| Literature DB >> 25250568 |
Wen-Hong Chen1, Yu-Min Shui2, Jun-Bo Yang3, Hong Wang2, Kanae Nishii4, Fang Wen5, Zhi-Rong Zhang3, Michael Möller4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The karst regions in South China have an abundance of endemic plants that face high extinction risks. The Chinese Gesneriaceae endemic Paraisometrum mileense ( = Oreocharis mileensis), was presumed extinct for 100 years. After its re-discovery, the species has become one of five key plants selected by the Chinese forestry government to establish a new conservation category for plants with extremely small populations. For conservation purposes, we studied the phylogenetic and population genetic status of P. mileense at the three only known localities in Guangxi, Guizhou and Yunnan. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPALEntities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25250568 PMCID: PMC4176718 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0107967
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Map of localities of Paraisometrum mileense in Yunnan, Guangxi and Guizhou.
A. Pie charts for haplotypes (above) and nucleotypes (below) are given for the three main geographical distribution areas. B. Median-joining networks of chloroplast haplotypes based on trnLF and matK sequences (above) and of ITS nucleotypes (below) for P. mileense samples rooted on its closest relative Ancylostemon hekouensis.
Detailed locality information for the 12 populations of Paraisometrum mileense used for AFLP analysis.
| Population code | Locality name | Forest type | Position on slope | Altitude (m) | Distance (m) from village | Population size | Area size (ha) | Sample number | Individual sample no |
| Yu1 | Yunnan, Shilin, Guishan | secondary | lower | 2001 | 25 | 46 | 0.40 | 5 | Yu1a–e |
| Yu2 | Yunnan, Shilin, Guishan | secondary | lower | 2083 | 40 | 50 | 0.20 | 5 | Yu2a–e |
| Yu3 | Yunnan, Shilin, Guishan | secondary | lower | 2112 | 20 | 52 | 0.25 | 5 | Yu3a–e |
| Yu4 | Yunnan, Shilin, Guishan | secondary | lower | 1970 | 60 | 100 | 0.65 | 15 | Yu4a–n |
| Yu5 | Yunnan, Shilin, Guishan | primary | lower-middle | 2149 | 800 | 76 | 0.25 | 8 | Yu5a–e |
| Yu6 | Yunnan, Shilin, Guishan | primary | lower-middle | 2018 | 40 | 84 | 0.26 | 5 | Yu6a–f |
| Yu7 | Yunnan, Shilin, Guishan | primary | lower-middle | 2077 | 600 | 120 | 1.20 | 5 | Yu7a–e |
| Yu8 | Yunnan, Shilin, Guishan | primary | middle-upper | 2349 | 1000 | 32 | 0.20 | 5 | Yu8a–e |
| Yu9 | Yunnan, Shilin, Guishan | primary | upper | 2412 | 1200 | 36 | 0.15 | 5 | Yu9a–e |
| Yu10 | Yunnan, Shilin, Guishan | primary | upper | 2496 | 1500 | 34 | 0.16 | 10 | Yu10a–i |
| Gx11 | Guangxi, Longlin, Yacha | primary | upper | 1183 | 1500 | 150 | 0.80 | 19 | Gx11a–s |
| Gz12 | Guizhou, Xingyi, Jingnan | primary | middle-upper | 1405 | 1000 | 60 | 0.60 | 17 | Gz12a–q |
* - approximate number of mature plants per population based on data from August 2010.
Figure 2Populations of Paraisometrum mileense in Yunnan.
A. Distribution of the ten populations analysed. B. Graphs of distance from village (left) and the average altitude (right) of populations 1–4 (light blue) and 5–10 (red).
Name and DNA sequences of primers and adaptors used in the AFLP experiments on Paraisometrum mileense samples.
| Primer name | Primer sequence | |
| Adaptors |
| 5′ -CTC |
|
| 5′ -TGT | |
|
| 5′ -GAC | |
|
| 5′ -TAC | |
| Pre-amplification primers |
| 5′ -GAC |
|
| 5′ -GAT GA | |
| Selective amplification primers | ||
|
|
| 5′ -GAC |
|
| 5′ -GAC | |
|
| 5′ -GAC | |
|
| 5′ -GAC | |
|
| 5′ -GAC | |
|
| 5′ -GAC | |
|
| 5′ -GAC | |
|
| 5′ -GAC | |
|
|
| 5′ -GAT |
| (marked FAM) |
| 5′ -GAT |
|
| 5′ -GAT | |
|
| 5′ -GAT | |
|
| 5′ -GAT | |
|
| 5′ -GAT | |
|
| 5′ -GAT | |
|
| 5′ -GAT |
Figure 3Bayesian inference analysis placing Paraisometrum mileense in Oreocharis.
Tree based on combined ITS and trnLF sequence data with average branch lengths and posterior probabilities. Photo of P. mileense by Yu-Min Shui.
Haplotypes and nucleotypes found among the samples of Paraisometrum mileense.
| Regions | N | Haplotypes | Nucleotypes | ||||||||
| I | II | III | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |||
| Yunnan (Pops1–10) | 43 | 43 | – |
| 4 | 39 |
|
|
|
| |
| [Yunnan (Pops1–4)] | 22 | 22 |
|
| 2 | 20 |
|
|
|
| |
| [Yunnan (Pops5–10)] | 21 | 21 |
|
| 2 | 19 |
|
|
|
| |
| Guangxi (Pop11) | 15 | 5 | 10 |
|
|
| 2 | 11 | 2 |
| |
| Guizhou (Pop12) | 15 | 5 |
| 10 |
|
|
| 5 | 1 | 9 | |
| Total | 73 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Genetic diversity indices based on AFLP data among the 12 populations of Paraisometrum mileense analysed.
| Population |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Yu1 | 5 | 33.37 | 0.744 (0.023) | 1.160 (0.007) | 0.155 (0.006) | 0.100 (0.004) | 0.111 (0.004) |
| Yu2 | 5 | 36.37 | 0.762 (0.024) | 1.172 (0.007) | 0.170 (0.006) | 0.109 (0.004) | 0.121 (0.004) |
| Yu3 | 5 | 33.01 | 0.712 (0.023) | 1.161 (0.007) | 0.156 (0.006) | 0.100 (0.004) | 0.112 (0.004) |
| Yu4 | 15 | 55.85 | 1.130 (0.024) | 1.195 (0.007) | 0.200 (0.006) | 0.124 (0.004) | 0.128 (0.004) |
| Yu5 | 8 | 44.34 | 0.938 (0.024) | 1.202 (0.008) | 0.195 (0.006) | 0.125 (0.004) | 0.133 (0.005) |
| Yu6 | 5 | 28.60 | 0.660 (0.022) | 1.154 (0.007) | 0.142 (0.006) | 0.093 (0.004) | 0.103 (0.004) |
| Yu7 | 5 | 32.95 | 0.727 (0.023) | 1.174 (0.007) | 0.162 (0.006) | 0.106 (0.004) | 0.118 (0.005) |
| Yu8 | 5 | 36.01 | 0.760 (0.024) | 1.194 (0.008) | 0.179 (0.006) | 0.117 (0.004) | 0.130 (0.005) |
| Yu9 | 5 | 43.66 | 0.891 (0.024) | 1.197 (0.007) | 0.199 (0.006) | 0.126 (0.004) | 0.140 (0.004) |
| Yu10 | 10 | 49.17 | 1.017 (0.024) | 1.224 (0.008) | 0.214 (0.006) | 0.137 (0.004) | 0.144 (0.005) |
| Gx | 19 | 57.99 | 1.190 (0.024) | 1.213 (0.008) | 0.212 (0.006) | 0.133 (0.004) | 0.137 (0.004) |
| Gz | 17 | 66.99 | 1.344 (0.023) | 1.220 (0.007) | 0.235 (0.006) | 0.143 (0.004) | 0.148 (0.004) |
| Total | 8.7(0.036) | 43.19 (3.48) | 0.906 (0.007) | 1.189 (0.002) | 0.185 (0.002) | 0.118 (0.001) | 0.127 (0.001) |
|
| |||||||
| Yunnan | 68 | 90.88 | 1.818 (0.014) | 1.231 (0.007) | 0.247 (0.006) | 0.149 (0.004) | 0.150 (0.004) |
| Guangxi | 19 | 60.75 | 1.240 (0.024) | 1.219 (0.008) | 0.219 (0.006) | 0.137 (0.004) | 0.141 (0.004) |
| Guizhou | 17 | 67.42 | 1.352 (0.023) | 1.227 (0.007) | 0.238 (0.006) | 0.146 (0.004) | 0.151 (0.004) |
|
| |||||||
| Total | 34.667(0.337) | 73.01(9.14) | 1.470(0.013) | 1.226(0.004) | 0.235(0.003) | 0.144(0.002) | 0.147(0.002) |
Values are means (and SE).
N = no. of samples; P = percentage of polymorphic loci; Na = no. of different alleles; Ne = no. of effective alleles; SI = Shannon’s Information index; He = expected heterozygosity; uHe = unbiased expected heterozygosity.
Results of an unstructured hierarchical AMOVA on AFLP data of 12 populations of Paraisometrum mileense.
| Source | df | SS | MS | Est. Var. | Var. (%) |
|
|
| Among Pops | 11 | 4914.428 | 446.766 | 36.513 | 21 |
| <0.001 |
| Within Pops | 92 | 12907.486 | 140.299 | 140.299 | 79 | − | − |
| Total | 103 | 17821.913 | − | 176.812 | 100 | − | − |
Results of a structured hierarchical AMOVA on AFLP data of 12 populations of Paraisometrum mileense, with three regions, Yunnan (10 pops), Guangxi (1 pop), Guizhou (1 pop).
| Source | df | SS | MS | Est. Var. | Var. (%) |
|
|
| Among Regions | 2 | 2243.796 | 1121.898 | 22.405 | 12 |
| <0.001 |
| Among Pops | 9 | 2670.632 | 296.737 | 23.581 | 13 |
| <0.001 |
| Within Pops | 92 | 12907.486 | 140.299 | 140.299 | 75 |
| <0.001 |
| Total | 103 | 17821.913 | − | 186.286 | 100 | − | − |
Figure 4Results of the Bayesian inference STRUCTURE analysis on AFLP data of 12 Paraisometrum mileense populations.
A. Plot of K-clusters versus mean (±SD) likelihoods (L[K]). B. K plotted against the second order rate of change of the likelihoods (ΔK). C. STRUCTURE clustering results for K = 3 to 5 as suggested in B. Numbers refer to populations in Table 1. 1–10 = Yunnan, 11 = Guangxi, 12 = Guizhou.
Figure 5Four genetic lineages exist in Paraisometrum mileense.
A. PCoA scatter plot based on AFLP data using the Jaccard distance on 12 populations of P. mileense. Axis 1(x) and 2(y). B. Unrooted NJ-tree based on Nei and Li’s restriction site distances. Bootstrap values only given for internal branches (1000 Neighbor-Joining replicates).