2010): (i) a single domestication event in the southwestern Amazon, as suggested by phylogenetic studies (Ferreira 1999) and RAPD marker-based studies (Rodrigues et al. 2004); (ii) a single domestication event in the Colombian inter-Andean valleys and adjacent Pacific lowlands, as suggested by archeological evidence (Morcote-Rios and Bernal 2001); and (iii) multiple independent centers of domestication (Mora-Urpí 1999; Hernández-Ugalde et al. 2011). Diversity Peach palm is a predominantly outcrossing species, though self-fertilization #www.selleckchem.com/products/pf-06463922.html randurls[1|1|,|CHEM1|]# has also been observed (Mora-Urpí et al. 1997). Pollination is carried out mainly by insects,

particularly small curculionid beetles over distances between 100 and 500 m; wind and gravity can also function as pollen vectors (Mora-Urpí et al. 1997; Clement et al. 2009). Since peach palm is a long-lived perennial and a predominantly outcrossing species, one can expect its populations and landraces to contain high levels of genetic diversity (Hamrick and Godt 1996; Mora-Urpí et al. 1997). In addition, extensive human dispersal up to a distance of 600 km has further stimulated gene flow and low differentiation (Cole et al. 2007). A review of studies on genetic variation within and between populations, using different types of markers and considering allelic richness (A), expected heterozigosity (He) and genetic differentiation BIBW2992 (Gst), supports those observations (Table 1). Even so, the studies reveal no

clear areas of high Aprepitant diversity, and their use of different sampling methods, molecular marker techniques, markers and genetic parameters

makes comparison difficult. The use of standardized sets of molecular markers and genetic parameters would greatly improve our understanding of patterns of genetic variation across areas of peach palm distribution and the center(s) of its domestication (Clement et al. 2010). Table 1 Use of molecular markers to study genetic variation between peach palm populations Author Markers Number of loci Number of populations Mean number individuals per populations Covered countries Mean A per locus per population Highest mean A per locus Mean Hes per locus per population Highest Hes Gst Alves-Pereira et al. (2012) SSR 11 5 38.4 Peru, Brazil 10.02 Pampa Hermosa, Peru (13.10) 0.81 Paranapura, Peru (0.83) 0.005 Hernández-Ugalde et al. (2011) SSR 5 12 19.58 Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Panama, Peru, Venezuela 6.36 Azuero, Panama (8.8) – – – Reis (2009) SSR 17 11 15.7 Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Costa Rica, Peru, Venezuela 6.86 Putumayo, Brazil/Peru (10.82) 0.78 Putumayo, Brazil/Peru; Pampa Hermosa, Peru; Alto Madeira, Brazil (0.83) 0.13 Hernández-Ugalde et al. (2008) SSR 4 13 38.77 Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Panama, Peru, Venezuela 6.58 Azuero, Panama (8.75) 0.75 Azuero, Panama (0.84) 0.15 Cole et al. (2007) SSR 3 4 55.25 Peru 11 San Carlos (12) 0.83 Nuevo San Juan (0.85) 0.001 SSR 3 4 41.25 Peru 11.58 Pucaurquillo, Peru (15) 0.79 Puerto Isango (0.83) 0.