| Literature DB >> 22567383 |
Rachel Massicotte1, Bernard Angers.
Abstract
This project aims at investigating the link between individual epigenetic variability (not related to genetic variability) and the variation of natural environmental conditions. We studied DNA methylation polymorphisms of individuals belonging to a single genetic lineage of the clonal diploid fish Chrosomus eos-neogaeus sampled in seven geographically distant lakes. In spite of a low number of informative fragments obtained from an MSAP analysis, individuals of a given lake are epigenetically similar, and methylation profiles allow the clustering of individuals in two distinct groups of populations among lakes. More importantly, we observed a significant pH variation that is consistent with the two epigenetic groups. It thus seems that the genotype studied has the potential to respond differentially via epigenetic modifications under variable environmental conditions, making epigenetic processes a relevant molecular mechanism contributing to phenotypic plasticity over variable environments in accordance with the GPG model.Entities:
Year: 2011 PMID: 22567383 PMCID: PMC3335555 DOI: 10.1155/2012/317175
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genet Res Int ISSN: 2090-3162
Figure 1Graphic representation of the general-purpose genotype (GPG) model and the flexibility hypothesis. (a) GPG model, a flexible genetic lineage (unfilled distribution) with a wide ecological niche and a high fitness under variable environmental conditions. (b) Epigenetic as a mechanism extending the flexibility of a genome, environmentally induced epigenotypes (grey distributions) from a single genetic lineage (unfilled distribution from (a)).
Summary of ecological and molecular data. Lake environmental characteristics, individual morphometric characteristics, sampling size, genetic diversity (number of genotypes), and epigenetic diversity (number of epigenotypes).
| Lakes | Geographic coordinates | Date of sampling | Habitat type* | Drainage | Altitude (m) |
| pH | Weight (g) | Length (cm) | K | GSI | Sampling size | Genotype | Epigenotype |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Richer | 45°50′35′′ N | 2007-05-29 | C | Nord | 360 | 24 | 6.4 | 3.32 ± 0.94 | 6.93 ± 0.71 | 0.97 ± 0.05 | 7.33 ± 2.27 | 4 | 1 | 2 |
| Merde | 45°57′55.9′′ N | 2007-05-28 | B | L'Assomption | 360 | 23 | 6.2 | 3.44 ± 1.36 | 6.78 ± 0.77 | 1.04 ± 0.07 | 11.37 ± 2.7 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
| Barbotte | 46°5′36′′ N | 2007-05-30 | C | L'Assomption | 280 | 22 | 6.5 | 2.16 ± 0.4 | 6.04 ± 0.41 | 0.97 ± 0.05 | 7.19 ± 2.5 | 8 | 6 | 2 |
| Jonction | 45°46′37′′ N | 2007-06-01 | C | Rouge | 340 | 24 | 7.1 | 2.38 ± 0.56 | 6.08 ± 0.54 | 1.05 ± 0.07 | 9.74 ± 0.71 | 4 | 1 | 1 |
| Dépotoir | 45°50′41.6′′ N | 2007-05-31 | B | Rouge | 320 | 25 | 7.1 | 1.85 ± 0.38 | 5.65 ± 0.45 | 1.01 ± 0.03 | 10.73 ± 0.53 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| Saumons | 45°59′38′′ N | 2007-06-16 | A | Nord | 490 | 22 | 7.0 | 3.2 ± 0.26 | 6.8 ± 0 | 1.01 ± 0.08 | 6.51 ± 1.31 | 2 | 1 | 2 |
| Saad | 45°54′51.4′′ N | 2007-06-16 | D | L'Assomption | 320 | 24 | 6.8 | 1.89 ± 0.18 | 5.9 ± 0.2 | 0.92 ± 0.008 | 4.48 ± 2.54 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
*Habitats characterization according to Schlosser et al. [29]: A: pond of moderate depth, B: a shallow beaver pond, C: a moderately deep area of open water upstream from a beaver dam, and D: pond of moderate depth with flooded standing and fallen tree.
Figure 2Details of sampling, genotypes, and epigenotypes diversity. (a) Sampled lakes in the Laurentian region, QC, Canada. (b) Minimum spanning network of the 12 genotypes identified by scoring nine microsatellite loci. The number of gynogenetic hybrids of each genotype per lake is indicated. (c) Minimum spanning network of the five main epigenotypes and two epigenetic groups (dash boxes) identified by the MSAP analysis. The number of gynogens of each epigenotype per lake is indicated. *refers to intrapopulation variation. The colour code of the sampled lakes from panel (a) is maintained throughout the rest of the figure.
Figure 3Relationship between the genotypes (genetic variation and microsatellite analysis) and the epigenotypes (methylation profiles difference and MSAP analysis).