| Literature DB >> 27114867 |
Seth W Cunningham1, Matthew H Shirley2, Evon R Hekkala1.
Abstract
Landscape heterogeneity, phylogenetic history, and stochasticity all influence patterns of geneflow and connectivity in wild vertebrates. Fine-scale patterns of genetic partitioning may be particularly important for the sustainable management of widespread species in trade, such as crocodiles. We examined genetic variation within the rediscovered African crocodile, Crocodylus suchus, across its distribution in West and Central Africa. We genotyped 109 individuals at nine microsatellite loci from 16 sampling localities and used three Bayesian clustering techniques and an analysis of contemporary gene flow to identify population structure across the landscape. We identified up to eight genetic clusters that largely correspond to populations isolated in coastal wetland systems and across large distances. Crocodile population clusters from the interior were readily distinguished from coastal areas, which were further subdivided by distance and drainage basin. Migration analyses indicated contemporary migration only between closely positioned coastal populations. These findings indicate high levels of population structure throughout the range of C. suchus and we use our results to suggest a role for molecular tools in identifying crocodile conservation units for this species. Further research, including additional sampling throughout the Congo and Niger drainages, would clarify both the landscape connectivity and management of this species.Entities:
Keywords: African biogeography; Crocodylus suchus; Genetic variation; Management units; Nile crocodile; Population divergence
Year: 2016 PMID: 27114867 PMCID: PMC4841213 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.1901
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PeerJ ISSN: 2167-8359 Impact factor: 2.984
Figure 1(A) Map of Central and West Africa showing localities of Crocodylus suchus samples utilized in this study (CI, Côte d’Ivoire; DRC, Democratic Republic of the Congo). Three bar graphs represent genetic subdivision among sampled C. suchus populations, utilizing nine microsatellite loci. (B) K = 8 genetic clusters were detected using the Bayesian cluster analysis implemented in the program STRUCTURE. (C) BAPS bar plot representing admixture coefficients for C. suchus individuals from a spatial clustering tests, uncovering K = 8 unique genetic clusters. (D) TESS bar plot representing admixture coefficients for C. suchus individuals representing K = 6 unique genetic groups from a spatial clustering test.
Collection locality information and number of samples (N) for Crocodylus suchus throughout Central and West Africa.
The Cluster column identifies the STRUCTURE identified cluster into which individuals from each sampling locality clustered.
| Sample locality | Country | Region | Cluster | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Ziguincher | Senegal | Far West Africa | 1 | 8 | 6 |
| 2. River Gambia NP | The Gambia | 1 | 7 | 5 | |
| 3. SE Coastal Guinea | Guinea | 2 | 12 | 10 | |
| 4. San Pedro Dam | Côte d’Ivoire | West Africa | 3 | 9 | 8 |
| 5. Grand Lahou | Côte d’Ivoire | 4 | 3 | 2 | |
| 6. Agneby River | Côte d’Ivoire | 4 | 2 | 2 | |
| 7. Abi Lagoon | Côte d’Ivoire | 4 | 13 | 12 | |
| 8. SE coastal lagoon | Côte d’Ivoire | 5 | 5 | 4 | |
| 9. Half Assini | Ghana | 5 | 10 | 10 | |
| 10. Amansuri Wetlands | Ghana | 5 | 8 | 7 | |
| 11. Hans Cottage Botel | Ghana | 5 | 3 | 3 | |
| 12. Accra Zoo | Ghana | 6 | 2 | 2 | |
| 13. Black Volta River | Ghana | 6 | 15 | 12 | |
| 14. Tiatia | Ghana | 7 | 7 | 7 | |
| 15. Kinshasa Reptile Park | Dem. Repub. Congo | Central Africa | 7/8 | 2 | 2 |
| 16. Kidepo Valley | Uganda | 8 | 19 | 17 | |
| Total | 125 | 109 |
Notes.
Documented wild locality.
Reported wild locality.
Figure 2Principle coordinate analysis based on pairwise F values across all Crocodylus suchus populations.
Points are labeled with population numbers consistent with STRUCTURE results (Fig. 1, Table 1: Cluster).
Intraspecific genetic diversity measures (expected heterozygosity (H), observed heterozygosity (H), number of alleles (N), allelic richness (α), private allelic richness (PA) for Crocodylus suchus localities.
Cluster number corresponds to those clusters identified by STRUCTURE.
| Cluster | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.656 | 0.602 | 5.33 | 3.47 | 0.753 |
| 2 | 0.591 | 0.560 | 4.44 | 3.15 | 0.674 |
| 3 | 0.443 | 0.426 | 2.78 | 2.33 | 0.134 |
| 4 | 0.651 | 0.594 | 5.33 | 3.25 | 0.538 |
| 5 | 0.674 | 0.602 | 5.44 | 3.37 | 0.411 |
| 6 | 0.657 | 0.575 | 5.33 | 3.42 | 0.810 |
| 7 | 0.237 | 0.181 | 1.89 | 1.77 | 0.216 |
| 8 | 0.605 | 0.570 | 4.78 | 3.01 | 0.706 |
| Average | 0.564 | 0.514 | 4.415 | 2.971 | 0.530 |
Pairwise F values among Crocodylus suchus populations, where populations are identified as the clusters found by STRUCTURE (Table 1: Cluster).
Values above the diagonal are for the analysis of 7 populations, below for 8 populations. In the 7 population analysis, individuals from the Senegambian and Guinean clusters were combined; thus, populations 2–7 are the same as populations 3–8 in Table 1. Values in light grey are considered to not show high levels of inter-population isolation.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.234 | 0.169 | 0.215 | 0.163 | 0.370 | 0.171 | |
| 2 | 0.110 | 0.253 | 0.308 | 0.331 | 0.535 | 0.327 | |
| 3 | 0.259 | 0.285 | 0.160 | 0.207 | 0.390 | 0.251 | |
| 4 | 0.165 | 0.211 | 0.253 | 0.219 | 0.374 | 0.294 | |
| 5 | 0.212 | 0.248 | 0.308 | 0.160 | 0.312 | 0.223 | |
| 6 | 0.165 | 0.211 | 0.331 | 0.207 | 0.219 | 0.400 | |
| 7 | 0.422 | 0.437 | 0.534 | 0.390 | 0.374 | 0.312 | |
| 8 | 0.189 | 0.208 | 0.327 | 0.251 | 0.294 | 0.223 | 0.400 |
Notes.
All values significant at P-value < 0.05, calculated with ARLEQUIN using 10,100 permutations.
Estimated rates of migration among the eight inferred Crocodylus suchus populations (clusters identified by STRUCTURE, Fig. 1) in BAYESASS v1.3.
Rates indicate gene flow from source populations (top) to recipient populations (side). Empty cells indicate migration rates <0.05.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.697 (SD 0.028) | 0.228 (SD 0.052) | ||||||
| 2 | 0.976 (SD 0.022) | |||||||
| 3 | 0.981 (SD 0.018) | |||||||
| 4 | 0.184 (SD 0.095) | 0.746 (SD 0.104) | ||||||
| 5 | 0.987 (SD 0.012) | |||||||
| 6 | 0.976 (SD 0.022) | |||||||
| 7 | 0.957 (SD 0.052) | |||||||
| 8 | 0.983 (SD 0.017) |
Estimated rates of migration among Crocodylus suchus populations (clusters identified by STRUCTURE, Fig. 1, combining individuals from the Senegambian and Guinean clusters) in BAYESASS v1.3.
Rates indicate gene flow from source populations (top) to recipient populations (side). Empty cells indicate migration rates <0.05.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.984 (SD 0.016) | ||||||
| 2 | 0.967 (SD 0.029) | ||||||
| 3 | 0.275 (SD 0.030) | 0.685 (SD 0.017) | |||||
| 4 | 0.987 (SD 0.012) | ||||||
| 5 | 0.976 (SD 0.022) | ||||||
| 6 | 0.962 (SD 0.034) | ||||||
| 7 | 0.982 (SD 0.017) |