breeding institutes around the world. For further information see the project website:http://www.cwrdiversity.org/. Pietro Gramazio is grateful to Universitat Politecnica de Valencia for a pre-doctoral (Programa FPI de la UPV-Subprograma 1/2013 call) contract. Mariola Plazas is grateful to Spanish Ministerio de Economia, Industria y Competitividad for a post-doctoral grant within the Santiago Grisolia Programme (FCJI-2015-24835). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.Acquadro, A.; Barchi, L.; Gramazio, P.; Portis, E.; Vilanova Navarro, S.; Comino, C.; Plazas Ávila, MDLO.... (2017). Coding SNPs analysis highlights genetic relationships and evolution pattern in eggplant complexes. PLoS ONE. 12(7). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0180774Se018077412

Microsatellite diversity and genetic structure among common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) landraces in Brazil, a secondary center of diversity

Brazil is the largest producer and consumer of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), which is the most important source of human dietary protein in that country. This study assessed the genetic diversity and the structure of a sample of 279 geo-referenced common bean landraces from Brazil, using molecular markers. Sixty-seven microsatellite markers spread over the 11 linkage groups of the common bean genome, as well as Phaseolin, PvTFL1y, APA and four SCAR markers were used. As expected, the sample showed lower genetic diversity compared to the diversity in the primary center of diversification. Andean and Mesoamerican gene pools were both present but the latter gene pool was four times more frequent than the former. The two gene pools could be clearly distinguished; limited admixture was observed between these groups. The Mesoamerican group consisted of two sub-populations, with a high level of admixture between them leading to a large proportion of stabilized hybrids not observed in the centers of domestication. Thus, Brazil can be considered a secondary center of diversification of common bean. A high degree of genome-wide multilocus associations even among unlinked loci was observed, confirming the high level of structure in the sample and suggesting that association mapping should be conducted in separate Andean and Mesoamerican Brazilian samples

Comparison of transcriptome-derived simple sequence repeat (SSR) and single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers for genetic fingerprinting, diversity evaluation, and establishment of relationships in eggplants

[EN] Simple sequence repeat (SSR) and single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers are amongst the most common markers of choice for studies of diversity and relationships in horticultural species. We have used 11 SSR and 35 SNP markers derived from transcriptome sequencing projects to fingerprint 48 accessions of a collection of brinjal (Solanum melongena), gboma (S. macrocarpon) and scarlet (S. aethiopicum) eggplant complexes, which also include their respective wild relatives S. incanum, S. dasyphyllum and S. anguivi. All SSR and SNP markers were polymorphic and 34 and 36 different genetic fingerprints were obtained with SSRs and SNPs, respectively. When combining both markers all accessions but two had different genetic profiles. Although on average SSRs were more informative than SNPs, with a higher number of alleles, genotypes and polymorphic information content (PIC), and expected heterozygosity (He) values, SNPs have proved highly informative in our materials. Low observed heterozygosity (Ho) and high fixation index (f) values confirm the high degree of homozygosity of eggplants. Genetic identities within groups of each complex were higher than with groups of other complexes, although differences in the ranks of genetic identity values among groups were observed between SSR and SNP markers. For low and intermediate values of pair-wise SNP genetic distances, a moderate correlation between SSR and SNP genetic distances was observed (r(2) = 0.592), but for high SNP genetic distances the correlation was low (r(2) = 0.080). The differences among markers resulted in different phenogram topologies, with a different eggplant complex being basal (gboma eggplant for SSRs and brinjal eggplant for SNPs) to the two others. Overall the results reveal that both types of markers are complementary for eggplant fingerprinting and that interpretation of relationships among groups may be greatly affected by the type of marker used.This work has been funded by European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under Grant Agreement No 677379 (G2P-SOL project: Linking genetic resources, genomes and phenotypes of Solanaceous crops) and by Spanish Ministerio de Economia y Competitividad and Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (Grant AGL2015-64755-R from MINECO/FEDER). Pietro Gramazio is grateful to Universitat Politecnica de Valencia for a pre-doctoral contract (Programa FPI de la UPV-Subprograma 1/2013 call). Mariola Plazas is grateful to Spanish Ministerio de Economia, Industria y Competitividad for a post-doctoral grant within the Juan de la Cierva-Formacion programme (FJCI-2015-24835).Gramazio, P.; Prohens Tomás, J.; Borras, D.; Plazas Ávila, MDLO.; Herraiz García, FJ.; Vilanova Navarro, S. (2017). Comparison of transcriptome-derived simple sequence repeat (SSR) and single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers for genetic fingerprinting, diversity evaluation, and establishment of relationships in eggplants. Euphytica. 213(264):1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-017-2057-3S118213264Acquadro A, Barchi L, Gramazio P et al (2017) Coding SNPs analysis highlights genetic relationships and evolution pattern in eggplant complexes. PLoS ONE 12:e0180774. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0180774Adeniji O, Kusolwa P, Reuben S (2013) Morphological descriptors and micro satellite diversity among scarlet eggplant groups. Afr Crop Sci J 21(1):37–49Aguoru C, Omoigui L, Olasan J (2015) Molecular characterization of Solanum species (Solanum aethiopicum complex; Solanum macrocarpon and Solanum anguivi) using multiplex RAPD primers. J Plant Stud 4:27–34. https://doi.org/10.5539/jps.v4n1p27Arumuganathan K, Earle E (1991) Nuclear DNA content of some important plant species. Plant Mol Biol Rep 9(3):208–218Ashrafi H, Hill T, Stoffel K et al (2012) De novo assembly of the pepper transcriptome (Capsicum annuum): a benchmark for in silico discovery of SNPs, SSRs and candidate genes. BMC Genom 13:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-13-571Augustinos AA, Petropoulos C, Karasoulou V et al (2016) Assessing diversity among traditional Greek and foreign eggplant cultivars using molecular markers and morphometrical descriptors. Span J Agric Res 14:e0710. https://doi.org/10.5424/sjar/2016144-9020Avise JC (2012) Molecular markers, natural history and evolution. Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-2381-9Blanca J, Cañizares J, Roig C et al (2011) Transcriptome characterization and high throughput SSRs and SNPs discovery in Cucurbita pepo (Cucurbitaceae). BMC Genom 12:104. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-12-104Botstein D, White RL, Skolnick M, Davis RW (1980) Construction of a genetic linkage map in man using restriction fragment length polymorphisms. Am J Hum Genet 32(3):314–331Bukenya Z, Carasco J (1994) Biosystematic study of Solanum macrocarpon—S. dasyphyllum complex in Uganda and relations with Solanum linnaeanum. East Afr Agric For J 59(3):187–204Castillo A, Budak H, Varshney RK et al (2008) Transferability and polymorphism of barley EST-SSR markers used for phylogenetic analysis in Hordeum chilense. BMC Plant Biol 8:97. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2229-8-97Choudhary S, Sethy NK, Shokeen B, Bhatia S (2009) Development of chickpea EST-SSR markers and analysis of allelic variation across related species. Theor Appl Genet 118:591–608. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00122-008-0923-zCoates BS, Sumerford DV, Miller NJ et al (2009) Comparative performance of single nucleotide polymorphism and microsatellite markers for population genetic analysis. J Hered 100:556–564. https://doi.org/10.1093/jhered/esp028D’Agostino N, Golas T, van de Geest H et al (2013) Genomic analysis of the native European Solanum species, S. dulcamara. BMC Genom 14:356. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-14-356Daunay MC, Hazra P (2012) Eggplant. In: Peter KV, Hazra P (eds) Handbook of Vegetables. Studium Press, Houston, pp 257–322Davey J, Hohenlohe P, Etter P et al (2011) Genome-wide genetic marker discovery and genotyping using next-generation sequencing. Nat Rev Genet 12:499–510. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg3012De Barba M, Miquel C, Lobréaux S et al (2016) High-throughput microsatellite genotyping in ecology: improved accuracy, efficiency, standardization and success with low-quantity and degraded DNA. Mol Ecol Resour 17(3):492–507. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12594Doyle J, Doyle J (1987) A rapid DNA isolation procedure for small quantities of fresh leaf tissue. Phytochem Bull 19:11–15Ellegren H (2004) Microsatellites: simple sequences with complex evolution. Nat Rev Genet 5:435–445. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg1348Felsenstein, J (2007). PHYLIP (Phylogeny Inference Package) Version 3.67. Department of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USAFernandez-Silva I, Whitney J, Wainwright B (2013) Microsatellites for next-generation ecologists: a post-sequencing bioinformatics pipeline. PLoS ONE 8(2):e55990Filippi CV, Aguirre N, Rivas JG et al (2015) Population structure and genetic diversity characterization of a sunflower association mapping population using SSR and SNP markers. BMC Plant Biol 15:52. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12870-014-0360-xFischer MC, Rellstab C, Leuzinger M et al (2017) Estimating genomic diversity and population differentiation—an empirical comparison of microsatellite and SNP variation in Arabidopsis halleri. BMC Genom 18:69. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-016-3459-7Furini A, Wunder J (2004) Analysis of eggplant (Solanum melongena)-related germplasm: morphological and AFLP data contribute to phylogenetic interpretations and germplasm utilization. Theor Appl Genet 108:197–208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00122-003-1439-1Gadaleta A, Giancaspro A, Zacheo S et al (2011) Comparison of genomic and EST-derived SSR markers in phylogenetic analysis of wheat. Plant Genet Resour 9:243–246. https://doi.org/10.1017/S147926211100030XGe H, Liu Y, Jiang M et al (2013) Analysis of genetic diversity and structure of eggplant populations (Solanum melongena L.) in China using simple sequence repeat markers. Sci Hortic 162:71–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2013.08.004Gonzaga ZJ (2015) Evaluation of SSR and SNP Markers for Molecular Breeding in Rice. Plant Breed Biotechnol 3:139–152. https://doi.org/10.9787/PBB.2015.3.2.139Goodwin S, McPherson J, McCombie W (2016) Coming of age: ten years of next-generation sequencing technologies. Nat Rev Genet 17(6):333–351Gramazio P, Blanca J, Ziarsolo P et al (2016) Transcriptome analysis and molecular marker discovery in Solanum incanum and S. aethiopicum, two close relatives of the common eggplant (Solanum melongena) with interest for breeding. BMC Genom 17:300. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-016-2631-4Grover A, Sharma PC (2014) Development and use of molecular markers: past and present. Crit Rev Biotechnol 8551:1–13. https://doi.org/10.3109/07388551.2014.959891Hamblin MT, Warburton ML, Buckler ES (2007) Empirical comparison of simple sequence repeats and single nucleotide polymorphisms in assessment of maize diversity and relatedness. PLoS ONE 2:e1367. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0001367Hess JE, Matala AP (2011) Comparison of SNPs and microsatellites for fine-scale application of genetic stock identification of Chinook salmon in the Columbia River Basin Comparison of SNPs and microsatellites for fine-scale application of genetic stock identification of Chinook salmon in the Columbia River Basin. Mol Ecol Resour. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-0998.2010.02958.xHighton R (1993) The relationship between the number of loci and the statistical support for the topology of UPGMA trees obtained from genetic distance data. Mol Phylogenet Evol 2:337–343Hirakawa H, Shirasawa K, Miyatake K, Nunome, T et al (2014) Draft genome sequence of eggplant (Solanum melongena L.): the representative solanum species indigenous to the old world. DNA Res 21:649–660. https://doi.org/10.1093/dnares/dsu027Hong CP, Piao ZY, Kang TW et al (2007) Genomic distribution of simple sequence repeats in Brassica rapa. Mol Cells 23:349–356.Hu J, Wang L, Li J (2011) Comparison of genomic SSR and EST-SSR markers for estimating genetic diversity in cucumber. Biol Plant 55:577–580. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10535-011-0129-0Isshiki S, Iwata N, Khan MMR (2008) ISSR variations in eggplant (Solanum melongena L.) and related Solanum species. Sci Hortic 117:186–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2008.04.003Jones ES, Sullivan H, Bhattramakki D, Smith JSC (2007) A comparison of simple sequence repeat and single nucleotide polymorphism marker technologies for the genotypic analysis of maize (Zea mays L.). Theor Appl Genet 115:361–371. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00122-007-0570-9Kalia RK, Rai MK, Kalia S et al (2011) Microsatellite markers: an overview of the recent progress in plants. Euphytica 177:309–334Kashi Y, King DG (2006) Simple sequence repeats as advantageous mutators in evolution. Trends Genet 22:253–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tig.2006.03.005Kaushik P, Prohens J, Vilanova S et al (2016) Phenotyping of eggplant wild relatives and interspecific hybrids with conventional and phenomics descriptors provides insight for their potential utilization in breeding. Front Plant Sci 7:677Kim C, Guo H, Kong W et al (2016) Application of genotyping by sequencing technology to a variety of crop breeding programs. Plant Sci 242:14–22Knapp S, Vorontsova MS, Prohens J (2013) Wild relatives of the eggplant (Solanum melongena L.: Solanaceae): new understanding of species names in a complex group. PLoS ONE 8:e57039Kruglyak S, Durrett RT, Schug MD, Aquadro CF (1998) Equilibrium distributions of microsatellite repeat length resulting from a balance between slippage events and point mutations. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 95:10774–10778. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.95.18.10774Lester RN, Daunay MC (2003) Diversity of African vegetable Solanum species and its implications for a better understanding of plant domestication. Schriften zu Genetischen Ressourcen 22:137–152Lester RN, Niakan L (1986) Origin and domestication of the scarlet eggplant, Solanum aethiopicum, from S. anguivi in Africa. In: D’Arcy WG (ed) Solanaceae: biology and systematics. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 433–456Lester RN, Jaeger PML, Bleijendaal-Spierings BHM et al (1990) African eggplants-a review of collecting in West Africa. Plant Genet Resour Newsl 81:17–26Levin R, Myers N, Bohs L (2006) Phylogenetic relationships among the ‘spiny solanums’ (Solanum subgenus Leptostemonum, Solanaceae). Am J Bot 93(1):157–169Li WH, Gojobori T, Nei M (1981) Pseudogenes as a paradigm of neutral evolution. Nature 292:237–239Li YC, Korol AB, Fahima T et al (2002) Microsatellites: genomic distribution, putative functions and mutational mechanisms: a review. Mol Ecol 11:2453–2465Liu K, Muse S (2005) PowerMarker: an integrated analysis environment for genetic marker analysis. Bioinformatics 21:2128–2129Mantel N (1967) The detection of disease clustering and a generalized regression approach. Cancer Res 27:209–220. https://doi.org/10.1038/214637b0Martínez-Arias R, Calafell F, Mateu E et al (2001) Sequence variability of a human pseudogene. Genome Res 11:1071–1085. https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.167701Meyer RS, Karol KG, Little DP et al (2012) Phylogeographic relationships among Asian eggplants and new perspectives on eggplant domestication. Mol Phylogenet Evol 63:685–701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2012.02.006Muñoz-Falcón J, Prohens J, Vilanova S, Nuez F (2009) Diversity in commercial varieties and landraces of black eggplants and implications for broadening the breeders’ gene pool. Ann Appl Biol 154(3):453–465Nandha PS, Singh J (2014) Comparative assessment of genetic diversity between wild and cultivated barley using gSSR and EST-SSR markers. Plant Breed 133:28–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/pbr.12118Nei M (1972) Genetic distance between populations. Am Nat 106:283–292. https://doi.org/10.1086/282771Nunome T, Negoro S, Kono I et al (2009) Development of SSR markers derived from SSR-enriched genomic library of eggplant (Solanum melongena L.). Theor Appl Genet 119:1143–1153. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00122-009-1116-0Page R (2001) TreeView. Glasgow University, GlasgowPeakall P, Smouse R (2012) GenAlEx 6.5: genetic analysis in Excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research an update. Bioinformatics 28:2537–2539Pessarakli M, Dris R (2004) Pollination and breeding of eggplants. J Food Agric Environ 2:218–219Plazas M, Andújar I, Vilanova S et al (2014) Conventional and phenomics characterization provides insight into the diversity and relationships of hypervariable scarlet (Solanum aethiopicum L.) and gboma (S. macrocarpon L.) eggplant complexes. Front. Plant Sci 5:318Ranil R, Niran H, Plazas M et al (2015) Improving seed germination of the eggplant rootstock Solanum torvum by testing multiple factors using an orthogonal array design. Sci Hortic 193:174–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2015.07.030Sakata Y, Lester RN (1997) Chloroplast DNA diversity in brinjal eggplant (Solanum melongena L.) and related species. Euphytica 97:295–301. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003000612441Sakata Y, Nishio T, Matthews PJ (1991) Chloroplast DNA analysis of eggplant (Solanum melongena) and related species for their taxonomic affinity. Euphytica 55:21–26Särkinen T, Bohs L, Olmstead RG, Knapp S (2013) A phylogenetic framework for evolutionary study of the nightshades (Solanaceae): a dated 1000-tip tree. BMC Evol Biol 13:214. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-13-214Scheben A, Batley J, Edwards D (2017) Genotyping-by-sequencing approaches to characterize crop genomes: choosing the right tool for the right application. Plant Biotechnol J 15:149–161Sneath P, Sokal R (1973) Numerical taxonomy. The principles and practice of numerical classification. W H Freeman Limited, San FranciscoStàgel A, Portis E, Toppino L et al (2008) Gene-based microsatellite development for mapping and phylogeny studies in eggplant. BMC Genom 9:357. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-9-357Sunseri F, Polignano GB, Alba V et al (2010) Genetic diversity and characterization of African eggplant germplasm collection. Afr J Plant Sci 4:231–241Syfert MM, Castañeda-Álvarez NP, Khoury CK et al (2016) Crop wild relatives of the brinjal eggplant (Solanum melongena): poorly represented in genebanks and many species at risk of extinction. Am J Bot 103:635–651. https://doi.org/10.3732/ajb.1500539Thiel T, Michalek W, Varshney R, Graner A (2003) Exploiting EST databases for the development and characterization of gene-derived SSR-markers in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.). Theor Appl Genet 106:411–422. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00122-002-1031-0Thomson MJ, Alfred J, Dangl J et al (2014) High-throughput SNP genotyping to accelerate crop improvement. Plant Breed Biotechnol 2:195–212. https://doi.org/10.9787/PBB.2014.2.3.195Thorvaldsdóttir H, Robinson JT, Mesirov JP (2013) Integrative genomics viewer (IGV): high-performance genomics data visualization and exploration. Brief Bioinform 14:178–192. https://doi.org/10.1093/bib/bbs017Tumbilen Y, Frary A, Daunay MC, Doganlar S (2011) Application of EST-SSRs to examine genetic diversity in eggplant and its close relatives. Turk J Biol 35:125–136. https://doi.org/10.3906/biy-0906-57van Inghelandt D, Melchinger AE, Lebreton C, Stich B (2010) Population structure and genetic diversity in a commercial maize breeding program assessed with SSR and SNP markers. Theor Appl Genet 120:1289–1299. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00122-009-1256-2Van Tassell CP, Smith TPL, Matukumalli LK et al (2008) SNP discovery and allele frequency estimation by deep sequencing of reduced representation libraries. Nat Methods 5:247–252. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.1185Varshney R, Graner A, Sorrells M (2005) Genic microsatellite markers in plants: features and applications. Trends Biotechnol 23(1):48–55Varshney RK, Chabane K, Hendre PS et al (2007) Comparative assessment of EST-SSR, EST-SNP and AFLP markers for evaluation of genetic diversity and conservation of genetic resources using wild, cultivated and elite barleys. Plant Sci 173:638–649. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2007.08.010Vilanova S, Manzur JP, Prohens J (2012) Development and characterization of genomic simple sequence repeat markers in eggplant and their application to the study of diversity and relationships in a collection of different cultivar types and origins. Mol Breed 30:647–660. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11032-011-9650-2Vilanova S, Hurtado M, Cardona A (2014) Genetic diversity and relationships in local varieties of eggplant from different cultivar groups as assessed by genomic SSR markers. Not Bot Horti Agrobo Cluj-Napoca 42:59–65Vogel JP, Gu YQ, Twigg P et al (2006) EST sequencing and phylogenetic analysis of the model grass Brachypodium distachyon. Theor Appl Genet 113:186–195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00122-006-0285-3Vorontsova MS, Stern S, Bohs L, Knapp S (2013) African spiny solanum (subgenus Leptostemonum, Solanaceae): a thorny phylogenetic tangle. Bot J Linn Soc 173:176–193. https://doi.org/10.1111/boj.12053Weese TL, Bohs L (2010) Eggplant origins: out of Africa, into the Orient. Taxon 59:49–56. https://doi.org/10.2307/27757050Wright S (1965) The interpretation of population structure by F-statistics with special regard to systems of mating. Evolution 19:395–420. https://doi.org/10.2307/2406450Xiao M, Zhang Y, Chen X et al (2013) Transcriptome analysis based on next-generation sequencing of non-model plants producing specialized metabolites of biotechnological interest. J Biotechnol 166:122–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiotec.2013.04.004Yan J, Yang X, Shah T et al (2010) High-throughput SNP genotyping with the Goldengate assay in maize. Mol Breed 25:441–451. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11032-009-9343-2Yang X, Xu Y, Shah T et al (2011) Comparison of SSRs and SNPs in assessment of genetic relatedness in maize. Genetica 139:1045–1054. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10709-011-9606-9Yu J, Zhang Z, Zhu C et al (2009) Simulation appraisal of the adequacy of number of background markers for relationship estimation in association mapping. Plant Genome 2:63. https://doi.org/10.3835/plantgenome2008.09.0009Zhan L, Paterson I, Fraser B (2016) MEGASAT: automated inference of microsatellite genotypes from sequence data. Ecol Resour, Mol. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.1256

Global Spatial Risk Assessment of Sharks Under the Footprint of Fisheries

Effective ocean management and conservation of highly migratory species depends on resolving overlap between animal movements and distributions and fishing effort. Yet, this information is lacking at a global scale. Here we show, using a big-data approach combining satellite-tracked movements of pelagic sharks and global fishing fleets, that 24% of the mean monthly space used by sharks falls under the footprint of pelagic longline fisheries. Space use hotspots of commercially valuable sharks and of internationally protected species had the highest overlap with longlines (up to 76% and 64%, respectively) and were also associated with significant increases in fishing effort. We conclude that pelagic sharks have limited spatial refuge from current levels of high-seas fishing effort. Results demonstrate an urgent need for conservation and management measures at high-seas shark hotspots and highlight the potential of simultaneous satellite surveillance of megafauna and fishers as a tool for near-real time, dynamic management

Validation of a novel multivariate method of defining HIV-associated cognitive impairment

Background. The optimum method of defining cognitive impairment in virally suppressed people living with HIV is unknown. We evaluated the relationships between cognitive impairment, including using a novel multivariate method (NMM), patient– reported outcome measures (PROMs), and neuroimaging markers of brain structure across 3 cohorts. Methods. Differences in the prevalence of cognitive impairment, PROMs, and neuroimaging data from the COBRA, CHARTER, and POPPY cohorts (total n = 908) were determined between HIV-positive participants with and without cognitive impairment defined using the HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HAND), global deficit score (GDS), and NMM criteria. Results. The prevalence of cognitive impairment varied by up to 27% between methods used to define impairment (eg, 48% for HAND vs 21% for NMM in the CHARTER study). Associations between objective cognitive impairment and subjective cognitive complaints generally were weak. Physical and mental health summary scores (SF-36) were lowest for NMM-defined impairment (P < .05). There were no differences in brain volumes or cortical thickness between participants with and without cognitive impairment defined using the HAND and GDS measures. In contrast, those identified with cognitive impairment by the NMM had reduced mean cortical thickness in both hemispheres (P < .05), as well as smaller brain volumes (P < .01). The associations with measures of white matter microstructure and brain-predicted age generally were weaker. Conclusion. Different methods of defining cognitive impairment identify different people with varying symptomatology and measures of brain injury. Overall, NMM-defined impairment was associated with most neuroimaging abnormalities and poorer selfreported health status. This may be due to the statistical advantage of using a multivariate approac