==== Front Sci Rep Sci Rep Scientific Reports 2045-2322 Nature Publishing Group UK London 37386134 37522 10.1038/s41598-023-37522-1 Article Rapid and easy construction of a simplified amplicon sequencing (simplified AmpSeq) library for marker-assisted selection Nishio Sogo nishios@affrc.go.jp 1 Moriya Shigeki 2 Kunihisa Miyuki 1 Takeuchi Yukie 1 Imai Atsushi 1 Takada Norio 1 1 grid.416835.d 0000 0001 2222 0432 Institute of Fruit Tree and Tea Science, NARO, 2-1 Fujimoto, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8605 Japan 2 grid.482892.d 0000 0001 2220 7617 Institute of Fruit Tree and Tea Science, NARO, Morioka, Iwate 020-0123 Japan 29 6 2023 29 6 2023 2023 13 1057510 5 2023 22 6 2023 © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. Marker-assisted selection (MAS) is fundamental for plant breeding programs, as it can identify desirable seedlings at a young stage and reduce the cost, time and space needed for plant maintenance, especially for perennial crops. To facilitate the process of genotyping, which is time consuming and laborious, we developed a simplified amplicon sequencing (simplified AmpSeq) library construction method for next-generation sequencing that can be applied to MAS in breeding programs. The method is based on one-step PCR with a mixture of two primer sets: the first consisting of tailed target primers, the second of primers that contain flow-cell binding sites, indexes and tail sequences complementary to those in the first set. To demonstrate the process of MAS using s implified AmpSeq, we created databases of genotypes for important traits by using cultivar collections including triploid cultivars and segregating seedlings of Japanese pear (Pyrus pyrifolia Nakai), Japanese chestnut (Castanea crenata Sieb. et Zucc.) and apple (Malus domestica Borkh.). Simplified AmpSeq has the advantages of high repeatability, ability to estimate allele number in polyploid species and semi-automatic evaluation using target allele frequencies. Because this method provides high flexibility for designing primer sets and targeting any variant, it will be useful for plant breeding programs. Subject terms Agricultural genetics Plant breeding issue-copyright-statement© Springer Nature Limited 2023 ==== Body pmcIntroduction With advances in molecular genetic technology, marker-assisted selection (MAS) has become fundamental and essential for plant breeding1,2. It is increasingly common that molecular markers linked to traits of interest in commercial crops have been identified and that these markers can be practically used in breeding programs3–5. Instead of evaluating phenotypic traits in mature plants, a laborious and time-consuming procedure, MAS allows breeders to determine the genotypes for target traits easily and quickly when the plants are young, enabling breeders to reduce the cost of raising plants and the amount of field space required. In a 2014 summary, studies of the Poaceae (including rice, wheat and maize) accounted for 60% of plant MAS publications3. On the other hand, MAS has been less widely adopted in perennial crops such as fruit trees4, despite the fact that it offers tremendous advantages for these species6 because the trees have a long juvenile phase and are large, and the number of trees that can be managed is limited. Until recently, genotyping for MAS was usually conducted using agarose gel electrophoresis for molecular markers such as sequence-characterized amplified regions (SCAR) and cleaved amplified polymorphic sequences (CAPS) and using capillary electrophoresis for simple sequence repeats (SSRs). Because these procedures generally require visual scoring to determine genotypes, unintentional human errors are inevitable. Moreover, it is labor-intensive to detect and identify each target band for each important trait in studies involving more than a few markers and more than a thousand individuals, as would be needed for MAS in breeding programs. Although SSRs are suitable for MAS owing to their multi-allelic nature, codominance and high transferability across cultivars and species7, the existence of slippage and stutter bands makes allele determination difficult8. Also, those traditional genotyping methods are not suitable for genotyping for polyploid plants, in which it is necessary to detect and count duplicated alleles. To overcome these difficulties and further improve breeding programs, an easy, fast and flexible method to identify genotypes is required. With the advent of next-generation sequencing (NGS) technology, the cost and time needed for sequencing has dramatically decreased9. Reference genomes have been constructed for most commercial crops, accelerating the development of molecular markers and the identification of genes of interest. Methods such as genotyping by sequencing (GBS), restriction-site-associated DNA sequencing (RAD-seq), genotyping by random amplicon sequencing-direct (GRAS-Di) and multiplexed inter-simple sequence repeat genotyping by sequencing (MIG-seq) have been practically used to construct genetic maps and to conduct genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and population genetics studies10–14. These methods are used to sequence specific regions in a genome that are located between restriction enzyme sites or random primer annealing sites and that can be used to identify considerable numbers of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in cultivar collections or breeding populations. On the other hand, advances in NGS technology have had relatively less effect on improvement of MAS. To genotype specific SNPs linked to genes of interest for MAS, an amplicon sequencing method (AmpSeq) has been developed and used in case studies15,16. However, AmpSeq requires two-step PCR to add adaptors to be detected by the NGS platform, which takes twice the time and cost of a normal one-step PCR procedure for genotyping. Also, in recent years, Kompetitive Allele-Specific PCR (KASP) has been applied in some breeding programs17–19, but it is not suitable for multiplex PCR or for use with crude DNA. The objectives of this study were (1) to develop a new, simple method for genotyping and allele calling for MAS using a simplified amplicon sequencing process (“simplified AmpSeq”), (2) to create a database for MAS using simplified AmpSeq in Japanese pear, Japanese chestnut and apple and demonstrate that the method is useful for breeding programs, and (3) to confirm the repeatability and versatility of this method, including for analysis of triploid cultivars. Results Constructing a simplified AmpSeq library for NGS using simplified one-step PCR In general, amplicon sequencing libraries for NGS are constructed by two-step PCR: a 1st PCR to amplify target sequences and a 2nd PCR to extend adapters responsible for flow-cell binding and indexes for discriminating individuals (Fig. 1a)16,20. To simplify the process of constructing an amplicon library for MAS, the possibility of using simplified one-step PCR, in which the 1st and 2nd primer sets are used in a single reaction, was investigated (Fig. 1b). The 1st primers contained pairs of sequences to amplify the target regions and extended sequences containing R1 and R2 seq primers. The 2nd primers contained the extended sequences along with Illumina flow-cell binding sites and different 8-bp indexes. Each sample (cultivar or seedling) was identified by a unique pair of indexes. By using pear and chestnut cultivars and primers that were already being used in breeding programs (Tables 1 and 2; Supplementary Tables 1 and 2), the possibility of amplifying target bands by simplified one-step PCR was preliminarily confirmed. The bands detected by agarose gel electrophoresis were of the size required for NGS libraries (242–271 bp), which included the target sequences of the markers (107–136 bp) and extended sequences (135 bp) composed of R1 and R2 primers, flow-cell binding sites and indexes.Figure 1 Summary of library construction for next-generation sequencing using (a) two-step PCR and (b) simplified one-step PCR. A different set of indexes (green) was added to each sample (i.e., cultivar or seedling) to allow the sequences from that sample to be distinguished after multiplexing. Table 1 Cultivars, selections and seedlings used in this study. Plant Sample sizes Parentage of seedlings Pear 59 cultivars and selections 96 seedlings 48 seedlings derived from crosses between Tsukuba 63 and 515-020 48 seedlings derived from crosses between Tsukuba 60 and 592-021 Chestnut 46 cultivars and selections 24 seedlings 24 seedlings derived from crosses between 776-013 and 794-017 Apple 52 cultivars and selections 66 seedlings 66 seedlings derived from crosses between 7-4151 and 8-818 Table 2 Markers used in this study. Marker Plant Trait Type Chr Start End Size (bp) Reference No. TsuENH101 Pear Pear scab resistance SSR 1 9,845,756 9,845,882 127 38 TsuENH157.mod Pear scab resistance SSR 1 12,536,169 12,536,041 129 38 PPACS2.mod Fruit-ripening day SSR 15 12,380,055 12,379,942 114 40 Psc07 Fruit skin color SSR 8 4,160,692 4,160,574 119 34 Mdo.chr11.34.modA Pear black spot resistance SSR 11 2,276,164 2,276,299 136 43 Co Apple Columnar type Dominant marker 10 128 24 CH-Vf1 Apple scab resistance SSR 1 27,995,071 27,995,204 134 42 MdPG1.mod Flesh mealiness SSR 10 27,298,443 27,298,550 108 45 Alt_indel Apple black spot resistance Indel 11 2,804,575 2,804,736 162 44 Mdo.chr11.34.modB Apple black spot resistance SSR 11 2,824,157 2,824,283 127 43 CmSca06716.mod Chestnut Pellicle peelability SSR A 12,150,467 12,150,575 109 23 CCR1.0F_56177061 Pellicle peelability SNP F 56,177,032 56,177,138 107 41 Determining optimal primer concentrations To determine the optimal balance between the 1st and 2nd primer pair concentrations for simplified one-step PCR, we used a fixed final concentration of the 2nd primers (0.1 µM each) in combination with various final concentrations of the 1st primers (0, 0.001, 0.005, 0.01, 0.02, 0.04, 0.06 and 0.1 µM each) using eight cultivars each of pear and chestnut (Fig. 2a–d). Because the amplifications among the eight cultivars within a species were similar at the same 1st-primer concentrations, the amplifications from one cultivar per species using different 1st-primer concentrations were examined by agarose gel electrophoresis to confirm the intensity and distribution of the bands (Fig. 2a, c; Supplementary Fig. S1). For each cultivar, the PCR products from two-step PCR were used as a control during agarose gel electrophoresis to indicate the target band size. This analysis showed amplicons of the target size when the 1st-primer concentration was 0.01 to 0.1 µM, but the amplicons were inconsistent when the concentration was 0.005 µM, and no clear amplicons were detected when using concentrations of 0 and 0.001 µM. The amplicons of the markers used in this study were 107 to 136 bp, so the bands extended with Illumina flow-cell sequences and indexes would be 242–271 bp if amplification were successful with both the 1st and 2nd primer sets. On the other hand, if the amplicons originated only from the 1st primer pairs, which lack the flow-cell binding site and index sequences, they would range from about 174–205 bp. The overall intensities of bands in both pear and chestnut were stronger as the concentration of the 1st primer increased (Fig. 2a, c). But at 1st-primer concentrations of 0.04–0.1 µM, the frequency of short amplicons (174–205 bp), which do not carry sequences amplified by the 2nd primer set, also increased.Figure 2 Electrophoresis of PCR products and number of reads for each marker obtained by using different primer concentrations. (a) Electrophoresis of PCR products created through simplified one-step PCR with various 1st-primer concentrations in pear ‘Wase Kozo’. The PCR products obtained through two-step PCR are included to indicate the target amplicon size. Five primer sets (TsuENH101, TsuENH57.mod, PPACS2.mod, Psc07 and Mdchr11.34.modA) were used in a single multiplex reaction for each sample. (b) Average numbers of reads of each marker from eight pear cultivars. (c) Electrophoresis of PCR products created through simplified one-step PCR with various 1st-primer concentrations in chestnut ‘Otomune’. Two primer sets (CCR1.0F5617761 and CmSca06716) were used in a single multiplex reaction for each sample. As in (a), a comparable reaction using two-step PCR is included at the far right. (d) Average numbers of reads of each marker from eight chestnut cultivars. Uncropped gel images for (a) and (c) are available in Supplementary Fig. S1. To assess the efficiency of amplification at different primer concentrations, we submitted an equal volume of each final reaction mixture for analysis on the Illumina MiSeq platform. The total number of sequences increased as 1st-primer concentration increased from 0 to 0.02 µM and then decreased at concentrations from 0.02 to 0.1 µM in both pear and chestnut (Fig. 2b, d), consistent with the intensities of bands around 242–271 bp viewed by agarose gel electrophoresis. The proportion of amplicons that originated from each primer pair (marker) was stable across different 1st-primer concentrations (Fig. 2b and d). Obtaining sequences amplified by both the 1st and 2nd primers (here, amplicons distributed around 242–271 bp) is crucial for NGS. On the other hand, amplified sequences that do not carry the 2nd-primer sequences (here, ~ 174–205 bp) are not useful for NGS and would add to the background. We concluded that concentrations of 0.02 µM for the 1st primers and 0.1 µM for the 2nd primers would be optimal on the basis of the numbers of reads obtained in NGS (Fig. 2b, d) and the balance between complete and incomplete amplicons (Fig. 2a, c). Allelic composition of diploid cultivars Using the primer concentrations determined in the above experiments, pear and chestnut cultivars were genotyped by both simplified one-step PCR (simplified AmpSeq) and two-step PCR (standard AmpSeq), and apple cultivars and segregating seedlings of pear, chestnut and apple were genotyped by simplified one-step PCR (Supplementary Tables S3–S5). The four most common alleles per locus were identified and their frequencies were calculated to estimate the genotype of each cultivar. Generally, the first and second alleles were sufficient to determine the genotypes, but the third and fourth alleles were also scored in case an allele had a high numbers of repeats, which would increase the frequency of stutter bands around that allele. Because the presence of stutter bands and differences in allele amplification made genotyping difficult, we also created digital electropherograms of the molecular marker allele frequencies obtained through the SSR-GBS pipeline (Fig. 3), which helped in assessing the extent of stutter bands. For example, marker locus Psc07 in pear has more than 24 repeats of CT in the 151-bp allele (Fig. 3a), and CH-vf1 in apple has more than 27 repeats of AG in the 128-bp allele (Fig. 3c). Those markers sometimes produced a stutter band stronger than the original band, such as the 141-bp band for Psc07 in ‘Amanogawa’ pear and the 128-bp band for CH-Vf1 in ‘Shinano Gold’ apple (Supplementary Tables S3, S5). Thus, allele calling was based on both the allele frequencies and the electropherograms. All of the genotypes determined by simplified one-step and two-step PCR in pear and chestnut were identical, suggesting that both methods have high reliability.Figure 3 Digital electropherograms of molecular markers used in this study: electropherograms of (a) five molecular markers for pear, (b) two for chestnut and (c) five for apple. All of the molecular markers other than CCR1.0F_56177061 (SNP), Co (dominant marker) and Alt_indel (indel marker) are SSRs. Allelic composition of triploid cultivars Four triploid cultivars (‘Santaro’, ‘Jonagold’, ‘Hokuto’ and ‘Mutsu’) from the apple cultivar collection were also genotyped, each of which would have a maximum of three alleles per locus. Although these cultivars cannot produce offspring because of their triploid chromosome constitution, they were used for allele-frequency-based genotyping to clarify whether the one-step PCR method could be applied to genotyping of polyploid species. We used markers MdPG1.mod and Alt_indel to test triploid cultivar genotyping because they produced fewer stutter bands than other markers (Table 3 and Fig. 3). For MdPG1.mod, the frequencies of the third-most-common alleles were > 0.2 in ‘Santaro’, ‘Jonagold’ and ‘Hokuto’, but < 0.03 in diploid cultivars, revealing the presence of three different alleles in each of these three triploid cultivars. ‘Mutsu’ has a frequency of 0.65 for the 108-bp allele and a frequency of 0.30 for the 114-bp allele, suggesting that it has genotype ‘108/108/114’. In contrast, ‘Indo’ (diploid), which has alleles in common with ‘Mutsu’, has a frequency of 0.49 for the 108-bp allele and of 0.45 for the 114-bp allele, suggesting that it has genotype ‘108/114’. Likewise, the Alt_indel genotype of ‘Hokuto’ is predicted to be ‘159/162/162’, because it has a frequency of 0.63 for the 162-bp allele and 0.35 for the 159-bp allele.Table 3 Allele frequencies and predicted genotypes of diploid and triploid apple cultivars. Individual Ploidy Trait Marker Total reads Reads of target marker Allele1 Freq1 Allele2 Freq2 Allele3 Freq3 Allele4 Freq4 Predicted genotype Indo Diploid PG MdPG1. mod 5540 1566 108 0.49 114 0.45 111 0.02 107 0.01 108/114 Delicious Diploid 5870 1522 105 0.48 114 0.47 111 0.02 113 0.01 105/114 Fuji Diploid 6603 1712 105 0.50 108 0.47 104 0.01 107 0.01 105/108 Gold Rush Diploid 4873 1435 105 0.52 108 0.46 107 0.01 104 0.01 105/108 Santaro Triploid 7284 2053 108 0.34 105 0.33 114 0.29 111 0.01 105/108/114 Jonagold Triploid 5384 1560 108 0.33 105 0.32 114 0.31 111 0.01 105/108/114 Hokuto Triploid 4575 968 105 0.36 108 0.33 114 0.27 107 0.01 105/108/114 Mutsu Triploid 8565 2233 108 0.65 114 0.30 105 0.02 107 0.02 108/108/114 Indo Diploid Susceptibility to Alt_indel 5540 696 159 0.57 162 0.41 174 0.01 158 0.00 159/162 Delicious Diploid Alternaria blotch 5870 961 159 0.53 162 0.44 174 0.01 158 0.01 159/162 Fuji Diploid 6603 1018 162 0.99 161 0.01 NA NA NA NA 162/162 Gold Rush Diploid 4873 415 162 0.99 161 0.01 163 0.00 NA NA 162/162 Santaro Triploid 7284 772 162 0.99 161 0.01 NA NA NA NA 162/162/162 Jonagold Triploid 5384 520 162 0.99 161 0.01 159 0.00 NA NA 162/162/162 Hokuto Triploid 4575 761 162 0.63 159 0.35 161 0.01 147 0.00 159/162/162 Mutsu Triploid 8565 976 162 0.98 161 0.02 160 0.00 NA NA 162/162/162 Allele1 indicates the size (bp) of the most common allele, Freq1 indicates the frequency of the most common allele. Proportion of reads represented by each molecular marker Out of the total reads for each species, the average proportions represented by the sum of the marker reads were 0.87 for two-step PCR in pear cultivars, 0.70 for simplified one-step PCR in pear cultivars and 0.57 for simplified one-step PCR in pear seedlings (Fig. 4). The proportions for chestnut were 0.85 for two-step PCR in cultivars, 0.59 for simplified one-step PCR in cultivars and 0.10 for simplified one-step PCR in seedlings. In apple, those proportions were 0.71 for simplified one-step PCR in cultivars and 0.57 for simplified one-step PCR in seedlings. In both pear and chestnut, the marker reads represented a higher proportion of the total reads in two-step PCR than in simplified one-step PCR. On the other hand, the amplification bias (i.e., the variation in amplification efficiency among different markers) using two-step PCR (0.36, 0.36, 0.06, 0.06 and 0.03 for the five markers in pear; 0.46 and 0.34 for two markers in chestnut) was larger than in simplified one-step PCR (0.20, 0.19, 0.14, 0.10 and 0.05 in pear; 0.26 and 0.25 in chestnut). Because DNA samples from the seedlings were extracted by a simple method and were of only moderate quality, the proportion of marker reads was lower in seedlings than in cultivars. In particular, the sum of target marker reads was low in chestnut seedlings because of the high rate of primer dimer sequences. Nevertheless, the result of the genotyping was acceptable for practical use for MAS (Supplementary Table 4), as there were enough reads (mean 256 and 406 reads for each marker) and clear allele frequency values.Figure 4 Proportion of reads represented by each marker using cultivars and seedlings of pear, chestnut and apple. (a) Proportion of reads represented by each marker using 59 cultivars and 96 seedlings of pear. The average numbers of reads were 8227 for two-step PCR using the cultivars, 18,683 for simplified one-step PCR using the cultivars and 17,090 for simplified one-step PCR using the seedlings. (b) Proportion of reads represented by each marker using 52 cultivars and 24 seedlings of chestnut. The average numbers of reads were 3657 for two-step PCR using the cultivars, 8310 for simplified one-step PCR using the cultivars and 5519 for simplified one-step PCR using the seedlings. (c) Proportion of reads represented by each marker using 59 cultivars and 66 seedlings in apple. The average numbers of reads were 6552 for simplified one-step PCR using the cultivars and 4022 for simplified one-step PCR using the seedlings. Repeatability and correlations between simplified one-step and two-step PCR The repeatability and correlations between simplified one-step and two-step PCR were calculated using allele frequencies of the first (i.e., most common) alleles (Table 4). The first-allele frequency values were considered to be a good indicator of repeatability because these values generally represent the most important information for estimating SSR genotypes. The frequencies of the first alleles were generally distributed around 0.8 when the genotype was homozygous and around 0.4 when the genotype was heterozygous (Supplementary Tables 3 and 5), though these values fluctuated depending on the extent of stutter bands, competition with amplification of other alleles and primer dimers. The repeatability for simplified one-step PCR was high at 0.965 to 0.996, which is sufficient for genotyping in a breeding program. The repeatability for two-step PCR was also high at 0.939 to 0.996, similar to that for simplified one-step PCR. The correlation between simplified one-step and two-step PCR ranged from 0.956 to 0.995. In summary, the allele frequency-based evaluation was repeatable for both simplified one-step and two-step PCR.Table 4 Repeatability and correlation between simplified one-step and two-step PCR based on the frequency of the first (most common) allele. Marker Plant Repeatability of simplified one-step PCR Repeatability of two-step PCR Correlation between simplified one-step and two-step PCR TsuENH101 Pear 0.993 0.993 0.992 TsuENH157.mod 0.995 0.996 0.995 PPACS2.mod 0.996 0.993 0.994 Psc07 0.979 0.951 0.964 Mdo.chr11.34.modA 0.965 0.939 0.956 CH-Vf1 Apple 0.958 MdPG1.mod 0.995 Alt_indel 0.963 Mdo.chr11.34.modB 0.982 CmSca06716.mod Chestnut 0.984 0.990 0.982 CCR1.0F_56177033 0.996 0.994 0.995 Use of simplified AmpSeq to identify individuals carrying target alleles Generally, allele calling and genotyping are conducted before selection of seedlings that carry the target genes. But this step is laborious and time consuming and is not necessary for practical MAS in a breeding program. Instead of determining genotype, we used the frequency of the target (desired) allele in each individual to determine which ones carried that allele. As an example, we summarized the results for TsuENH157.mod, PPACS2.mod and Psc07 from pear seedlings (Table 5), which are related to scab resistance, fruit-ripening day and fruit skin color, respectively. For TsuEHH157.mod, a seedling was determined to carry the resistance allele (127 bp) when the frequency of the allele in that individual was > 0.30. Likewise, for PPACS2.mod, a seedling was determined to carry the early-harvesting allele when the frequency of the 132-bp allele was > 0.20. For Psc07, which frequently produces a stutter band, the judgment criterion was lowered to 0.10; thus, when the frequency of the 151-bp allele was > 0.10, the seedlings were judged to carry the allele related to red fruit skin color. Out of 10 seedlings listed in Table 5, only seedling 7 carried the target alleles for all three markers and remained after selection.Table 5 Example of marker-assisted selection through frequency of target alleles using a population derived from Tsukuba 60 and 592–021. Individual Trait Marker Total reads Reads of target marker Allele1 Freq1 Allele2 Freq2 Allele3 Freq3 Allele4 Freq4 Frequency of target allele Evaluation Tsukuba 60 Scab resistance TsuENH 157.mod 10,597 3016 127 0.48 129 0.39 125 0.08 131 0.02 0.48 Resistant 592–021 9283 2859 129 0.45 131 0.40 127 0.09 133 0.03 0.09 Susceptible Seedling 1 11,028 2938 129 0.80 127 0.13 131 0.03 125 0.02 0.13 Susceptible Seedling 2 11,368 3574 129 0.48 131 0.36 127 0.10 133 0.02 0.10 Susceptible Seedling 3 5786 1516 127 0.41 131 0.38 129 0.10 125 0.07 0.41 Resistant Seedling 4 11,885 3314 127 0.44 131 0.37 129 0.09 125 0.06 0.44 Resistant Seedling 5 13,207 3602 127 0.47 129 0.42 125 0.07 131 0.02 0.47 Resistant Seedling 6 11,114 2857 127 0.47 129 0.42 125 0.08 131 0.02 0.47 Resistant Seedling 7 10,381 2712 127 0.49 129 0.39 125 0.08 131 0.01 0.49 Resistant Seedling 8 14,526 4513 129 0.49 131 0.39 127 0.08 133 0.02 0.08 Susceptible Seedling 9 9231 2253 127 0.36 131 0.28 129 0.19 125 0.07 0.36 Resistant Seedling 10 6214 1456 127 0.39 131 0.38 129 0.11 125 0.05 0.39 Resistant Tsukuba 60 Fruit-ripening day PPACS2 10,597 2025 114 0.56 132 0.31 130 0.08 128 0.02 0.31 Early harvesting 592–021 9283 2299 114 0.98 113 0.01 112 0.01 116 0.00 0.00 Late harvesting seedling 1 11,028 2149 114 0.98 113 0.01 112 0.01 115 0.00 0.00 Late harvesting Seedling 2 11,368 2550 114 0.57 132 0.28 130 0.09 113 0.02 0.28 Early harvesting Seedling 3 5786 1061 114 0.98 113 0.01 112 0.01 116 0.00 0.00 Late harvesting Seedling 4 11,885 2506 114 0.98 113 0.01 112 0.00 116 0.00 0.00 Late harvesting Seedling 5 13,207 2675 114 0.98 113 0.01 112 0.00 116 0.00 0.00 Late harvesting Seedling 6 11,114 2018 114 0.97 113 0.01 112 0.01 116 0.00 0.00 Late harvesting Seedling 7 10,381 1673 114 0.59 132 0.28 130 0.07 134 0.02 0.28 Early harvesting Seedling 8 14,526 3340 114 0.56 132 0.31 130 0.08 128 0.02 0.31 Early harvesting Seedling 9 9231 1874 114 0.81 113 0.08 132 0.05 130 0.02 0.05 Late harvesting Seedling 10 6214 980 114 0.93 113 0.03 132 0.02 112 0.01 0.02 Late harvesting Tsukuba 60 Fruit skin color Psc07 10,597 1306 141 0.29 151 0.17 139 0.13 149 0.12 0.17 Red 592–021 9283 1819 119 0.42 133 0.27 131 0.13 117 0.07 0.00 Green Seeding 1 11,028 1726 119 0.52 141 019 139 0.11 117 0.07 0.00 Green Seeding 2 11,368 2080 119 0.49 141 0.20 139 0.10 117 0.07 0.00 Green Seeding 3 5786 766 133 0.38 141 0.19 131 0.13 139 0.11 0.00 Green Seeding 4 11,885 1559 133 0.32 141 0.24 139 0.14 131 0.13 0.00 Green Seeding 5 13,207 1784 133 0.31 141 0.25 131 0.14 139 0.12 0.00 Green Seeding 6 11,114 1528 119 0.52 151 0.16 149 0.11 117 0.07 0.16 Red Seeding 7 10,381 1268 133 0.32 151 0.17 131 0.15 149 0.12 0.17 Red Seeding 8 14,526 2760 133 0.34 141 0.21 131 0.14 139 0.13 0.00 Green Seeding 9 9231 1277 133 0.22 141 0.18 139 0.11 131 0.11 0.00 Green Seeding 10 6214 670 119 0.48 141 0.21 139 0.10 117 0.08 0.00 Green In the “allele” columns, marker alleles linked to the target gene are underlined and indicated in bold. In the “Frequency of target allele” column, target allele frequencies meeting or exceeding the threshold for the presence of that allele are underlined and indicated in bold. Discussion Here we developed a new method for constructing an amplicon sequencing library by using one-step PCR. This method, which we call simplified AmpSeq, reduces the time and labor needed for library construction. The amount of DNA required for our method is low (< 5 ng), because it uses a simple PCR reaction. This is an advantage for applying this method to MAS, as breeders want to conduct MAS at the juvenile stage, ideally just after germination, using a simple method. Also, we demonstrated that DNA of moderate quality could be used in this method. Generally, MAS is conducted using DNA extracted by a simple and cost-effective extraction method21,22; the quantity and quality of DNA used for MAS is not high but is satisfactory for use as a PCR template. For some chestnut seedlings that had low-quality DNAs extracted by very simple methods20,21, MAS based on allele frequency was possible, although the number of target reads was reduced (Supplementary Tables 3–5; Fig. 4b). As an alternative to the simplified AmpSeq method developed in this study, an amplicon library can be constructed using long primer sets containing Illumina flow-cell binding regions, indexes, R1 and R2 seq primer sequences and target primer sequences. But the cost of the long primer sets would be exceedingly expensive when the number of samples is more than a thousand. Here, we divided the long primer sequences into 1st primers, which include target primer sequences and R1 and R2 seq (anchor sequences), and 2nd primers, which include Illumina flow-cell binding regions, indexes and R1 and R2 seq. This makes it easier for users to replace the target primer sequences and reduces the cost of developing target markers combined with different indexes. It is very common that the primer pairs for target traits would be updated by fine mapping of those traits23–25, suggesting that flexibility of the 1st primer set is very important for MAS. The simplified AmpSeq method has several advantages over two-step PCR. In addition to reducing the procedure time and reagent cost, it produced less variation among marker sets (Fig. 4), probably owing to fewer PCR cycles. Although primer dimers and other superfluous products were more frequent in the simplified one-step PCR, they can be easily eliminated by discarding reads shorter than 80 bp. Both the simplified one-step and two-step PCR methods had high repeatability, and the difference in first-allele frequencies was negligible (Table 4). Therefore, it is reasonable to use this new simplified one-step PCR for MAS in practical breeding programs. The key to success of the simplified one-step PCR is optimal balance between the concentrations of the 1st and 2nd primer sets, which was found to be at concentrations of 0.02 µM and 0.1 µM, respectively. Because the PCR products from the 2nd primer sets were longer than those from the 1st primer sets, the amplification from the 2nd primer sets generally produced fewer PCR products. By reducing the concentration of the 1st primer sets relative to the 2nd primer sets, the depletion of 1st primer sets during the 35 cycles of PCR combined with amplification from the 2nd primer sets reduced the amount of additional amplification from the 1st primer sets. When the concentrations of the 1st primer sets were as high as 0.4× to 1.0× those of the 2nd primer sets (Fig. 2), amplification from the 1st primer sets continued and produced undesirable background from the resulting short PCR products, resulting in smaller numbers of reads detected in NGS. Basically, any sequencing platform capable of producing paired-end reads can accommodate libraries constructed using our method. However, an inherent issue called “index hopping” arises in which misassignments occur across multiple samples sequenced in the same lane26–28. The rate of index hopping varies depending on the type of sequencer. The sequencers that have a nonpatterned flow cell, including MiSeq and NextSeq, showed lower levels of index hopping than those that have a patterned flow cell, including Hiseq X and NovaSeq29. Thus, we used MiSeq for demonstrating MAS; in addition to having a nonpatterned flow cell, this platform has several types of reagent kits including nano, micro and standard configurations, depending on the number of sequence reads (2–30 million). The number of paired-end reads produced by MiSeq Reagent kit V2 is 24–30 million (300 cycle, Illumina), which is equivalent to 12–15 million for single reads. As the numbers of reads per genotype by NGS for SSRs are ideally 100–100030–32, simplified AmpSeq with several markers can be conducted with 5000 reads per marker per sample, which means that more than a thousand samples can be covered by the single MiSeq run. When the target markers are SNPs or indels, the number of reads per sample can be lowered, as the basic pipeline for detecting SNPs is based on 4× to 20× coverage12,16,33. For example, the annual cost for simplified AmpSeq-based MAS in the pear breeding program at the Institute of Fruit Tree and Tea Science is less than US$2000 for 1500–2000 individuals, including US$1200 for the single MiSeq run, US$200 for PCR reagents, US$200 for plastic plates, plastic tips and other reagents for library construction. Despite the expense, simplified AmpSeq-based MAS is cost-effective because it reduces the time and labor needed for evaluation. The method helps breeders to select target genotypes and gives genetic information about individuals, such as contamination from unintended cross-pollination, by using several important marker sets. The use of simplified AmpSeq for MAS has advantages in expandability and versatility. Using target allele frequency as the selection criterion, semi-automated evaluation can be implemented, reducing the labor required compared with genotyping by visually scoring target bands after electrophoresis. Further, we demonstrated by using triploid apple cultivars that this method can detect and count duplicated alleles in polyploid species (Table 3). Because the method has high repeatability for the frequency of the first allele (Table 4), allele frequencies can be used to estimate the numbers and types of alleles in individuals from polyploid species. Furthermore, the method is applicable to many variant types, including SSRs, SNPs and indels, as well as combinations of those markers. Although SNPs, which are the most widely used markers, generally have only two alleles per locus, important genes may have more than two alleles that affect the target trait, sometimes with different levels of effect. For example, the markers associated with fruit skin color in pear and flesh mealiness in apple in this study34,35 each have at least three types of alleles in cultivar collections. In pear, HAP1 has a strong dominant effect on cork layer formation, HAP2 and HAP3 have a weaker dominant effect, and HAP4–HAP6 are recessive and have no effect on cork layer formation. In this case, using SSR markers that detect multiple alleles is efficient and rational for selection. Also, in the amplicon of CCR1.0F_56177061 of chestnut, a SNP was identified at ChrF:56177075, a position different from the target variant position (ChrF:56177061). In this case, haplotype-based evaluation using both variants can be applied in MAS, which may enhance selection for this trait in breeding programs. By introducing the simplified AmpSeq-based MAS, breeders will be able to design the kinds of markers that are most suitable for selection in their breeding programs. In conclusion, we developed a simplified AmpSeq library construction method using one-step PCR that can be applied to MAS. By using pear, chestnut and apple, we demonstrated that it can be used for practical selection with high accuracy and repeatability. We also demonstrated that semi-automated evaluation can be implemented using target allele frequency as the selection criterion. By implementing simplified AmpSeq, breeders can reduce the time and labor needed for genotyping, which previously required visual detection of bands in agarose gel or fragments from a capillary sequencer, and the risk of human error. As it enables flexibility in designing primer sets and targeting any kind of sequence-based variant, this method is an option not only for the species demonstrated here, but also for breeding programs in other species. Materials and methods Plant materials, DNA extraction and molecular markers As plant materials, 59 cultivars and 96 seedlings of Japanese pear, 46 cultivars and 24 seedlings of Japanese chestnut, and 52 cultivars and 66 seedlings of apple were used (Table 1, Supplementary Table S1). Each cultivar was represented by a single tree. Genomic DNA was extracted from young leaves of the cultivar collections with a DNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen, Germany). To determine the DNA quality needed for practical use of simplified AmpSeq-based MAS, genomic DNA was extracted from seedlings using simple and rapid DNA extraction methods. For pear, DNA was extracted from 5 mg of young leaves using a NucleoMag Plant kit (Macherey–Nagel, Germany) according to the manufacturer’s instructions, except that the amounts of tissue and reagents used were each one-quarter of the specified amounts. For chestnut, DNA was extracted from 5 mg of cotyledons using a simple method23,36. For apple, TPS buffer (100 mM Tris·HCl, 1 M KCl, 10 mM EDTA, pH 8.0) was used for DNA extraction with a simple isopropanol washing step37. Leaf sections (3– 4 cm) from each seedling were disrupted in 300 µL TPS buffer in a Multi-beads Shocker. After centrifugation, DNA was precipitated by addition of 2-propanol, washed with 70% ethanol and dissolved in 50 µL 0.1 × TE buffer (1 mM Tris·HCl, 0.1 mM EDTA, pH 8.0). The databases for MAS were created using five molecular markers associated with disease resistance38,39, fruit-ripening day40 and fruit skin color34 in Japanese pear; two associated with pellicle peelability in Japanese chestnut23,41 and five related to disease resistance42–44, columnar growth type24 and flesh mealiness35,45 in apple (Table 2, Supplementary Table S2). To promote stable amplification in multiplex PCR, some of the primer pairs were re-designed to shorten the length of the product to less than 150 bp against the reference genomes of ‘Nijisseiki’ pear, ‘Ginyose’ chestnut and ‘Golden Delicious’ doubled haploid 13 (GDDH13) apple46–48. Constructing libraries for simplified AmpSeq To construct a library for AmpSeq , a two-step PCR method based on Nishio et al.31 and a newly developed simplified one-step PCR method were used. Both methods require the primers to contain Illumina flow-cell binding sites, 8-bp indexes and sequences for determining the insert sequences on both sides of the amplicons (Fig. 1). In two-step PCR, the 1st PCR was performed using target-specific primers extended with the forward R1 seq primer (5′-ACACTCTTTCCCTACACGACGCTCTTCCGATCT-3′) and the reverse R2 seq primer (5′-GTGACTGGAGTTCAGACGTGTGCTCTTCCGATCT-3′). The five (1st) primer sets for pear, two for chestnut and five for apple were used in a single multiplex reaction for each sample (i.e., cultivar or seedling) of the corresponding species. PCR amplification was performed in 10 µL containing 5 µL of 2 × Green GoTaq G2 Hot Start Master Mix (0.4 mM each dNTP, Taq DNA polymerase and 4 mM MgCl2, pH 8.5; Promega, Madison, WI, USA), 0.2 µL of the 1st primer set (10 µM), 3.8 µL H2O and 1 µL of genomic DNA (2.5 ng/µL). Amplification was performed in an initial denaturation of 94 °C for 5 min; 25 cycles of 94 °C for 30 s, 60 °C for 1 min and 72 °C for 30 s; and 72 °C for a final extension of 10 min. The 2nd PCR for each sample was performed using a pair of long primers as the 2nd primer set, with the first primer containing the P5 sequence, an 8-bp index and the R1 seq primer (5′-AATGATACGGCGACCACCGAGATCTACAC[Index]ACACTCTTTCCCTACACGACG-3′) and the second containing the P7 sequence, a different 8-bp index and the R2 seq primer (5′-CAAGCAGAAGACGGCATACGAGAT[Index]GTGACTGGAGTTCAGACGTGT-3′). A unique combination of indexes was used for each sample and PCR method. The P5 and P7 sequences produce the Illumina flow-cell binding sites, and the two different 8-bp indexes per sample were used for demultiplexing. PCR amplification was performed in 10 µL containing 5 µL of 2× Green GoTaq G2 Hot Start Master Mix, 1 µL of the 2nd primer set (1 µM), 3 µL H2O and 1 µL of the 1st PCR products. PCR reactions used an initial denaturation of 94 °C for 5 min; 15 cycles of 94 °C for 30 s, 60 °C for 1 min and 72 °C for 30 s; and 72 °C for a final extension of 10 min. In simplified one-step PCR, PCR amplification was performed in 10 µL containing 5 µL of 2 × Green GoTaq G2 Hot Start Master Mix, 0.2 µL of the 1st primer set, 1 µL of the 2nd primer set (1 µM), 2.8 µL H2O and 1 µL of genomic DNA (2.5 ng/µL). To clarify the optimal primer concentration for simplified one-step PCR, we used initial concentrations of the 1st primer set from 0 to 5 μM to obtain final concentrations of 0, 0.001, 0.005, 0.01, 0.02, 0.04, 0.06 or 0.1 µM, which were tested using eight cultivars each of pear and chestnut (Supplementary Table S1). The 2nd-primer concentrations were set at 0.1 µM because a primer concentration of 0.1 µM to 1.0 µM was recommended in the manual for GoTaq G2 Hot Start Master Mix and a relatively low primer concentration (0.2 µM) was recommended in some multiplex PCR kits. PCR reactions used an initial denaturation of 94 °C for 5 min; 35 cycles of 94 °C for 30 s, 60 °C for 1 min and 72 °C for 30 s; and 72 °C for a final extension of 10 min. For pear and chestnut cultivars, the two-step and simplified one-step PCR experiments were done twice for each cultivar collection to test repeatability. For apple cultivars, only simplified one-step PCR was done. Simplified one-step PCR was also applied to seedlings of pear, chestnut and apple to check whether the method was applicable for practical MAS. In total, three libraries for NGS were constructed from the PCR products: one from cultivars and seedlings of pear and chestnut that included 614 samples, one from apple cultivars that included 208 samples and one from apple seedlings that included 132 samples. In each library, all of the 2nd PCR products of two-step PCR and/or the PCR products of simplified one-step PCR were mixed equally by volume in a single tube and purified using AMPure XP beads (Beckman Coulter, Inc., Bree, CA, USA) following the Agencourt AMPure XP PCR Purification protocol. The library concentrations were quantified with a Qubit 3.0 fluorometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and Qubit dsDNA BR assay kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific). The libraries were sequenced by PE 150-bp sequencing on an Illumina MiSeq platform (Illumina, Inc., San Diego, CA, USA). Data analyses for simplified AmpSeq Data were analyzed by means of the SSR-GBS pipeline31 with a slight modification. The reads from Illumina MiSeq were demultiplexed to each cultivar or seedling and PCR method on the basis of the index sequences, and paired fastq files of each cultivar were obtained. The fastq files were trimmed of adapter sequences and low-quality bases in Trimmomatic v. 0.39 software49. The paired fastq files were merged in flash2 software50 with parameters “-M 150 -X 0.05—allow-outies”. The merged reads were then demultiplexed on the basis of target primer sequences. For indels and SSRs, the number of reads from each allele (defined by allele length) in each cultivar was counted by a basic Linux command using a custom script (Supplementary file 1). The four most common alleles were extracted and their allele frequencies were calculated. For SNP marker CCR1.0F_56177061, haplotype frequencies were calculated because a second SNP was identified at ChrF:56177075, a position different from the target variant position (ChrF:56177061). The three major haplotypes among the 46 chestnut cultivars were designated as HAP1, HAP2 and HAP3. The merged reads were aligned and stacked by sequence, and the allele frequency of the two most common haplotypes was calculated for each individual by using a custom script (Supplementary file 2). Cultivars were genotyped using the allele frequency data and digital electropherograms created in R v. 4.2.2 software (R Development Core Team). The allele frequency of the target band associated with each trait was calculated to determine which individuals carried the target allele. Generally, the frequencies of target alleles associated with each trait provided sufficient information for genotyping, but the frequencies of other alleles helped in detecting the presence of stutter bands and the accuracy of the called genotype. Supplementary Information Supplementary Figure S1. Supplementary Tables. Supplementary Information. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1038/s41598-023-37522-1. Acknowledgements This work was supported by the Genome Breeding Support Office of Institute of Crop Science, NARO (NICS). We thank T, Wako, H, Kanamori and K, Kurita for technical assistance for the operation of MiSeq. Author contributions S.N. designed the experiments. S.N., S.M and performed the experiments. S.N. and Y.T. contributed reagents and analysis tools. S.N., S.M., M.K., Y.T., A.I. and N.T. prepared the plant materials. S.N. wrote the paper. Data availability The datasets supporting the conclusions of this article are included within the article and its supplementary information files. Sequence reads are available from the Sequence Read Archive (DRA) of DNA Data Bank of Japan (DDBJ) under the accession numbers of DRA16007, DRA16008 and DRA 16009. Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests. Publisher's note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. ==== Refs References 1. Collard BCY Mackill DJ Marker-assisted selection: an approach for precision plant breeding in the twenty-first century Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B.. Biol. Sci. 2008 363 557 572 10.1098/rstb.2007.2170 2. Xu Y Crouch JH Marker-assisted selection in plant breeding: From publications to practice Crop Sci. 2008 48 391 407 10.2135/cropsci2007.04.0191 3. Muranty H Potential for marker-assisted selection for forest tree breeding: Lessons from 20 years of MAS in crops Tree Genet. Genomes 2014 10 1491 1510 10.1007/s11295-014-0790-5 4. Ru S Main D Evans K Peace C Current applications, challenges, and perspectives of marker-assisted seedling selection in Rosaceae tree fruit breeding Tree Genet. Genomes 2015 11 1 12 10.1007/s11295-015-0834-5 5. Foolad MR Panthee DR Marker-assisted selection in tomato breeding CRC. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 2012 31 93 123 10.1080/07352689.2011.616057 6. Luby JJ Shaw DV Does marker-assisted selection make dollars and sense in a fruit breeding program? HortScience 2001 36 872 879 10.21273/HORTSCI.36.5.872 7. Powell W Machray GC Provan J Polymorphism revealed by simple sequence repeats Trends Plant Sci. 1996 1 215 222 10.1016/1360-1385(96)86898-1 8. Hosseinzadeh-Colagar A Haghighatnia MJ Amiri Z Mohadjerani M Tafrihi M Microsatellite (SSR) amplification by PCR usually led to polymorphic bands: Evidence which shows replication slippage occurs in extend or nascent DNA strands Mol. Biol. Res. Commun. 2016 5 167 174 28097170 9. Goodwin S McPherson JD McCombie WR Coming of age: Ten years of next-generation sequencing technologies Nat. Rev. Genet. 2016 17 333 351 10.1038/nrg.2016.49 27184599 10. Elshire RJ A robust, simple genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS) approach for high diversity species PLoS ONE 2011 6 e19379 10.1371/journal.pone.0019379 21573248 11. Baird NA Rapid SNP discovery and genetic mapping using sequenced RAD markers PLoS ONE 2008 3 e3376 10.1371/journal.pone.0003376 18852878 12. Shirasawa K Hirakawa H Isobe S Analytical workflow of double-digest restriction site-associated DNA sequencing based on empirical and in silico optimization in tomato DNA Res. 2016 23 145 153 10.1093/dnares/dsw004 26932983 13. Hosoya S Random PCR-based genotyping by sequencing technology GRAS-Di (genotyping by random amplicon sequencing, direct) reveals genetic structure of mangrove fishes Mol. Ecol. Resour. 2019 19 1153 1163 10.1111/1755-0998.13025 31009151 14. Suyama Y Matsuki Y MIG-seq: An effective PCR-based method for genome-wide single-nucleotide polymorphism genotyping using the next-generation sequencing platform Sci. Rep. 2015 5 1 12 10.1038/srep16963 15. Fresnedo-Ramírez J An integrative AmpSeq platform for highly multiplexed marker-assisted pyramiding of grapevine powdery mildew resistance loci Mol. Breed. 2017 37 1 16 10.1007/s11032-017-0739-0 28127252 16. Yang, S. et al. A next-generation marker genotyping platform (AmpSeq) in heterozygous crops: a case study for marker-assisted selection in grapevine. Hortic. Res. 3, (2016). 17. Kaur B Mavi GS Gill MS Saini DK Utilization of KASP technology for wheat improvement Cereal Res. Commun. 2020 48 409 421 10.1007/s42976-020-00057-6 18. Yang G Development and utilization of functional KASP markers to improve rice eating and cooking quality through MAS breeding Euphytica 2019 215 1 12 10.1007/s10681-019-2392-7 19. Zhang X Diagnostic kompetitive allele-specific PCR markers of wheat broad-spectrum powdery mildew resistance genes Pm21, PmV, and Pm12 developed for high-throughput marker-assisted selection Plant Dis. 2021 105 2844 2850 10.1094/PDIS-02-21-0308-RE 33881917 20. Tibihika PD Application of microsatellite genotyping by sequencing (SSR-GBS) to measure genetic diversity of the East African Oreochromis niloticus Conserv. Genet. 2019 20 357 372 10.1007/s10592-018-1136-x 21. Mahuku GS A simple extraction method suitable for PCR-based analysis of plant, fungal, and bacterial DNA Plant Mol. Biol. Report. 2004 22 71 81 10.1007/BF02773351 22. Frey JE Frey B Sauer C Kellerhals M Efficient low-cost DNA extraction and multiplex fluorescent PCR method for marker-assisted selection in breeding Plant Breed. 2004 123 554 557 10.1111/j.1439-0523.2004.01033.x 23. Terakami S Fine mapping of the gene controlling the easy-peeling pellicle trait and development of an efficient marker-assisted selection system in Japanese chestnut (Castanea crenata Sieb. et Zucc.) Tree Genet. Genomes 2023 19 1 14 10.1007/s11295-022-01575-6 24. Okada K Expression of a putative dioxygenase gene adjacent to an insertion mutation is involved in the short internodes of columnar apples (Malus × domestica) J. Plant Res. 2016 129 1109 1126 10.1007/s10265-016-0863-7 27650512 25. Terakami S Development of an SSR marker set for efficient selection for resistance to black spot disease in pear breeding Breed. Sci. 2021 71 240 252 10.1270/jsbbs.20136 34377072 26. Kircher M Sawyer S Meyer M Double indexing overcomes inaccuracies in multiplex sequencing on the Illumina platform Nucl. Acids Res. 2012 40 e3 e3 10.1093/nar/gkr771 22021376 27. Ros-Freixedes R Impact of index hopping and bias towards the reference allele on accuracy of genotype calls from low-coverage sequencing Genet. Sel. Evol. 2018 50 1 14 10.1186/s12711-018-0436-4 29373954 28. van der Valk T Vezzi F Ormestad M Dalén L Guschanski K Index hopping on the Illumina HiseqX platform and its consequences for ancient DNA studies Mol. Ecol. Resour. 2020 20 1171 1181 10.1111/1755-0998.13009 30848092 29. Illumina Inc. Effects of index misassignment on multiplexing and downstream analysis. https://www.illumina.com/content/dam/illumina-marketing/documents/products/whitepapers/index-hopping-white-paper-770-2017-004.pdf (2017). 30. Neophytou C Analysis of microsatellite loci in tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima (Mill Swingle) using SSR-GBS Tree Genet. Genomes 2018 14 1 12 10.1007/s11295-018-1295-4 31. Nishio S Development of SSR databases available for both NGS and capillary electrophoresis in apple, pear and tea Plants 2021 10 2796 10.3390/plants10122796 34961266 32. Vartia S A novel method of microsatellite genotyping-by-sequencing using individual combinatorial barcoding R. Soc. Open Sci. 2016 3 150565 10.1098/rsos.150565 26909185 33. Nishio S Genome-wide association study of individual sugar content in fruit of Japanese pear (Pyrus spp BMC Plant Biol. 2021 21 1 19 10.1186/s12870-021-03130-2 33386069 34. Takeuchi Y Haplotype structure analysis of a locus associated with fruit skin type on chromosome 8 in Japanese pear Tree Genet. Genomes 2021 17 1 13 10.1007/s11295-020-01483-7 35. Moriya S Identification of QTLs for flesh mealiness in apple (Malus × domestica Borkh.) Hortic. J. 2017 86 2 159 170 10.2503/hortj.MI-156 36. Thomson D Henry R Single-step protocol for preparation of plant tissue for analysis by PCR Biotechniques 1995 19 394 400 7495552 37. Kitazawa N Rapid DNA-genotyping system targeting ten loci for resistance to blast disease in rice Breed. Sci. 2019 69 68 83 10.1270/jsbbs.18143 31086485 38. Yamamoto T Terakami S Genomics of pear and other Rosaceae fruit trees Breed. Sci. 2016 66 148 159 10.1270/jsbbs.66.148 27069399 39. Terakami S Genetic mapping of the pear scab resistance gene Vnk of Japanese pear cultivar Kinchaku Theor. Appl. Genet. 2006 113 743 752 10.1007/s00122-006-0344-9 16838137 40. Iwata H Potential assessment of genome-wide association study and genomic selection in Japanese pear Pyrus pyrifolia Breed. Sci. 2013 63 125 140 10.1270/jsbbs.63.125 23641189 41. Nishio S Detecting a novel locus associated with pellicle peelability in Japanese chestnut populations preselected for a major peelability gene Sci. Hortic. 2022 306 111446 10.1016/j.scienta.2022.111446 42. Vinatzer BA Isolation of two microsatellite markers from BAC clones of the Vf scab resistance region and molecular characterization of scab-resistant accessions in Malus germplasm Plant Breed. 2004 123 321 326 10.1111/j.1439-0523.2004.00973.x 43. Terakami S Fine mapping of the gene for susceptibility to black spot disease in Japanese pear (Pyrus pyrifolia Nakai) Breed. Sci. 2016 66 271 280 10.1270/jsbbs.66.271 27162498 44. Moriya S Identification of candidate genes responsible for the susceptibility of apple (Malus × domestica Borkh.) to Alternaria blotch BMC Plant Biol. 2019 19 1 13 10.1186/s12870-019-1737-7 30606102 45. Longhi S A candidate gene based approach validates Md-PG1 as the main responsible for a QTL impacting fruit texture in apple (Malus ×domestica Borkh) BMC Plant Biol. 2013 13 1 13 10.1186/1471-2229-13-37 23280064 46. Daccord N High-quality de novo assembly of the apple genome and methylome dynamics of early fruit development Nat. Genet. 2017 49 1099 1106 10.1038/ng.3886 28581499 47. Shirasawa K Itai A Isobe S Chromosome-scale genome assembly of Japanese pear (Pyrus pyrifolia) variety ‘Nijisseiki’ DNA Res. 2021 28 dsab001 10.1093/dnares/dsab001 33638981 48. Shirasawa K Chromosome-level genome assembly of Japanese chestnut (Castanea crenata Sieb. et Zucc.) reveals conserved chromosomal segments in woody rosids DNA Res. 2021 28 dsab016 10.1093/dnares/dsab016 34424280 49. Bolger AM Lohse M Usadel B Trimmomatic: A flexible trimmer for Illumina sequence data Bioinformatics 2014 30 2114 2120 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu170 24695404 50. Magoč T Salzberg SL FLASH: fast length adjustment of short reads to improve genome assemblies Bioinformatics 2011 27 2957 2963 10.1093/bioinformatics/btr507 21903629