Identified gaps for Sorghum genepool

(see downloads)

We found data for 29 wild species and 2 infraspecific taxa (S. bicolor subsp. drummondii, S. bicolor subsp. arundinaceum), accounting to a total of 31 taxa for analysis. We have classified Sorghum taxa using Stenhouse et al., (1997) genepool classification, which suggest the following genepools:

The analysis dataset (download) contained 4,337 observations, with 4,111 (95%) being herbarium specimens and 226 (5%) being genebank accessions. The average number of total samples per taxon was 140 (standard deviation of 426), indicating that available data is relatively abundant, although it is concentrated in certain taxa (i.e. S. halepense [2,399], S. plumosum [276], S. stipoideum [226], S. bicolor subsp. arundinaceum [146], S. bicolor subsp. drummondii [147]). Other taxa such as S. pauciflorum (1), S. usorum (1) and S. somaliense (2), along with others, present a very limited sampling and/or data availability and thus need further characterization and sampling for assessing a reliable ecogeographic evaluation on them.

The gap analysis of the Sorghum genepool showed that there are 27 taxa that are either underrepresented or not represented in any way in genebanks out of the 31 taxa under analysis and these taxa were therefore flagged as high priority species. 7 of these taxa presented only 10 or less data points (sum of herbarium and germplasm), which indicate that these species in particular need to be further collected (i.e. S. pauciflorum, S. usorum, S. aterrimum, S. miliaceum, S. somaliense, S. mjoebergii, S. trichocladum). There were no species flagged as very well conserved ex-situ, which indicates either genebanks are or correctly storing wild Sorghum diversity or access to their data is not available. Species S. almum and S. purpureo-sericeum appear to be relatively poorly conserved and were thus flagged as medium priority species, whilst taxa S. bicolor subsp. arundinaceum and S. bicolor subsp. drummondii appear to be the most conserved taxa among the genepool.

Potential sampling zones

View in Google Earth

Sorghum high priority taxa were found to be distributed in central Asia, part of Oceania, India and Africa. Zones in the figures above are those in which the species is likely to exist and no genebank accessions have been collected.

Potential sampling richness

View in Google Earth

The greatest sampling-richness was found in the Northern Territory of Australia.

Brief description of data used in the analysis

The table below shows the number of records (herbarium, germplasm, total) used per species for the Eleusine genepool gap analysis.

Species’ taxonomy was reviewed using Maxted and Kell (2009) as a first stage, the GRIN taxonomical review in second place, and the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew taxonomy database. After cross-checking and correcting both synonyms and orthography of the species’ names, a thorough georeferencing process is carried out to obtain a spatially explicit database containing as many records as possible for each species. After this, records outside continental boundaries were deleted and a final dataset was produced for analyses.

These are the 61 different collections from which data were readily available:

1. Árboles de la Península de Yucatán, Flora del Distrito de Tehuantepec, Oaxaca y Familia Asteraceae en México (IBUNAM)
2. Arizona State University Vascular Plant Herbarium
3. Australian National Herbarium (CANB)
4. BDBCV BioBlitz in Penyagolosa (Castellon, Spain)
5. Biodiversidad de Costa Rica
6. Bishop Museum Natural History Specimen Data
7. Botanical Society of the British Isles - Vascular Plants Database
8. Bundesamt fuer Naturschutz / Netzwerk Phytodiversitaet Deutschland
9. California State University, Chico
10. Database Schema for UC Davis [Herbarium Labels]
11. Direccion General de Investigacion, Desarrollo Tecnologico e Innovacion de la Junta de Extremadura(DGIDTI): HSS
12. EURISCO, The European Genetic Resources Search Catalogue
13. Fairchild Tropical Botanic Garden Virtual Herbarium Darwin Core format
14. FloVegSI - Floristical and fitocenological database of ZRC SAZU
15. Galapagos grasses and sedges
16. Herbario de la Universidad de Sevilla, SEV-Historico
17. Herbario del Instituto de Ecologia, A.C., México (IE-BAJIO)
18. Herbarium (UNA)
19. Herbarium GJO
20. Herbarium of Oskarshamn (OHN)
21. Herbarium Specimens of Bonin and Ryukyu Islands
22. Herbarium Specimens of Museum of Nature and Human Activities, Hyogo Pref., Japan
23. Herbarium Willing
24. Herbarium WU
25. Herbier de la Guyane
26. Hortus Botanicus Sollerensis Herbarium (FBonaf+¿)
27. ICRISAT SORGHUM
28. Instituto de Ciencias Naturales
29. IPK Genebank
30. Israel Nature and Parks Authority
31. Leiner-Herbar Konstanz
32. Lund Botanical Museum (LD)
33. MEXU/Plantas Vasculares
34. Missouri Botanical Garden
35. Natural History Museum Rotterdam (NMR)
36. New Zealand National Plant Herbarium (CHR)
37. Nordic Herbarium (S)
38. NSW herbarium collection
39. Observations du Conservatoire botanique national du Bassin parisien.
40. Phanerogamie
41. Plants (GBIF-SE:Artdatabanken)
42. Plants of Papua New Guinea
43. Real Jardin Botanico (Madrid), Vascular Plant Herbarium (MA)
44. Repatriacion de datos del Herbario de Arizona (ARIZ)
45. Specimen Database of Colorado Vascular Plants
46. The AAU Herbarium Database
47. The Deaver Herbarium, Northern Arizona University
48. The System-wide Information Network for Genetic Resources (SINGER)
49. United States National Plant Germplasm System Collection
50. Universidad de Almeria, HUAL
51. Universidad de Extremadura, UNEX
52. Universidad de Malaga: MGC-Cormof
53. University and Jepson Herbaria DiGIR provider
54. USDA PLANTS Database
55. USU-UTC Specimen Database
56. Utah Valley State College Herbarium
57. Vascular Plant Collection
58. Vascular Plant Collection - University of Washington Herbarium (WTU)
59. Vascular Plant Herbarium, Oslo (O)
60. Vascular Plant Type Specimens
61. Zoological specimens

Downloads

back to top