| Literature DB >> 19895687 |
Bruno Gomes1, Carla A Sousa, Maria T Novo, Ferdinando B Freitas, Ricardo Alves, Ana R Côrte-Real, Patrícia Salgueiro, Martin J Donnelly, António P G Almeida, João Pinto.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Culex pipiens L. is the most widespread mosquito vector in temperate regions. This species consists of two forms, denoted molestus and pipiens, that exhibit important behavioural and physiological differences. The evolutionary relationships and taxonomic status of these forms remain unclear. In northern European latitudes molestus and pipiens populations occupy different habitats (underground vs. aboveground), a separation that most likely promotes genetic isolation between forms. However, the same does not hold in southern Europe where both forms occur aboveground in sympatry. In these southern habitats, the extent of hybridisation and its impact on the extent of genetic divergence between forms under sympatric conditions has not been clarified. For this purpose, we have used phenotypic and genetic data to characterise Cx. pipiens collected aboveground in Portugal. Our aims were to determine levels of genetic differentiation and the degree of hybridisation between forms occurring in sympatry, and to relate these with both evolutionary and epidemiological tenets of this biological group.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19895687 PMCID: PMC2778655 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2148-9-262
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Evol Biol ISSN: 1471-2148 Impact factor: 3.260
Autogeny and insemination rates in Culex pipiens from Comporta, Portugal
| INS = 0% | 0%< INS <100% | INS = 100% | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Autogenous | 1 (0.9) | 30 (26.1) | 84 (73.0) | 115 |
| Non-autogenous | 22 (73.3) | 8 (26.7) | 0 (0.0) | 30 |
| Total | 23 (15.9) | 38 (26.2) | 84 (57.9) | 145 |
INS: proportion of inseminated females in each family.
Figure 1Frequency distribution of insemination rates in autogenous and non-autogenous families of . X-axis: proportion of inseminated females in each family at intervals of 5%. Y-axis: proportion of families (in percentage). Blue bars: non-autogenous; Red bars: autogenous.
Polymorphism at the flanking region of microsatellite CQ11 (CQ11FL) according to phenotypic groups of Culex pipiens.
| Total | Autogeny | Insemination rates | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Autogenous | Non-autogenous | INS = 100% | 0%< INS <100% | INS = 0% | ||
| CQ11FL250/250 | 78 | 77 | 1 | 60 | 17 | 1 |
| (53.8) | (67.0) | (3.3) | (71.4) | (44.7) | (4.3) | |
| CQ11FL200/250 | 26 | 22 | 4 | 16 | 7 | 3 |
| (17.9) | (19.1) | (13.3) | (19.0) | (18.4) | (13.0) | |
| CQ11FL200/200 | 41 | 16 | 25 | 8 | 14 | 19 |
| (28.3) | (13.9) | (83.3) | (9.5) | (36.8) | (82.6) | |
| Chi-square tests | χ2 = 58.9, d.f. = 2, | χ2 = 51.7, d.f. = 4, | ||||
INS: proportion of inseminated females in a family. Values in parenthesis refer to the relative genotypic frequencies (in percentage) within each phenotypic group. χ2: P-values of chi-square tests of homogeneity of genotypic frequencies among phenotypes.
Figure 2Bayesian cluster analysis conducted by STRUCTURE [23]. Columns correspond to the multilocus genotype of each individual, partitioned in two colours representing the probability of ancestry (q) to each cluster. Red: cluster 1 (molestus); blue: cluster 2 (pipiens). Individuals were ordered according to their genotype at the CQ11FL locus. Dashed lines indicate the qthreshold used to determine admixed individuals (see Methods). A: analysis performed with 13 loci; B: analysis performed without locus CQ11. Arrows indicate individuals with different assignment between analyses.
Frequencies (in percentage) of genotypes at the CQ11FL locus and phenotypes for autogeny and insemination rates in each of the ancestry clusters revealed by STRUCTURE [23].
| CQ11FL genotype | Autogeny | Insemination rate | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 250/250 | 200/250 | 200/200 | autogenic | non-autogenic | INS = 0% | 0%<INS<100% | INS = 100% | ||
| Cluster 1 | 96 | 72.9 | 19.8 | 7.3 | 100.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 20.8 | 79.2 |
| Admixed | 13 | 46.2 | 23.1 | 30.7 | 76.9 | 23.1 | 0.0 | 38.5 | 61.5 |
| Cluster 2 | 36 | 5.6 | 11.1 | 83.3 | 25.0 | 75.0 | 63.9 | 36.1 | 0.0 |
INS: proportion of inseminated females in a family.
Figure 3Microsatellite allele richness and frequency in . Allele frequencies, allele richness (A) and private alleles richness (pA) were calculated for samples of common ancestry determined by Bayesian clustering analysis using STRUCTURE [23]. Red: molestus cluster, blue: pipiens cluster. X-axis: allele sizes in basepairs. Y-axis: allele frequency.
Results of heterozygosity tests [52] for molestus and pipiens clusters of Cx. Pipiens
| SMM | TPM (10%) | TPM (20%) | TPM (30%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cluster 1 | 4 | 6 | 8 | 9 | |
| 0.027 | 0.685 | 0.736 | 0.497 | ||
| Cluster 2 | 2 | 3 | 6 | 8 | |
| 0.057 | 0.340 | 0.893 |
H>H: number of loci in which expected heterozygosity estimated from allele frequencies (H) was higher than the estimate obtained from the number of alleles and sample size under MDE (H). P: P-values of Wilcoxon tests to detect if Hdiffers from Hin a significant number of loci. SMM: stepwise mutation model. TPM: two-phase model. In bold: significant P-value after correction for multiple testing by the sequential Bonferroni procedure.
Figure 4Bayesian assignment of simulated purebred and hybrid individuals obtained by HYBRIDLAB [25], as implemented by NEWHYBRIDS [24]. Pure molestus, pure pipiens and hybrid (F1, F2 and backcrosses with each parental line) simulated individuals were generated from the genotypes of Cx. pipiens specimens that displayed by NEWHYBRIDS a q>0.90 of being pure molestus (N = 100) and pure pipiens (N = 11). Simulations were done using HYBRIDLAB [25] to produce 100 simulated individuals for each class. Each vertical line represents a simulated individual. Lines are partitioned in colours according to the probabilities of assignment to each class. A: probabilities were obtained for each of the six classes. B: the "hybrid" category is the sum of probabilities of assignment to each of the four hybrid classes originally simulated.
Figure 5Bayesian assignment of individuals into pure and hybrid classes as implemented by NEWHYBRIDS [24]. Each column represents an individual analysed and it is partitioned into colours according to the probability of assignment to each of the six classes denoted in the label (pure molestus, pure pipiens, F1 hybrid, F2 hybrid, BxM: backcross with molestus, BxP: backcross with pipiens). Individuals were arranged according to their probability of ancestry obtained by STRUCTURE [23] analysis. Dashed lines highlight the two probability thresholds (Tq) used to assign individuals into classes (see Methods).
Proportions of pure and admixed Culex pipiens individuals inferred by Bayesian assignment methods implemented by SRUCTURE [23] and NEWHYBRIDS [24]
| molestus | admixed | pipiens | |
|---|---|---|---|
| STRUCTURE | 96 (66.2) | 13 (9.0) | 36 (24.8) |
| NEWHYBRIDS ( | 104 (71.7) | 15 (10.3) | 26 (17.9) |
| NEWHYBRIDS ( | 101 (69.7) | 11 (7.6) | 19 (13.1) |
* At this threshold, only 131 specimens were assigned to classes. The remainder 14 analysed individuals presented qi<0.70 of belonging to any of the classes and were thus undetermined.