| Literature DB >> 24405939 |
Dong-Wei Zhao, Jun-Bo Yang, Shi-Xiong Yang1, Kenji Kato, Jian-Ping Luo.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tea is one of the most popular beverages in the world. Many species in the Thea section of the Camellia genus can be processed for drinking and have been domesticated. However, few investigations have focused on the genetic consequence of domestication and geographic origin of landraces on tea plants using credible wild and planted populations of a single species. Here, C. taliensis provides us with a unique opportunity to explore these issues.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24405939 PMCID: PMC3890520 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2229-14-14
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Plant Biol ISSN: 1471-2229 Impact factor: 4.215
Figure 1(a) A branch with young fruit showing the five-loculed ovary, (b) wild tree, (c) wild trees after felling, (d)in situ recently domesticated trees, (e)ex situ recently domesticated trees, (f) planted trees. Picture (c) was taken by DWZ; all other pictures were taken by SXY.
Genetic diversity, inbreeding coefficient and number of private alleles in each population of
| W | SJW | 24 | 4.202 (0.545) | 0.583 (0.072) | 0.506 (0.062) | 0.131 (0.094) | 4 |
| YXW | 23 | 4.923 (0.645) | 0.603 (0.086) | 0.504 (0.065) | 0.164 (0.071) | 1 | |
| NMW | 22 | 4.757 (0.522) | 0.619 (0.061) | 0.555 (0.058) | 0.104 (0.120) | 0 | |
| GMW | 24 | 4.515 (0.530) | 0.598 (0.071) | 0.482 (0.053) | 0.195 (0.073) | 1 | |
| CYW | 23 | 4.196 (0.617) | 0.542 (0.087) | 0.467 (0.063) | 0.137 (0.080) | 0 | |
| MHW | 22 | 5.400 (0.559) | 0.668 (0.065) | 0.600 (0.052) | 0.102 (0.059) | 2 | |
| JCW | 11 | 3.428 (0.388) | 0.541 (0.059) | 0.468 (0.073) | 0.135 (0.103) | 2 | |
| MJW | 24 | 4.662 (0.498) | 0.632 (0.068) | 0.538 (0.050) | 0.149 (0.075) | 0 | |
| OJW | 23 | 4.641 (0.577) | 0.587 (0.076) | 0.466 (0.057) | 0.206 (0.070) | 0 | |
| LXW | 32 | 4.592 (0.589) | 0.549 (0.079) | 0.476 (0.055) | 0.133 (0.050) | 2 | |
| YJW | 29 | 4.568 (0.492) | 0.623 (0.069) | 0.484 (0.059) | 0.223 (0.060) | 0 | |
| LCW | 23 | 4.143 (0.525) | 0.561 (0.067) | 0.462 (0.052) | 0.176 (0.082) | 0 | |
| HQW | 33 | 3.883 (0.482) | 0.489 (0.062) | 0.397 (0.040) | 0.188 (0.057) | 0 | |
| TCW | 24 | 3.994 (0.480) | 0.551 (0.076) | 0.400 (0.061) | 0.275 (0.098) | 0 | |
| GSW | 21 | 4.325 (0.481) | 0.585 (0.073) | 0.477 (0.057) | 0.184 (0.078) | 0 | |
| YDW | 22 | 4.176 (0.517) | 0.633 (0.055) | 0.561 (0.051) | 0.113 (0.111) | 0 | |
| P | YXP | 21 | 5.443 (0.664) | 0.641 (0.075) | 0.622 (0.064) | 0.029 (0.068) | 0 |
| CNP | 19 | 4.627 (0.571) | 0.577 (0.083) | 0.469 (0.070) | 0.188 (0.096) | 0 | |
| FQP | 24 | 5.108 (0.648) | 0.616 (0.076) | 0.508 (0.057) | 0.175 (0.088) | 0 | |
| LLP | 24 | 5.162 (0.663) | 0.615 (0.072) | 0.503 (0.058) | 0.183 (0.085) | 0 | |
| DLP | 23 | 4.215 (0.617) | 0.568 (0.072) | 0.494 (0.068) | 0.129 (0.114) | 0 | |
| D | OJD | 24 | 4.846 (0.526) | 0.621 (0.069) | 0.500 (0.058) | 0.194 (0.071) | 1 |
| LXD | 24 | 4.745 (0.498) | 0.618 (0.063) | 0.488 (0.053) | 0.211 (0.122) | 1 | |
| YJD | 24 | 5.524 (0.647) | 0.682 (0.072) | 0.602 (0.049) | 0.117 (0.062) | 1 | |
| ZKD | 24 | 4.857 (0.640) | 0.619 (0.068) | 0.525 (0.054) | 0.153 (0.091) | 0 | |
| Total | 587 | 6.778 (0.753) | 0.597 (0.062) | 0.502 (0.050) | 0.160 (0.050) | - | |
Population means are followed by standard error in parentheses. n, number of individuals; A, allelic richness; H , gene diversity; H , observed heterozygosity; F , inbreeding coefficient; and N , number of private alleles.
Genetic structure and genetic diversity of wild (W), planted (P) and recently domesticated (D) populations
| All | 9 | 40 | 44 | <0.001** | <0.001** | 0.578 | |
| Sub | 70/77 | 57 | 64 | 0.074 | 0.065 | - | |
| All | 4.400 (0.115) | 4.911 (0.218) | 4.993 (0.179) | 0.026* | 0.016* | 0.401 | |
| Sub | 4.624 (0.299)/4.604 (0.036) | 5.302 (0.141) | 5.185 (0.339) | 0.099 | 0.126 | - | |
| All | 0.583 (0.011) | 0.606 (0.014) | 0.634 (0.016) | 0.191 | 0.017* | 0.190 | |
| Sub | 0.594 (0.009)/0.602 (0.018) | 0.628 (0.013) | 0.651 (0.030) | 0.250 | 0.133 | - | |
| All | 0.489 (0.013) | 0.522 (0.027) | 0.529 (0.026) | 0.133 | 0.110 | 0.431 | |
| Sub | 0.491 (0.014)/0.474 (0.009) | 0.565 (0.060) | 0.551 (0.051) | 0.097 | 0.089 | - | |
| All | 0.161 (0.044) | 0.139 (0.075) | 0.166 (0.065) | 0.184 | 0.442 | 0.203 | |
| Sub | 0.173 (0.067)/0.213 (0.058) | 0.100 (0.071) | 0.154 (0.054) | 0.077 | 0.118 | - | |
| All | 0.153 (0.010) | 0.092 (0.019) | 0.093 (0.011) | 0.003** | 0.010** | 0.482 | |
| Sub | 0.147 (0.027)/0.160 (0.039) | 0.071 (0.020) | 0.077 (0.019) | 0.100 | 0.083 | - | |
NR, Number of rare alleles. All, comparisons performed between wild, planted and recently domesticated groups. Sub, means the subsample comparisons: YXP and LLP versus YXW and GSW, OJW and YJW versus OJD and YJD. Parameter means are followed by standard error in parentheses. Before ‘/’, there are values of YXW and GSW; and after it, there are values of OJW and YJW. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01.
AMOVA for different regions divided in
| Wild, planted and recently domesticated groups | ||||||
| Among groups | 2 | 65.2 | 0.00 | 0.0 | 0.880 | |
| Among populations within groups | 22 | 727.2 | 0.63 | 12.9 | 0.001 | |
| Among individuals within populations | 535 | 2704.1 | 0.81 | 16.5 | 0.001 | |
| Within individuals | 560 | 1927.5 | 3.44 | 70.6 | 0.001 | |
| Total | 1119 | 5423.9 | 4.87 | 100.0 | | |
| Geographical cluster I, II and III | ||||||
| Among clusters | 2 | 113.5 | 0.08 | 1.5 | 0.001 | |
| Among populations within clusters | 22 | 678.8 | 0.58 | 11.8 | 0.001 | |
| Among individuals within populations | 535 | 2704.1 | 0.81 | 16.5 | 0.001 | |
| Within individuals | 560 | 1927.5 | 3.44 | 70.2 | 0.001 | |
| Total | 1119 | 5423.9 | 4.90 | 100.0 | ||
Figure 2Map of the sampling locations. The dots indicate wild populations, the squares indicate planted populations and the triangles indicate recently domesticated populations. The colours correspond to the model ancestry analysis.
Figure 3Estimated population structure of the wild and recently domesticated with = 3. The genome of each individual is represented by a vertical line that is divided into coloured segments in proportion to the estimated membership of each of three clusters: Cluster I (green), Cluster II (red) and Cluster III (blue).
Figure 4Ancestry analysis of planted Each genome of a planted individual is represented by a vertical line divided into coloured segments in proportion to the estimated ancestry of each source cluster.
Figure 5Neighbor-joining phylogenetic relationships of 25 populations of Mean F values for each population appear along lines. The colours correspond to model source clusters.