| Literature DB >> 24324860 |
Nancy C Saavedra-Sotelo1, Luis E Calderon-Aguilera, Héctor Reyes-Bonilla, David A Paz-García, Ramón A López-Pérez, Amilcar Cupul-Magaña, José A Cruz-Barraza, Axayácatl Rocha-Olivares.
Abstract
The coral fauna of the Eastern Tropical Pacific (ETP) is depauperate and peripheral; hence, it has drawn attention to the factors allowing its survival. Here, we use a genetic seascape approach and ecological niche modeling to unravel the environmental factors correlating with the genetic variation of Porites panamensis, a hermatypic coral endemic to the ETP. Specifically, we test if levels of diversity and connectivity are higher among abundant than among depauperate populations, as expected by a geographically relaxed version of the Abundant Center Hypothesis (rel-ACH). Unlike the original ACH, referring to a geographical center of distribution of maximal abundance, the rel-ACH refers only to a center of maximum abundance, irrespective of its geographic position. The patterns of relative abundance of P. panamensis in the Mexican Pacific revealed that northern populations from Baja California represent its center of abundance; and southern depauperate populations along the continental margin are peripheral relative to it. Genetic patterns of diversity and structure of nuclear DNA sequences (ribosomal DNA and a single copy open reading frame) and five alloenzymatic loci partially agreed with rel-ACH predictions. We found higher diversity levels in peninsular populations and significant differentiation between peninsular and continental colonies. In addition, continental populations showed higher levels of differentiation and lower connectivity than peninsular populations in the absence of isolation by distance in each region. Some discrepancies with model expectations may relate to the influence of significant habitat discontinuities in the face of limited dispersal potential. Environmental data analyses and niche modeling allowed us to identify temperature, water clarity, and substrate availability as the main factors correlating with patterns of abundance, genetic diversity, and structure, which may hold the key to the survival of P. panamensis in the face of widespread environmental degradation.Entities:
Keywords: Ecological niche modeling; MaxEnt; genetic diversity; genetic structure; hermatypic coral; relaxed Abundant Center Hypothesis; seascape genetics
Year: 2013 PMID: 24324860 PMCID: PMC3853554 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.734
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ecol Evol ISSN: 2045-7758 Impact factor: 2.912
Figure 1Massive morphotype of the hermatypic coral Porites panamensis from La Paz, Baja California Sur, Mexico (Photo: David A. Paz-García).
Figure 2Sampling localities (white circles) and the estimated probability of habitat suitability for Porites panamensis using the maximum entropy (MaxEnt) model. Values of estimated probability ranged from 0 (blue color) to 1 (red color). Histograms indicate total live coral cover (black bars) and live coral cover of P. panamensis (white bars). Percentages are indicated above each bar; broken black columns represent values out of scale (i.e., >10%). Rocky shorelines are indicated by bold lines.
Environmental variables obtained from public databases used to run Ecological Niche Model with the software MaxEnt v.3.3.3k (Phillips et al., 2004)
| Environmental variables | Source Database |
|---|---|
| Temperature (°C) (yearly mean, maximum and minimum) | MODIS-Aqua satellite available at ftp.cdc.noaa.gov/datasets/noaa.oisst.v2/sst.mmean.mc |
| Chlorophyll- | |
| Yearly average of Photosynthetically Active Radiation (PAR, Einstein/m2/d) | |
| Light attenuation coefficient (1/m) | |
| Nutrient concentrations (Phosphate, Silicate and Nitrates; mM), | World Ocean Atlas available at |
| Dissolved oxygen (mL/L) | |
| Salinity (PSU) | |
| Bathymetry (m) | General Bathymetric Chart of the Oceans available at |
| Atmospheric CO2 | Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla, CA ( |
| Alkalinity estimated as a function of sea surface salinity and temperature | Equations described by Lee et al., |
| pH and aragonite concentration were estimated from salinity, temperature, alkalinity, silicate, phosphate, and atmospheric CO2 | Estimates using the CO2SYS program (Lewis & Wallace |
Sample size (n), number of haplotypes or alleles (A), private haplotypes or alleles (pA), haplotype diversity (h ± SD), nucleotide diversity (π ± SD), observed heterozygosity (Ho), expected heterozygosity (He), Porites panamensis percent live coral cover (% LCC), and MaxEnt derived probability of occurrence (PO)
| rDNA (ITS) | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Region | Localities | p | p | p | % LCC (±SD) | PO | |||||||
| Peninsula | BLA | 29 | 6 | 3 | 3.90 | 1.51 | 5.10 | 2.38 | 0.63 ± 0.07 | 0.65 ± 0.11 | 0.28 ± 0.19 | 3.50 (±0.81) | 0.849 |
| BC | 24 | 3 | 0 | 2.71 | 0.19 | 2.99 | 0.02 | 0.42 ± 0.11 | 0.44 ± 0.14 | 0.08 ± 0.08 | 1.10 (±0.03) | 0.698 | |
| LO | 21 | 6 | 2 | 4.65 | 1.47 | 6 | 2.08 | 0.75 ± 0.06 | 0.75 ± 0.09 | 0.45 ± 0.28 | 2.10 (±0.62) | 0.583 | |
| LP | 28 | 9 | 5 | 5.48 | 2.55 | 7.67 | 3.99 | 0.70 ± 0.09 | 0.71 ± 0.13 | 0.25 ± 0.18 | 4.80 (±2.58) | 0.746 | |
| CP | 30 | 11 | 5 | 6.94 | 2.74 | 9.31 | 4.01 | 0.88 ± 0.04 | 0.87 ± 0.07 | 0.41 ± 0.25 | 5.30 (±3.96) | 0.716 | |
| Continent | MZ | 21 | 3 | 2 | 2.14 | 1.14 | 3 | 2 | 0.19 ± 0.11 | 0.20 ± 0.13 | 0.03 ± 0.05 | 0.10 (±0.00) | 0.544 |
| IM | 34 | 10 | 7 | 5.52 | 3.84 | 7.75 | 6.06 | 0.71 ± 0.08 | 0.70 ± 0.12 | 0.41 ± 0.26 | 2.62 (±1.63) | 0.745 | |
| CA | 12 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1.65 | n.d. | n.d. | 0.17 ± 0.13 | 0.17 ± 0.13 | 0.12 ± 0.11 | 2.83 (±1.56) | 0.733 | |
| BH | 14 | 3 | 2 | 2.97 | 1.99 | n.d. | n.d. | 0.48 ± 0.14 | 0.48 ± 0.15 | 0.27 ± 0.19 | 0.25 (±0.33) | 0.704 | |
Locations are categorized as peninsular (BLA, BC, LO, LP, PA, CP) and continental (MZ, IM, CA, BH). Allozyme data are from Paz-García et al. (2012). Subscript in brackets indicates standardized values at minimum sample size (n = 12 and n = 21). n.d., Not defined and –, no data.
Figure 3Sampling localities (red circles) and haplotype and allele frequencies from (A) rDNA, (B) a nuclear ORF, and (C) three representative alloenzymatic loci (of five analyzed). Shared haplotypes or alleles are color coded, the rest are private (n = sample size).
Hierarchical analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA) to estimate levels of genetic differentiation between regions (Φct), among localities within regions (Φsc), and among all localities (Φst) using DNA sequences, and analogous hierarchical analysis of variance (ANOVA, F-statistics) using allozymes
| rDNA (ITS) | ORF | Allozymes | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Source of variation | Variance components | % of variation | Variance components | % of variation | Variance components | % of variation |
| (A) Partitioning of genetic variation between regions | ||||||
| Between regions | 0.00111 | 43.73 | 0.00019 | 11.62 | 0.07550 | 5.01 |
| Among localities within regions | 0.00073 | 28.83 | 0.00044 | 26.84 | 0.13306 | 8.83 |
| Within localities | 0.00070 | 27.43 | 0.00101 | 61.54 | 1.29716 | 86.14 |
| | 0.437 ( | 0.116 ( | ||||
| | 0.512 ( | 0.304 ( | ||||
| | 0.726 ( | 0.385 ( | ||||
| (B) Partitioning of genetic variation among peninsular localities | ||||||
| Among localities | 0.00013 | 13.63 | 0.00028 | 16.92 | 0.08901 | 6.25 |
| Within localities | 0.00083 | 86.37 | 0.00139 | 83.08 | 1.33493 | 93.74 |
| | 0.136 ( | 0.169 ( | ||||
| (C) Partitioning of genetic variation among continental localities | ||||||
| Among localities | 0.00184 | 79.54 | 0.00065 | 54.96 | 0.27001 | 18.13 |
| Within localities | 0.00047 | 20.46 | 0.00053 | 45.04 | 1.21869 | 81.86 |
| | 0.795 ( | 0.550 ( | ||||
Pairwise Φst and Fst between populations of Porites panamensis obtained from rDNA, ORF and allozyme analyses and linear geographic distance between localities in kilometers used in IBD analyses
| Pairwise | Pairwise | Pairwise | Distance, km | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BLA vs. BC | 0.096 | 0.001 | 305 | |
| BLA vs. LO | 0.029 | 0.017 | – | 409 |
| BLA vs. LP | 0.045 | 0.049 | 0.001 | 621 |
| BLA vs. PA | – | – | 695 | |
| BLA vs. CP | 0.114 | – | 736 | |
| BLA vs. MZ | 0.088 | – | 953 | |
| BLA vs. IM | 1216 | |||
| BLA vs. CA | – | 1438 | ||
| BLA vs. BH | 0.223 | 2406 | ||
| BC vs. LO | 0.341 | – | 102 | |
| BC vs. LP | 0.018 | 0 | 0.014 | 314 |
| BC vs. PA | – | – | 388 | |
| BC vs. CP | – | 428 | ||
| BC vs. MZ | 0.130 | – | 660 | |
| BC vs. IM | 0.005 | 912 | ||
| BC vs. CA | – | 1133 | ||
| BC vs. BH | 0 | 2119 | ||
| LO vs. LP | 0.102 | – | 217 | |
| LO vs. CP | 0.049 | 0.052 | – | 327 |
| LO vs. MZ | 0.213 | – | 559 | |
| LO vs. IM | 0.490 | – | 808 | |
| LO vs. CA | – | 1028 | ||
| LO vs. BH | – | 2000 | ||
| LP vs. PA | – | – | 75 | |
| LP vs. CP | – | 119 | ||
| LP vs. MZ | 0.087 | – | 410 | |
| LP vs. IM | 0.055 | 616 | ||
| LP vs. CA | – | 823 | ||
| LP vs. BH | 0.053 | 1798 | ||
| PA vs. IM | – | – | 0.018 | 600 |
| PA vs. BH | – | – | 1720 | |
| CP vs. MZ | – | 307 | ||
| CP vs. IM | – | 498 | ||
| CP vs. CA | – | 706 | ||
| CP vs. BH | – | 1675 | ||
| MZ vs. IM | 0.113 | – | 119 | |
| MZ vs. CA | – | 528 | ||
| MZ vs. BH | 0.224 | – | 1495 | |
| IM vs. CA | – | 244 | ||
| IM vs. BH | 0 | 1215 | ||
| CA vs. BH | – | 978 |
Bold values are significant (P < 0.05) after sequential Bonferroni correction and (–) no data.
Figure 4Direction and magnitude of gene flow between population pairs (black circles) of Porites panamensis estimated from rDNA sequences. Arrows represent directional gene flow and their relative magnitude is coded by line thickness. 1- BLA, 2- BC, 3- LO, 4- LP, 5- CP, 6- MZ, 7- IM, 8- CA, and 9- BH.
Figure 5Correlation between genetic diversity of Porites panamensis using rDNA and Factor 2 of PCA. (A) Standardized haplotype richness (A(12)) versus Factor 2 and (B) standardized haplotype diversity index (h(12)) versus Factor 2.
Results of partial Mantel tests between matrices of genetic differentiation (Φst rDNA and Fst allozymes), linear geographic distance (km), and environmental distance (Euclidean distances)
| rDNA | Allozyme | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Correlation of Φst and Euclidean distance | 0.21 | 0.21 | −0.07 | 0.53 |
| 2. Partial correlation of Φst and km, controlling for Euclidean distance matrix | 0.40 | 0.07 | 0.84 | 0.001 |
| 3. Partial correlation of Φst and Euclidean distance matrix, controlling for km. | −0.05 | 0.51 | −0.67 | 0.98 |
| 4. Correlation of Φst and km | 0.44 | 0.03 | 0.68 | 0.059 |
Figure 6Isolation by distance of Porites panamensis in the Mexican Pacific. (A) Φst rDNA and (B) Fst allozyme is plotted as a function of geographic distance. P, peninsular localities, C, continental localities.