Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 30, 2026
A PCR-based Genotyping Method to Distinguish Between Wild-type and Ornamental Varieties of Imperata cylindrica
Published on: February 20, 2012
Comparison of Kompetitive Allele Specific PCR (KASP) and genotyping by sequencing (GBS) for quality control analysis
Berhanu Tadesse Ertiro1, Veronica Ogugo2, Mosisa Worku3
1Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research (EIAR), Bako National Maize Research Center, Bako, West Shoa, Oromia, Ethiopia. btadde@yahoo.com.
Background:
Quality control (QC) analysis is an important component in maize breeding and seed systems. Genotyping by next-generation sequencing (GBS) is an emerging method of SNP genotyping, which is being increasingly adopted for discovery applications, but its suitability for QC analysis has not been explored. The objectives of our study were 1) to evaluate the level of genetic purity and identity among two to nine seed sources of 16 inbred lines using 191 Kompetitive Allele Specific PCR (KASP) and 257,268 GBS markers, and 2) compare the correlation between the KASP-based low and the GBS-based high marker density on QC analysis.
Results:
Genetic purity within each seed source varied from 49 to 100% for KASP and from 74 to 100% for GBS. All except one of the inbred lines obtained from CIMMYT showed 98 to 100% homogeneity irrespective of the marker type. On the contrary, only 16 and 21% of the samples obtained from EIAR and partners showed ≥95% purity for KASP and GBS, respectively. The genetic distance among multiple sources of the same line designation varied from 0.000 to 0.295 for KASP and from 0.004 to 0.230 for GBS. Five lines from CIMMYT showed ≤ 0.05 distance among multiple sources of the same line designation; the remaining eleven inbred lines, including two from CIMMYT and nine from Ethiopia showed higher than expected genetic distances for two or more seed sources. The correlation between the 191 KASP and 257,268 GBS markers was 0.88 for purity and 0.93 for identity. A reduction in the number of GBS markers to 1,343 decreased the correlation coefficient only by 0.03.
Conclusions:
Our results clearly showed high discrepancy both in genetic purity and identity by the origin of the seed sources (institutions) irrespective of the type of genotyping platform and number of markers used for analyses. Although there were some numerical differences between KASP and GBS, the overall conclusions reached from both methods was basically similar, which clearly suggests that smaller subset of preselected and high quality markers are sufficient for QC analysis that can easily be done using low marker density genotyping platforms, such as KASP. Results from this study would be highly relevant for plant breeders and seed system specialists.
