| Literature DB >> 22952747 |
Xue-Jun Ge1, Tsai-Wen Hsu, Kuo-Hsiang Hung, Chung-Jian Lin, Chi-Chung Huang, Chao-Ching Huang, Yu-Chung Chiang, Tzen-Yuh Chiang.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pinus massoniana, an ecologically and economically important conifer, is widespread across central and southern mainland China and Taiwan. In this study, we tested the central-marginal paradigm that predicts that the marginal populations tend to be less polymorphic than the central ones in their genetic composition, and examined a founders' effect in the island population. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPALEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22952747 PMCID: PMC3430689 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0043717
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Map showing the distribution and genetic composition of populations of Pinus massoniana in mainland China and Taiwan (Pale-green region: species range).
Frequencies of cpDNA and nDNA haplotypes in each population are indicated by pie diagrams. Abbreviations of populations are given in Table 1.
Locations, codes and sample sizes of sampled populations in Taiwan, and geographical populations (East, West, and South) of mainland China of Pinus massoniana.
| Regions | Locations | Coordinates | Code | Sample size |
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
| Huangshan I, Anhui | 30°07′N, 118°11′E | HS I | 33 | |
| Huangshan II, Anhui | 30°07′N, 118°11′E | HS II | 40 | |
|
| ||||
| Lushan, Jiangxi | 29°33′N, 115°59′E | JX | 66 | |
| Zhangjiajie, Hunan | 29°20′N, 110°25′E | HN | 50 | |
| Fanjingshan, Guizhou | 27°54′N, 108°39′E | GU | 45 | |
|
| ||||
| Daiyunshan, Fujian | 25°39′N, 118°13′E | DA | 31 | |
| Yangshan, Guangdong | 24°49′N, 112°07′E | HO | 33 | |
|
| ||||
| Miaoli, Taiwan | 24°29′N, 120°72′E | TAI | 22 |
Figure 2The maximum likelihood tree of Pinus massoniana with at outgroup sequences.
Divergence times between major lineages and bootstrap values are indicated at nodes. A) cpDNA haplotypes; B) alleles of AdhC2 introns.
Distribution of cpDNA haplotypes in Taiwan population, and geographical populations (East, West, and South) of mainland China Pinus massoniana.
| Region | Population | A | B | C | D | |||||||||||
| A1 | A2 | A3 | A4 | A5 | B1 | B2 | B3 | B4 | C1 | D1 | D2 | D3 | D4 | No. of cytotypes | ||
| Interior vs. Exterior nodes | E | I | E | E | I | I | E | E | E | I | I | E | I | E | (no. of private types) | |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| HS I | 2 | 22 | 9 | 3 (0) | ||||||||||||
| HS II | 8 | 25 | 7 | 3 (0) | ||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| JX | 2 | 9 | 28 | 22 | 3 | 2 | 6 (3) | |||||||||
| HN | 31 | 16 | 3 | 3 (0) | ||||||||||||
| GU | 2 | 28 | 11 | 4 | 4 (1) | |||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| DA | 2 | 3 | 16 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 6 (3) | |||||||||
| HO | 3 | 16 | 2 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 6 (2) | |||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| TAI | 2 | 20 | 2 (1) | |||||||||||||
| Total | 2 | 9 | 2 | 2 | 103 | 130 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 31 | 20 | 4 | 6 | 3 | ||
The haplotype numbers (Hap.), nucleotide diversity (θ), and neutrality tests at the atpB-rbcL spacer of cpDNA and the intron of AdhC2 of nDNA within Taiwan population, and geographical populations (East, West, and South) of mainland China of Pinus massoniana.
| Mainland China: | Hap. | θ | Fu and Li's | Fu and Li's | Tajima's | |||||
| cpDNA | nDNA | cpDNA | nDNA | cpDNA | nDNA | cpDNA | nDNA | cpDNA | nDNA | |
| East | ||||||||||
| HS I | 3 | 8 | 0.00090 | 0.00266 | −0.33034 | 1.27814 | −0.35947 | 1.40390 | −0.28956 | 1.14714 |
| HS II | 3 | 9 | 0.00085 | 0.00302 | 0.95275 | 0.67857 | 0.83322 | 0.60882 | 0.09664 | 0.12704 |
| West | ||||||||||
| JX | 6 | 9 | 0.00216 | 0.00317 | −1.63654 | −0.51291 | −1.64220 | −0.35815 | −0.87383 | 0.21384 |
| HN | 3 | 7 | 0.00514 | 0.00517 | −2.76648** | −0.59590 | −2.90467** | −0.82140 | −1.88781* | −1.02384 |
| GU | 4 | 9 | 0.00121 | 0.00564 | −1.08108 | −0.05394 | −1.08324 | −0.01401 | −0.57961 | 0.09712 |
| South | ||||||||||
| DA | 6 | 8 | 0.00696 | 0.01205 | −1.83464 | 0.66778 | −2.03715 | 0.89330 | −1.72970 | 1.20269 |
| HO | 6 | 12 | 0.00672 | 0.01558 | 0.70711 | −0.76809 | 0.48060 | −0.70068 | −0.40404 | −0.18716 |
|
| ||||||||||
| TAI | 2 | 5 | 0.00488 | 0.00396 | 1.48091* | −1.71912 | 0.84973 | −2.03545 | −1.12149 | −1.85502* |
|
| 14 | 51 | 0.00596 | 0.01142 | −1.77173 | −4.01321** | −1.24552 | −3.18093** | 0.12439 | −0.66249 |
Distribution of nucleotypes in Taiwan population, and geographical populations (East, West, and South) of mainland China of Pinus massoniana.
| Region | Population | α | β | γ | |||||||||
| α1 | α2 | α3 | α4 | α5 | β | γ1 | γ2 | γ3 | γ4 | γ5 | No. of cytotypes | ||
| Interior vs. Exterior nodes | E | I | I | E | I | I | I | E | E | E | E | (no. of private types) | |
|
| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
| HS I | 9 | 4 | 20 | 4 (0) | |||||||||
| HS II | 29 | 4 | 2 | 5 | 5 (1) | ||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
| JX | 25 | 29 | 5 | 7 | 4 (0) | ||||||||
| HN | 19 | 26 | 3 | 2 | 4 (1) | ||||||||
| GU | 15 | 5 | 16 | 7 | 2 | 5 (0) | |||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
| DA | 16 | 3 | 7 | 5 | 4 (0) | ||||||||
| HO | 12 | 2 | 7 | 3 | 9 | 5 (0) | |||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
| TAI | 3 | 1 | 18 | 3 (1) | |||||||||
| Total | 28 | 29 | 74 | 40 | 72 | 20 | 1 | 2 | 10 | 10 | 34 | ||
Figure 3Minimum spanning network of Pinus massoniana.
Geographical distribution of each haplotype and lineage is indicated: west (W), south (S), and island (I). A) cpDNA haplotypes; B) AdhC2 alleles; C) lineage ß of AdhC2 alleles.
A comparison of genetic diversity at11 microsatellite loci in 8 populations of Pinus massoniana.
|
|
|
| |
|
| 4.273 | 0.16061 | 0.59492 |
| East | |||
| HS I | 1.909 | 0.15978 | 0.29659 |
| HS II | 2.455 | 0.14773 | 0.41858 |
| West | |||
| JX | 2.273 | 0.09091 | 0.45709 |
| HN | 2.000 | 0.11455 | 0.32505 |
| GU | 1.636 | 0.11515 | 0.24208 |
| South | |||
| DA | 1.909 | 0.29032 | 0.32113 |
| HO | 2.545 | 0.16804 | 0.35695 |
|
| |||
| TAI | 1.636 | 0.09091 | 0.18989 |
| Overall | 4.273 | 0.13949 | 0.59291 |
A : Observed average allele number; Ho: Observed heterozygosity; He: Expected heterozygosity.
Figure 4Unrooted NJ tree showing genetic relationship based on microsatellite loci among populations.
Numbers at the nodes are bootstrapping values from 1000 replicates.
Figure 5Bayesian inference of the number of clusters (K) of Pinus massoniana based on microsatellites.
The three clusters (K = 5) were detected from STRUCTURE analysis with highest ΔK value.
Fixation indices corresponding to groups of populations inferred by SAMOVA for Pinus massoniana populations tested for the cpDNA, nDNA, and microsatellites.
| Marker | Group | Population groupings | Variation among group (%) | FCT | P |
| cpDNA |
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 | (HS I, HS II, JX, HN, GU, DA) (HO) (TAI) | 54.08 | 0.54078 | 0.03128 | |
| 4 | (HS I) (HS II, JX, HN, GU, DA) (HO) (TAI) | 46.84 | 0.46836 | 0.00000 | |
| 5 | (HS I, HS II) (JX, HN, GU) (DA) (HO) (TAI) | 45.26 | 0.45262 | 0.00000 | |
| 6 | (HS I,HS II) (JX) (HN, GU) (DA) (HO) (TAI) | 41.73 | 0.41731 | 0.00489 | |
| nDNA | 2 |
|
|
|
|
| 3 | (HS I, HS II, JX, HN, GU) (DA, HO) (TAI) | 40.70 | 0.40703 | 0.00587 | |
| 4 | (HS I) (HS II) (JX, HN, GU) (DA, HO,TAI) | 26.28 | 0.26277 | 0.00000 | |
| 5 | (HS I) (HS II) (JX, HN, GU) (DA, HO) (TAI) | 33.72 | 0.33721 | 0.00098 | |
| 6 | (HS I, JX, HN) (HS II) (GU) (DA)(HO) (TAI) | 33.57 | 0.33574 | 0.01760 | |
| SSR | 2 |
|
|
|
|
| 3 | (HS I, DA) (HS II, JX, HN, HO, TAI) (GU) | 83.24 | 0.83239 | 0.00684 | |
| 4 | (HS I) (HS II, JX, HN, HO, TAI) (GU) (DA) | 82.80 | 0.82799 | 0.01760 | |
| 5 | (HS I) (HS II, JX, HN,TAI) (GU) (DA) (HO) | 79.90 | 0.79897 | 0.00782 | |
| 6 | (HS I) (HS II, JX, HN) (GU) (DA) (HO) (TAI) | 79.97 | 0.78975 | 0.00000 |
Figure 6Bayesian skyline plots based on cpDNA and nDNA for the effective population size fluctuation through time.
Y axis: population size × generation time; X axis: time, years before present (million years ago). Population fluctuations of A) mainland populations based on cpDNA; B) Taiwan population based on cpDNA; C) mainland populations based on nDNA; and D) Taiwan population based on nDNA are presented. Black lines represent median estimations; area between gray lines represent 95% confidence intervals).