| Literature DB >> 22151746 |
Etienne Bezault1, Patricia Balaresque, Aboubacar Toguyeni, Yves Fermon, Hitoshi Araki, Jean-François Baroiller, Xavier Rognon.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Reconstructing the evolutionary history of a species is challenging. It often depends not only on the past biogeographic and climatic events but also the contemporary and ecological factors, such as current connectivity and habitat heterogeneity. In fact, these factors might interact with each other and shape the current species distribution. However, to what extent the current population genetic structure reflects the past and the contemporary factors is largely unknown. Here we investigated spatio-temporal genetic structures of Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) populations, across their natural distribution in Africa. While its large biogeographic distribution can cause genetic differentiation at the paleo-biogeographic scales, its restricted dispersal capacity might induce a strong genetic structure at micro-geographic scales.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2011 PMID: 22151746 PMCID: PMC3260159 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2156-12-102
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Genet ISSN: 1471-2156 Impact factor: 2.797
Population samples information
| Sub-species | Ichthyo. Regions | Basin | Station | GPS location | Codes | Sample size | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debra Zeit | 08°45' N | 38°59' E | 2002 | 30 | ||||
| Koka | 08°24' N | 39°01' E | 2002 | 30 | ||||
| Abadir | 08° 51' N | 39°50' E | 2002 | 30 | ||||
| El Molo Bay | 03°37' N | 36°02' E | 1994 | 15 | ||||
| Lake Manzala | 31°17' N | 31°59' E | 1992 | 14 | ||||
| Djouj Nat.Park | 16°24' N | 16°12' W | 1991 | 15 | ||||
| Bamako | 12°38' N | 07°60' W | 1990 | 10 | ||||
| Bama | 11°22' N | 04°28' W | 2004 | 16 | ||||
| Kpandu | 06°48' N | 00°18' E | Total | 103 | ||||
| Nyinuto | 05°56' N | 00°41' E | Total | 87 | ||||
Taxonomic, bio-geographic and sample size information of the ten populations of Nile tilapia, Oreochromis niloticus, studied at both spatial and temporal scales.
Figure 1Population genetic differentiation of Nile tilapia, . Geographic representation of the 10 sampled populations of Nile tilapia within the natural distribution range of the species (shaded area) and summary of the genetic differentiation observed according to the clustering obtained from AMOVA analysis (see Table 4); (A) at macro-geographic level across Africa and (B) zoom on micro-geographic and temporal variability within the Volta basin. Separation times between hydrographical basins are based on paleontological information (see References in the Discussion section). The genetic differentiations are the average pairwise population value observed within (dotted line) or between (solid line) basins or ichthyological provinces and regions; calculations are based on RST at Macro-geographic scale, while on FST.at micro-geographic and temporal scales, according to the test suggested by Hardy et al. [35] (see Table 3 & 5 respectively). The population symbols refer to the different morphological sub-species: O. n. niloticus (black dot), O. n. vulcani (black diamond), O. n. cancellatus (black square) and O. n. filoa (black star) - (see Table 1 for population codes).
Genetic diversity per population.
| Populations | He ± SD | Hobs ± SD | Relatedness | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Spatial | Mrxy | Vrxy | |||||||||
| 2.33 | 2.15 ± 1.16 | 0.32 ± 0.28 | 0.29 ± 0.26 | 0.089 | |||||||
| 2.11 | 1.68 ± 0.60 | 0.17 ± 0.21 | 0.17 ± 0.24 | -0.027 | |||||||
| 2.78 | 2.31 ± 0.78 | 0.36 ± 0.23 | 0.34 ± 0.25 | 0.063 | |||||||
| 5.00 | 4.75 ± 1.40 | 0.72 ± 0.10 | 0.66 ± 0.18 | 0.090 | |||||||
| 5.33 | 4.94 ± 1.74 | 0.74 ± 0.11 | 0.69 ± 0.13 | 0.070 | |||||||
| 7.44 | 6.30 ± 3.41 | 0.67 ± 0.27 | 0.63 ± 0.29 | 0.058 | |||||||
| 3.00 | 3.00 ± 1.41 | 0.42 ± 0.24 | 0.39 ± 0.28 | 0.076 | |||||||
| 6.33 | 5.30 ± 1.77 | 0.65 ± 0.18 | 0.64 ± 0.19 | 0.020 | |||||||
| 9.89 | 5.79 ± 1.94 | 0.69 ± 0.19 | 0.58 ± 0.15 | 0.158 | *** | -0.01 | 0.22 | ||||
| 8.56 | 5.37 ± 2.51 | 0.64 ± 0.19 | 0.55 ± 0.24 | 0.149 | *** | -0.04 | *** | 0.35 | |||
Genetic diversity and allelic richness observed and estimated from rarefaction algorithm calculated over the nine loci for the ten study populations and their temporal samples (codes are given in Table 1), as well as level of relatedness rxy [63], estimated based on mean (Mrxy) and variance (Vrxy) of the distribution of pairwise relatedness index, calculated for each temporal samples from each location and across temporal samples for each location (see main text for additional details)
A = number of alleles observed per population; Ar = allelic richness per population based on rarefaction algorithm; He = non-biased expected heterozygosity; Hobs = observed heterozygosity (with standard deviations = SD); the FIS = fixation index values with their significances after sequential Bonferroni correction; Test significance: *P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001.
Matrix of macro-geographic population differentiation based on Rand Festimators
| Hr | Kk | Me | Mz | Tu | Se | Nb | Ko | Kp | Ny | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.427*** | 0.072** | 0.601*** | 0.472*** | 0.713*** | 0.636*** | 0.693*** | 0.587** | 0.660*** | ||
| 0.296*** | 0.473*** | 0.696*** | 0.582*** | 0.833*** | 0.787*** | 0.816*** | 0.709*** | 0.770*** | ||
| 0.059** | 0.287*** | 0.553*** | 0.377*** | 0.692*** | 0.599*** | 0.671*** | 0.573*** | 0.632*** | ||
| 0.451*** | 0.553*** | 0.425*** | 0.259*** | 0.384*** | 0.247*** | 0.397*** | 0.425*** | 0.424*** | ||
| 0.442*** | 0.549*** | 0.416*** | 0.115*** | 0.431*** | 0.209*** | 0.469*** | 0.520*** | 0.517*** | ||
| 0.489*** | 0.596*** | 0.467*** | 0.225*** | 0.229*** | 0.217*** | 0.152*** | 0.133** | 0.101** | ||
| 0.603*** | 0.723*** | 0.585*** | 0.326*** | 0.331*** | 0.243*** | 0.377*** | 0.374*** | 0.349*** | ||
| 0.507*** | 0.607*** | 0.481*** | 0.222*** | 0.214*** | 0.097*** | 0.306*** | 0.0249 | 0.0073 | ||
| 0.404*** | 0.456*** | 0.392*** | 0.216*** | 0.221*** | 0.054** | 0.246*** | 0.054** | 0.0142 | ||
| 0.455*** | 0.524*** | 0.440*** | 0.243*** | 0.224*** | 0.101*** | 0.261*** | 0.095** | 0.078** |
Pairwise RST (above diagonal) and FST (below diagonal) for the ten spatial populations studied, with corresponding level of significance (based on 10,000 replicates). The significance of the test of Hardy [35] (P < 0.001) suggests that RST is more appropriate to describe genetic differentiation among these populations than FST.
Figure 2Population structure at macro-geographic, micro-geographic and temporal levels. Individual-based Bayesian clustering using STRUCTURE v.2.3.1[32,33] to assess the genetic population structure at both A) macro-geographic and B) micro-geographic and temporal scales. For each scale, the number of genetic clusters (K), which was best supported by the procedure proposed by Evanno et al. (ΔK) [34] was represented (i.e. K = 3 for A and K = 4 for B). Different colours represent different genetic clusters in each figure. Code representing populations and hydrographic basins are given above graphs (see Table 1 for details). Results for different K are shown in Additional file 3.
Figure 3Hierarchical spatio-temporal population clustering. Factorial correspondence analyses based on genotype of O. niloticus samples at successive hierarchical spatial and temporal levels, depicting the best population clustering. For each population a star representation is used: every individual is linked with a line to the barycentre of its own population (labelled using sample code according to Table 1). At macro-geographic scale, we performed the projection of the 10 populations representing the overall biogeographic region studied (i.e. Ethiopian Rift Valley province, Nilotic, Sudano-Sahelian regions) on factorial planes F1 × F2 (a) and F1 × F3 (b), the projection of the Sudano-Sahelian region (i.e. West-African populations: Niger, Senegal and Volta basin populations) on factorial plane F1 × F2 (c), the projection of the Ethiopian Rift Valley province populations (i.e. Awash basin) on factorial plane F1 × F2(d). For the micro-geographic and temporal scales analysis, we performed the projection of the samples from the Volta basin including Kou, Kpandu and Nyinuto populations (temporal sample series are represented by stars and the area of each geographic population is represented by a 95% confidence ellipse), on factorial plane F1 × F2 (e). For each correspondence analysis, the percentage of variation represented by each factorial axis is given aside of its label.
Hierarchical partitioning of the genetic variance.
| Variance components (%) | Φ | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grouping | Within pops | Among groups | Among pops within groups | Φ | Φ | Φ | |
| All populations in one group | 54.69 | 45.31 | |||||
| All populations grouped by region 0 | 43.90 | 49.42 | 6.68 | ||||
| All populations grouped by basin 1 | 46.74 | 49.78 | 3.48 | ||||
| All populations grouped by taxonomy 2 | 43.72 | 47.14 | 9.14 | ||||
| within Sudano-Sahelian region | 90.61 | 9.39 | |||||
| within Sudano-Sahel. grouped by basin3 | 75.03 | 24.79 | 0.18 | 0.248 ns | 0.002 ns | ||
| within Ethiopian region (Awash) | 61.16 | 38.84 | |||||
| within Nilotic region (Turkana & Nile) | 73.05 | 26.95 | |||||
| within Volta basin | 100.45 | -0.45 | 0.004 ns | ||||
| within Volta basin | 93.67 | 6.33 | |||||
| within Volta grouped by site 4 | 91.56 | 6.48 | 1.96 | ||||
| within Kpandu (all temporal samples) | 98.71 | 1.29 | |||||
| within Nyinuto (all temporal samples) | 92.61 | 7.39 | |||||
Hierarchical analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA) calculated based on (1) R-Statistics for the macro-geographic scale and on (2) F-Statistics for the micro-geographic and temporal scales, considering the results of the test suggested by Hardy et al. [35]; the populations grouping reflects ichthyological provinces and regions, hybrographic basins, and taxonomy status (cf. Table 1).
0 3 groups: (Ethiopian: Hr, Kk, Me), (Nilotic: Mz, Tu), (Sudano-Sahelian: Se, Nb, Ko, Kp, Ny)
1 6 groups: (Awash: Hr, Kk, Me), (Nile: Mz), (Turkana: Tu), (Senegal: Se), (Niger: Nb), (Volta: Ko, Kp, Ny)
2 4 groups: (O.n.cancellatus: Hr, Kk), (O.n.filoa: Me), (O.n.vulcani: Tu), (O.n.niloticus: Mz, Se, Nb, Ko, Kp, Ny)
3 3 groups: (Senegal: Se), (Niger: Nb), (Volta: Ko, Kp, Ny)
4 3 groups: (Ko), (Kp: KpN1, KpM2, KpJ2, KpF3), (Ny: NyN1, NyM2, NyF3)
Test significance: ns = non-significant, * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001.
Matrix of micro-geographic and temporal population differentiation based on Festimators.
| Ko | KpN1 | KpM2 | KpJ2 | KpF3 | NyN1 | NyM2 | NyF3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.068** | ||||||||
| 0.069*** | 0.029* | |||||||
| 0.052** | 0.016 | -0.015 | ||||||
| 0.072*** | 0.024* | 0.038** | 0.030* | |||||
| 0.101*** | 0.103*** | 0.060*** | 0.092*** | 0.053** | ||||
| 0.116*** | 0.130*** | 0.118*** | 0.106*** | 0.105*** | 0.045** | |||
| 0.106*** | 0.099*** | 0.100*** | 0.103*** | 0.080*** | 0.053*** | -0.0037 |
F(below diagonal) for the eight spatio-temporal samples from the 3 geographic populations studied along the Volta basin, with corresponding level of significance (based on 10,000 replicates). The non-significance of the test of Hardy [35] suggests that Fis more appropriate to describe genetic differentiation among these populations than R.
Test significance: ns = non-significant, * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001.
S; below diagonal) and associated level of significance (above diagonal).
Effective population size and dispersal rate.
| Estimator | LD- | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Population | Source | 95%CI | 95%CI | 95%CI | 95%CI | ||||
| 31 | 21-53 | 0.097 | 0.053-0.160 | 143 | 70-817 | 61 | 37-142 | ||
| 27 | 19-44 | 0.094 | 0.052-0.157 | 34 | 23-55 | 23 | 17-33 | ||
Estimates of effective population size (Ne) and dispersal rate (m) from temporal samples of two populations from the Volta basin using three different methods: (1) maximum likelihood temporal method to jointly estimate Neopen and migration m [36], (2) pseudo-likelihood temporal method to estimate Neclosed [38], and (3) point-estimate Linkage-Disequilibrium based method LD-Ne [37] averaged over the different temporal samples (KpM2 (n = 13) was excluded from the calculations).