ARTICLE   Open Access    

The revelation of genomic breed composition using target capture sequencing: a case of Taxodium

  • # Authors contributed equally: Zhitong Han, Yangkang Chen

More Information
  • Received: 24 June 2024
    Revised: 13 August 2024
    Accepted: 03 September 2024
    Published online: 08 October 2024
    Forestry Research  4 Article number: e034 (2024)  |  Cite this article
  • Taxodium plants have good flood tolerance and thus were introduced into China from North America in the early 1900s. The subsequent decades of cross-breeding experiments within Taxodium have produced many new hybrid cultivars in China while also creating confusion in the genetic background of Taxodium plants. In the present study, target capture sequencing-derived SNP markers were used to reveal the genomic composition of different species and cultivars of Taxodium. The results unraveled the phylogenetic relationship within Taxodium and suggested the possibility of recent interspecific natural hybridization events. The introduced (Chinese) population is genetically similar to the native (North American) population, thus providing genetic evidence for historical introductions of Taxodium. Hybrid categories of different cultivars of Taxodium hybrid 'Zhongshanshan' were further identified, and their differences in parentage were revealed. Collectively, the findings provide evidence for understanding the genetics and hybridization of Taxodium and shed light on the future breeding and cultivation of cultivars with great ecological and economic potential.
  • Sweet cherries (Prunus avium L.) are a major focus of agriculture in the Okanagan region of British Columbia (BC), Canada. A large portion of the cherries grown in BC are exported and undergo up to four weeks of storage during transportation before delivery and consumption[1]. In 2022, sweet cherries accounted for 11.6% of the revenue of exported fruit from Canada and have an export value of nearly CAD$130 million[2]. As such, sweet cherry is an important fruit with high commercial importance for Canada. Although the application of cold storage is a necessary postharvest tool to maintain fruit quality up to consumption, there are preharvest factors that impact quality after longer-term storage. The work of Serrano et al.[3] noted that the maturity stage at harvest determined the fruit quality of sweet cherries after storage. For this reason, producers use several parameters to establish the optimum time for harvesting. Producers have long used colour as a marker for maturity, yet the concept of fruit dry matter (DM) at harvest affecting post-storage quality has advanced[46]. In fact, Toivonen et al.[6] developed a predictive model for 'Lapins' sweet cherry DM content using a visible/near-infrared spectrometer and noted its potential application to other cultivars to provide a rapid and non-destructive means of determining DM linked to cherry fruit quality. If sweet cherries are harvested at the wrong time or stored improperly during transit the quality of the cherries at their final destination does not compare to that at the time of harvest. Therefore, it is of the utmost importance to harvest cherries at their optimal time to ensure quality retention. Cherry fruits have minimal reserve carbohydrates so respiration relies primarily upon organic acids[7]. Additionally, cherries have a high susceptibility to physical damage making them highly perishable, so it is imperative to store them properly to maintain their flavour profile and overall quality[811]. Lower respiration rates help to maintain higher titratable acidity (TA) levels, thereby retaining flavour quality[11,12]. Decreased respiration rates are achieved through low-temperature storage and shipping.

    Previous research linking cherry fruit maturity to flavour quality indicated early-harvested cherries with low soluble solids (SS) levels showed low consumer acceptance due to perceived low sweetness, while late-harvested cherries showed low consumer acceptance due to poor texture[13,14]. This information underscores the challenge growers face when determining picking date. Additionally, once cherries are harvested, quality changes occur which include changes in the balance of SS to TA levels. Previous work has shown that SS levels remain relatively constant while malic acid levels (the predominant acid in sweet cherries) decreased by 20% when stored for 4 d at 20 °C[8,14]. Further, SS, TA, and the SS/TA ratio are key parameters in defining flavour quality[15] and consumer acceptance[14] as SS and TA have been reported to be measures of the cherry fruit attributes of sweetness, and sourness, respectively. Additionally, the SS/TA ratio is regarded as an overall taste attribute determining sweet cherry acceptability[14,16,17].

    Depending on cultivar and growing location, SS values for sweet cherries have been reported to range from 12.3 to 23.7 °Brix[14]. Rootstock and storage conditions have also been reported to affect SS, TA, and SS/TA values[18]. Depending on rootstock, for 'Regina' sweet cherries, harvest SS values ranged from 14.8 to 16.6 °Brix and TA values ranged from 5.7 to 7.4 g·L−1, while SS values after storage ranged from 14.6 to 18.2 °Brix and TA values ranged from 4.4 to 6.0 g·L−1. The harvest SS/TA ratio ranged from 2.0 to 2.91 and the SS/TA ratio after storage ranged from 2.47 to 3.77 depending on rootstock. Based on sensory studies using various cherry cultivars and breeding selections to gauge flavour quality and consumer acceptance, the optimal SS/TA ratio was reported to be between 1.5 and 2.0, with SS values ranging between 17 and 19 °Brix[19].

    Unfortunately, members of British Columbia's sweet cherry industry have noted that while their cherries arrive at their export locations with good condition in terms of appearance (i.e. firm, shiny, with green stems), issues have been reported concerning flavour. Poor flavour has been associated with lower levels of TA and lower oxygen in the storage atmosphere. Our previous work noted that BC cherry growers tend to pick their cherries at lighter colours in an attempt to harvest the crop as soon as possible to avoid any weather or pest issues and achieve the highest yield possible[1]. Staccato (SC) is a late maturing economically important cultivar with little research data available. It has been reported that SC cherries have a respiration rate that is negatively correlated with colour when collected between a 2 to 6 colour level as determined with CTFIL (Centre Technique Interprofessionnel des Fruit et Legumes, Paris, France) colour chips[1], which have been typically used as a marker of maturity. For SC cultivars, data showed the lowest respiration levels with cherries harvested at CTFIL colour standards 4-5, and may potentially have better flavour quality retention due to these lower respiration rates[1]. The aim of the work was to: 1) examine indicators of maturity/readiness for harvest (colour, SS, DM, TA, and the ratio of soluble solids to titratable acidity (SS/TA)); and 2) determine whether colour at harvest or other parameters (SS, TA, SS/TA, and DM) better predict flavour quality retention after storage.

    Sweetheart (SH), Staccato (SC), and Sentennial (SL) sweet cherries were sourced from research plots located at the Summerland Research and Development Center (SuRDC, Summerland, BC, Canada) in the Okanagan Valley region of British Columbia over three growing seasons (2018, 2019, and 2021). In the 2018 growing season, two cherry cultivars (SH and SC were collected, in the 2019 growing season, in response to BC Cherry Association interest, three cherry cultivars (SH, SC, and SL) were collected. Due to COVID, data was not collected during the 2020 growing season. In the 2021 growing season, full data (SS, TA, DM, and respiration rate) was only collected on the SC cherry cultivar, while DM and respiration values at harvest were also collected for SH and SL cultivars.

    To collect fruit at different maturity levels, cherry fruits were collected at three different color levels using the CTFIL (Centre Technique Interprofessionnel des Fruit et Legumes, Paris, France) colour standard series at three harvest dates for each cultivar which corresponded to the 3-4, 4-5, and 5-6 colour levels.

    To collect environmental data, two trees were chosen in each orchard block and Onset HOBO (Bourne, MA, USA) temperature and humidity loggers were mounted in these trees as described by Ross et al.[1] and captured data at 10 min intervals. The temperature and humidity data were used to calculate average temperature (AT), average high temperature (AHT), average low temperature (ALT), and average relative humidity (ARH) for 28 d preceding the cherry harvest date.

    Cherries were generally harvested before 11:00 h on each harvest day. Harvested cherries were transported back to the lab for sorting, sampling, and storage. Upon arrival, cherries were placed into a walk-in cooler at 0.5 °C to mimic rapid hydro-cooling capabilities that the industry uses. In the afternoon of each harvest day, cherries were removed from the cooler and sorted following British Columbia Tree Fruits Company protocol: (i) size was greater than 25.4 mm (< 10.5 row size); (ii) stemless cherries were removed; and (iii) cherries with defects such as blemishes, splits, pitting, disease (rot, fungi), hail damage and insect damage were removed. Again, the colour of the cherries was assessed using the CTFIL colour standard series. Based on the harvest period, cherries were separated into different colour levels: 3-4, 4-5, and 5-6. For each colour category, quality assessments (DM, SS, TA, SS/TA ratio, firmness, size, stem pull force, stem shrivel, stem browning, pitting, and pebbling) were performed before and after storage.

    Maintaining the quality of sweet cherries undergoing long distance ocean container shipment (up to 28 d/4 weeks) is important for securing a successful export market for Canadian sweet cherries and for ensuring that current market demand is met[1]. For cherries to be marketable after storage, they must pass several quality attributes. Attributes of firmness, size, stem pull force, stem shrivel, stem browning, pitting, and pebbling were assessed using previously described methods[1,20] to assess fruit quality at harvest and after storage for 28 d at 0.5 °C, ideal refrigerated storage temperature, for all cherry cultivars, and also storage for 28 d at 3 °C, non-ideal refrigerated storage temperature, for SC cherries. The values of these parameters are provided in Supplementary Tables S1S6. As the focus of this work was to examine how maturity level at harvest influenced the flavour quality of SC, SH, and SL sweet cherry cultivars, SS, DM, TA, and respiration rate values were the focus for discussion. Respiration analysis was performed using methods described by Ross et al. on freshly harvested cherries[1]. Rates of CO2 production were expressed as mg CO2 kg−1·h−1.

    DM of the cherries was determined using a Felix F750 handheld spectrometer (Felix Instruments, Inc., Camas, WA, USA) loaded with a valid model developed at the Summerland Research and Development Centre for cherries[6]. DM was measured on 25 fruits that were randomly selected from each sample replicate (i.e. 50 cherries). For SS and TA analyses, the methods of Ross et al.[1,20] were used to test 25 fruits that were randomly selected from each sample replicate (i.e. 50 cherries). Briefly, de-stemmed cherries were transferred into a 15.2 cm × 22.9 cm polyethylene Ziplock bag. The bag was left partially open, and the cherries were pressed by hand to obtain juice. The juice was strained and collected into 60 mL polypropylene screw cap containers. The resulting filtrate was tested for SS (°Brix), and TA (g·L−1 malic acid). For SS determination, the refractive indices of the solutions were observed in °Brix temperature-corrected mode on a digital refractometer (Mettler-Toledo, Refracto 30PX, 13/02, LXC13237, Japan). An automated titrator (Metrohm 848 Tritrino Plus; Mississauga, ON, Canada) was used to measure the TA of 10 mL of the juice with 65 mL distilled water to an endpoint of 8.1 with 0.1 mol·L−1 NaOH.

    At each colour level (3-4, 4-5, or 5-6) 10 kg of cherry samples were cooled to either 0.5 or 3 °C (for SC in 2021) and then packed into cardboard boxes with a polyethylene liner, an absorbent pad, and an iButton (Thermodata, Whitewater, WI, USA), which measured temperatures experienced by the cherries in the cardboard boxes during storage. After 28 d, the same quality assessment tests were performed to see if values varied throughout storage time at each temperature.

    Statistical analysis was conducted using SAS Institute Inc. software version 9.3 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA). Data were subjected to a four-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) using the SAS PROC GLM procedure. The four factors tested were colour level (3-4, 4-5, and 5-6), cultivar (SH, SC, and SL), growing year (2018, 2019, and 2021), and time (harvest or storage (0.5 °C)). The significance of the main effects and interaction of the four factors was determined using Type III sum of squares via the ANOVA test. Additionally, ANOVA using the SAS PROC GLM procedure was performed on data collected for SC cultivar in the 2021 growing year to assess the influence on storage temperature (0.5 and 3 °C) on quality parameters. Statistical significance was determined by least significant difference (LSD) Fisher's test at 5% significance level. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was performed using SAS version 9.3 PROC PRINCOMP (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA) on data collected from the three cultivars over the tested growing years at three colour levels (i.e., up to nine samples per cultivar) and 10 variables for each investigation. Variables included: AT, AHT, ALT, ARH, colour at harvest (ColourH), SS at harvest (SSH), SS after 28 d of storage at 0.5 °C (SS05), TA at harvest (TAH), TA after 28 d of storage at 0.5 °C (TA05), and DM of cherry fruit at harvest (DMH). Microsoft Excel was used to generate PCA plots from the data provided by SAS. Only data available for every growing year were included in the PCA. Correlation coefficients were determined using Pearson's correlation coefficient statistical function in Excel (version 2306, Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA). Histograms and frequency data were generated using the statistical function in Excel (version 2306, Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA). Dry matter bin sizes of 1.5% increments were used to present and analyze the histogram and frequency data.

    Tables 14 present data on flavour attributes via values of soluble solids (SS), titratable acidity (TA), SS/TA ratio, and dry matter (DM) as affected by cultivar, growing year, storage and colour level at harvest and after storage, respectively. The most influential parameters in sweet cherry flavour have been found to be SS, TA, and the SS/TA ratio[15]. Additionally, SS and TA values have been found to be related to DM values in kiwis[2124], apples[25], and cherries[6,26]. DM is a measure of solids which includes both soluble sugars and acids along with insoluble structural carbohydrates and starch. Crisosto et al.[4] proposed using DM as an additional quality parameter as DM was determined not to change during cold storage[22]. Toivonen et al.[6] have performed research linking dry matter measurements with sweet cherry quality. As cold storage is also used to maintain cherry quality, assessing DM at harvest and upon storage was of relevance, and a key aspect of this work was to examine how DM values relate to sweet cherry respiration rates and cherry quality parameters.

    Table 1.  Soluble solids values as affected by cultivar, growing year, storage, and colour level at harvest.
    Cultivar Colour level Soluble solids (SS, °Brix)
    2018 2019 2021
    Harvest Storage (0.5 °C) Harvest Storage (0.5 °C) Harvest Storage (0.5 °C) [3 °C]
    Sweetheart 3-4 18.1aA1 17.7aA1 18.1aA1 18.2aA1
    4-5 20.0bA1 19.8bA1 19.4bA1 18.8bA1
    5-6 21.9cA1* 21.1cA1* 19.9bA1* 19.6cA1*
    Staccato 3-4 17.2aA2 17.2aA1 17.1aA2 17.2aA1 18.8aA* 18.9aA*
    18.4a
    4-5 17.8aA2 17.9aA2 18.3bA23 18.1bA1 19.9bA* 18.6aB
    18.9ab
    5-6 20.2bA2 17.9aB2* 20.2cA1 20.3cA13 20.1bA 19.5aA
    19.7b
    Sentennial 3-4 18.1aA1 18.1aA1
    4-5 18.9bA13 18.5aA1
    5-6 20.8cA2 20.6bA23
    Main effects Significance F-value Degrees of freedom
    Cultivar p < 0.0001 36.90 2
    Colour level p < 0.0001 125.76 2
    Year p < 0.0001 9.26 2
    Time (harvest or storage at 0.5 °C) p = 0.0002 13.68 1
    Colour differences: within common time and cultivar, values followed by different lower case letters indicate significant differences (p ≤ 0.05); Cultivar differences: within common colour level and time, values followed by different numbers indicate significant differences (p ≤ 0.05); Growing year differences: within common time, colour level and cultivar, values followed by * indicate significant differences (p ≤ 0.05); Storage differences (Harvest versus 0.5 °C storage): within common cultivar, colour level and growing year, values followed by different uppercase letter indicate significant differences (p ≤ 0.05); Temperature differences: within Staccato cultivar at 28 d storage and at common colour level, bolded values indicate significant differences (p ≤ 0.05) between storage temperatures (0.5 °C vs 3 °C). (N.B. no bolded values appear in this table).
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 2.  Titratable acidity values as affected by cultivar, growing year, storage and colour level at harvest.
    Cultivar Colour level Titratable acidity (TA, g·L−1 malic acid)
    2018 2019 2021
    Harvest Storage (0.5 °C) Harvest Storage (0.5 °C) Harvest Storage (0.5 °C) [3 °C]
    Sweetheart 3-4 8.99aA1* 7.11aB1* 7.31aA1* 6.31aB1*
    4-5 9.55bA1* 7.57bB1* 7.14aA1* 6.13aB1*
    5-6 10.56cA1* 8.57cB1* 7.56aA1* 6.50aB1*
    Staccato 3-4 8.53aA2* 6.65aB2* 6.96aA1* 5.51aB2* 12.0aA* 10.5aB*
    9.7a
    4-5 8.87abA2* 7.04bB2* 7.30aA1* 6.21bB1* 12.8aA* 10.2aB*
    9.3a
    5-6 8.91bA2* 6.91abB2 7.18aA1* 6.46bB1 10.6bA* 9.5b*
    8.5b
    Sentennial 3-4 9.21acA2 7.60aB3
    4-5 9.33aA2 7.89aB2
    5-6 8.79bcA2 7.66aB2
    Main effects Significance F-value Degrees of freedom
    Cultivar p < 0.0001 193.58 2
    Colour level p = 0.0023 5.49 2
    Year p < 0.0001 1,007.20 2
    Time (harvest or storage at 0.5 °C) p < 0.0001 474.18 1
    Colour differences: within common time and cultivar, values followed by different lower case letters indicate significant differences (p ≤ 0.05); Cultivar differences: within common colour level and time, values followed by different numbers indicate significant differences (p ≤ 0.05); Growing year differences: within common time, colour level and cultivar, values followed by * indicate significant differences (p ≤ 0.05); Storage differences (Harvest versus 0.5 °C storage): within common cultivar, colour level and growing year, values followed by different uppercase letter indicate significant differences (p ≤ 0.05); Temperature differences: within Staccato cultivar at 28 d storage and at common colour level, bolded values indicate significant differences (p ≤ 0.05) between storage temperatures (0.5 °C vs 3 °C).
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 3.  Soluble solids to titratable acidity ratio values as affected by cultivar, growing year, storage and colour level at harvest.
    Cultivar Colour level Soluble solids to titratable acidity ratio (SS/TA)
    2018 2019 2021
    Harvest Storage (0.5 °C) Harvest Storage (0.5 °C) Harvest Storage (0.5 °C) [3 °C]
    Sweetheart 3-4 2.02a1A* 2.49a1B* 2.49a1A* 2.78a1B*
    4-5 2.09a1A* 2.61a1B* 2.71b1A* 3.06b1B*
    5-6 2.07a1A* 2.46a1B* 2.63b1A* 3.02b1B*
    Staccato 3-4 2.01a1A* 2.58a1B* 2.46a1A* 3.11a2B* 1.57aA* 1.79aB*
    1.89a
    4-5 2.0a1A* 2.54a1B* 2.51a2A* 2.91b1B* 1.55aA* 1.83aB*
    2.04a
    5-6 2.27b2A* 2.58a1B* 2.81b1A* 3.14a1B* 1.89bA* 2.06bB*
    2.32b
    Sentennial 3-4 1.97a2A 2.38a3B
    4-5 2.02a3A 2.34a2B
    5-6 2.37b2A 2.69b2B
    Main effects Significance F-value Degrees of freedom
    Cultivar p < 0.0001 94.79 2
    Colour level p < 0.0001 22.04 2
    Year p < 0.0001 361.13 2
    Time (harvest or storage at 0.5 °C) p < 0.0001 134.15 1
    Colour differences: within common time and cultivar, values followed by different lower case letters indicate significant differences (p ≤ 0.05); Cultivar differences: within common colour level and time, values followed by different numbers indicate significant differences (p ≤ 0.05); Growing year differences: within common time, colour level and cultivar, values followed by * indicate significant differences (p ≤ 0.05); Storage differences (Harvest versus 0.5 °C storage): within common cultivar, colour level and growing year, values followed by different uppercase letter indicate significant differences (p ≤ 0.05); Temperature differences: within Staccato cultivar at 28 d storage and at common colour level, bolded values indicate significant differences (p ≤ 0.05) between storage temperatures (0.5 °C vs 3 °C).
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 4.  Dry matter values as affected by cultivar, growing year, storage and colour level at harvest.
    Cultivar Colour level Dry matter (DM, %)
    2018 2019 2021
    Harvest Storage (0.5 °C) Harvest Storage (0.5 °C) Harvest Storage (0.5 °C) [3 °C]
    Sweetheart 3-4 20.9aA1* 20.6aA1* 18.6aA1* 18.6aA1* 22.1aA1*
    4-5 21.9bA1 22.0bA1* 19.9bA1* 19.8acA1* 22.5bA1
    5-6 25.2cA1* 23.5cB1* 21.1cA1* 20.6bcA1* 23.6cA1*
    Staccato 3-4 20.2aA1* 19.5aA2* 18.4aA2* 18.1aA23* 21.0aA2* 20.6aA*
    19.8a
    4-5 20.4aA2* 20.8bA2* 19.1aA1* 18.8aA2* 22.0bA2* 21.6bA*
    21.9b
    5-6 22.4bA2 22.3cA2 22.9bA2* 21.6bA23 23.0cA2 22.2bA
    22.4b
    Sentennial 3-4 18.2aA2 18.4aA13 20.5aA2*
    4-5 19.3bA1 18.8bA2 22.6bA12*
    5-6 22.9cA2 20.9bA13 23.5cA12
    Main effects Significance F-value Degrees of freedom
    Cultivar p < 0.0001 11.36 2
    Colour level p < 0.0001 130.99 2
    Year p < 0.0001 56.64 2
    Time (harvest or storage at 0.5 °C) Not significant, p = 0.0922 2.97 1
    Colour differences: within common time and cultivar, values followed by different lower case letters indicate significant differences (p ≤ 0.05); Cultivar differences: within common colour level and time, values followed by different numbers indicate significant differences (p ≤ 0.05); Growing year differences: within common time, colour level and cultivar, values followed by * indicate significant differences (p ≤ 0.05); Storage differences (Harvest versus 0.5 °C storage): within common cultivar, colour level and growing year, values followed by different uppercase letter indicate significant differences (p ≤ 0.05); Temperature differences: within Staccato cultivar at 28 d storage and at common colour level, bolded values indicate significant differences (p ≤ 0.05) between storage temperatures (0.5 °C vs 3 °C). (N.B. no bolded values appear in this table).
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Data in Table 1 shows the SS levels at each colour level for each sweet cherry cultivar. Overall, SH cherries at harvest had ranges of 18.1%−21.9% over the 2018 and 2019 growing seasons. SC cherries at harvest had levels between 17.1%−20.2% over the three growing years (2018, 2019, and 2021), while SL cherries at harvest had levels of 18.1%−20.8% in 2019. Statistical analysis showed that the main effects of Cultivar (p < 0.0001; F-value = 36.90; degrees of freedom (df) = 2), Colour (p < 0.0001; F-value = 125.76, df = 2), Time (p = 0.0007; F-value = 13.68; df = 1), and Year (p < 0.0001; F-value = 9.26; df = 2) were all significant. Additionally, the interactions of Cultivar * Year (p < 0.0001, F-value = 26.37; df = 1), Colour * Year (p < 0.0069; F-value = 4.19; df = 4), Cultivar * Colour * Year (p < 0.0003; F-value = 10.28; df = 2) and Colour * Time * Year (p < 0.0131; F-value = 3.67; df = 4) were all significant.

    With respect to growing year differences, in 2018, SS levels in SH were greater than those of SC at all colour levels. In 2019, again at the 3-4 colour level SC, cherries exhibited lower SS levels than SH and SL cherries. At the 4-5 colour level, SH cherries again showed higher SS levels compared to SC cherries. At the 5-6 colour level, SL cherries showed higher SS levels compared to SC and SH, while SC and SH cherries showed comparable SS levels at the 5-6 colour level. The SS values of SC cherries at 3-4 and 4-5 colour levels from the 2021 growing year were higher than values observed at the same colour levels in 2018 and 2019 growing year samples. There was no difference observed in SS levels of SC cherries at the 5-6 colour level between growing years. The data shows that colour level, cultivar, and growing year all affected SS levels.

    Within cultivars, for SH in the 2018 growing season, as colour level increased, SS level increased. An increase in SS as colour at harvest increased for SH cultivar was reported by Puniran et al.[27]. In the 2019 growing year for SH cherries and in the 2021 growing year for SC cherries, SS levels plateaued at the 4-5 colour level. For SC (2018 and 2019 growing year) and SL cherries (2019 growing year) as colour level increased, SS level increased. Ross et al.[1] reported this same trend for SC cultivar on data collected from 2015, 2016, and 2017 growing years. This data demonstrates the influence of growing conditions on SS levels.

    In general the SS levels at each colour level for each sweet cherry cultivar did not change over the 28 d storage at 0.5 °C. It should be noted that SC cherries from the 2018 growing year at the 5-6 colour level and SC cherries from the 2021 growing year at the 4-5 colour level did show a significant (p ≤ 0.05) decrease in soluble solids after 28 d of storage at 0.5 °C. SS values for 2018 SC cherries at the 5-6 colour level harvest was 20.2 °Brix, while SS values after 28 day storage at 0.5 °C was 17.9 °Brix. SS values for 2021 SC cherries at the 4-5 colour level harvest was 19.9 °Brix, while SS values after 28 d of storage at 0.5 °C was 18.6 °Brix. In 2021 the effect of storage temperature (0.5 °C vs 3 °C) was investigated. SS levels in the SC cherries at the different colour levels were not affected by the different storage temperatures. This result was consistent with other findings[1,8,14], which suggested that under typical low temperature storage conditions and proper shipping conditions, the change in flavour profiles were likely not due to major changes in SS levels. It is important to note that Alique et al.[8] found that while SS values were consistent, the levels of glucose and fructose decreased by 13% and 10%, respectively, after 4 d under ambient conditions. It may be worth investigating if under a lower temperature environment, the levels of key monosaccharides would remain constant or change.

    This moves the focus of flavour retention to TA values. Table 2 shows the TA levels at each colour level for each sweet cherry cultivar. Statistical analysis showed that the main effects of Cultivar (p < 0.0001; F-value = 193.58; df = 2), Colour (p = 0.0023; F-value = 5.49, df = 2), Time (p < 0.0001; F-value = 474.18; df = 1), and Year (p < 0.0001; F-value = 1007.20; df = 2) were all significant. The interactions of Cultivar * Colour (p < 0.001; F-value = 5.81; df = 4); Cultivar * Year (p < 0.0001; F-value = 19.9; df = 1); Colour * Time (p = 0.0431; F-value = 3.44; df = 2); Colour * Year (p < 0.0001; F-value = 18.01; df = 4); Time * Year (p < 0.0001; F-value = 17.21; df = 2); Cultivar * Colour * Year (p = 0.0009; F-value = 8.63; df = 2); Colour * Time * Year (p = 0.0127; F-value = 3.70; df = 4) were all significant.

    SH cherries at harvest had TA value ranges of 8.99−10.56 g·L−1 in 2018, and 7.31−7.56 g·L−1 in 2019. In 2018, the highest TA value was at the 5-6 colour level for SH cherries, while for the 2019 SH cherries there was no difference between colour levels for the TA values. After storage SH cherries at the various colour levels showed TA levels of 7.11−8.57 g·L−1 and 6.31−6.50 g·L−1 for 2018 and 2019, respectively. Again the stored 2018 SH cherries at the 5-6 colour level showed the highest TA values, while the TA values for the stored 2019 SH cherries were not affected by colour level. SC cherries at harvest showed TA value ranges of 8.53−8.91 g·L−1 in 2018, 6.96−7.18 g·L−1 in 2019, and 10.6−12.8 g·L−1 in 2021. After storage SC cherries had lower TA values at all colour levels for all growing years. In 2018, 2019, and 2021, TA values for SC cherries after storage ranged from 6.65–7.04 g·L−1, 5.51−6.46 g·L−1 and 8.5−10.5 g·L−1, respectively. In 2021, for the SC cherries, the higher storage temperature (3 °C) resulted in a greater loss of TA values for all colour levels compared to the lower temperature of 0.5 °C. SL cherries at harvest had TA levels of 8.79−9.33 g·L−1 in 2019 and after storage at 0.5 C, TA values ranged from 7.60−7.89 g·L−1, with the highest value of TA at the 4-5 colour level. Therefore for all cultivars over all growing years, TA values decreased upon storage, which was expected. The data from Table 2 shows the magnitude of the decrease in TA values after storage varied by growing year. Additionally, trends for differences of TA magnitude change with respect to cultivar and colour level were not obvious. The magnitude of the decrease in TA values between harvest and storage was higher for the SC cherries stored at 3 °C compared to those stored at 0.5 °C.

    Comparing the effect of colour level on TA level within cultivar for SH cherries, TA values increased as colour level at harvest increased in 2018, but the trend did not continue in 2019, possibly due to different growing conditions such as orchard temperature and relative humidity values, which will be further discussed. For SC cherries, TA values peaked at the 4-5 colour level for 2018 and 2021 growing years, but were not significantly different between colour levels in 2019 (p ≤ 0.05). In the 2019 growing year, SL cherries also had the highest TA values at the 4-5 colour level. Comparing the effect of cultivar on TA level within comparable colour level, 2018 harvest SH cherries showed higher TA values than SC cherries. In the 2018 growing year, upon storage and at comparable colour level, SH cherries again showed higher TA values than SC cherries. In the 2019 harvest, SC cherries exhibited the same TA values as SH cherries, while SL cherries had higher TA values than SC and SH. In the 2019 growing year SL cherries harvested at the 3-4 colour level showed greater TA values after storage compared to SH and SC cherries; SC cherries had the lowest TA values at this colour level. When harvested at the 4-5 and 5-6 colour levels, SL cherries had higher TA values upon storage compared to SH and SC cherries.

    The data suggests that different cultivars tend to peak TA values, which may be affected by growing conditions/growing year and maturity level/colour level. This is further supported by the work of Miloševic & Miloševic[28] that indicated TA levels of sour cherries are affected by level of ripeness. Puniran et al.[27] also indicted that finding where peak TA values occur at harvest can help negate the decrease in values that occurs during storage and therefore promote flavour quality retention.

    In 2021 the effect of storage temperature (0.5 °C vs 3 °C) was investigated as 0.5 °C represents ideal storage temperature while 3 °C represents a storage temperature where quality deterioration would be promoted, and may be a more realistic temperature experienced during overseas/export shipping (personal communication, Dr. Peter Toivonen, May, 2021). TA levels in the SC cherries harvested at the different colour levels were affected by the different storage temperature as seen in Table 2. At common colour level, SC cherries from the 2021 growing season stored at 3 °C showed lower TA values than samples stored at 0.5 °C. The SC cherries at the 5-6 colour level stored at 3 °C showed the lowest TA values upon storage. As higher TA values are associated with flavour quality[11,12], the SC cherries harvested at the 5-6 colour level and stored at 3 °C would show poorer flavour quality.

    Table 3 shows the SS/TA ratio values as affected by cultivar, growing year, storage and colour level at harvest. Statistical analysis showed that the main effects of Cultivar (p = 0.0001; F-value = 94.79; df = 2), Colour (p < 0.0001; F-value = 22.04; df = 2), Time (p < 0.0001; F-value = 134.15; df = 1), and Year (p < 0.0001; F-value = 361.13; df = 2) were all significant. The interactions of Cultivar * Colour (p = 0.0009; F-value = 5.91; df = 4) and Time * Year (p = 0.0059; F-value = 5.95; df = 2) were significant. The SS/TA ratio values over all cultivars, colour levels and growing years ranged from 1.55 to 2.81 at harvest and 1.79 to 3.14 after storage at 0.5 °C for 28 d. SC cherries in the 2021 growing year were tested to determine the effect of storage temperature (0.5 or 3 °C) on flavour quality. The SS/TA ratio for the 2021 SC cherries stored at 0.5 °C for 28 d ranged from 1.79 to 2.06 while the SS/TA ratio for the 2021 SC cherries stored at 3 °C for 28 d ranged from 1.89 to 2.32. SS/TA ratios for the 3 °C stored cherries at the 4-5 and 5-6 colour levels were significantly higher (p ≤ 0.05) compared to corresponding SS/TA ratios for the 0.5 °C stored cherries at the 4-5 and 5-6 colour levels. Higher SS/TA ratio are due to lower TA values (data in Table 3) and impact flavour quality and therefore lower storage temperatures are preferable, which was expected.

    Comparing between growing years, for SH and SC cherries, the SS/TA ratio at harvest was higher in the 2019 growing year compared to the 2018 growing year. SC cherries from the 2021 growing year showed the lowest at harvest SS/TA ratio. Within cultivar, the SH cherries from the 2018 growing year showed no difference in harvest SS/TA ratio at the different colour levels. SH cherries from the 2019 growing year showed higher harvest SS/TA ratios at the 4-5 and 5-6 colour levels compared to the 3-4 colour level. The SC cherries at all growing years showed highest harvest SS/TA ratio levels at the 5-6 colour level and comparable harvest SS/TA ratio levels at the 3-4 and 4-5 colour levels. SL cherries also showed the highest harvest SS/TA ratio at the 5-6 colour level and comparable harvest SS/TA ratios at the 3-4 and 4-5 colour levels.

    Comparing cultivars at common colour level, in 2018 growing year SC cherries at the 5-6 colour level showed a higher harvest SS/TA ratio compared to SH cherries at the corresponding colour level. In the 2019 growing year SH and SC cherries showed higher harvest SS/TA ratios at the 3-4 colour level compared to SL cherries. At the 4-5 colour level, SH cherries showed the highest harvest SS/TA ratio value and SL cherries showed the lowest harvest SS/TA ratio value. At the 5-6 colour level, SH and SC cherries showed comparable SS/TA ratios while SL cherries showed the lowest SS/TA ratio.

    Overall, this data indicates that ensuring cherry flavour quality is complex as SS/TA ratio varied by growing year, colour level and cultivar. Comparing SS/TA ratio data for all cultivars over all growing years did not show an observable trend between colour level and SS/TA ratio. As such, colour is not a reliable indicator of flavor quality.

    Table 4 shows the DM values as affected by cultivar, growing year, storage and colour level at harvest. Statistical analysis showed that the main effects of Cultivar (p = 0.0001; F-value = 11.36; df = 2), Colour (p < 0.0001; F-value = 130.99; df = 2), and Year (p < 0.0001; F-value = 56.64; df = 2) were all significant. Notably, the main effect of Time (harvest vs stored) was not significant (p = 0.0922). The interactions of Cultivar * Year (p = 0.001; F-value = 6.45; df = 3); Colour * Year (p = 0.0004; F-value = 6.38; df = 4); Cultivar * Colour * Year (p = 0.0018; F-value = 4.64; df = 5) were all significant. Although SS and TA values were not obtained for all three cultivars in 2021, DM values at harvest were obtained for all three cultivars in 2021. Data in Table 4 show, in general, DM levels did not change over 28-d storage, which was expected. Additionally, data in Table 4 shows that in most cases, at common cultivar and colour level, DM values measured in 2021 were greater than DM values measured in 2018 and 2019 for all cultivars (SH, SC, and SL).

    Within each cultivar, over all growing years, the harvest DM values were significantly different (p < 0.05) at each colour level, except for SC cherries in the 2018 and 2019 growing years. 2018 and 2019 DM values were not significantly different from colour level 3-4 to colour level 4-5. At the 5-6 colour level, over all growing years, SH cherries showed higher DM values compared to dry matter values observed for SC cherries (p < 0.05). At the 3-4 colour level, over all growing seasons, the DM values for SL and SC cherries were not significantly different (p < 0.05). At the 4-5 colour level, over all growing seasons, the DM values for SL were not significantly different than the DM values exhibited by SH and SC cherries (p < 0.05). In 2021 the effect of storage temperature (0.5 °C vs 3 °C) was investigated. DM levels in the SC cherries at the different colour levels were not affected by the different storage temperature. Overall, DM levels ranged from 18.1 to 25.2 depending on cultivar, colour level, growing year, and storage.

    Figure 1ac shows the distribution of the three cherry cultivars relative to DM value ranges over all three growing years via histograms. Cherries at the same colour level did not all have the same DM; this was observed both within and between cultivars (Fig. 1ac). DM data, compiled over all available growing years, for each cultivar in the 3-4, 4-5, and 5-6 colour levels had considerable overlap. However, it is noted there is consistent shift to a higher DM at the 5-6 colour level.

    Figure 1.  Histogram representing distribution of dry matter data for: (a) Sweetheart (SH) cherries over the 2018, 2019, and 2021 growing years; (b) Staccato (SC) cherries over the 2018, 2019, and 2021 growing years; and (c) Sentennial (SL) cherries over the 2019 and 2021 growing years. For all parts, the 3-4 colour level is solid black, the 4-5 level is black stripes, and the 5-6 level is solid grey. On the horizontal axis different dry matter value (DM) ranges are shown via bins and on the vertical axis the frequency or proportion (%) of cherries within the DM bins/ranges are shown. Data was generated from two replicates of samples of 25 cherries (i.e. 50 cherries) from all available growing years.

    Over all growing years, DM values for SH cherries ranged from 14%−27%, 14%−28.5%, and 16.5%−33%, at the 3-4, 4-5, and 5-6 colour levels, respectively (Fig. 1a). SH cherries at the 3-4 and 4-5 colour levels showed the highest proportion (26% and 26%, respectively) of cherries resided in the 22.5 and 22.5% DM bins indicating the highest percentage of SH cherries in these colour levels exhibited a DM of 21% to 22.5%, while the highest proportion (21%) of cherries at the 5-6 colour level resided in the 24% DM bin indicating the highest percentage of SH cherries at this colour level exhibited a DM of 22.5% to 24% (Fig. 1a).

    For SC cherries over all growing years, DM values ranged from 14%−25.5%, 14%−30%, and 16.5%−30%, at the 3-4, 4-5, and 5-6 colour levels, respectively (Fig. 1b). SC cherries at the 3-4 colour level showed the highest proportion of cherries (27%) resided in the 19.5% DM bin which indicated the highest percentage of SC cherries at this colour level exhibited a DM of 18 to 19.5%. SC cherries at the 4-5 colour level showed the highest proportion of cherries (25%) resided in the in the 21% DM bin which indicated the highest percentage of SC cherries at this colour level exhibited a DM of 19.5% to 21 %. At the 5-6 colour level, the highest proportion (35%) of SC cherries resided in the 22.5% DM bin which indicated the highest percentage of SC cherries exhibited a DM of 21%−22.5% (Fig. 1b).

    Over the 2019 and 2021 growing years, SL cherries DM values ranged from 15%−25.5%, 15%−28.5%, and 16.5%−33% at the 3-4, 4-5 and 5-6 colour levels, respectively (Fig. 1c). SL cherries at the 3-4 colour level showed the highest proportion of cherries (36%) resided in the 21% DM bin which indicated the highest percentage of SL cherries at this colour level exhibited a DM of 19.5% to 21%. SL cherries at the 4-5 colour level showed the highest proportion of cherries (28%) resided in the in the 21% DM bin which indicated the highest percentage of SL cherries at this colour level exhibited a DM of 19.5% to 21 %. At the 5-6 colour level, the highest proportion (26%) of SC cherries resided in the 22.5% DM bin which indicated the highest percentage of SL cherries exhibited a DM of 21%−22.5% (Fig. 1c).

    In all, the data in Tables 14 and Fig. 1 indicate that colour is not a reliable indicator of maturity or flavor quality. Cherries of the same colour may differ in DM, SS, TA, and SS/TA ratio due to cultivar and growing conditions. The implication of these results are discussed in subsequent sections.

    Temperature, relative humidity and harvest date for the 2018, 2019, and 2021 growing years are detailed in Table 5. Environmental variations between years impacted colour development, which resulted in yearly variations in our harvest dates as cherry picks were based on cherry colour levels: 2018, July 16 to August 9; 2019, July 18 to August 6; and 2021, July 5 to July 27, nearly two weeks earlier than in previous years (Table 5). In terms of environmental data, the average temperature (AT), average high temperature (AHT), and average low temperature (ALT) values measured in 2021 were greater than the values determined in 2018 and 2019, while the average relative humidity (ARH) values determined in 2021 were lower than the values measured in 2018 and 2019 (Table 5). Depending on growing year and harvest date, average temperature values ranged from 17.17 to 24.28 °C, average high temperature values ranged from 28.59 to 50.68 °C, average low temperatures ranged from 7.17 to 10.68 °C, and average relative humidity values ranged from 40.68% to 66.16% (Table 5).

    Table 5.  Temperature and relative humidity environmental data for 2018, 2019, and 2021 growing years.
    Growing year Colour level Harvest date Average
    temperature
    (AT) (°C)
    Average relative humidity (ARH) Average low temperature (ALT) (°C) Average high temperature (AHT) (°C)
    2018 Sweetheart 3-4 July 16 18.96 61.5% 7.17 32.14
    4-5 July 23 18.85 59.8% 7.17 32.13
    5-6 July 30 20.45 56.85% 7.49 32.05
    Staccato 3-4 July 30 19.74 59.17% 7.42 32.04
    4-5 August 9 21.14 54.46% 7.42 32.77
    5-6 August 9 21.14 54.49% 7.42 32.77
    2018 overall average 20.05 57.71% 7.35 32.32
    2019 Sweetheart 3-4 July 18 17.86 66.04% 7.22 28.79
    4-5 July 24 18.39 66.1% 7.22 28.59
    5-6 July 24 18.39 66.1% 7.22 28.59
    Staccato 3-4 July 22 18.03 66.16% 7.22 28.59
    4-5 July 29 19.19 62.92% 8.67 29.39
    5-6 July 31 19.19 62.92% 8.67 29.39
    Sentennial 3-4 July 22 18.03 66.16% 7.22 28.59
    4-5 July 29 18.99 63.77% 8.67 29.39
    5-6 August 6 19.79 59.94% 8.67 29.39
    2019 overall average 18.87 63.65% 8.19 28.96
    2021 Sweetheart 3-4 July 5 24.01 40.68% 8.51 50.68
    4-5 July 12 24.28 40.68% 10.68 49.23
    5-6 July 20 24.10 40.68% 9.66 47.47
    Staccato 3-4 July 13 24.01 40.68% 8.51 50.68
    4-5 July 21 24.28 40.68% 10.68 49.23
    5-6 July 27 24.10 40.68% 9.66 47.47
    Sentennial 3-4 July 12 24.01 40.68% 8.51 50.68
    4-5 July 19 24.28 40.68% 10.68 49.23
    5-6 July 26 24.10 40.68% 9.66 47.47
    2021 overall average 24.12 40.68% 9.62 49.13
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Principal component analysis (PCA) was performed on all cultivars over all growing seasons to best resolve cultivar specific relationships between variables affecting flavour quality parameters: colour, DM, SS and TA (Fig. 2).

    Figure 2.  Principal component analysis (PCA) plot for: Sweetheart (SH) cherries with data from 2018 and 2019 growing years at the 3-4, 4-5, and 5-6 colours levels (SH34-2018, SH45-2018, SH56-2018, SH34-2019, SH45-2019, and SH56-2019; Staccato (SC) cherries with data from 2018, 2019 and 2021 growing years at the 3-4, 4-5, and 5-6 colour levels (SC34-2018, SC45-2018, SC56-2018, SC34-2019, SC45-2019, SC56-2019, SC34-2021, SC45-2021, and SC56-2021); and Sentennial (SL) cherries with data from 2019 growing year (SL34-2019, SL45-2019, and SL56-2019). PC1 and PC2 accounted for 84.75% variation. The variables include: average temperature (AT), average high temperature (AHT), average low temperature (ALT), average relative humidity (ARH), colour at harvest (ColourH), SS at harvest (SSH), SS after 28 d of storage at 0.5 °C (SS05), titratable acidity at harvest (TAH), titratable acidity after 28 d of storage at 0.5 °C (TA05) and dry matter of cherry fruit at harvest (DMH). Orchard growing factors, flavour quality attributes (loading factors), along with sweet cherry cultivars from each growing season (component scores) were presented as lines with arrows, lines with circles, and squares, respectively. Variables close to each other with small angles between them are strongly positively correlated; variables at right angles are likely not correlated; variables at large angles (close to 180°) are strongly negatively correlated.

    Figure 2 shows that principal components 1 and 2 described most of the variation (84.75%) in the model. SS at harvest (SSH) and SS at 28-d storage at 0.5 °C (SS05) along with DM at harvest (DMH) were positively correlated with colour at harvest (ColourH). TA at harvest (TAH) and TA at 28-d storage at 0.5 °C (TA05) were positively correlated with average high temperature (ATH). AHT, average low temperature (ALT) and average temperature (AT). DMH was more strongly correlated with TAH and TA05 compared to ColourH. TAH and TA05 were positively correlated, yet negatively correlated with average relative humidity (ARH). The 2021 SC samples at the 3-4, 4-5, and 5-6 colour levels (SC34-2021, SC45-2021, and SC56-2021) were clustered with TAH, TA05, ALT, AHT, and AT variables and located in a quadrant opposite of ARH. In late June 2021 a heatwave of unprecedented magnitude impacted the Pacific Northwest region of Canada and the United States; the Canadian national temperature record was broken with a new record temperature of 49.6 °C[29]. Also, the relative humidity levels during this period were also extremely low[30]. As the location of this study was impacted by this heatwave, the data shown in Table 6 shows higher temperatures and lower relative humidity values for the 2021 growing year. The TA values measured in the 2021 growing year were nearly two times the levels measured in the 2018 and 2019 growing years (Table 2). This shows an impact of growing conditions on flavor quality; both the negative correlation between ARH and TA and positive correlations of AT, AHT, and ALT with TA are notable. However, it is noted that correlation does not mean causation. The SH and SC cultivars from the 2018 growing year at the 5-6 colour level were clustered together, and were located in the same quadrant as ColourH, SSH, SS05, and DMH variables (Fig. 2). This indicates these samples were characterized by high values of SSH, SS05, and DMH. All cultivars at the 3-4 colour level from the 2018 (SH and SC), and 2019 (SH, SC, and SL) growing years along with all cultivars at the 4-5 colour level from the 2019 (SH, SC, and SL) growing year were clustered in quadrants opposite of the SSH, SS05, DMH, ColourH, TAH, and TA05 variables while near the ARH variable. The clustering of the samples indicates similarity and lower levels of SSH, SS05, DMH, TAH, and TA05.

    Table 6.  Average colour level and respiration rate of sweet cherries at harvest.
    Growing year Colour
    level
    Average colour measured at harvest
    [average dry matter at harvest]
    Dry matter bin (%), highest
    proportions of cherries
    Respiration rate (mg CO2 kg−1·h−1)
    assessed at 0.5, 5 or 10 °C
    0.5 °C 5 °C 10 °C
    2018 Sweetheart 3-4 3.74a1 [20.9%] 21, 38% 2.87a1 * 5.99a1* 9.75a1*
    4-5 4.66b1 [21.9%] 22.5, 38% 3.57b1* 5.53b1* 9.06a1*
    5-6 5.54c1 [25.2%] 25.5, 26% 3.50b1* 5.18b1* 9.58a1*
    Staccato 3-4 3.58a1 [20.2%] 19.5, 44% 4.43a2* 7.08a2* 9.90a1*
    4-5 4.62b1 [20.4%] 21, 36% 4.58a2* 8.05b2* 11.22b2*
    5-6 5.64c1 [22.4%] 22.5, 50% 4.12b2* 6.43c2* 9.78a1*
    2019 Sweetheart 3-4 3.76a1 [18.6%] 18, 26%; 19.5, 26% Nd 6.04 13.7
    4-5 4.42b1 [19.9%] 21, 32% Nd Nd 8.3
    5-6 5.42c1 [21.1%] 22.5, 28% Nd 6.95 13.5
    Staccato 3-4 3.46a1 [18.4%] 19.5, 32% Nd 5.8 12.47
    4-5 4.40b12 [19.1%] 19.5, 40% Nd 6.14 Nd
    5-6 5.40c1 [22.9%] 22.5, 26% Nd Nd Nd
    Sentennial 3-4 3.62a1 [18.2%] 18, 28% Nd 6.5 12.80
    4-5 4.22b2 [19.3%] 21, 40% Nd 3.76 Nd
    5-6 5.20c2 [22.9%] 22.5, 24% Nd Nd Nd
    2021 Sweetheart 3-4 Nd [22.1%] 22.5, 40% 3.18a1* 5.86a1* 8.8a1*
    4-5 Nd [22.5%] 22.5, 28% 2.78a1* 5.08b1* 8.1a1*
    5-6 Nd [23.6%] 24, 30% 2.65a1* 4.32c1* 9.19a1*
    Staccato 3-4 3.50a1 [21.0%] 19.5, 28% 2.72a1 4.65ab2 10.94a2*
    4-5 4.80b1 [22.0%] 21, 24%; 22.5, 20% 3.27a1* 4.38a2* 8.22b1*
    5-6 5.60c1 [23.0%] 24, 30% 3.05a1* 5.07b2* 9.57ab1*
    Sentennial 3-4 Nd [20.5%] 21, 48% 2.71a1* 4.77a2* 7.84a1*
    4-5 Nd [22.6%] 22.5, 28%; 24, 24% 2.78a1* 4.81a12* 8.28ab1*
    5-6 Nd [23.5%] 22.5, 28%; 24, 24% 4.23b2 4.47a12 9.88b1*
    Within common cultivar and growing year, values followed by different letters indicate significant differences (p ≤ 0.05)-shows colour differences; Within common colour level and growing year, values followed by different numbers indicate significant differences (p ≤ 0.05)-shows cultivar differences; Within common cultivar, growing year and colour level, values followed by * indicate significant differences (p ≤ 0.05)-shows respiration rate differences at the different temperatures. Due to incomplete data, statistical analysis was not performed on 2019 data. Nd = Actual colour was not calculated for Sweetheart and Sentennial cherries in 2021 although cherries were collected 3-4, 4-5, 5-6 colour levels as in previous years and can be considered to have colour levels of approximately 3.5, 4.5, and 5.5, respectively.
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    High respiration rates have long been associated with rapid fruit quality deterioration[11]. Lower respiration rates help to maintain higher TA levels, thereby retaining flavour quality[11,12]. This work aimed to provide information on assessing whether rapid and non-invasive dry matter measurements can serve as a surrogate for respiration rate measurements and/or TA measurements to predict fruit quality as this information is essential for developing recommendations to optimize cherry quality retention upon long distance transport. Although it is well known that quality deteriorates more quickly in fruit with higher respiration rates, the respiration rate data for the SH, SC, and SL cherries was collected and analyzed with respect to the different colour levels and corresponding DM values to investigate a link between respiration rate and DM value. Examining the data with this perspective is very novel and additionally very little information on respiration rates is available for SC and SL sweet cherries cultivars in the literature.

    Table 6 shows the respiration rates for a) SH and b) SC cherries at different colour levels for the 2018 growing year and how they were affected by respiration rate assessment temperature (0.5, 5, and 10 °C). Table 6 also shows the respiration rates for a) SH, b) SC, and c) SL cherries at different colour levels for the 2021 growing year and how they are affected by respiration rate assessment temperature. Please note respiration data is incomplete for the 2019 growing year because of data constraints due to equipment difficulties and therefore no statistical analysis was performed on the available 2019 respiration data. As little information exists in the literature for SC and SL cherries, we have included the incomplete respiration data. Table 6 also shows average color data and average DM data for the cherries collected at the different colour levels. Additionally, Table 6 shows data on the DM (%) bins containing the highest proportion of cherries for each cultivar in each growing year at each colour level (histograms for each cultivar for individual growing year not shown).

    Table 6 shows the average colour measured for the cherries harvested at the 3-4, 4-5, and 5-6 colour levels all varied slightly depending on growing year and cultivar. In both the 2018 and 2019 growing years there was no difference in color levels between SH and SC at harvest. In the 2019 growing year, the SL cherries showed lower average colour values at the 4-5 and 5-6 colour levels compared to the average colour levels of SH and SC cherries at the same level. Nevertheless, results indicated the cherries were harvested and sorted to the desired colour levels. In 2021, average colour was not calculated for SH and SL cherries, although cherries were collected at the 3-4, 4-5, and 5-6 colour levels, as in previous years, and can be considered to have been within range. The average colour level was calculated for SC cherries in 2021, as SC cultivar received comprehensive study over all growing years (2018, 2019 and 2021). The calculated colour level values for SC cherries in the 2021 growing year at the 3-4, 4-5, and 5-6 colour levels were 3.5, 4.8, and 5.6, respectively.

    Table 6 shows the lower the respiration rate assessment temperature, the lower the respiration rate, which was expected as cherries are recommended to be stored at 0.5 °C to ensure quality retention due to this fact[1]. In 2018, SH respiration rate values were consistently lower than SC cherries at 0.5 and 5 °C. However, at 10 °C the respiration rate values become comparable between cultivars (Table 6). Comparing between colour level, SH at colour level 3-4 showed the lowest respiration rate at 0.5 °C but had the highest respiration rate when assessed at 5 °C (Table 6). While SC 5-6 cherries at the 5 °C respiration rate assessment temperature showed a significantly lower respiration rate compared to respiration rates measured for SC 3-4 and SC 4-5 cherries at 5 °C (Table 6).

    In 2021, SH and SC respiration rates were more comparable at 0.5 and 10 °C, but at 5 °C, SH respiration rates were higher than SC at the 3-4 and 4-5 colour levels while SC cherries showed a higher respiration rate when assessed at 5 °C compared to the SH cherries at the 5-6 colour level (Table 6). SH respiration rates in 2021 were consistent at 0.5 and 10 °C for all colour levels (Table 6). However, at 5 °C SH cherries at the 5-6 colour level had the lowest respiration rate for all three of the colour levels and the SH cherries at the 3-4 colour level showed the highest respiration rate. This occurred in both 2018 and 2021 (Table 6). The respiration rates of SC cherries were not affected by colour level when assessed at 0.5 °C, but at the 5 °C respiration rate assessment temperature, 2018 SC cherries at 5-6 colour level had lower respiration values (Table 6), while 2021 SC cherries at the 4-5 colour level showed a lower respiration rate value (Table 6). Comparing colour levels, SL cherries at the 5-6 colour level had the highest respiration rates at 0.5 and 10 °C (Table 6). However, at 5 °C, all SL colour levels had comparable respiration values (Table 6). Further, in 2021, all cultivars at 0.5 °C assessment temperature showed respiration rates that were comparable between all colour levels except for SL 5-6. This respiration rate value was significantly higher than the respiration rates measured for the SL 3-4 and 4-5 colour levels and was also higher than the respiration rates determined for SH and SC at the 5-6 colour level. Interestingly, the respiration rate assessed at 0.5 °C for SL at the 5-6 colour level was not significantly different than the respiration rate assessed at 5 °C for SL at the 5-6 colour level (Table 6).

    To further discuss the results presented above, a main source of decreasing TA values in cherries is high respiratory activity[11]. Therefore, linking flavour quality, which is affected by TA levels, to differences in respiration rates is reasonable. Higher respiration rate assessment temperatures were related to higher respiration rates of cherries as seen in Table 6, which was not unexpected and again points to the importance of keeping temperature near 0.5 °C during storage. Additionally, the temperature cherries experience during a growing season affects the respiration rate of the harvested fruit, as Ross et al.[1] found the average temperature and the average high temperature measured in an orchard was positively correlated with the cherry respiration rate at both 5 and 10 °C. Therefore, understanding factors that impact respiration rate, and ensuring cherries are harvested under conditions that ensure a low respiration rate is of significant importance. Table 6 (2021 data) suggests the colour level with the lowest respiration rates for SC cherries is 4-5, which is supported by previous work[1]. While Table 6 (2018 data) suggests the 5-6 colour level gives the lowest respiration rates for SC cherries. When this information is combined with the TA value data, the peak TA values for SC cherries occurs at the 4-5 level and 5-6 colour levels. SH cherries showed that for respiration rate assessed at 0.5 °C, the colour level with the consistently lowest respiration rate was 3-4, but at the 5 °C respiration rate assessment temperature, which is a more abusive temperature, the 5-6 colour level showed the lowest respiration rate in both 2018 and 2021. The highest TA values were seen at the 5-6 colour level for SH cherries. SL cherries show highest TA values at the 3-4 and 4-5 colour level in the 2019 growing year, but insufficient respiration rate data is available in 2019 to comment further. However, the data in Tables 14 indicate that colour is not a reliable indicator of maturity and/or flavor quality. Cherries of the same colour may differ in DM, SS and TA due to cultivar and growing conditions. Figure 1 shows that not all cherries at the same colour level are at the same DM both within and between cultivars. There is a range of DM values for each cultivar in the 3-4, 4-5, and 5-6 colour ranges. However, it is noted the distribution of DM shifted to the right (higher levels) in the 5-6 colour cherries. The work of Palmer et al.[25] and Toivonen et al.[6] have indicated the importance of DM as a fruit quality metric. The implications of colour, DM, and respiration rate results on flavour quality and DM standards are discussed below.

    Associations between colour and DM at harvest with sweet cherry flavour quality attributes and respiration rates were statistically examined using Pearson's correlation coefficient from all available data over all growing years to investigate whether there may be colour/DM levels that are associated with lower respiration rates (Table 7) and could be indicative of when harvest should be performed (i.e. maturity). It was found that colour at harvest was positively correlated with SS at harvest and SS after storage (r = 0.845, p ≤ 0.0005, and r = 0.684, p ≤ 0.005, respectively). Colour at harvest was also positively correlated with DM at harvest (r = 0.768, p ≤ 0.0005). This was expected as darker cherries of a certain cultivar are generally more developed or mature; sugar content (main contributor to DM) and TA increases upon fruit development[1,6,22]. Neither colour or DM at harvest were correlated with SS/TA ratio at harvest or after storage (Table 7). Over all cultivars, no correlation was seen between respiration rate at any assessment temperature and colour level (Table 7). No significant correlations were found between respiration rate assessed at 0.5 and 10 °C and DM (Table 7). A significant negative correlation (r = −0.514, p ≤ 0.025) was found between respiration rate at 5 °C and DM. It was speculated that a correlation between respiration rate and DM was not observed when assessed at 0.5 °C, as this temperature is very low and effectively slows metabolic activity regardless of physiological status of the cherry. No observed correlation between respiration rate assessed at 10 °C and DM was speculated to be due to 10 °C being such an abusive temperature that even physiologically healthy cherries show elevated respiration rates when stored at 10 °C, and likely experienced increased flavour quality deterioration, which could be tested by measuring SS and TA values. Over all cultivars at 5 °C, cherries with lower DM tended to have higher respiration rates, and may be susceptible to more rapid quality deterioration at non-ideal temperatures such as 3−5 °C, which can be encountered in the cherry industry, particularly during export shipping (personal communication, Dr. Peter Toivonen, May, 2021). This points to the importance of good temperature control during storage and diverting lower DM cherries to the domestic and/or rapid consumption market vs export market. Colour was not correlated with TA, while DM at harvest was positively correlated with TA at harvest and upon storage (Table 7), which is relevant for flavour quality. These results indicate that DM has a greater influence on flavour quality attributes than cherry colour.

    Table 7.  Correlations between colour and dry matter at harvest with sweet cherry flavour quality attributes and respiration rate.
    Relationship assessed for Sweetheart*,
    Staccato, and Sentennial**
    cultivars over 2018, 2019,
    and 2021 growing seasons
    Pearson's
    correlation
    coefficient
    Significance
    level
    (p value)
    Colour correlated with
    Soluble solids at harvest r = +0.845 p ≤ 0.0005
    Soluble solids at 28-d storage r = +0.684 p ≤ 0.005
    Dry matter at harvest r = +0.768 p ≤ 0.0005
    Dry matter correlated with
    Soluble solids at harvest r = +0.871 p ≤ 0.0005
    Soluble solids at 28-d storage r = +0.776 p ≤ 0.0005
    Colour at harvest r = +0.769 p ≤ 0.0005
    Titratable acidity at harvest r = +0.439 p ≤ 0.05
    Titratable acidity at 28 d storage r = +0.398 p ≤ 0.10
    Respiration rate at 5 °C r = −0.514 p ≤ 0.025
    Insignificant correlations
    Colour and titratable acidity at harvest r = +0.099 p = 0.696
    Colour and titratable acidity at 28 d storage r = +0.100 p = 0.692
    Colour and soluble solids to titratable
    acidity ratio at harvest
    r = +0.218 p = 0.383
    Colour and soluble solids to titratable
    acidity ratio at 28 d storage
    r = +0.073 p = 0.774
    Colour and respiration rate at 0.5 °C r = +0.252 p = 0.364
    Colour and respiration rate at 5 °C r = −0.206 p = 0.462
    Colour and respiration rate at 10 °C r = +0.084 p = 0.766
    Dry matter and soluble solids to titratable
    acidity ratio at harvest
    r = −0.135 p = 0.595
    Dry matter and soluble solids to titratable
    acidity ratio at 28 d storage
    r = −0.227 p = 0.365
    Dry matter and respiration rate at 0.5 °C r =−0.125 p = 0.657
    Dry matter and respiration rate at 10 °C r = −0.181 p = 0.519
    *Only 2018 and 2019 growing season data available; **only 2019 growing season data available.
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Further, specific cultivar respiration rate and DM relationships were also examined (data not shown). For SH cherries, a negative correlation was determined between respiration rate assessed at 5 °C and DM (p ≤ 0.1), yet this correlation was not seen for SL cherries. Based on statistical parameters SC cherries only showed a negative correlation between respiration rate assessed at 5 °C and DM if a higher p value > 0.1 was used which signifies evidence is not strong enough to suggest a relationship exists. Nevertheless, the statistically significant negative correlation between respiration rate assessed at 5 °C and DM over all cultivars was identified (Table 7).

    Although colour was positively correlated with DM (Table 7), a higher colour may not necessarily indicate a low respiration rate as no significant correlation was observed between colour and respiration rate at any assessment temperature when examined over all cultivars over the growing years tested. Although this highlights the importance of DM in overall quality rather than colour, the data presented thus far suggests certain cultivars achieve different optimal DM values or ranges at maturity that are related to quality retention. In general, higher DM is positive, but is there an upper limit/threshold in terms of higher respiration rate. The lack of correlation between respiration rate assessed at 5 °C and DM for SC and SL cherries seems to indicate a lower optimal DM level for these cultivars compared to SH cherries, as a negative correlation between respiration rate assessed at 5 °C and DM was observed for SH cherries. Again, non-ideal temperatures such as 3−5 °C, can be encountered in the cherry industry, particularly during export shipping, which makes these results extremely relevant to help ensure cherry growers deliver high quality fruit for the export market.

    In 2018, the respiration rate at 5 °C was lowest at the 4-5 and 5-6 colour levels for SH cherries, and the average DM values were ~22% and 25%, respectively. Information from Table 6 shows that 38% of SH fruit were in the 22.5% DM bin indicating the highest percentage of SH cherries at the 4-5 colour level had a DM of 21% to 22.5% while 26% of SH cherries at the 5-6 colour level resided in the 25.5% DM bin indicating the highest percentage of cherries at this colour level had a DM of 24% to 25.5%. For SH cherries in 2021, the lowest respiration rate at 5 °C was at the 5-6 colour level and average DM value was ~23.6%. Information from Table 6 shows that 30% of SH at the 5-6 colour level resided in 24% DM bin indicating the highest percentage of SH cherries at this colour level had a dry mater of 22.5% to 24%. For 2018 SH cherries, titratable acidity, which is important for flavour quality, was highest at the 5-6 colour level where respiration rate assessed at 5 °C was lower. These results imply, that at maturity, cherries tend to a certain DM value or range that corresponds to reduced respiratory activity and promotes quality retention, and would therefore be considered optimal. Based on this data (lower respiration rate (2018 and 2021) and peak TA (2018)), an optimal DM range for SH may be between 22.5%−25% DM or around 23% DM. This optimal DM corresponded to cherries in the 4-5 colour level (21.9%) in 2018, and in the 5-6 colour level (25.2%, 23.6% respectively) in 2018 and 2021.

    2018 respiration rate (assessed at 5 °C) was lowest at the 5-6 colour level for SC cherries and the average DM value was ~22%, respectively. Information from Table 6 shows that 50% of SC cherries resided in the 22.5% DM bin indicating the highest percentage of SC cherries at the 5-6 colour level had a DM of 21% to 22.5% The 2021 respiration rate (assessed at 5 °C) was lowest for SC cherries at the 4-5 colour level and average DM value was ~22% while the highest respiration rate was measured at the 5-6 colour level and the average DM value was ~23.0%. Information from Table 6 shows that 24% and 20% of SC cherries resided in each the 21% and 22.5% DM bins, respectively, indicating the highest percentage of SC cherries at the 4-5 colour level had a DM of 19.5% to 22.5%. For 2021 SC cherries, TA was higher at the 4-5 colour levels, where respiration rate assessed at 5 °C was lowest. Again, these results imply that at maturity cherries tends to a certain DM value or range (optimal) that corresponds to reduced respiratory activity and promotes quality retention. Based on this data (lower respiration rate (2018 and 2021) and peak TA (2018 and 2021)) an optimal DM range for SC may be between 19.5%−22.5% DM or around 22% DM. This optimal DM corresponded to cherries in the 4-5 colour level (22.0%) in 2021, and in the 5-6 colour level (22.4%) in 2018. The data also shows the optimal DM range for SH cherries is higher than the optimal DM range for SC cherries.

    In 2021, for the SL cherries, all colour levels showed the same respiration rate (assessed at 5 °C) and average DM values were 20.5%, 22.6% and 23.5% for the 3-4, 4-5 and 5-6 colour levels, respectively. Information from Table 6 shows that SL cherries at both the 4-5 and 5-6 colour levels, 28% and 24% of the cherries resided in the 22.5% and 24% DM bins indicting the highest percentage of cherries at these colour stages ranged from 21% to 24% DM. For SL, based on the one year of respiration data (2021), determining optimum DM was not as clear. At lower storage temperature (0.5 °C), lower average DM (20.5%−22.6% vs 23.5%) maintained lower respiration rates, but at higher storage temperature (5 and 10 °C) respiration rate did not appear to be affected by DM level. These lower DM values occurred at the 3-4 and 4-5 colour levels.

    Available DM, TA and respiration rate data as discussed suggests the optimal DM range for SH may be between 22.5%−25% DM or around 23% and an optimal dry matter range for SC may be between 19.5%−22.5% DM or around 22% DM, The histogram data over all growing years does further strengthen the justification for suggesting different optimal DM values for different cultivars (Fig. 1). The data over all growing years shows higher proportions of cherries in the 24 % DM bin for SH cherries at the 5-6 colour level which indicated highest proportion of cherries with a DM of 22.5% to 24%. The SC cherries at the 5-6 colour level showed the highest proportion of cherries in the 22.5% DM bin, which indicates the highest percentage of cherries have a DM of 21% to 22.5%; again these DM ranges have been suggested as optimal DM values based on previously discussed respiration data.

    In psychology self-actualization is a concept regarding the process by which an individual reaches their full potential[31]. The data suggests that sweet cherries self-actualize, with the majority of cherries reaching maturity with a DM range that promotes quality retention during storage when growing conditions are favourable. This optimal DM range is different for different cultivars, and growing conditions would be expected to influence the rate and/or ability of this 'self-actualization', as this work and our previous research has shown that environmental factors are correlated with these important quality characteristics[1]. Placing highest importance on distribution of DM levels at the 5-6 colour levels (Fig. 1) is justified as the cherries are the most physiologically mature and will likely exhibit the highest proportion of cherries with optimal DM; however, the optimal DM can occur at other colour ranges and should be used as the primary indicator of maturity. Maturity at harvest is the most important factor that determines storage-life and final fruit quality assweet cherries produce very small quantities of ethylene and do not respond to ethylene treatment; they need to be picked when fully ripe to ensure good flavour quality[32]. It is noted the CTFIL colour standard series goes up to colour level 7, yet a balance needs to be reached between flavour quality optimization vs other quality parameters such as firmness and stem pull force. Supplementary Tables S1S6 provide values of the quality parameters of firmness, stem pull force, stem shrivel, stem browning, pebbling and pitting levels at harvest and after storage for the SH, SC and SL cherries. All of these cherry cultivars exhibited good quality attributes at the 5-6 colour level, as well as lighter colour ranges.

    It is noted that the development of DM standards for different cultivars is a novel concept. This work was positioned as field work that collected cherry data for three cultivars over three growing years in adjacent orchards using the same management practices. Equipment constraints limited respiration rate data collection. As such absolute optimal DM values and/or ranges could not be determined nor was the goal of this study. The goal of this work was to further the concept that different cultivars may reach maturity at different DM levels, which would result in lower respiration rates and higher TA levels at harvest, and after storage, achieving enhanced quality retention. In this regard, absolute optimal DM would be the DM achievable by a cherry cultivar that maximizes flavour attributes and minimizes respiration under ideal conditions. In reality, the absolute optimal DM may or may not be reached during a growing season depending on environmental conditions and orchard management practices; however, cherry cultivars will reach a DM that will be optimal for the growing conditions at harvest maturity, as the present research demonstrates. Developing definitive DM standards to determine optimal harvest points for different cultivars under different environmental conditions should be a direction of research to be further pursued to ensure cherry quality, particularly for cherries subjected to longer term storage and/or cherries destined for the overseas export market.

    The present work is not the first to point to the importance of DM and cherry flavour retention, as an anecdotal report[33] indicated that SH cherries should be harvested at a DM of no higher than 20% or the fruit will lose both sugar and acidity more rapidly during shipping storage. Although this DM value is lower than the DM recommended for SH in the current work, it indicates the importance of DM level and flavour quality in relation to a specific cultivar. The differences between optimal DM for flavour retention in our work and the anecdotal report signifies the complexity of determining DM standards and the impact of growing year/environmental conditions and orchard management practices on optimal DM. Growers will continue to face these complex issues but the present work provides valuable information to growers regarding DM standards for three cultivars.

    It must be noted again that development of absolute DM standards for different cherry cultivars requires more study under rigorous controlled environmental conditions. Additionally, given the impact of environmental conditions on optimal DM, cultivars of interest must be studied over many growing years and orchard conditions to collect a robust data set. Nevertheless, the present research indicates that SH, SC, and SL cultivars have different dry matter values at maturity. The data also shows the DM range for SH cherries at maturity is higher than the DM range for SC cherries at maturity and that for SL, lower DM levels maintained lower respiration rates at lower temperatures, potentially improving ability to maintain quality after harvest.

    Overall, this research showed that DM was a better indicator of flavour quality than colour, as DM was related to both sugars and TA, while colour was only related to sugar. Therefore, this work identified that colour may not be a reliable indicator of maturity and/or flavor quality. This work indicated that cherries of the same colour may differ in DM, SS, and TA due to cultivar type and growing conditions as influenced by growing year. Relative humidity encountered by cherries during the growing season was negatively correlated with TA and higher growing temperatures were positively correlated with TA. This work discovered that sweet cherries may self-actualize, in that when growing conditions are favourable, DM levels may tend towards a certain level at maturity (optimal DM) resulting in superior flavour quality attributes and lower respiration, allowing cherries to reach their full quality potential and ensure quality retention in storage. Therefore, optimal DM can be reached at maturity despite colour. Remaining challenges include development of DM standards for various sweet cherry cultivars and further understanding the impact of growing conditions to better allow for self-actualization and prediction of the optimal DM under those conditions to optimize timing of harvest from year-to-year. Nevertheless, this research based on field work for three sweet cherry cultivars over three growing years, indicated an optimal DM range for SH between 22.5%−25% DM and an optimal DM range for SC between 19.5%−22.5% DM. Interestingly, under the same field conditions, the optimal DM range for SH cherries was higher than the optimal DM range for SC cherries. More analysis is required for determining optimal DM for SL, but the initial data indicates DM in the range of 20.5% to 22.6% maintained lower respiration rates at lower temperature potentially improving ability to maintain quality after harvest.

    The authors confirm contribution to the paper as follows: study conception and design: Ross KA, DeLury NC, Fukumoto L; data collection: Ross KA, DeLury NC, Fukumoto L; analysis and interpretation of results: Ross KA, DeLury NC, Fukumoto L; draft manuscript preparation: Ross KA, DeLury N, Fukumoto L, Forsyth JA. All authors reviewed the results and approved the final version of the manuscript.

    The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

    We are grateful to the BC Cherry Association for financial support of this research project. We acknowledge Manon Gentes, Gillian Beaudry, and Duncan Robinson for their technical assistance. We are grateful to Brenda Lannard for providing her expertise on using the Felix F750 handheld spectrometer (Felix Instruments, Inc.) to obtain dry matter values and obtaining respiration data. Kelly A. Ross would like to thank and acknowledge Dr. Peter Toivonen for his mentorship, valuable scientific discussions and consistently kind support.

  • The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

  • Supplemental Table S1 Sample collecting information.
    Supplemental Table S2 Three calibration points used in the divergence time estimation for Taxodium and close genus. Ma: million years ago.
    Supplemental Table S3 Climate variables usage in SDMs.
    Supplemental Table S4 Estimated Posterior Probabilities of that Each Individual Belongs to Each of the Different Genotype Frequency Categories. The number in the quote separated by "/" represent the expected proportion of each categories: 00, 01, 10, 11. For example, 0.500/0.250/0.250/0.000 means the proportion of the 00, 01, 10 and 11 genotype of this individual is supposed to be 0.500, 0.250, 0.250 and 0.000, separately.
    Supplemental Fig. S1 Pairwise distance analysis. The figure demonstrates the average genetic distance between ITM and other taxa using both Chloroplast and nuclear data under both the Tajima-Nei model and the Maximum Composite Likelihood method.
    Supplemental Fig. S2 Parameters and Ecological Factor Selection in SDMs. From top to bottom: T. mucronatum, T. distichum, T. ascendens.
    Supplemental Fig. S3 Relative heterozygosity among Taxodium populations. The 28142 Taxodium-shared SNPs were used to calculate heterozygosity. The values were scaled in the R program. Each dot represents an individual.
    Supplemental Fig. S4 Divergence times of Taxodium and other close genus estimated based on nuclear SNPs using MCMCTREE. A-C indicate calibration points. Median ages of nodes are shown in million years ago (Ma), with 95% highest posteriori density intervals indicated.
    Supplemental Fig. S5 Hybrid stages infered by NewHybrids, ZSS samples were identified to be 'F1' in all subsets. (A) All collected samples; (B) sample 'Zss 405-2' and its parental species; (C) sample 'Zss 401' and its parental species; (D) sample 'Zss 111-2' and its parental species; (E) sample 'Zss 302-2' and its parental species.
    Supplemental Fig. S6 Species Distribution Modeling of the Three Taxodium Species in LGM and future 2070.
    Supplemental Fig. S7 ROC plots for the three species models, with AUC values labelled top right. (A) T. distichum; (B) T. ascendens; (C) T. mucronatum.
  • [1]

    Duan H, Guo J, Xuan L, Wang Z, Li M, et al. 2020. Comparative chloroplast genomics of the genus Taxodium. BMC Genomics 21:114

    doi: 10.1186/s12864-020-6532-1

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [2]

    Brunsfeld SJ, Pamela SS, Douglas ES, Paul AG, Christopher JQ, et al. 1994. Phylogenetic relationships among the genera of Taxodiaceae and Cupressaceae: evidence from rbcL sequences. Systematic Botany 19:253−62

    doi: 10.2307/2419600

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [3]

    Zhang JJ, Pan SH, Zhu PSH, Zhu WJ, Niu HJ, et al. 2003. Taxodiomeria (Taxodiaceae), an intergeneric hybrid between Taxodium and Cryptomeria from Shanghai, People's Republic of China. SIDA, Contributions to Botany 2003:999−1006

    Google Scholar

    [4]

    Wang C, Li C, Wei H, Xie Y, Han W. 2016. Effects of long-term periodic submergence on photosynthesis and growth of Taxodium distichum and Taxodium ascendens saplings in the hydro-fluctuation zone of the Three Gorges Reservoir of China. PLoS One 11(9):e0162867

    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0162867

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [5]

    Li C, Zhong Z, Geng Y, Schneider R. 2010. Comparative studies on physiological and biochemical adaptation of Taxodium distichum and Taxodium ascendens seedlings to different soil water regimes. Plant and Soil 329(1):481−94

    doi: 10.1007/s11104-009-0174-z

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [6]

    Zheng Y, Wang D, Li X, Wang Z, Zhou Q, et al. 2021. Biometric identification of Taxodium spp. and their hybrid progenies by electrochemical fingerprints. Biosensors 11(10):403

    doi: 10.3390/bios11100403

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [7]

    Megonigal JP, Day FP. 1992. Effects of flooding on root and shoot production of bald cypress in large experimental enclosures. Ecology 73(4):1182−93

    doi: 10.2307/1940668

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [8]

    Denny GC, Michael AA. 2007. Taxonomy and nomenclature of baldcypress, pondcypress, and montezuma cypress: one, two, or three species? HortTechnology 17(1):125−27

    doi: 10.21273/HORTTECH.17.1.125

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [9]

    Allen JA, Pezeshki SR, Chambers JL. 1996. Interaction of flooding and salinity stress on baldcypress (Taxodium distichum). Tree Physio logy 16(1−2):307−13

    doi: 10.1093/treephys/16.1-2.307

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [10]

    Yu C, Xu S, Yin Y. 2016. Transcriptome analysis of the Taxodium 'Zhongshanshan 405' roots in response to salinity stress. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry 100:156−65

    doi: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2016.01.009

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [11]

    Lei X, Hua J, Zhang F, Wang Z, Pei X, et al. 2021. Identification and functional analysis of ThADH1 and ThADH4 genes involved in tolerance to waterlogging stress in Taxodium hybrid 'Zhongshanshan 406'. Genes 12(2):225

    doi: 10.3390/genes12020225

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [12]

    Yu C, Yin Y, Xu J. 2011. Four hybrid varieties of Taxodium. Scientia Silvae Sinicae 47(5):181−82

    doi: 10.11707/j.1001-7488.20110531

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [13]

    Guo J, Duan H, Xuan L, Wang Z, Hua J, et al. 2019. Identification and functional analysis of LecRLK genes in Taxodium 'Zhongshanshan'. PeerJ 7:e7498

    doi: 10.7717/peerj.7498

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [14]

    Yang Y, Xuan L, Yu C, Wang Z, Xu J, et al. 2018. High-density genetic map construction and quantitative trait loci identification for growth traits in (Taxodium distichum var. distichum × T. mucronatum) × T. mucronatum. BMC Plant Biology 18(1):263

    doi: 10.1186/s12870-018-1493-0

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [15]

    Tsumura Y, Tomaru N, Suyama Y, Bacchus S. 1999. Genetic diversity and differentiation of Taxodium in the south-eastern United States using cleaved amplified polymorphic sequences. Heredity 83(3):229−38

    doi: 10.1038/sj.hdy.6885810

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [16]

    Chen Y, Pan S, Zhang J, Zhu W, Niu H, et al. 2002. RAPD analysis of genetic relationships among natural populations of hybrid Taxodium mucronatum Tenore. Journal of Fudan University, Natural Science 41(6):641−45

    Google Scholar

    [17]

    Yu C, Yin Y, Xu J. 2020. Identification of Taxodium hybrids by SRAP analysis. Scientia Silvae Sinicae 45(2):142−46

    Google Scholar

    [18]

    Ling Y, Lu WF, Lu F, Wang YG, Chen JK, et al. 2006. PCR-RFLP and AP-PCR of rbcL and ITS of rDNA show that × Taxodiomeria peizhongii (Taxodium × Cryptomeria) is not an intergeneric hybrid. Journal of Integrative Plant Biology 48(4):468−72

    doi: 10.1111/j.1744-7909.2006.00209.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [19]

    Li J, Milne RI, Ru D, Miao J, Tao W, et al. 2020. Allopatric divergence and hybridization within Cupressus chengiana (Cupressaceae), a threatened conifer in the northern Hengduan Mountains of western China. Molecular Ecology 29(7):1250−66

    doi: 10.1111/mec.15407

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [20]

    Bolger AM, Lohse M, Usadel B. 2014. Trimmomatic: a flexible trimmer for Illumina sequence data. Bioinformatics 30(15):2114−20

    doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu170

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [21]

    Li H, Durbin R. 2009. Fast and accurate short read alignment with Burrows–Wheeler transform. Bioinformatics 25(14):1754−60

    doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp324

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [22]

    Matasci N, Hung LH, Yan ZX, Carpenter EJ, Wickett NJ, et al. 2014. Data access for the 1,000 Plants (1KP) project. GigaScience 3(1):2047-217X-3-17

    doi: 10.1186/2047-217X-3-17

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [23]

    Li H, Handsaker B, Wysoker A, Fennell T, Ruan J, et al. 2009. The sequence alignment/map format and SAMtools. Bioinformatics 25(16):2078−79

    doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp352

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [24]

    Broad Institute. 2019. Picard toolkit. https://broadinstitute.github.io/picard/

    [25]

    McKenna A, Hanna M, Banks E, Sivachenko A, Cibulskis K, et al. 2010. The Genome Analysis Toolkit: a MapReduce framework for analyzing next-generation DNA sequencing data. Genome Research 20(9):1297−303

    doi: 10.1101/gr.107524.110

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [26]

    Danecek P, Auton A, Abecasis G, Albers CA, Banks E, et al. 2011. The variant call format and VCFtools. Bioinformatics 27(15):2156−58

    doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btr330

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [27]

    Kumar S, Stecher G, Li M, Knyaz C, Tamura K. 2018. MEGA X: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis across computing platforms. Molecular Biology and Evolution 35(6):1547−49

    doi: 10.1093/molbev/msy096

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [28]

    Alexander DH, Novembre J, Lange K. 2009. Fast model-based estimation of ancestry in unrelated individuals. Genome Research 19(9):1655−64

    doi: 10.1101/gr.094052.109

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [29]

    Purcell S, Neale B, Todd-Brown K, Thomas L, Ferreira MAR, et al. 2007. PLINK: a tool set for whole-genome association and population-based linkage analyses. The American Journal of Human Genetics 81(3):559−75

    doi: 10.1086/519795

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [30]

    Patterson N, Price AL, Reich D. 2006. Population structure and eigenanalysis. PLoS Genetics 2(12):e190

    doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.0020190

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [31]

    Stamatakis A. 2014. RAxML version 8: a tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies. Bioinformatics 30(9):1312−13

    doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu033

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [32]

    Álvarez-Carretero S, Tamuri AU, Battini M, Nascimento FF, Carlisle E, et al. 2022. A species-level timeline of mammal evolution integrating phylogenomic data. Nature 602:263−67

    doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-04341-1

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [33]

    Yang Z. 2007. PAML 4: phylogenetic analysis by maximum likelihood. Molecular Biology and Evolution 24(8):1586−91

    doi: 10.1093/molbev/msm088

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [34]

    Mao K, Milne RI, Zhang L, Peng Y, Liu J, et al. 2012. Distribution of living Cupressaceae reflects the breakup of Pangea. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 109(20):7793−98

    doi: 10.1073/pnas.111431910

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [35]

    Wheeler TJ. 2009. Large-scale neighbor-joining with NINJA. Proc. 9th Algorithms in Bioinformatics. WABI 2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, eds Salzberg SL, Warnow T. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. pp. 375–89. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-04241-6_31

    [36]

    Huson DH. 1998. SplitsTree: analyzing and visualizing evolutionary data. Bioinformatics 14(1):68−73

    doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/14.1.68

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [37]

    Vonholdt BM, Pollinger JP, Earl DA, Parker GF, Ostrander EA, et al. 2013. Identification of recent hybridization between gray wolves and domesticated dogs by SNP genotyping. Mammalian Genome 24(1):80−88

    doi: 10.1007/s00335-012-9432-0

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [38]

    Team R Core. 2021. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. www.R-project.org

    [39]

    Anderson EC, Thompson E. 2002. A model-based method for identifying species hybrids using multilocus genetic data. Genetics 160(3):1217−29

    doi: 10.1093/genetics/160.3.1217

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [40]

    Wringe BF, Stanley RR, Jeffery NW, Anderson EC, Bradbury IR. 2017. HYBRIDDETECTIVE: a workflow and package to facilitate the detection of hybridization using genomic data in R. Molecular Ecology Resources 17(6):e275−e284

    doi: 10.1111/1755-0998.12704

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [41]

    GBIF Secretariat. 2023. GBIF Backbone Taxonomy. Checklist dataset. doi: /10.15468/39omei

    [42]

    Aiello-Lammens ME, Boria RA, Radosavljevic A, Vilela B, Anderson RP. 2015. spThin: an R package for spatial thinning of species occurrence records for use in ecological niche models. Ecography 38(5):541−45

    doi: 10.1111/ecog.01132

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [43]

    Duan RY, Kong XQ, Huang MY, Fan WY, Wang ZG. 2014. The predictive performance and stability of six species distribution models. PLoS One 9(11):e112764

    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0112764

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [44]

    Phillips SJ, Anderson RP, Schapire RE. 2006. Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecological Modelling 190(3−4):231−59

    doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2005.03.026

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [45]

    Qin A, Liu B, Guo Q, Bussmann RW, Ma F, et al. 2017. Maxent modeling for predicting impacts of climate change on the potential distribution of Thuja sutchuenensis Franch., an extremely endangered conifer from southwestern China. Global Ecology and Conservation 10:139−46

    doi: 10.1016/j.gecco.2017.02.004

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [46]

    Petit RJ, Duminil J, Fineschi S, Hampe A, Salvini D, et al. 2005. Invited review: comparative organization of chloroplast, mitochondrial and nuclear diversity in plant populations. Molecular Ecology 14(3):689−701

    doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2004.02410.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [47]

    Kusumi J, Tsumura Y, Yoshimaru H, Tachida H. 2002. Molecular evolution of nuclear genes in Cupressacea, a group of conifer trees. Molecular Biology and Evolution 19(5):736−47

    doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a004132

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [48]

    Farjon A. 2001. World checklist and bibliography of conifers. 2nd Edition. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. 316 pp. https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/distributed/W/bo9857105.html

    [49]

    Wolfe KH, Li WH, Sharp PM. 1987. Rates of nucleotide substitution vary greatly among plant mitochondrial, chloroplast, and nuclear DNAs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 84(24):9054−58

    doi: 10.1073/pnas.84.24.9054

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [50]

    Drouin G, Daoud H, Xia J. 2008. Relative rates of synonymous substitutions in the mitochondrial, chloroplast and nuclear genomes of seed plants. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 49(3):827−31

    doi: 10.1016/j.ympev.2008.09.009

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [51]

    Kou YX, Shang HY, Mao KS, Li ZH, Rushforth K, et al. 2014. Nuclear and cytoplasmic DNA sequence data further illuminate the genetic composition of Leyland cypresses. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science 139(5):558−66

    doi: 10.21273/JASHS.139.5.558

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [52]

    Hughes AR, Inouye BD, Johnson MTJ, Underwood N, Vellend M. 2008. Ecological consequences of genetic diversity. Ecology Letters 11(6):609−23

    doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01179.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [53]

    Booy G, Hendriks RJJ, Smulders MJM, Van Groenendael JM, Vosman B. 2000. Genetic diversity and the survival of populations. Plant Biology 2(4):379−95

    doi: 10.1055/s-2000-5958

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [54]

    Crossa J, Pérez-Rodríguez P, Cuevas J, Montesinos-López O, Jarquín D, et al. 2017. Genomic selection in plant breeding: methods, models, and perspectives. Trends in Plant Science 22(11):961−75

    doi: 10.1016/j.tplants.2017.08.011

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [55]

    Capblancq T, Fitzpatrick MC, Bay RA, Exposito-Alonso M, Keller SR. 2020. Genomic prediction of (mal)adaptation across current and future climatic landscapes. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 51:245−69

    doi: 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-020720-042553

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

  • Cite this article

    Han Z, Chen Y, Dai X, Yu C, Cheng J, et al. 2024. The revelation of genomic breed composition using target capture sequencing: a case of Taxodium. Forestry Research 4: e034 doi: 10.48130/forres-0024-0031
    Han Z, Chen Y, Dai X, Yu C, Cheng J, et al. 2024. The revelation of genomic breed composition using target capture sequencing: a case of Taxodium. Forestry Research 4: e034 doi: 10.48130/forres-0024-0031

Figures(4)

Article Metrics

Article views(1940) PDF downloads(273)

ARTICLE   Open Access    

The revelation of genomic breed composition using target capture sequencing: a case of Taxodium

Forestry Research  4 Article number: e034  (2024)  |  Cite this article

Abstract: Taxodium plants have good flood tolerance and thus were introduced into China from North America in the early 1900s. The subsequent decades of cross-breeding experiments within Taxodium have produced many new hybrid cultivars in China while also creating confusion in the genetic background of Taxodium plants. In the present study, target capture sequencing-derived SNP markers were used to reveal the genomic composition of different species and cultivars of Taxodium. The results unraveled the phylogenetic relationship within Taxodium and suggested the possibility of recent interspecific natural hybridization events. The introduced (Chinese) population is genetically similar to the native (North American) population, thus providing genetic evidence for historical introductions of Taxodium. Hybrid categories of different cultivars of Taxodium hybrid 'Zhongshanshan' were further identified, and their differences in parentage were revealed. Collectively, the findings provide evidence for understanding the genetics and hybridization of Taxodium and shed light on the future breeding and cultivation of cultivars with great ecological and economic potential.

    • Native North American genus Taxodium, comprising three currently known species, T. ascendens Brongn., T. distichum (L.) Rich., and T. mucronatum Ten., was introduced into China in the early 20th century for use in forestry[15]. Since the 1960s, Chinese researchers have been crossbreeding within Taxodium and have produced a succession of interspecific hybrid varieties named by Taxodium hybrid 'Zhongshanshan' (ZSS)[6]. The inherent tolerance of Taxodium to environmental stresses including flooding and salt[79], and decades of selective breeding have combined to shape the ecological adaptability of ZSS, which has strong resistance to a wide range of environmental stresses including wind, perennial flood, salinization, and alkalinization[10,11]. ZSS has therefore been widely cultivated in wetland, riverbanks, and the coastal floodplains of eastern China for flood control and landscaping[10,12].

      In recent years, due to the great ecological and economic potential of Taxodium, an increased interest in its genetic background and gene functions has emerged. A few studies have used bioinformatics and molecular biology approaches to identify and characterize specific genes inherited by Taxodium that play important roles in the tolerance of diverse environmental stresses, and to reveal the expression and regulation of these genes in response to environmental changes[13,14]. In contrast, the genetic background and interspecific phylogenetic relationships within Taxodium have been rarely studied, leaving a controversial definition of species and varieties within the genus. Despite Tsumura et al.[15] used cleaved amplified polymorphic sequences (CAPS) markers to study phylogenetic relationships among North American taxa, introduced hybrid Taxodium species/variants in China remain overshadowed by their more than 100-year history of introduction and morphological similarity. Previous studies on Taxodium cultivated in China have sought to ascertain the genetic background within the genus adopted the random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD), sequence-related amplified polymorphism (SRAP) and comparative chloroplast genomics[1,16,17]. Zheng et al.[6] applied electrochemical fingerprints to identify Taxodium taxa and derived hybrid progenies. Among these studies, cultivars of ZSS (including 'ZSS301', 'ZSS302', 'ZSS401', and 'ZSS405') have been extensively researched. The common parentage of these cultivars was from the colony of Chinese introduced T. mucronatum (ITM), which is considered to be the progeny of cuttings from North American T. mucronatum and has a long history of cultivation in China, but has scarcely been studied. In addition, the genetic relationship between the Chinese and North American Taxodium plants need to be further clarified. Unlike North American populations where the Chinese populations originate, the latter may have lower genetic diversity due to founder effects and inbreeding, which in turn, obstructs its expansion and forestry applications.

      Nevertheless, in-depth studies applying efficient sequencing techniques and genome-wide markers are rare in Taxodium spp., limiting the understanding of their taxonomy and genomic breed compositions. In the present study, the aim is to provide new insights into the following questions: (1) What is the genetic component of ZSS? (2) What are the phylogenetic relationships within the genus Taxodium? (3) How is the ecological suitability of Taxodium in China? The target capture sequencing method was applied to sequence the genome-wide exomes which are subsequently called nuclear and chloroplast SNPs, separately. The SNPs were used to develop multiple population genetic and evolutionary analyses, which it is believed will cast light on the genomic breed composition and kinship of Taxodium. Species Distribution Modeling (SDM) results were integrated to facilitate the understanding of the ecological suitability of the genus, which may provide a reference for future introduction and cultivation.

    • The leaves of 31 individuals were sampled and numbered into seven groups, including ITM (T. mucronatum introduced in China), Mxg (T. mucronatum native to Mexico), ZSS (T. hybrid 'Zhongshanshan'), Lys (T. distichum), Cs (T. ascendens), Ss (Glyptostrobus pensilis) and Ls (Cryptomeria fortunei) (Supplemental Table S1). Most of these samples were collected in 2019 in the middle and lower Yangtze River Plain (China), the others (all belonging to Mxg) were provided by the Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh, UK. The Mxg group was collected to compare the genetic composition with the ITM group, thereby verifying their relationship. Four individuals were included in the ZSS group, each of a different cultivar ('Zhongshanshan111', 'Zhongshanshan302', 'Zhongshanshan401', 'Zhongshanshan405'), were used to study the genetic background of the ZSS group and to compare the hybrid composition of the different cultivars. These cultivars of ZSS are morphologically similar but vary in genetic backgrounds, and they are reported as F1 generations that are crossed between different species[6]. The Ls group was collected because C. fortunei may have been involved in a controversial intergeneric hybrid, thus becoming a potential donor of genetic material to the ZSS[3,18]. The Ss group was collected as an outgroup in the phylogenetic analysis. All samples were kept at −80°C until DNA extraction.

    • The targeted region was captured using the NimbleGen SeqCap EZ probes which was designed by Li et al.[19], and sequenced following the standard Illumina library construction protocol (Illumina, San Diego, California, USA). The data volume of each sample was 1,000 to 6,000 M according to the species.

      The quality of Illumina raw reads was controlled via Trimmomatic version 0.36[20]. Then BWA version 0.7.17[21] with default parameters was used to align the filtered reads to the transcriptome and the chloroplast genome of T. mucronatum, obtained from 1,000 plants project[22] and NCBI separately. SAMtools version 1.9[23] was used to convert the file format. Duplicates produced by PCR were marked by Picard version 2.20.3[24]. The variants were called using HaplotypeCaller implemented in GATK version 4.1.2[25] for each sample. After combining the GVCF files, genotypes and SNPs were called using GATK-GenotypeGVCFs and GATK-SelectVariants. Finally, the official guide of GATK was used, SNPs were filtered by GATK-VariantFiltration, with parameters that exclude SNPs 'QD < 2.0; QUAL < 30.0; SOR > 3.0; FS > 60.0; MQ < 40.0; MQRankSum < −12.5; ReadPosRankSum < −8.0'. VCFtools version1.9[26] was used to further filter the remaining SNPs by Minor Allele Frequency (MAF) and missing data, the parameters were set as '--max-alleles 2 --min-alleles 2 --max-missing 0.8 --maf 0.05 --minDP 3 --maxDP 1000'.

    • Nuclear and chloroplast pairwise distances between ITM and other taxa were computed under both the Tajima-Nei model and the Maximum Composite Likelihood method implemented in MEGA version 10.1.5[27], the values of which are shown as the average standard of each taxon (Supplemental Fig. S1). Then a model-based evolutionary clustering analysis was conducted via ADMIXTURE version 1.3.0[28] to analyze population genetic structure using nuclear SNPs. In the Principal Component Analysis (PCA), PLINK version 1.9[29] and VCFtools version1.9[26] were used to produce PCA files using the nuclear data, and SMARTPCA implemented in EIGENSTART version 6.1.3[30] to conduct the analysis.

    • RAxML version 8.0.0[31] was used to build maximum likelihood (ML) phylogenetic trees with the substitution model GAMMA for both the nuclear SNPs and the chloroplast SNPs. The clades' relative robustness was estimated by performing 1,000 bootstrap replicates based on which a 95% confidence network was constructed. Based on the nuclear ML phylogeny, the divergence times of Taxodium and related genera were further estimated using the Bayesian sequential-subtree dating approach[32], which was implemented in PAML version 4.10.7[33]. The divergence times estimates was incorporated with three calibration points[34], each for a node between genus (Supplemental Table S2). To compare the result from RAxML, NINJA[35] was also used to build a neighbour-joining (NJ) tree with chloroplast SNPs. To investigate the hybridization events in the cultivation history of ITM, the Neighbor network method implemented in SplitsTree version 4.15.1[36] was applied to reconstruct reticulate networks with nuclear SNPs.

    • To further discover diagnostic SNPs, the population genetics differentiation (FST) between T. distichum and T. ascendens was calculated for each SNP by VCFtools version 1.9[26]. The hybrid proportion was quantified by Detection of Recent Hybridization (DRH) analysis[37]. This analysis detects hybrids by genotyping individuals at multiple loci and calculating two metrics: allelic dosage (fraction of alleles from one parental source) and observed heterozygosity (Ho). It plots these values and uses confidence regions to classify individuals into genealogical groups including F1 hybrids, backcrosses, or parentals based on expected patterns under Mendelian inheritance. Significance is inferred when confidence regions don't overlap, indicating distinct hybrid classes from parental populations. Following the instruction from Vonholdt et al.[37], a 24-SNP panel and a 100-SNP panel were subset for the DRH analysis. Both panels were determined by Fst (SNPs with the highest Fst values were kept), which adequately represents the genetic divergence among populations. R version 4.0.5[38] was then used to calculate the average number of non-reference (non-T. distichum) alleles of each locus and the fraction of each individual's heterozygous loci, and then present them orthogonally. In this way, the parents in the hybrid event should be around the base angles, one on each side, and the hybrid F1 should be around the vertex angle. To cross-validate the hybrid stages of the four ZSS samples, NewHybrids Version 2.0[39] was used to compute the posterior distribution that each falls into different categories using the 100-SNP panel. This test was conducted on all samples, as well as separate ZSS and its parents. The output was then plotted using the package hybriddetective Version 0.1.0.9000[40], which was implemented in R.

    • Spatial distribution data for the three Taxodium species, limited to their native habitats in North America, were downloaded from the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF)[41]. The distribution points were then sparsified to prevent overfitting of the model. The Nearest Neighbor Distance (NND) between retained distribution points were set to be > 5 km, and the thinning process was performed for 100 iterations using the package spThin[42] implemented in R. The data was finally filtered to retain 367 distribution points, including 47 for T. ascendens, 284 for T. distichum, and 36 for T. mucronatum. Climate data was downloaded from WorldClim 1.4[43], including periods of current (1960−1990), future (2050 and 2070 under RCP2.6 scenario) and Last Glacial Maximum, with a resolution of 2.5' (5 km × 5 km). Distribution modeling was then conducted in Maxent version 3.4.1[44] following the methods section of Qin et al.[45]. All 19 climate variables were first put into the model for data wrangling, the Jacknife method was used to calculate the contribution of each variable, and variables removed with r ≥ 0.7 Pearson correlation coefficient and a low contribution. (See Supplemental Fig. S2 and Supplemental Table S3 for the performance and contribution of each ecological factor). The distribution points of Taxodium were subset into test (25%) and training (75%) sets, which were imported into the Maxent for 500 'Subsample' iterations along with the filtered climate variables. The rule for thresholding was selected as 'Maximum training sensitivity plus specificity', and other parameters were set to default values. After evaluating the performance of the model using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), Maximum training sensitivity plus specificity (MTSS) was adopted, Cloglog threshold, implemented in Maxent, to reclassify the habitat suitability: unsuitable habitat (< 1*MTSS); barely suitable habitat (1*MTSS–2*MTSS); suitable habitat (2*MTSS–3*MTSS); highly suitable habitat (3*MTSS <).

    • After reads mapping, variants calling, and filtration for all samples from seven populations, 2,752,534 nuclear SNPs and 6,901 chloroplast SNPs were revealed. For hybrid stage delimitation and genetic components quantification, the SNPs were called again for all taxon except for G. pensilis, M. glyptostroboides, and C. fortunei and obtain 28,142 SNPs. The scaled overall heterozygosity for each Taxodium population was calculated based on the shared SNP markers (see Supplemental Fig. S3). In detection of recent hybridization (DRH) analysis and hybrid stage analysis, 24 and 100 SNP panels with the highest contribution on Fst statistic among populations were further filtered out.

    • According to the Admixture and cross-validation analysis result, K = 2 is the best supported model, and K = 4 is the second. When K = 2, all Taxodium samples (including cultivars) were clearly distinguished from the outgroups (Cryptomeria-Glyptostrobus cluster) (Fig. 1). When K = 4, new clusters are subdivided within the Taxodium, showing ITM and T. mucronatum as an integrated cluster and that ZSS shares both SNPs from the Taxodium distichum cluster and ITM cluster. The result indicates that ITM has a similar genetic composition to the natural population of T. mucronatum in Oaxaca, Mexico (Mxg50J). Samples of ZSS showed distinct hybrid features under K = 4 and K = 5 models, that each of the four cultivars can be half-and-half affiliated to T. ascendens-T. distichum cluster and ITM-T. mucronatum cluster. Evidence was also found that partial samples of T. mucronatum may have experienced hybrid or genetic introgression events that present complicated genetic composition when K = 4 and 5. Individuals of T. ascendens and T. distichum have remained in the same cluster under different K values, showing high genetic similarity.

      Figure 1. 

      Population structure analysis with PCA and ADMIXTURE. Principal component analysis (PCA) of the seven taxa involved for 2,752,534 nuclear SNPs. The first and the second eigenvectors separated G. pensilis, M. glyptostroboides, and C. fortunei from the Taxodium (including ITM; p = 0.0252, 0.0113 and 0.0004 separately, Tracy-Widom test). The third eigenvector segregated each species/breed within Taxodium (p = 3.47026e-08). Genetic clustering of species and cultivars inferred by ADMIXTURE. Simulations were set at 1,000 bootstraps. Each individual is represented by a thin vertical bar, which is partitioned into K-colored segments and represents the individual affiliation to each cluster (K is set from 2 to 10). Delta K = 2 and K = 4 are the two peak values according to cross-validation analysis.

      In the principal component analysis (PCA), the first principal component (PC1), which explained 24.01% of all genetic variance, separated Cryptomeria, Glyptostrobus, and Taxodium into three clusters. PC2, which explained 15.84% genetic variance, further separated Taxodium into three clusters: the T. ascendens-T. distichum cluster, the ZSS cluster, and the ITM-T. mucronatum cluster, with the ZSS cluster occupying an intermediate space between the other two. PC3 primarily subdivides the populations of T. mucronatum (Fig. 1). PCA shows a close relationship between ITM and the native T. mucronatum. Meanwhile, ZSS represented a mixture of genetic components between the T. ascendens-T. distichum and T. mucronatum cluster, indicating former hybrid events. Consistent with the results of the genetic structure analysis above, T. ascendens and T. distichum remained highly coherent in PC space, forming a stable cluster.

    • The phylogenetic trees generated from both maximum likelihood (ML) and neighbour-joining (NJ) methods showed similar clustering information for chloroplast SNPs (Fig. 2a). Both trees split all Taxodium samples into three distinct clusters: ITM-T. mucronatum, T. distichum, and T. ascendens cluster, using G. pensilis and C. fortunei as outgroups. Since the chloroplast genomes are believed to be paternally inherited in Cupressaceae sensu lato[46], the chloroplast phylogenetic tree indicates each individual's direct paternal parent. The ITM and native T. mucronatum clustered together, which confirmed the conjecture that most ITM individuals are derived from one of the earliest introduced T. mucronatum individuals (ITM02), introduced to mainland China in 1925. Zss302-2 (T. 'Zhongshanshan 302') and Zss401 (T. 'Zhongshanshan 401') are located inside ITM-T. mucronatum cluster, suggesting that the paternal species of them are identified as T. mucronatum. Similarly, since Zss405-2 (T. 'Zhongshanshan 405') and Zss111-2 (T. 'Zhongshanshan 111') clustered with T. distichum and T. ascendens separately, their paternal parents were also indicated.

      Figure 2. 

      Phylogenetic and neighbour-net analyses. Colour represents the population. Branch labels are bootstrap support values from 1,000 replicates. (a) ML tree based on 6,901 chloroplast SNPs. (b) Maximum Likelihood tree based on 2,752,534 nuclear SNPs. (c) Results of neighbour-net analysis based on 2,752,534 nuclear SNPs, with a zoomed-in view of the Taxodium cluster in the lower half. All species and cultivars are highlighted in different colours, and the length of the lines indicates the distance among clusters/individuals.

      To further reveal the phylogenetic relationships within Taxodium, a ML tree for 2,752,534 nuclear SNPs was constructed (Fig. 2b). ITM and ZSS admixed with T. mucronatum, suggesting the indivisible kinship of these three species and cultivars. The result indicated that ZSS has a closer affinity to T. mucronatum than the other two parents, T. distichum and T. ascendens. In phylogenetic analysis, T. distichum and T. ascendens together form a monophyletic clade, rather than being sister branches to each other. The support values within this monophyletic clade are also low, with half of them showing support values ≤ 50. The neighbour-net analysis further revealed the relationship among all clusters (Fig. 2c). The plot intimated the same kinship network as the previous analyses did, with a more distinct view of the hybrid property of ZSS. Five ITM samples were derived from ITM02, confirming the parental identity of ITM02 in the initial colonization. Meanwhile, an evolutionary timescale of Taxodium was reconstructed and the divergence time estimation based on nuclear SNPs suggested that Taxodium diverged into three species in Late Paleocene to early Eocene (median ages: 62.54−52.47 Ma), with T. mucronatum diverged before the split of the other two species (Supplemental Fig. S4).

    • According to the results of genetic inference, the T. ascendens-T. distichum cluster is located on one parent angle and the ITM-T. mucronatum cluster located on the other (Fig. 3). ZSS plants occupied the vertex angle, indicating a hybrid genetic composition of both clusters. Due to the close phylogenetic relationship of Taxodium species, the result may involve polymorphic markers to present both parents not purely polarized. ITM shows its attribute as part of T. mucronatum with even further genetic distances to the T. ascendens-T. distichum cluster than native T. mucronatum individuals. In both 24-SNP and 100-SNP cases, T. mucronatum shows a relatively large intraspecific genetic variance than T. ascendens and T. distichum.

      Figure 3. 

      Detection of recent hybridization (DRH) analysis. Each dot represents an individual, and the colour shows the taxon. Hybrid individuals and individuals with overlapping positions are labelled. The black lines delineated the triangle formed a hybrid region, the vertex angle of which represents pure F1 generation and the base angles represent pure parents (one on each side). (a) DRH analysis based on the 100-SNP panel. (b) DRH analysis based on the 24-SNP panel.

      The result of the hybrid stage inference analysis reveals the posterior probability that each sample belongs to each hybrid stage (Supplemental Table S4). Most of the individuals have a relatively high posterior probability that supports the category division. T. ascendens and T. distichum are categorized as 'parent 1'. However, this cluster cannot be subdivided based on current analysis because of the similarity of genetic composition between them. Two T. mucronatum individuals (Mxg50J, Mxg756) can be assigned to 'parent 2', but the other two possess a relatively large probability of being 'back cross 2' (Mxg296, Mxg297). This can be attributed to the complex genetic variation within the taxon. All four ZSS samples were assigned to 'F1, with a concrete support rate (Supplemental Fig. S5).

    • The potential distributions of the three Taxodium species were inferred in both North America and East Asia under present, past, and future climate scenarios (Fig. 4 & Supplemental Fig. S6). The models for all three species showed good performance in testing, with all AUC values > 0.98 (Supplemental Fig. S7). The results indicate that the suitable distribution areas (suitability score ≥ 1*MTSS) of all native North American populations expand from present to 2050 (76.8% for T. ascendens, 27.7% for T. distichum and 12.7% for T. mucronatum). The distribution areas in China are also simulated to have substantially increases in the cases of T. ascendens (106%) and T. distichum (109%), while the distribution of T. mucronatum will shrink by 10.2% in China.

      Figure 4. 

      Species distribution modeling of the three Taxodium species in present and future 2050. (a)−(h) shows the native distribution of Taxodium species. (a)−(d) present the present distribution, and (e)−(h) for future 2050. Order in rows (a)−(d) represents T. mucronatum, T. ascendens, T. distichum, and the whole genus, respectively. The identical models' output was symmetrically projected to east coast Asia (i)−(p).

    • The present phylogenetic analyses revealed that all samples can be divided into three clusters based on both nuclear SNPs and chloroplast SNPs: Glyptostrobus, Cryptomeria, and Taxodium. This result coordinates with the previous taxonomy that they represent three separate genera of Cupressaceae sensu lato[46,47]. Furthermore, the phylogenetic results of nuclear SNPs indicated a closer kinship between T. distichum and T. ascendens than T. distichum and T. mucronatum, which is consistent with previous studies[15,48]. Nevertheless, the chloroplast phylogeny supports a sister relationship between T. distichum and T. mucronatum, which agrees with previous studies based on the whole chloroplast genome[1]. Two possible explanations are presented here: First, as have been mentioned in the results, the Taxodium may have experienced recent natural hybrid events, which requires the collection samples to be as broad and diverse as possible in further experiments; second, the probe used in the present study are designed based on RNA sequences[19], which reflect exome status. T. distichum and T. ascendens may have a close relationship in the exome region — referring to their similarity in morphological traits — but the three species have experienced incomplete lineage sorting due relatively short internode branch length between the most recent common ancestor of the three species and that of T. distichum and T. ascendens, and hence chloroplast genome, which represent a single locus on a whole, supporting a different phylogeny[49,50]. It is therefore believed that hybridization between T. distichum-T. ascendens cluster and T. mucronatum, rather than hybridization between T. distichum and T. ascendens, will be more valuable in forestry and possess higher ecological potential because they have rather far genetic distance, consistent with the current hybrid strategies of ZSS. Efforts to identify evolutionary relationships and genetic distances between these two species will require future population genetics studies that include more (for example, hundreds of) samples from different populations.

      The PCA, Admixture, and phylogenetic analyses supported that ZSS appears to be a mixture of T. mucronatum clade and T. distichum-T. ascendens clade. The frequency-based analysis further confirms the conclusion. ZSS has the highest heterozygosity and locates in the middle of T. ascendens-T. distichum and T. mucronatum clades in both Bayesian hybrid inference and DRH analysis, suggesting its hybrid identity. The divergence time estimates suggest that species within Taxodium diverged around 52−63 million years ago, which is earlier than previous chloroplast-based estimates of divergence[34]. Hybridisation between species that have diverged for such a long time indicates weak reproductive isolation within Taxodium, which is consistent with Kou et al.[51] where two genera diverged ca. 46 million years ago can still hybridize with each other. Due to the paternally inherited nature of chloroplasts in Taxodium[46], phylogenetic results based on chloroplast (paternal) and nuclear genes can reveal the parental species of hybrid individuals of ZSS. Particularly, Zss401 with T. mucronatum as paternity and T. ascendens as maternity; Zss302-2 with T. mucronatum as paternity and T. distichum as maternity; Zss111-2 with T. ascendens as paternity and T. mucronatum as maternity; Zss405-2 with T. distichum as paternity and T. mucronatum as maternity. These results are consistent with the previous identification using electrochemical fingerprints[6]. For other plants with the same characteristics (i.e., paternally inherited chloroplasts), similar methods can be applied to the detection and identification of other hybrid individuals (e.g., hybrid among different species in Cupressaceae), thus facilitating breeding and forestry studies.

      There is sufficient evidence to declare that ITM is not a hybrid production but a clone of T. mucronatum, and genetic components of most ITM samples were inherited from the ITM individual ITM02. ITM was propagated artificially from cuttings of native T. mucronatum[3], which could leave low genetic variation and high genetic similarity within the population. The uniformity of genetic components within a population is harmful and obstructive to the expansion of the population[52,53]. Therefore, we suggest that native T. mucronatum of genetic variation from different geological locations should be introduced for the consideration of further afforestation. Future studies of the worldwide genetic variance of T. mucronatum and identification of the source location of ITM require a broader sample collection.

    • With the assumption that hybrid cultivars can inherit the ecological traits of parental species[54], hybrids with T. distichum as a parent should be promoted more in China in the future, as T. distichum has the greatest expansion of potentially suitable areas (264,200 km2, 109%) in Taxodium. However, considering the varying degrees of intra-/interspecific genetic distances and nucleoplasm conflicts in phylogenetic analysis, future hybridization experiments are still necessary.

      The investigation of wild germplasms and existing cultivars in genetic and ecological distribution should be prior information for future forestry studies. We suggest that High-Throughput Sequencing should be more widely applied in forestry research. For hybrid cultivars delimitation, analysis conducted on both nuclear and chloroplast levels is necessary. Nuclear SNPs for diploid samples help to polarise the genetic components to bidirectional parental information. Because of the nature of hybridization (F1) that approximately half-to-half of the chromosomes come from each parental species, it is easy to tell whether a sample is a hybrid. On the other hand, due to its characteristics of inheritance, the chloroplast genome helps to identify paternal and maternal species of hybrids. In addition, high-throughput sequencing may also help to reveal the genetic components before assessing traits or conducting new hybridization, especially for accessions whose genomic background are not known. Meanwhile, environmental-associated SNPs and genomic selection models can serve as powerful tools to predict potential adaptions and reduce uncertainty in the experiments of hybrid, thus improving the quality of future cultivars[55].

    • By analysing the chloroplast and nuclear genes of Taxodium, the phylogeny of species and cultivars of the genus were constructed. Based on that, the genetic background of Chinese introduced T. mucronatum was further explored and the genetic components of Taxodium hybrid 'Zhongshanshan' identified. Given the flooding resistance of Taxodium, the data and results generated in this study could provide valuable resources and references for forest genetics and breeding studies of the genus. The target capture sequencing approach employed can also be applied to future forestry studies to reveal the genetic background of other woody plant species and/or hybrids.

    • The authors confirm contribution to the paper as follows: study conception and design: Chen Y, Li J, Han Z, Mao K; samples and materials providing: Yu C; data collection: Dai X, Li J, Han Z; analysis and interpretation of results: Chen Y, Han Z, Cheng J; draft manuscript preparation: Han Z, Chen Y, Mao K. All authors reviewed the results and approved the final version of the manuscript.

    • The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. Codes and scripts used in this study can be found under: https://github.com/chenyangkang/CNN_of_chloroplast_delimitation.

      • This project was financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 31622015), Sichuan Science and Technology Program (Grant No. 2023NSFSC0186), China Post doctoral Science Foundation (Grant No. BX20230241, 2024M752196), Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (Grant No. SCU2023D003, SCU2024D003, 2023SCU12108) and the Institutional Research Fund from Sichuan University (Grant No. 2021SCUNL102).

      • The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

      • # Authors contributed equally: Zhitong Han, Yangkang Chen

      • Supplemental Table S1 Sample collecting information.
      • Supplemental Table S2 Three calibration points used in the divergence time estimation for Taxodium and close genus. Ma: million years ago.
      • Supplemental Table S3 Climate variables usage in SDMs.
      • Supplemental Table S4 Estimated Posterior Probabilities of that Each Individual Belongs to Each of the Different Genotype Frequency Categories. The number in the quote separated by "/" represent the expected proportion of each categories: 00, 01, 10, 11. For example, 0.500/0.250/0.250/0.000 means the proportion of the 00, 01, 10 and 11 genotype of this individual is supposed to be 0.500, 0.250, 0.250 and 0.000, separately.
      • Supplemental Fig. S1 Pairwise distance analysis. The figure demonstrates the average genetic distance between ITM and other taxa using both Chloroplast and nuclear data under both the Tajima-Nei model and the Maximum Composite Likelihood method.
      • Supplemental Fig. S2 Parameters and Ecological Factor Selection in SDMs. From top to bottom: T. mucronatum, T. distichum, T. ascendens.
      • Supplemental Fig. S3 Relative heterozygosity among Taxodium populations. The 28142 Taxodium-shared SNPs were used to calculate heterozygosity. The values were scaled in the R program. Each dot represents an individual.
      • Supplemental Fig. S4 Divergence times of Taxodium and other close genus estimated based on nuclear SNPs using MCMCTREE. A-C indicate calibration points. Median ages of nodes are shown in million years ago (Ma), with 95% highest posteriori density intervals indicated.
      • Supplemental Fig. S5 Hybrid stages infered by NewHybrids, ZSS samples were identified to be 'F1' in all subsets. (A) All collected samples; (B) sample 'Zss 405-2' and its parental species; (C) sample 'Zss 401' and its parental species; (D) sample 'Zss 111-2' and its parental species; (E) sample 'Zss 302-2' and its parental species.
      • Supplemental Fig. S6 Species Distribution Modeling of the Three Taxodium Species in LGM and future 2070.
      • Supplemental Fig. S7 ROC plots for the three species models, with AUC values labelled top right. (A) T. distichum; (B) T. ascendens; (C) T. mucronatum.
      • Copyright: © 2024 by the author(s). Published by Maximum Academic Press, Fayetteville, GA. This article is an open access article distributed under Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
    Figure (4)  References (55)
  • About this article
    Cite this article
    Han Z, Chen Y, Dai X, Yu C, Cheng J, et al. 2024. The revelation of genomic breed composition using target capture sequencing: a case of Taxodium. Forestry Research 4: e034 doi: 10.48130/forres-0024-0031
    Han Z, Chen Y, Dai X, Yu C, Cheng J, et al. 2024. The revelation of genomic breed composition using target capture sequencing: a case of Taxodium. Forestry Research 4: e034 doi: 10.48130/forres-0024-0031

Catalog

  • About this article

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return