| Literature DB >> 22754378 |
Pei-Chun Liao1, Chi-Chu Tsai2, Chang-Hung Chou3, Yu-Chung Chiang4.
Abstract
The landrace strains of Momordica charantia are widely cultivated vegetables throughout the tropics and subtropics, but not in Taiwan, a continental island in Southeast Asia, until a few hundred years ago. In contrast, the related wild populations with smaller fruit sizes are native to Taiwan. Because of the introduction of cultivars for agricultural purposes, these two accessions currently exhibit a sympatric or parapatric distribution in Taiwan. In this study, the cultivars and wild samples from Taiwan, India, and Korea were collected for testing of their hybridization and evolutionary patterns. The cpDNA marker showed a clear distinction between accessions of cultivars and wild populations of Taiwan and a long divergence time. In contrast, an analysis of eight selectively neutral nuclear microsatellite loci did not reveal a difference between the genetic structures of these two accessions. A relatively short divergence time and frequent but asymmetric gene flows were estimated based on the isolation-with-migration model. Historical and current introgression from cultivars to wild populations of Taiwan was also inferred using MIGRATE-n and BayesAss analyses. Our results showed that these two accessions shared abundant common ancestral polymorphisms, and the timing of the divergence and colonization of the Taiwanese wild populations is consistent with the geohistory of the Taiwan Strait land bridge of the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM). Long-term and recurrent introgression between accessions indicated the asymmetric capacity to receive foreign genes from other accessions. The modern introduction of cultivars of M. charantia during the colonization of Taiwan by the Han Chinese ethnic group enhanced the rate of gene replacement in the native populations and resulted in the loss of native genes.Entities:
Keywords: IM model; Momordica charantia; divergence time; effective population size; introgression
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22754378 PMCID: PMC3382758 DOI: 10.3390/ijms13056469
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 6.208
Figure 1The neighbor-joining tree of the cultivars and wild samples of Taiwan, India, and Korea of Momordica charantia, inferred by the chloroplast atpB-rbcL spacer. Samples denoted in regular, bold, and italic are the cultivars, wild samples, and hybrids, respectively. The CBM1 and the FBM1 are wild samples from India and Korea, respectively. Each wild population and landrace cultivar variety included five to eight individuals with the same haplotype in the figure. Numbers between the branches are the supporting values for monophyly by 1000 bootstrap replications.
Genetic diversity and neutrality tests of the chloroplast atpB-rbcL spacer in the cultivar accession and the Taiwan accession of Momordica charantia (gaps are excluded).
| Taxa | Tajima’s | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The cultivar accession | 20 | 3 | 2 | 0.0005 | 0.0002 | −1.2414 |
| The Taiwan accession | 7 | 2 | 1 | 0.0004 | 0.0003 | −1.0062 |
| Hybrid | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | −1.0488 |
| Total | 29 | 5 | 4 | 0.001 | 0.0011 | 0.1977 |
Number of lines;
Number of haplotypes;
Segregating sites;
Genetic diversity index estimated from segregating sites;
Nucleotide diversity estimated by site-by-site pairwise comparison;
None of the values are significant and the null (neutral) hypothesis cannot be rejected.
Figure 2Distribution of population genetic differentiation index FST as a function of heterozygosity by simulation, while considering the neutral markers only, and forcing the mean FST under a stepwise mutation model. The dashed lines and the solid line represent the 0.95 quantiles and the median, respectively. Each dot represents a microsatellite locus; loci above the 0.95 quantile line (upper dotted line) were classified as under divergent selection, while those below the lower dotted line were classified as loci under balancing selection.
Primer sequences, annealing temperature (Tm), and polymorphic type of eleven microsatellite loci and the expected heterozygosity (Hexp), genetic diversity index (θ), number of alleles and effective alleles (Na and Ne) of eight neutral evolving and polymorphic loci. The forward and reverse primers are denoted in “F” and “R” in front of the primer sequences, respectively.
| Locus | Primer set | Type | cultivars | wild population (Taiwan) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| ||||||||||
| CMBR21 | F: 5′-AGATTCTGGTTGTTGGGCAG-3′ | 59 °C | P | 0.528 | 1.506 | 3 | 2.062 | 0.264 | 2.075 | 2 | 1.324 |
| CMBR22 | F: 5′-CCAAAACGACCAAATGTTCC-3′ | 56 °C | P | 0.554 | 1.523 | 5 | 2.174 | 0.615 | 1.613 | 3 | 2.333 |
| CMBR30 | F: 5′-CACTGCATACACACACATCCA-3′ | 58 °C | P | 0.097 | 5.186 | 2 | 1.105 | 0.440 | 1.530 | 2 | 1.690 |
| CMBR47 | F: 5′-ATCCCAACCCATCACTCTCA-3′ | 59 °C | P | 0.738 | 2.089 | 6 | 3.571 | 0.791 | 2.527 | 5 | 3.769 |
| CMBR57 | F: 5′-GCTCTGAAGAGTGGAATGAGAGA-3′ | 59 °C | P | 0.708 | 1.917 | 6 | 3.226 | 0.659 | 1.726 | 4 | 2.579 |
| CMBR66 | F: 5′-TCAAGCAAAAACCATAATCAGAA-3′ | 52 °C | P | 0.272 | 2.026 | 3 | 1.361 | 0.659 | 1.726 | 3 | 2.579 |
| CMBR82 | F: 5′-ACGACTCTTGGAAATCGGTC-3′ | 54 °C | P | 0.344 | 1.717 | 3 | 1.504 | 0.527 | 1.506 | 2 | 1.960 |
| CMBR152 | F: 5′-CCCACATTGGTCTCAACAAG-3′ | 54 °C | P | 0.590 | 1.567 | 4 | 2.353 | 0.440 | 1.530 | 2 | 1.690 |
| CMBR31 | F: 5′-AAACAAACCAAACCAAACCG-3′ | 58 °C | BS | 0.610 | 1.602 | 4 | 2.469 | 0.703 | 1.896 | 3 | 2.882 |
| CMBR114-1 | F: 5′-TGCTTTGCCTTAACCGTCTT-3′ | 52 °C | PS | 0.097 | 5.186 | 2 | 1.105 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1.000 |
| CMBR114-2 | F: 5′-TGCTTTGCCTTAACCGTCTT-3′ | 52 °C | M | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| CMBR145 | F: 5′-TGTGACAATGTGCAACCAG-3′ | 56 °C | M | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
P: polymorphic; M: Monomorphic; PS: positive selection; BS: balancing selection.
Figure 3Population structure estimated by the principle coordinate analysis (PCoA). Scatter plot of the first axis (31.05% explanation) and the second axis (21.76% explanation) of the PCoA based on variations of 8 microsatellite loci (excluding the FST outlier loci CMBR31 and CMBR114-1). The black and white dots indicated the individuals from “the cultivar accession” and “the Taiwan accession”, respectively.
Analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA) between the cultivar accession and the Taiwan accession. The variance explained by differences among accessions and its significance were calculated using probabilities derived from 1000 permutations.
| Source of variation | Sum of Squares | Variance Components | Percentage of Variance | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Between accessions | 1 | 104.955 | 0.528 | 0.56 | 0.0056 | 0.615 |
| Within accessions | 52 | 4887.786 | 93.996 | 99.44 | ||
| Total | 53 | 4992.741 | 94.524 | 100 |
Figure 4Genetic subdivision inferred using the Bayesian-clustering method implemented in the STRUCTURE program [31] for eight neutral microsatellite loci. The left plot is the log of the estimated posterior probability of K, which indicates a best fit of K = 4; the right panels are individual genotypes grouped by K = 2~5; the marks C, T, I, and K of each individual plot indicate the cultivar samples, the wild samples of Taiwan, India, and Korea, respectively.
Figure 5Marginal posterior probability density distribution of (A) the current effective population size of the cultivar accession and the Taiwan accession; (B) the ancestral population size; (C) migration rates of the cultivar accession and the Taiwan accession; and (D) divergence time of these two accessions, each scaled by the geometric mean of the mutation rates of all loci analyzed.
Log-likelihood nested model tests by the full model (θC ≠ θT ≠ θA, m1 ≠ m2 ≠ 0, where m1 = mC→T and m2 = mT→C). Statistical nonsignificance (not rejecting the null model) is indicated in bold.
| Model | T | 2LLR | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full model | |||||||||
| mode | 0.135 | 0.3314 | 0.1767 | 3.3572 | 9.95 | 0.01 | |||
| 95% CI Low | 0.065 | 0.1736 | 0.0589 | 1.708 | 1.61 | 0.05 | |||
| 95% CI High | 0.545 | 1.9409 | 0.6086 | 29.5471 | 19.37 | 18.85 | |||
| Null models | |||||||||
| | 0.1167 | 0.5634 | 0.1469 | 2.1057 | 3.2863 | 3.2863 | 1 | 4.3693 | 0.0366 |
| | |||||||||
| | 0.0995 | 0.4138 | 0.2023 | 2.5454 | 0.0001 | 9.4322 | 1 | 14.8471 | 5.829 × 10−5 |
| | 0.1785 | 0.7870 | 0.4202 | 1.8314 | 0.0001 | 0.0001 | 2 | 718.0318 | 6.03 × 10−157 |
| | |||||||||
| | 0.2213 | 0.6101 | 0.6101 | 0.6101 | 7.8461 | 2.8492 | 2 | 16.3993 | 2.747 × 10−4 |
| | 0.0902 | 0.1906 | 0.1906 | 2.1566 | 19.5826 | 19.5826 | 2 | 9.8940 | 0.0071 |
| | 0.1785 | 0.7026 | 0.7026 | 1.8250 | 0.0001 | 0.0001 | 3 | 746.7677 | 7.58 × 10−162 |
| | 0.2213 | 0.6107 | 0.6107 | 0.6107 | 5.4662 | 5.4662 | 3 | 51.8731 | 3.19 × 10−11 |
| | 0.1785 | 0.8188 | 0.8188 | 0.8188 | 0.0001 | 0.0001 | 4 | 803.2170 | 7.72 × 10−173 |
| | 0.2537 | 1.0702 | 0.4156 | 1.0702 | 7.3973 | 0.0478 | 1 | 5.9515 | 0.0147 |
| | 0.2980 | 1.5204 | 0.3881 | 1.5204 | 1.4217 | 1.4217 | 2 | 25.8596 | 2.42 × 10−6 |
| | 0.1785 | 0.9223 | 0.4204 | 0.9223 | 0.0001 | 0.0001 | 3 | 759.3913 | 1.39 × 10−164 |
| | 0.2213 | 0.6338 | 0.5800 | 0.5800 | 7.8300 | 2.8436 | 1 | 15.4141 | 8.63 × 10−5 |
| | 0.2213 | 0.6347 | 0.5806 | 0.5806 | 5.4683 | 5.4683 | 2 | 50.8823 | 8.93 × 10−12 |
| | 0.1785 | 0.7864 | 0.8914 | 0.8914 | 0.0001 | 0.0001 | 3 | 801.3394 | 1.11 × 10−173 |
The log-likelihood ratio result from IMa analysis [33] approximates a χ2 distribution. For models where migration estimates are set to zero, the expected distribution is a mixture, and the 2LLR approximates a 1/2χ2 distribution [33].
T: unscaled divergent time; θC, θT, and θA: unscaled population size of cultivar accession, Taiwan accession, and ancestors, respetivly; mC→T and mT→C: migration rate from cultivar accession to Taiwan accession and the opposite direction, respectively; df: degrees of freedom; 2LLR denotes the log-likelihood ratio test expressed by two-times difference of logarithmic likelihoods between alternative and null models; P is the one-tailed probability value for the χ2 test used for LRT.
Summary of immigration rate between accessions of Momordica charantia estimated by IMa [33], MIGRATE-n [34], and BayesAss [35].
| IMa | MIGRATE-n | BayesAss | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Source | Cultivar accession | Taiwan accession | Cultivar accession | Taiwan accession | Cultivar accession | Taiwan accession |
| Cultivar accession | - | 2.655 | - | 507.5 | 0.985 | 0.071 |
| Taiwan accession | 0.195 | - | 52.5 | - | 0.015 | 0.929 |
Immigration rates were revealed in m of IMa [33], M (= m/μ) of MIGRATE-n [34], and the proportion of migrants in the data sets of two accessions in a migration rate of 0.166 (95% CI: 0.008~0.325) of BayesAss [35], respectively.
Figure 6Posterior distribution of migration rate (M) over all loci between the cultivar accession and the Taiwan accession estimated by using the MIGRATE-n [34] analysis.
Resources and accessions of the Momordica charantia in this study.
| Species | Strain | Accessions | Sample size | Resource | Abbreviation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pai Bitter Gourd | TVI006693 | 6 | NPGRC, TARI, COA | BM1 | |
| Pin Tung He Tzu Ku Kua No. 8 | TVI007217 | 6 | NPGRC, TARI, COA | BM2 | |
| Pai Pi Bitter Gourd | TVI007364 | 6 | NPGRC, TARI, COA | BM3 | |
| Chin Lien Bitter Gourd | TVI007723 | 6 | NPGRC, TARI, COA | BM4 | |
| Pin Tung He Tzu Bitter Gourd | TVI007895 | 6 | NPGRC, TARI, COA | BM5 | |
| Ming Hua | TVI006970 | 6 | NPGRC, TARI, COA | BM8 | |
| Lin Nei Tzu Liu Chung | TVI009016 | 5 | NPGRC, TARI, COA | BM12 | |
| Chiang Men Ta Ting Bitter Gourd | TVI010175 | 6 | NPGRC, TARI, COA | BM16 | |
| Ping Tung Li Kang Bitter Gourd | TVI009615 | 5 | NPGRC, TARI, COA | BM18 | |
| Small Bitter Melon | TVI009995 | 5 | NPGRC, TARI, COA | BM20 | |
| Chen Chu | TVI006900 | 6 | NPGRC, TARI, COA | BM24 | |
| Kuang Han Te Ta Chang Pai Bitter Gourd | TVI009892 | 5 | NPGRC, TARI, COA | BM27 | |
| Pai Pi Tsu Mi Bitter Gourd | TVI009534 | 5 | NPGRC, TARI, COA | BM31 | |
| Ping Tung Bitter Gourd | TVI007365 | 5 | NPGRC, TARI, COA | BM33 | |
| Chinese Gui-Nin No. 2 | SYSU-BM-1 | 5 | Exchange from South China Botanical Garden, China. | CBM2 | |
| Chin Pi Bitter Gourd | TVI008603 | 6 | NPGRC, TARI, COA | BM22 | |
| Chin Pi Bitter Gourd | SYSU-BM-2 | 6 | Exchange from Kunming Institute of Botany, China. | BBM | |
| Kao Mien Bitter Gourd | TVI009317 | 5 | NPGRC, TARI, COA | FBM4 | |
| Han Ch’eng K’u Kua | CN93MJF135 | 5 | NPGRC, TARI, COA | FBM1 | |
| TVI009464 | 5 | NPGRC, TARI, COA | CBM1 | ||
| Ping Tung Chiu Chow Bitter Gourd | SYSU-BW-1 | 8 | N 22°39′14″, E 120°38′10″, 205 m altitude | BMW1 | |
| Nan Tou Bitter Gourd | SYSU-BW-2 | 8 | N 23°55′06″, E 120°53′04″, 700 m altitude | BMW2 | |
| Yeh Sheng Bitter Gourd | TVI009560 | 5 | NPGRC, TARI, COA | BMW5 | |
| Hua Lien Yeh Sheng Bitter Melon No. 1 | TVI009930 | 5 | NPGRC, TARI, COA | BMW9 | |
| Hua Lien Yeh Sheng Bitter Melon No. 5 | TVI009934 | 5 | NPGRC, TARI, COA | BMW10 | |
| Hua Lien Yeh Sheng Bitter Melon No. 10 | TVI009959 | 5 | NPGRC, TARI, COA | BMW11 | |
| Ping Tung Bitter Gourd | SYSU-BW-3 | 8 | N 22°24′57″, E 120°39′57″, 686 m altitude | BMW12 | |
| Hybrid between wild population and cultivars ( | Hua Lien Bitter Gourd No. 2 | HB002 | 5 | HDARES, COA | H2 |
| Hybrid between wild population and cultivars ( | Hua Lien Bitter Gourd No. 15 | HB015 | 5 | HDARES, COA | H15 |
NPGRC, TARI, COA: The National Plant Genetic Resources Center, Taiwan Agricultural Research Institute, Council of Agriculture of Taiwan, respectively.
HDARES, COA: Hualien District Agricultural Research and Extension Station, Council of Agriculture of Taiwan.