| Literature DB >> 21450111 |
Kang-Ning Shen1, Brian Wade Jamandre, Chih-Chieh Hsu, Wann-Nian Tzeng, Jean-Dominique Durand.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The study of speciation in the marine realm is challenging because of the apparent absence of physical barriers to dispersal, which are one of the main drivers of genetic diversity. Although phylogeographic studies using mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) information often reveal significant genetic heterogeneity within marine species, the evolutionary significance of such diversity is difficult to interpret with these markers. In the northwestern (NW) Pacific, several studies have emphasised the potential importance of sea-level regression during the most recent glaciations as a driver of genetic diversity in marine species. These studies have failed, however, to determine whether the period of isolation was long enough for divergence to attain speciation. Among these marine species, the cosmopolitan estuarine-dependent fish Mugil cephalus represents an interesting case study. Several divergent allopatric mtDNA lineages have been described in this species worldwide, and three occur in sympatry in the NW Pacific.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21450111 PMCID: PMC3079632 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2148-11-83
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Evol Biol ISSN: 1471-2148 Impact factor: 3.260
Figure 1Sampling localitions of . The shaded zone in dark grey is the area of the continental shelves that was exposed during periods of low sea levels. Blue arrows correspond to currents present in the area, C. C. C.: China Coastal Current, S. C. C.: South China Current.
List of phylogeographic studies that investigated the genetic diversity of NW Pacific marine species and summary of the relevant information reported in each study.
| Species | Organism | N | Structure/Refugium | NL | References | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fish | control region | 126 | East China Sea vs South China Sea | 2 | 48% | yes | [ | |
| Fish | control region | 140 | East China Sea vs South China Sea | 2 | 55% | no | [ | |
| Fish | cyto | 98 | Japan Sea vs East China Sea vs South China Sea | 3 | 5.1-6.6% | no | [ | |
| Fish | COI | 448 | Japan Sea vs South China Sea vs SW Pacific origin | 3 | 2.5-4.8% | yes | This study | |
| Fish | 16 S, 12 S | 9 | East China Sea vs South China Sea | 2 | 1.87%, 1.61% | yes | [ | |
| Fish | microsatellites | 713 | Japan Sea vs South China Sea vs SW Pacific origin | 3 | 11.5-30.5% | yes | This study | |
| Fish | AFLP | 118 | Bohai Sea vs Yellow Sea vs East China Sea vs South China Sea | 4 | - | no | [ | |
| Fish | control region | 272 | Japan Sea vs East China Sea vs South China Sea | 3 | 1.55-2.41% | no | [ | |
| Fish | 16 S, 12 S | 8 | East China Sea vs South China Sea | 2 | 2.81%, 4.11% | yes | [ | |
| Fish | ND5 | 85 | East China Sea vs South China Sea | 3 | 2.37-8.96% | yes | [ | |
| Fish | control region | 256 | Japan Sea vs East China Sea | 2 | 22.60% | yes | [ | |
| Fish | cyto b | 256 | Japan Sea vs East China Sea | 2 | 7.80% | yes | [ | |
| Crustacean | COII, cyto | 154 | Japan Sea vs East China Sea vs South China Sea | 3 | 3.2-4.05% | yes | [ | |
| Crustacean | COI, cyto | 446 | Japan Sea vs East China Sea vs South China Sea vs Ryukyu | 4 | - | no | [ | |
| Crustacean | control region | 95 | Japan Sea vs East China Sea vs South China Sea | 3 | no | [ | ||
| Mollusk | RAPD | 50 | Yellow Sea vs South China Sea | 2 | 10.90% | no | [ | |
| Mollusk | AFLP | 160 | Yellow Sea vs China Sea | 2 | - | no | [ | |
| Mollusk | COI | 38 | East China Sea vs South China Sea | 2 | 15% | no | [ | |
| Mollusk | RAPD | 96 | East China Sea vs South China Sea | 2 | 32.6 -45.1% | no | [ | |
| Mollusk | COI, 16 S, 12 S, ITS2 | 123 | East China Sea vs South China Sea vs Ryukyu & Taiwan Islands | 3 | 0.16-1.13% | yes | [ |
N: sample size, NL: number of lineage, % div.: percentage of divergence.
Summary of the collected data and sample sizes of Mugil cephalus used in microsatellite (MS) and mitochondrial (mtDNA) COI gene analyses.
| Country | code | Locations/Habitat | Sampling date | % mtDNA Lineage | Fork length | GSI | GSI mean ± se/ | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| microsat | COI/RS | 1 | 2 | 3 | mean ± se (mm) | mean ± se | mtDNA 1 | mtDNA 2 | mtDNA 3 | |||||
| Taiwan | 05 KL | Keelung/ | Dec. 2005 | 25°11'N 121°47'E | 50 | 50/50 | 92 | 8 | 0 | 464.80 ± 37.89 | 15.67 ± 5.97 | 15.91 ± 5.82 | 12.86 ± 7.94 | - |
| 06 KL | Coastal waters | Dec. 2006 | 48 | 11/48 | 98 | 2 | 0 | 478.77 ± 32.81 | 15.16 ± 7.80 | 15.32 ± 7.81 | 7.49 | - | ||
| 07 KL | Dec. 2007 | 47 | 47/47 | 77 | 19 | 4 | 484.6 ± 68.37 | 10.60 ± 6.45 | 12.31 ± 5.55 | 5.87 ± 6.58 | 1.03 ± 0.27 | |||
| 05 KS | Kaohsiung/ | Dec. 2005 | 22°37'N 119°30'E | 44 | 36/44 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 475.73 ± 34.55 | 20.61 ± 0.68 | 20.61 ± 0.68 | - | - | |
| 06 KS | Offshore waters | Dec. 2006 | 50 | 20/50 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 489.25 ± 25.37 | 19.75 ± 4.23 | 19.75 ± 4.23 | - | - | ||
| 07 KS | Dec. 2007 | 57 | 49/57 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 526.01 ± 38.07 | 18.03 ± 1.44 | 18.03 ± 1.44 | - | - | |||
| 05 KP | Kaoping River/ | Dec. 2005 | 22°28'N 120°25'E | 45 | 36/45 | 0 | 49 | 51 | 289.34 ± 19.58 | 0.81 ± 1.97 | - | 1.01 ± 1.52 | 0.73 ± 2.37 | |
| 07 KP | Estuary | Dec. 2007 | 49 | 39/49 | 14 | 63 | 23 | 501.07 ± 55.12 | 8.30 ± 7.50 | 7.31 ± 5.94 | 6.73 ± 6.19 | 13.37 ± 7.65 | ||
| 08 KP | Jan. 2008 | 38 | 37/38 | 13 | 71 | 16 | 481.69 ± 39.00 | 0.01 ± 0.01 | 0.02 ± 0.03 | 0 | 0.01 ± 0.01 | |||
| Japan | OK | Okinawa | Nov. 2005 | 26°24'N 127°54'E | 48 | 13/48 | 27 | 73 | 0 | - | - | - | - | - |
| YK | Yokosuka | Jan.-Feb. 2005 | 36°16'N 139°41'E | 43 | 8/43 | 35 | 65 | 0 | ||||||
| AS | Ariake Sea | Nov. 2007 | 33°00'N 130°26'E | 21 | 19/21 | 100 | 0 | 0 | - | - | - | - | - | |
| China | HN | Hainan | Apr. 2010 | 18°65'N 110°37'E | 32 | 32/32 | 0 | 41 | 59 | - | - | - | - | - |
| PR | Pearl River | Feb. 2005 | 22°45'N 113°37'E | 30 | 16/30 | 0 | 90 | 10 | ||||||
| ST | Shantou | Jan. 2008 | 23°20'N 116°44'E | 48 | 7/48 | 0 | 91 | 9 | - | - | - | - | - | |
| QD | Qingdao | Feb. 2006 | 36°02'N 120°21'E | 32 | 10/31 | 100 | 0 | 0 | - | - | - | - | - | |
| Philippines | PH | Philippines | Feb. 2007 | 18°21'N 121°37'E | 14 | 14/14 | 0 | 100 | 0 | - | - | - | - | - |
| Russia | RU | Russia | Jun. 2007 | 42°53'N 132°44'E | 4 | 4/4 | 100 | 0 | 0 | - | - | - | - | - |
| Jul.-Aug. 2009 | 13 | 0/13 | 100 | 0 | 0 | - | - | - | - | - | ||||
| Total | 713 | 448/712 | ||||||||||||
RS: rapid PCR screening of different lineages. The ratio of different lineages in each sample, their fork length and Gonadosomatic index (GSI) are also shown.
Figure 2Phylogenetic trees of . Phylogenetic trees reconstructed from (A) 36 COI sequences haplotypes (HT1-HT36) of Mugil cephalus in the northwestern Pacific and its geographic distribution (for location names follow Table 1). The values above the branches are bootstrap values for the NJ, ML and MP analyses and the posterior probabilities for the Bayesian analysis.
Figure 3Haplotype networks and mismatch distribution for three lineages of . (A) Haplotype networks for three lineages of Mugil cephalus COI sequences. The lengths of the connecting lines are in relation to the number of mutations between haplotypes. Each circle represents a haplotype, with the diameter of the circle proportional to the number of sequences of that haplotype. The names of the major haplotypes for each cryptic species correspond to those listed in Table S1. (B) Mismatch distributions from the mtDNA COI sequences of M. cephalus from the ten sampling locations. Blue bar: observed distributions; Light blue bar: expected distributions from the sudden expansion model.
Summary of the genetic diversity of Mugil cephalus.
| Species | Marker | n | π +/- se | RI | Tajima's | Fu's | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NWP1 | CR1 | 79 | 79 | 1.0000 +/- 0.0020 | 0.0095 +/- 0.0050 | 0.008 | -2.793*** | -24.76*** |
| Cyto | 35 | 6 | 0.2689 +/- 0.0982 | 0.0003 +/- 0.0003 | 0.285 | -2.007** | -5.866*** | |
| COI | 250 | 17 | 0.1316 +/- 0.0295 | 0.0002 +/- 0.0004 | 0.581 | -2.439*** | -3.4 × 1038*** | |
| Microsatellite | 390 | 17.2 | 0.6097 +/- 0.2751 | - | - | - | - | |
| NWP2 | CR1 | 47 | 47 | 1.0000 +/- 0.0040 | 0.0364 +/- 0.0180 | 0.003 | -1.962* | -23.263*** |
| Cyto | 43 | 24 | 0.9513 +/- 0.0176 | 0.0030 +/- 0.0017 | 0.028 | -1.68 | -16.53*** | |
| COI | 138 | 15 | 0.6525 +/- 0.0264 | 0.0021 +/- 0.0015 | 0.149 | -1.169 | -7.212** | |
| Microsatellite | 255 | 13.2 | 0.5745 +/- 0.2702 | - | - | - | - | |
| NWP3 | CR1 | 0 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Cyto | 17 | 11 | 0.9044 +/- 0.0572 | 0.0052 +/- 0.0030 | 0.08 | -0.783 | -1.875 | |
| COI | 60 | 4 | 0.2989 +/0.0737 | 0.0006 +/- 0.0006 | 0.245 | -0.361 | -1.617 | |
| Microsatellite | 68 | 5.8 | 0.3310 +/- 0.2991 | - | - | - | - | |
Number of individuals (n), number of haplotype (H) or alleles (Na), haplotype diversity (h ± standard deviation) or observed Heterozygosity (HO ± standard deviation), nucleotide diversity (π ± standard deviation) for each group of samples. Tajima's D and Fu's Fs, the corresponding P value, and the raggedness index (RI) of these lineages were also indicated.
1 data from [14], 2 data from [17]. *P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001
Temporal pair-wise θ test, using microsatellite loci between different sampling locations and years in Taiwan.
| KL | KS | KP | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Location | Year | (n) | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2005 | 2007 | 2008 |
| KL | 2005 | 50 | - | 0.000 | -0.003 | 0.003 | 0.004 | 0.001 | |||
| 2006 | 48 | - | 0.004 | -0.001 | 0.002 | 0.000 | |||||
| 2007 | 47 | - | 0.003 | 0.007* | 0.007** | ||||||
| KS | 2005 | 44 | - | 0.001 | 0.000 | ||||||
| 2006 | 50 | - | 0.001 | ||||||||
| 2007 | 57 | - | |||||||||
| KP | 2005 | 45 | - | 0.021* | |||||||
| 2007 | 49 | - | 0.003 | ||||||||
| 2008 | 38 | - | |||||||||
KL:Keelung; KS:Kaohsiung; KP:Kaoping River.
* < 0.05, ** < 0.01, *** < 0.001 in bold significant values after bonferroni correction [45]
Figure 4Correspondence between mtDNA lineages and nuclear Structure clusters. First row is the distribution of the 3 mtDNA lineages (green: lineage 1, blue: lineage 2, red: lineage 3) in 18 samples of Mugil cephalus in NW pacific. Second to forth row are the results of the assignment test using STRUCTURE [49] for M. cephalus microsatellite data. Each cluster (K) is designated by a different colour with vertical bars representing individuals and the proportion of a bar assigned to a single colour representing the posterior probability that an individual is assigned to that cluster. Assignment results are shown with K = 3, 4, 5 and 6.
Figure 5The distribution of three cryptic species of . (A) the proportions of the three species in various locations; coloured lines indicate sea surface temperature in the NW Pacific in December, which is the period of reproductive migration of Mugil cephalus; (B) the distribution range of NWP1 and location of the China Coastal Current; (C) the distribution range of NWP2 and location of the Kuroshio Current; (D) the distribution range of NWP3 and location of the South China Sea Current.
Pair-wise θ test, using microsatellite loci between different sampling locations under the same or different mtDNA lineages.
| Lineage 1 (L1) | Lineage 2 (L2) | Lineage 3 (L3) | ||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Locations | (n) | QD | AS | KL | KS | KP | YK | OK | KL | KP | YK | OK | ST | PR | HN | PH | KL | KP | ST | PR | HN | |
| RU | 17 | -0.002 | 0.008 | 0.003 | 0.001 | -0.003 | -0.001 | -0.002 | ||||||||||||||
| QD | 32 | 0.011* | 0.004 | 0.002 | -0.002 | -0.011 | 0.007 | |||||||||||||||
| AS | 21 | 0.011** | 0.008 | 0.000 | -0.003 | |||||||||||||||||
| L1 | KL | 129 | 0.001 | -0.006 | -0.003 | -0.001 | ||||||||||||||||
| KS | 151 | -0.002 | -0.003 | 0.001 | ||||||||||||||||||
| KP | 12 | -0.010 | 0.002 | |||||||||||||||||||
| YK | 14 | 0.002 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| OK | 14 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| KL | 14 | -0.001 | -0.002 | -0.004 | 0.004 | 0.005 | 0.005 | -0.013 | ||||||||||||||
| KP | 80 | 0.000 | 0.000 | -0.002 | 0.001 | 0.009 | 0.002 | |||||||||||||||
| YK | 29 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.002 | -0.002 | 0.002 | ||||||||||||||||
| L2 | OK | 34 | -0.002 | -0.004 | 0.000 | -0.004 | ||||||||||||||||
| ST | 44 | -0.005 | -0.002 | 0.001 | ||||||||||||||||||
| PR | 27 | -0.002 | -0.002 | |||||||||||||||||||
| HN | 13 | -0.008 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| PH | 14 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| KL | 2 | 0.026 | -0.049 | -0.095 | 0.006 | |||||||||||||||||
| KP | 40 | -0.026 | -0.026 | 0.019* | ||||||||||||||||||
| L3 | ST | 4 | -0.118 | -0.003 | ||||||||||||||||||
| PR | 3 | -0.017 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| HN | 19 | |||||||||||||||||||||
See Table 1 for the complete name of locations.
* < 0.05, ** < 0.01, *** < 0.001 in bold significant values after bonferroni correction [45]