| Literature DB >> 24453555 |
Jephris Gere1, Kowiyou Yessoufou2, Barnabas H Daru1, Ledile T Mankga1, Olivier Maurin1, Michelle van der Bank1.
Abstract
Recent studies indicate that the discriminatory power of the core DNA barcodes (rbcLa + matK) for land plants may have been overestimated since their performance have been tested only on few closely related species. In this study we focused mainly on how the addition of complementary barcodes (nrITS and trnH-psbA) to the core barcodes will affect the performance of the core barcodes in discriminating closely related species from family to section levels. In general, we found that the core barcodes performed poorly compared to the various combinations tested. Using multiple criteria, we finally advocated for the use of the core + trnH-psbA as potential DNA barcode for the family Combretaceae at least in southern Africa. Our results also indicate that the success of DNA barcoding in discriminating closely related species may be related to evolutionary and possibly the biogeographic histories of the taxonomic group tested.Entities:
Keywords: Combretaceae; DNA barcoding; closely related species; southern Africa
Year: 2013 PMID: 24453555 PMCID: PMC3890675 DOI: 10.3897/zookeys.365.5728
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Zookeys ISSN: 1313-2970 Impact factor: 1.546
Figure 1.Selected inflorescences of seven species indicating closely related species evaluated based upon floral characters. A B C D E F G . All photographs by O. Maurin.
Figure 2.Selectedmature dry four-winged fruits of closely related species of genus . A B C D E F G . All photographs by O. Maurin.
Statistics of all gene regions for the southern African Combretaceae included in the study.
| DNA regions | No. of seq | Seq length | K | Range inter | Mean inter (±SD) | Range intra | Mean intra (±SD) | Threshold (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 152 | 552 | 4 | 0-0.09 | 0.009±0.012 | 0-0.08 | 0.002±0.009 | 0.04 | |
| 133 | 771 | 6 | 0-0.07 | 0.014±0.011 | 0-0.02 | 0.002±0.004 | 1.10 | |
| 116 | 1034 | 3 | 0-0.15 | 0.047±0.035 | 0-0.03 | 0.003±0.007 | 1.80 | |
| nrITS | 91 | 821 | 21 | 0-0.21 | 0.110±0.045 | 0-0.05 | 0.004±0.010 | 1.70 |
| 129 | 1323 | 10 | 0-0.78 | 0.012±0.009 | 0-0.05 | 0.002±0.006 | 1.31 | |
| 87 | 2358 | 11 | 0-0.04 | 0.012±0.007 | 0-0.02 | 0.002±0.004 | 0.5 | |
| 74 | 2144 | 9 | 0-0.04 | 0.011±0.006 | 0-0.02 | 0.002±0.004 | 0.70 | |
| 70 | 3178 | 13 | 0-0.04 | 0.014±0.007 | 0-0.02 | 0.002±0.004 | 1.17 |
Figure 3.Comparisons of the distribution range of inter- versus intraspecific distances using boxplot a indicates comparison of single barcode gene regions b indicates the results of gene combinations.
Figure 4.Relationships between inter- and intraspecific distances indicating barcoding gap for all regions tested.
Percentage barcode gap in all sequences for each region using the Meier et al. (2008) approach.
| DNA region | Number of sequences without gap | Proportion of sequences with gap (%) |
|---|---|---|
| 132 | 13 | |
| 86 | 35 | |
| 54 | 53 | |
| nrITS | 25 | 73 |
| 82 | 36 | |
| 37 | 57 | |
| 27 | 64 | |
| 11 | 84 |
Identification efficacy of DNA barcodes using distance based methods. F = False and T = True.
| DNA region | Near Neighbour | BOLD (1%) | Best Close Match | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F (%) | T (%) | Ambiguous (%) | Correct (%) | Incorrect (%) | No ID (%) | Ambiguous (%) | Correct (%) | Incorrect (%) | No ID (%) | |
| 59 | 41 | 61 | 18 | 14 | 7 | 61 | 18 | 14 | 7 | |
| 46 | 54 | 81 | 11 | 7 | 1 | 47 | 38 | 14 | 1 | |
| 72 | 28 | 65 | 22 | 10 | 3 | 18 | 60 | 18 | 4 | |
| nrITS | 35 | 65 | 29 | 47 | 10 | 14 | 10 | 63 | 19 | 8 |
| 39 | 61 | 86 | 10 | 2 | 2 | 35 | 51 | 12 | 2 | |
| 38 | 62 | 79 | 16 | 2 | 3 | 6 | 80 | 8 | 6 | |
| 43 | 57 | 62 | 30 | 7 | 1 | 3 | 70 | 19 | 8 | |
| 36 | 64 | 52 | 41 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 87 | 9 | 4 | |
Figure 5.PCR efficiency for the four candidate barcodes (rbcLa, matK, trnH-psbA, nrITS).
Figure 6.Gene performance based on monophyly criteria. False = proportion of non-monophyletic species; True = proportion of monophyletic species.
Comparisons of efficacy of core barcodes and best barcode within subgenera and .
| Subgenus | DNA region | No. of seq | Mean Inter (±SD) | Threshold (%) | Best Close Match | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ambiguous (%) | Correct (%) | Incorrect (%) | No ID (%) | |||||
| 23 | 0.004±0.002 | 1.31 | 13 | 78 | 9 | 0 | ||
| 16 | 0.006±0.002 | 0.5 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 84 | 0.009±0.009 | 1.31 | 36 | 50 | 12 | 2 | ||
| 16 | 0.006±0.002 | 0.5 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | ||
Comparisons of core barcodes and the best barcode within five sections of the subgenera and .
| Sections | DNA regions | No. of seq | Mean inter (±SD) | Threshold (%) | Best Close Match | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ambiguous (%) | Correct (%) | Incorrect (%) | No ID (%) | |||||
| 19 | 0.007±0.014 | 2.6 | 58 | 11 | 26 | 5 | ||
| 15 | 0.006±0.006 | 0 | 86 | 7 | 7 | |||
| 20 | 0.004±0.002 | 0.3 | 45 | 55 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 15 | 0.006±0.003 | 0 | 73 | 27 | 0 | |||
| 8 | 0.005±0.004 | 0.8 | 37 | 38 | 12 | 13 | ||
| 8 | 0.010±0.006 | 88 | 12 | 0 | ||||
| 8 | 0.012±0.005 | 1.31 | 25 | 63 | 12 | 0 | ||
| 5 | 0.020±0.004 | 80 | 20 | 0 | ||||
| 15 | 0.002±0.001 | 0.1 | 53 | 34 | 13 | 0 | ||
| 9 | 0.003±0.002 | 44 | 56 | 0 | ||||
(Only sections with at least three different species are included).