| Literature DB >> 27231645 |
Nima Khalili Samani1, Yuzine Esa1, S M Nurul Amin1, Natrah Fatin Mohd Ikhsan1.
Abstract
Plotosus canius (Hamilton, 1822) is a significant marine species in Malaysia from nutritional and commercial perspectives. Despite numerous fundamental research on biological characteristics of P. canius, there are various concerns on the level of population differentiation, genomic structure, and the level of genetic variability among their populations due to deficiency of genetic-based studies. Deficiency on basic contexts such as stock identification, phylogenetic relationship and population genetic structure would negatively impact their sustainable conservation. Hence, this study was conducted to characterize the genetic structure of P. canius for the first time through the application of mitochondrial Cytochrome Oxidase I (COI) gene, cross amplification of Tandanus tandanus microsatellites, and a total of 117 collected specimens across five selected populations of Malaysia. The experimental results of the mitochondrial analysis revealed that the haplotype diversity and nucleotide diversity varied from 0.395-0.771 and 0.033-0.65 respectively. Moreover, the statistical analysis of microsatellites addressed a considerable heterozygote insufficiency in all populations, with average observed heterozygosity (Ho ) value of 0.2168, which was lower than the standard heterozygosity in marine populations (Ho = 0.79). This alongside the high Fis values estimation, high pairwise differentiation among populations and low within population variations are supposed to be associated with small sample size, and inbreeding system. Besides, the significant finding of this study was the sharing of common haplotype KR086940, which reflects a historical genetic connectivity between Peninsular Malaysia and Borneo populations due to the geological history of Southeast Asia during Pleistocene era. Demographic analyses showed that all populations were in an equilibrium state with no significant evidence of population expansion. To put it briefly, the current study has managed to provide an initial genomic database toward understanding of the genetic characterization, phylogenetic, molecular diversification and population structure in P. canius, and should be necessary highlighted for appropriate management and conservation of species. Further studies must be carried out involving more geographical and sampling sites, larger population size per site, and utilization of species specific microsatellites loci.Entities:
Keywords: COI gene; Malaysia; Microsatellites; Phylogenetic analysis; Plotosus canius; Population structure
Year: 2016 PMID: 27231645 PMCID: PMC4878373 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.1930
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PeerJ ISSN: 2167-8359 Impact factor: 2.984
Figure 1Sampling sites and sample size (N) diagram of P. canius and P. lineatus in Malaysia.
Hierarchical AMOVA in P. canius.
| Source of variation | Degree of freedom | Sum of squares | Variance components | Percentage of variation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Among populations | 4 | 77.873 | 3.09472 | 35.55 |
| Between populations | 18 | 100.969 | 5.60941 | 64.45 |
Overview of haplotypes, their sampling sites and accession numbers.
| Species | BOLDSYSTEM index | GenBank accession number | Sampling site |
|---|---|---|---|
| NUPM017-14 | |||
| NUPM016-14 | |||
| NUPM015-14 | |||
| NUPM001-14 | |||
| NUPM002-14 | |||
| NUPM006-14 | |||
| NUPM023-15 | |||
| NUPM003-14 | |||
| NUPM004-14 | |||
| NUPM005-14 | |||
| NUPM022-15 | |||
| NUPM007-14 | |||
| NUPM008-14 | |||
| NUPM009-14 | |||
| NUPM020-15 | |||
| NUPM021-15 | |||
| NUPM010-14 | |||
| NUPM011-14 | |||
| NUPM012-14 | |||
| NUPM013-14 | |||
| NUPM014-14 | |||
| NUPM018-15 | |||
| NUPM019-15 | |||
Summary of 23 observed mitochondrial DNA haplotypes and their distribution, nucleotide diversity, number of haplotypes, haplotype diversity and number of polymorphic sites.
| Haplotype | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GenBank accession number | Selangor | Negeri Sembilan | Johor | Sabah | Sarawak | Selangor |
| Nucleotide diversity (Pi JC) | 0.00457 | 0.00184 | 0.00306 | 0.00134 | 0.0391 | 0.00067 |
| Number of haplotypes | 6 | 5 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 3 |
| Haplotype diversity (Hd) | 0.642 | 0.614 | 0.667 | 0.395 | 0.771 | 0.410 |
| Number of polymorphic site | 14 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 57 | 2 |
Note:
Haplotype frequencies in each population are presented as percentage.
Pairwise Tamura-Nei genetic distance in 23 employed haplotypes of P. canius and P. lineatus.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2 | 0.002 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| 3 | 0.003 | 0.002 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4 | 0.091 | 0.089 | 0.087 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 5 | 0.093 | 0.091 | 0.089 | 0.002 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 6 | 0.091 | 0.089 | 0.087 | 0.089 | 0.002 | |||||||||||||||||||
| 7 | 0.090 | 0.088 | 0.086 | 0.002 | 0.003 | 0.002 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 8 | 0.097 | 0.094 | 0.092 | 0.005 | 0.006 | 0.005 | 0.006 | |||||||||||||||||
| 9 | 0.096 | 0.094 | 0.092 | 0.006 | 0.008 | 0.006 | 0.008 | 0.005 | ||||||||||||||||
| 10 | 0.089 | 0.087 | 0.084 | 0.002 | 0.003 | 0.002 | 0.003 | 0.006 | 0.006 | |||||||||||||||
| 11 | 0.091 | 0.089 | 0.087 | 0.003 | 0.005 | 0.003 | 0.005 | 0.008 | 0.009 | 0.005 | ||||||||||||||
| 12 | 0.089 | 0.087 | 0.084 | 0.005 | 0.006 | 0.005 | 0.006 | 0.009 | 0.011 | 0.006 | 0.008 | |||||||||||||
| 13 | 0.090 | 0.088 | 0.086 | 0.006 | 0.008 | 0.006 | 0.008 | 0.011 | 0.012 | 0.008 | 0.009 | 0.002 | ||||||||||||
| 14 | 0.091 | 0.089 | 0.087 | 0.006 | 0.008 | 0.006 | 0.008 | 0.011 | 0.012 | 0.008 | 0.009 | 0.002 | 0.003 | |||||||||||
| 15 | 0.093 | 0.091 | 0.089 | 0.005 | 0.006 | 0.005 | 0.006 | 0.009 | 0.011 | 0.006 | 0.008 | 0.003 | 0.005 | 0.005 | ||||||||||
| 16 | 0.087 | 0.084 | 0.082 | 0.006 | 0.008 | 0.006 | 0.008 | 0.011 | 0.012 | 0.008 | 0.009 | 0.005 | 0.006 | 0.006 | 0.005 | |||||||||
| 17 | 0.087 | 0.084 | 0.082 | 0.006 | 0.008 | 0.006 | 0.008 | 0.011 | 0.012 | 0.008 | 0.009 | 0.005 | 0.006 | 0.006 | 0.005 | 0.000 | ||||||||
| 18 | 0.089 | 0.087 | 0.084 | 0.005 | 0.006 | 0.005 | 0.006 | 0.009 | 0.011 | 0.006 | 0.008 | 0.003 | 0.005 | 0.005 | 0.003 | 0.002 | 0.002 | |||||||
| 19 | 0.089 | 0.087 | 0.084 | 0.005 | 0.006 | 0.005 | 0.006 | 0.009 | 0.011 | 0.006 | 0.008 | 0.003 | 0.005 | 0.005 | 0.003 | 0.002 | 0.002 | 0.000 | ||||||
| 20 | 0.078 | 0.076 | 0.078 | 0.028 | 0.029 | 0.028 | 0.029 | 0.032 | 0.032 | 0.026 | 0.028 | 0.026 | 0.027 | 0.027 | 0.026 | 0.024 | 0.024 | 0.022 | 0.022 | |||||
| 21 | 0.241 | 0.239 | 0.235 | 0.238 | 0.240 | 0.238 | 0.240 | 0.246 | 0.246 | 0.235 | 0.245 | 0.240 | 0.242 | 0.237 | 0.240 | 0.237 | 0.237 | 0.241 | 0.241 | 0.252 | ||||
| 22 | 0.237 | 0.235 | 0.231 | 0.235 | 0.237 | 0.235 | 0.237 | 0.243 | 0.243 | 0.232 | 0.241 | 0.236 | 0.239 | 0.234 | 0.236 | 0.234 | 0.234 | 0.237 | 0.237 | 0.248 | 0.002 | |||
| 23 | 0.237 | 0.235 | 0.231 | 0.235 | 0.237 | 0.235 | 0.237 | 0.243 | 0.243 | 0.232 | 0.241 | 0.236 | 0.239 | 0.234 | 0.236 | 0.234 | 0.234 | 0.237 | 0.237 | 0.248 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
Figure 2Summary of Neighbour-Joining relationship in 24 employed sequences of P. canius, P. lineatus and C. gariepinus (clades have been indicated by bold numbers in round brackets).
Figure 3Summary of maximum likelihood relationship in 24 employed sequences of P. canius, P. lineatus and C. gariepinus (clades have been indicated by bold numbers in round brackets).
Figure 4MSN of 20 haplotypes of P. canius.
Population pairwise (F) values of chi square test for population variation originated with 1,000 permutations.
| 0.00000 | |||||
| 0.60156 | 0.00000 | ||||
| 0.43390 | 0.05417 | 0.00000 | |||
| 0.62504 | 0.44097 | 0.09806 | 0.00000 | ||
| 0.41533 | 0.27777 | 0.29359 | 0.31333 | 0.00000 |
Figure 5Mismatch distribution of P. canius for different geographical regions and whole population.
Tajima’s D and Fu’s Fs, corresponding P-value, and mismatch distribution parameter estimates (significance level: P < 0.01).
| Species | Tajima’s | Fu’s | Mismatch distribution | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Selangor | −0.89 | 0.20 | −0.01 | 0.53 | 10.98 | 1.64 | 3.44 |
| N. Sembilan | −0.84 | 0.23 | 0.72 | 0.61 | 4.18 | 0.334 | 0.62 |
| Johor | 1.63 | 0.96 | 3.63 | 0.94 | 26.17 | 0.99 | 1.51 |
| Sabah | −0.35 | 0.42 | 0.08 | 0.49 | 0.74 | 0.001 | 99,783 |
| Sarawak | 2.24 | 0.99 | 15.14 | 1.00 | 58.39 | 26.44 | 53.03 |
| All populations | 1.42 | 0.38 | 6.08 | 0.33 | 22.39 | 8.74 | 51,632 |
Five engaged primer sets and their associated size and temperature in T. tandanus and P. canius.
| Primer | Sequence | Size | Size | Annealing temperature |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tan 1-2 | F: 5′CCGACTGTCAGTGAAAAGGAG3′ | 216–244 | 349–385 | 55 °C |
| Tan 1-7 | F: 5′TGTATGGAGCTACTAACAAAACAGG3′ | 181–227 | 114–125 | 55 °C |
| Tan 1-10 | F: 5′CCTGATTTCTCTCCCAAGG3′ | 298–310 | 91–97 | 55 °C |
| Tan 3-27 | F: 5′TGTGGAAGGTTGGGGTTATG3′ | 215–269 | 167–168 | 55 °C |
| Tan 3-28 | F: 5′CCCCATTTGCTTTTTCTCTG3′ | 289–301 | 280–299 | 55 °C |
Genetic variation at 5 microsatellite as of five populations of P. canius in Malaysia.
| Locus | N. Sembilan | Sabah | Selangor | Sarawak | Johor | Total* Mean |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 30 | 30 | 20 | 22 | 15 | 117 | |
| Tan 1-2 | ||||||
| | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 |
| Ar | 1.000 | 2.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 2.000 | 3.714 |
| 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.6000 | 0.0769 | |
| | 0.0000 | 0.4994 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.4345 | 0.5974 |
| | – | 0.000 | – | – | −0.400 | |
| HW | – | 1.0000 | – | – | 0.1791 | |
| Tan 1-7 | ||||||
| | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 6 |
| Ar | 2.000 | 2.000 | 3.000 | 2.000 | 1.000 | 5.844 |
| | 1.000 | 0.0000 | 0.6000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.3590 |
| | 0.5085 | 0.4994 | 0.6769 | 0.4947 | 0.0000 | 0.7727 |
| | −1.000 | 1.000 | 0.116 | 1.000 | – | |
| HW | 0.0000 | 1.0000 | 0.5856 | 1.0000 | – | |
| Tan 1-10 | ||||||
| | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Ar | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 2.000 | 2.564 |
| | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.4000 | 0.0513 |
| | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.3310 | 0.3472 |
| | – | – | – | – | −0.217 | |
| HW | – | – | – | – | 0.5395 | |
| Tan 3-27 | ||||||
| | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Ar | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.988 |
| | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 |
| | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.2242 |
| | – | – | – | – | – | |
| HW | – | – | – | – | – | |
| Tan 3-28 | ||||||
| | 3 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 8 |
| Ar | 3.000 | 2.000 | 3.000 | 2.000 | 1.000 | 7.592 |
| | 0.4667 | 1.0000 | 0.3000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.4274 |
| | 0.6169 | 0.5885 | 0.4769 | 0.4947 | 0.0000 | 0.8393 |
| | 0.247 | −1.000 | 0.377 | 1.000 | – | |
| HW | 0.5862 | 0.0000 | 0.5771 | 1.0000 | – | |
Note:
Sample size (N), Number of alleles (N), allele richness (Ar), (H), (H), inbreeding coefficient (Fis) (P < 0.05 symbolic accustomed nominal level (5%) 0.000042, and Hardy-Weinberg expectation (disequilibrium) (HW).
Analysis of population genetic using molecular coancestry information.
| Microsatellite | Heterozigosity | PIC (%) | Effective allele no. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tan 1-2 | 4 | 0.5949 | 54.12 | 2.47 |
| Tan 1-7 | 6 | 0.7694 | 73.99 | 4.34 |
| Tan 1-10 | 3 | 0.3457 | 30.11 | 1.53 |
| Tan 3-27 | 2 | 0.2235 | 19.86 | 1.29 |
| Tan 3-28 | 8 | 0.8357 | 81.71 | 6.09 |
Notes:
Number of alleles (N) and PIC.
Heterozygosity was estimated as arithmetic mean of expected and H.
Hierarchical AMOVA in P. canius.
| Source of variation | Sum of squares | Variance components | Variation % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Among populations | 191.456 | 1.02366 | 63.77361 |
| Among individuals within populations | 79.039 | 0.12422 | 7.73898 |
| Within individuals | 53.500 | 0.45726 | 28.48741 |
Pairwise F estimations through P. canius populations generated from five microsatellites loci and inclusion of five populations.
All calculations were fairly significant (P < 0.05) using 10,000 permutations.
| N. Sembilan | Sabah | Selangor | Sarawak | Johor | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | N. Sembilan | 0.00000 | ||||
| 2 | Sabah | 0.39244 | 0.00000 | |||
| 3 | Selangor | 0.29711 | 0.41039 | 0.00000 | ||
| 4 | Sarawak | 0.71934 | 0.68086 | 0.72437 | 0.00000 | |
| 5 | Johor | 0.73211 | 0.68561 | 0.74834 | 0.80500 | 0.00000 |
Membership ratio estimated for each population of P. canius.
| Populations | Cluster membership | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
| N. Sembilan | 0.005 | 0.041 | 0.941 | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Sabah | 0.005 | 0.004 | 0.005 | 0.983 | 0.003 |
| Selangor | 0.005 | 0.968 | 0.019 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Sarawak | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.988 |
| Johor | 0.985 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
Figure 6Tree plot scheme of five engaged populations of P. canius.
Figure 7Population structure of five P. canius populations in Malaysia.
Population assignment based upon five microsatellite loci frequencies in P. canius.
| Assigned population | CA% | Original location | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N. Sembilan ( | Sabah ( | Selangor ( | Sarawak ( | Johor ( | ||
| N. Sembilan | 100 | 4.219 | 70.330 | 35.873 | 117.792 | 92.839 |
| Sabah | 100 | 70.143 | 4.338 | 58.286 | 132.093 | 96.994 |
| Selangor | 100 | 35.937 | 58.537 | 4.715 | 101.049 | 83.156 |
| Sarawak | 100 | 115.433 | 129.921 | 98.626 | 3.133 | 101.070 |
| Johor | 100 | 88.554 | 92.895 | 78.807 | 99.143 | 2.761 |
Note:
CA, correct assignment.
P values originated from bottleneck analysis within five populations of P. canius.
| I.A.M | T.P.M | S.M.M | Mode Shift | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 60 | 70 | 80 | ||||
| N. Sembilan | 0.22672 | 0.24435 | 0.26030 | 0.26596 | 0.28595 | Y |
| Sabah | 0.07656 | 0.09247 | 0.09295 | 0.09683 | 0.10790 | Y |
| Selangor | 0.28119 | 0.31416 | 0.34221 | 0.32656 | 0.64363 | Y |
| Sarawak | 0.17976 | 0.21249 | 0.21558 | 0.20907 | 0.24057 | Y |
| Johor | 0.18105 | 0.21600 | 0.24444 | 0.26510 | 0.22513 | Y |
Notes:
I.A.M, infinite allele model; T.P.M, two phase model; S.M.M, stepwise mutational model, estimation indicate the mutation in stepwise mutational model; Y, yes; N, no; Significant values P < 0.05.