| Literature DB >> 26200110 |
Nathan Fedrizzi1, Melanie L J Stiassny2, J T Boehm3, Eric R Dougherty4, George Amato5, Martin Mendez6.
Abstract
The dwarf seahorse (Hippocampus zosterae) is widely distributed throughout near-shore habitats of the Gulf of Mexico and is of commercial significance in Florida, where it is harvested for the aquarium and curio trades. Despite its regional importance, the genetic structure of dwarf seahorse populations remains largely unknown. As an aid to ongoing conservation efforts, we employed three commonly applied mtDNA markers (ND4, DLoop and CO1) to investigate the genetic structuring of H. zosterae in Florida using samples collected throughout its range in the state. A total of 1450 bp provided sufficient resolution to delineate four populations of dwarf seahorses, as indicated by significant fixation indices. Despite an overall significant population structure, we observed evidence of interbreeding between individuals from geographically distant sites, supporting the hypothesis that rafting serves to maintain a degree of population connectivity. All individuals collected from Pensacola belong to a single distinct subpopulation, which is highly differentiated from the rest of Floridian dwarf seahorses sampled. Our findings highlight the utility of mtDNA markers in evaluating barriers to gene flow and identifying genetically distinct populations, which are vital to the development of comprehensive conservation strategies for exploited taxa.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26200110 PMCID: PMC4511636 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0132308
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Sampling locations, site codes and genetic diversity indices.
| Location | Site Code |
| H | π (SD) | K (SD) | Tajima’s D (P) | Fu’s F (P) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Plantation Key |
| 19 | 19 | 7.85937 (4.08528) | 9.95900 (1.96550) |
|
|
| Tavernier |
| 9 | 9 | 6.80289 (3.98578) | 5.93800 (1.27428) |
|
|
| Lower Matecumbe Key |
| 23 | 12 | 6.41407 (3.55904) | -0.06397 (0.90015) | -1.22823 (0.09200) | -0.99354 (0.33700) |
| Bradenton Beach |
| 11 | 11 | 8.29993 (4.76410) | 7.29000 (1.50405) | -1.19167 (0.13000) |
|
| Big Pine Key |
| 19 | 15 | 6.29673 (3.54677) | 9.13700 (2.06361) | -1.36253 (0.05800) |
|
| Tampa Bay |
| 22 | 21 | 9.16453 (5.01921) | 11.70700 (2.15030) |
|
|
| Indian River |
| 6 | 6 | 6.143791 (3.427238) | 4.31100 (1.02924) | -0.38669 (0.40900) | -2.03476 (0.05800) |
| Pensacola |
| 18 | 16 | 6.21145 (3.37410) | 8.78800 (1.90176) |
| -8.60416 (8.60416) |
Table includes sample size (n), number of haplotypes (Hn), mean nucleotide diversity (π), and mean number of pairwise differences among sequences (K); significant values are shown in bold.
Pairwise fixation indices measured between sampling locations.
| A | B | D | E | F | G | H | I | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | - | -0.02634 | -0.00383 |
| 0.03014 |
| 0.00387 |
|
| B | -0.03077 | - | 0.00585 |
| 0.04720 | 0.03366 | 0.00849 |
|
| D | -0.00060 | 0.01786 | - | 0.07015 |
|
| 0.05698 |
|
| E |
|
|
| - |
| 0.00466 | 0.07650 |
|
| F | 0.02804 | 0.02952 |
|
| - |
| 0.03060 |
|
| G |
|
|
| 0.00348 |
| - | 0.03514 |
|
| H | -0.00210 | 0.00756 | 0.04230 |
| 0.05570 |
| - |
|
| I |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| - |
Pairwise comparisons using three mtDNA markers in Arlequin 3.5; ΦST is shown on the upper diagonal; Jukes-Cantor corrected F ST values are presented on the lower diagonal; significant values are shown in bold.
Pairwise fixation indices measured between putative populations.
| Eastern Keys | West Coast | Big Pine Key | East Coast | Pensacola | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eastern Keys | - |
|
| 0.02484 |
|
| West Coast |
| - |
| 0.03895 |
|
| Big Pine Key |
|
| - | 0.03060 |
|
| East Coast | 0.02382 | 0.03802 | 0.02952 | - |
|
| Pensacola |
|
|
|
| - |
Pairwise comparisons using three mtDNA gene regions in Arlequin 3.5; ΦST is shown on the upper diagonal; Jukes-Cantor corrected F ST values are presented on the lower diagonal; significant values are shown in bold.
Fig 1Maximum parsimony median joining Network.
Network complexity was reduced with a star contraction algorithm with a maximum star radius of ten; circle size is proportionate to haplotype frequency and colors reflect groupings of populations established through non-significant pairwise ΦST and F ST (Table 2); hatch marks represent additional mutational steps separating haplotypes; visualization produced in Network v.4.611 (Bandelt et al. 1999).
Fig 2Pairwise ΦST measured between adjacent groups of sampling sites.
Groups were determined through non-significant pairwise ΦST and F ST (Tab. 2).
Fig 3Mantel test of correlation between geographic and genetic distance.
Matrix correlation between pairwise values of geographic distance (km) and genetic distance (ΦST) showed a significant correlation, P = 0.0042, from 30,000 randomizations.