| Literature DB >> 21085717 |
Jinping Chen1, Stephen J Rossiter, Jonathan R Flanders, Yanhong Sun, Panyu Hua, Cassandra Miller-Butterworth, Xusheng Liu, Koilmani E Rajan, Shuyi Zhang.
Abstract
The fulvous fruit bat (Rousettus leschenaulti) and the greater short-nosed fruit bat (Cynopterus sphinx) are two abundant and widely co-distributed Old World fruit bats in Southeast and East Asia. The former species forms large colonies in caves while the latter roots in small groups in trees. To test whether these differences in social organization and roosting ecology are associated with contrasting patterns of gene flow, we used mtDNA and nuclear loci to characterize population genetic subdivision and phylogeographic histories in both species sampled from China, Vietnam and India. Our analyses from R. leschenaulti using both types of marker revealed little evidence of genetic structure across the study region. On the other hand, C. sphinx showed significant genetic mtDNA differentiation between the samples from India compared with China and Vietnam, as well as greater structuring of microsatellite genotypes within China. Demographic analyses indicated signatures of past rapid population expansion in both taxa, with more recent demographic growth in C. sphinx. Therefore, the relative genetic homogeneity in R. leschenaulti is unlikely to reflect past events. Instead we suggest that the absence of substructure in R. leschenaulti is a consequence of higher levels of gene flow among colonies, and that greater vagility in this species is an adaptation associated with cave roosting.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2010 PMID: 21085717 PMCID: PMC2978090 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0013903
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Details of sampling locations in a) five populations of Rousettus leschenaulti and b) eight populations of Cynopterus sphinx.
| Location | Locality | Province | Country | Easting | Northing | n | |
| a) | 1 | Cheranmahadevi | Tamil Nadu | India | E77:42 | N8:44 | 20 |
| 2 | Menglun | Yunnan | China | E101:15 | N21:55 | 25 | |
| 3 | Wuming | Guangxi | China | E108:17 | N20:03 | 32 | |
| 4 | Maoming | Guangdong | China | E110:53 | N21:40 | 39 | |
| 5 | Haikou | Hainan Island | China | E110:20 | N20:02 | 41 | |
| b) | 6 | Mandiyoor | Tamil Nadu | India | E78:43 | N10:55 | 19 |
| 7 | Xishuangbanna | Yunnan | China | E101:25 | N21:41 | 31 | |
| 8 | Beihai | Guangxi | China | E109:07 | N21:28 | 22 | |
| 9 | Jiangmen | Guangdong | China | E113:04 | N22:35 | 14 | |
| 10 | Guangzhou | Guangdong | China | E113:23 | N23:09 | 64 | |
| 11 | Zhongshan | Guangdong | China | E113:22 | N22:32 | 18 | |
| 12 | Haikou | Hainan Island | China | E110:20 | N20:02 | 36 | |
| 13 | Pu Hong | Nghe An | Vietnam | E105:15 | N20:22 | 14 |
Locality, province, country, geographic co-ordinates (Easting and Northing), and sample size (n) are shown.
Figure 1Sampling locations for Cynopterus sphinx and Rousettus leschenaulti.
Map of the sampling locations for Cynopterus sphinx (triangles) and Rousettus leschenaulti (circles) across a) whole sampling range and b) detailed view of sampling sites and provinces in China and Vietnam.
Genetic variability based on cytochrome b and microsatellites recorded for a) Rousettus leschenaulti and b) Cynopterus sphinx.
| cytochrome | microsatellites | ||||||||||||
| Locality | n | h | H | S | K | π | n | MNA | He | Ho | RS | FIS | |
| a) | Cheranmahadevi | 6 | 5 | 0.93 | 23 | 1.00 | 0.0086 | 20 | 12.1 | 0.87 | 0.85 | 11.3 | 0.055 |
| Menglun | 5 | 5 | 1.00 | 22 | 1.00 | 0.0086 | 25 | 14.0 | 0.88 | 0.87 | 12.2 | 0.037 | |
| Wuming | 6 | 6 | 1.00 | 21 | 1.00 | 0.0069 | 32 | 14.2 | 0.87 | 0.94 | 11.0 | −0.062 | |
| Maoming | 6 | 5 | 0.93 | 16 | 0.93 | 0.0063 | 39 | 14.8 | 0.87 | 0.95 | 11.3 | −0.070 | |
| Haikou | 6 | 6 | 1.00 | 19 | 1.00 | 0.0070 | 41 | 15.5 | 0.88 | 0.86 | 11.5 | 0.043 | |
| Total | 29 | 27 | 0.99 | 52 | 0.99 | 0.0073 | 157 | 14.1 | 0.87 | 0.89 | 11.4 | −0.007 | |
| b) | Mandiyoor | 8 | 7 | 0.96 | 20 | 2.68 | 0.0025 | 19 | 7.1 | 0.78 | 0.82 | 6.5 | −0.020 |
| Xishuangbanna | 8 | 7 | 0.96 | 25 | 6.75 | 0.0063 | 31 | 12.6 | 0.83 | 0.82 | 8.9 | 0.027 | |
| Beihai | 7 | 6 | 0.95 | 24 | 8.19 | 0.0076 | 22 | 11.0 | 0.82 | 0.73 | 8.8 | 0.139 | |
| Jiangmen | 8 | 4 | 0.82 | 6 | 2.50 | 0.0023 | 14 | 9.3 | 0.81 | 0.74 | 8.2 | 0.116 | |
| Guangzhou | 8 | 4 | 0.64 | 9 | 2.25 | 0.0021 | 64 | 11.8 | 0.82 | 0.77 | 7.8 | 0.069 | |
| Zhongshan | 7 | 5 | 0.86 | 10 | 4.00 | 0.0037 | 1 | 7.9 | 0.79 | 0.84 | 7.6 | −0.022 | |
| Haikou | 6 | 5 | 0.93 | 10 | 4.40 | 0.0041 | 36 | 11.6 | 0.81 | 0.74 | 8.1 | 0.105 | |
| Pu Huong | 7 | 7 | 1.00 | 26 | 10.0 | 0.0093 | 14 | 8.4 | 0.81 | 0.78 | 8.2 | 0.085 | |
| Total | 59 | 34 | 0.96 | 71 | 10.5 | 0.0098 | 218 | 9.5 | 0.81 | 0.78 | 8.0 | 0.062 | |
n = sample size, h = no. of haplotypes, H = haplotype diversity, S = no. polymorphic sites, K = no. pairwise nucleotide differences, π = nucleotide diversity, MNA = Mean no. alleles per locus, Ho = observed heterozygosity, He = expected heterozygosity, RS = allelic richness, FIS = inbreeding coefficient.
Figure 2Clustering analysis for Cynopterus sphinx and Rousettus leschenaulti.
Clustering analysis for a) eight Cynopterus sphinx populations and b) five Rousettus leschenaulti populations. The different colors represent the proportional membership of individuals from each locality to a given cluster, undertaken for increasing numbers of clusters (K) using STRUCTURE.
Figure 3Parsimony haplotype networks for Cynopterus sphinx and Rousettus leschenaulti.
Parsimony haplotype networks for a) Cynopterus sphinx and b) Rousettus leschenaulti. Haplotypes are colour coded based on sampling locality, as follows: Guangdong = dark green, Yunnan = light green, Hainan = blue, Guangxi = yellow, Vietnam = red, India = pink. Circles are sized in proportion to the number of individuals with that haplotype.