| Literature DB >> 27907032 |
Mari Mette Tollefsrud1, Tor Myking1, Jørn Henrik Sønstebø1, Vaidotas Lygis2, Ari Mikko Hietala1, Myriam Heuertz3,4.
Abstract
During post glacial colonization, loss of genetic diversity due to leading edge effects may be attenuated in forest trees because of their prolonged juvenile phase, allowing many migrants to reach the colonizing front before populations become reproductive. The northern range margins of temperate tree taxa in Europe are particularly suitable to study the genetic processes that follow colonization because they have been little affected by northern refugia. Here we examined how post glacial range dynamics have shaped the genetic structure of common ash (Fraxinus excelsior L.) in its northern range compared to its central range in Europe. We used four chloroplast and six nuclear microsatellites to screen 42 populations (1099 trees), half of which corresponded to newly sampled populations in the northern range and half of which represented reference populations from the central range obtained from previously studies. We found that northern range populations of common ash have the same chloroplast haplotypes as south-eastern European populations, suggesting that colonization of the northern range took place along a single migration route, a result confirmed by the structure at the nuclear microsatellites. Along this route, diversity strongly decreased only in the northern range, concomitantly with increasing population differentiation and complex population substructures, a pattern consistent with a leading edge colonization model. Our study highlights that while diversity is maintained in the central range of common ash due to broad colonizing fronts and high levels of gene flow, it profoundly decreases in the northern range, where colonization was unidirectional and probably involved repeated founder events and population fluctuations. Currently, common ash is threatened by ash dieback, and our results on northern populations will be valuable for developing gene conservation strategies.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27907032 PMCID: PMC5132317 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0167104
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Characteristics of the plastid DNA haplotypes detected for Fraxinus excelsior in this study using four chloroplast microsatellite regions.
The haplotype definitions follow Heuertz et al. [41] and Sutherland et al. [33], except for the novel haplotypes H17, H18 and H19. Allele sizes for each of the loci (ccmp3, ccmp6, ccmp7 and ccmp10) are given in base pairs.
| Haplotype | ccmp3 | ccmp6 | ccmp7 | ccmp10 | Frequency |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| H01 | 97 | 97 | 118 | 103 | 650 |
| H02 | 97 | 99 | 117 | 104 | 41 |
| H03 | 97 | 99 | 117 | 103 | 26 |
| H04 | 97 | 98 | 118 | 104 | 44 |
| H05 | 97 | 98 | 117 | 103 | 9 |
| H06 | 97 | 97 | 117 | 103 | 22 |
| H07 | 97 | 97 | 118 | 104 | 25 |
| H12 | 96 | 97 | 118 | 103 | 7 |
| H15 | 98 | 99 | 118 | 104 | 1 |
| H17 | 97 | 97 | 117 | 104 | 1 |
| H18 | 98 | 99 | 117 | 104 | 2 |
| H19 | 97 | 97 | 118 | 107 | 2 |
Fig 1Distribution of chloroplast haplotypes in 42 common ash (Fraxinus excelsior) population samples.
Coding of the haplotypes follows Heuertz et al. [41] and Sutherland et al. [33], except for the novel haplotypes H17, H18 and H19. The definitions of the haplotypes are given in Table 1. The shaded gray areas represent the natural distribution range of common ash [29].
Basic characteristics of the six nuclear microsatellite loci in Fraxinus excelsior used in this study.
Ar, allelic richness, calculated based on 13 diploid individuals; HO, observed heterozygosity; HE, expected heterozygosity; FIS, inbreeding coefficient (the coefficients denoted with asterisk (*) are significantly greater than zero); FST, coefficient of genetic differentiation among populations [63]; and FSTENA, coefficient of genetic differentiation calculated using ENA correction [56].
| Locus | N alleles | Allele size range | Null allele frequency | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Femsatl4 | 52 | 152–266 | 12.47 | 0.806 | 0.879 | 0.082* | 0.049 | 0.049 | 0.018 |
| Femsatl8 | 39 | 128–196 | 14.95 | 0.610 | 0.944 | 0.330* | 0.043 | 0.041 | 0.169 |
| Femsatl11 | 34 | 174–242 | 10.47 | 0.850 | 0.889 | 0.053* | 0.061 | 0.061 | 0.007 |
| Femsatl16 | 18 | 174–208 | 5.26 | 0.349 | 0.641 | 0.507* | 0.094 | 0.077 | 0.145 |
| Femsatl19 | 42 | 134–225 | 13.29 | 0.874 | 0.931 | 0.059* | 0.054 | 0.053 | 0.009 |
| M2-30 | 52 | 190–296 | 17.37 | 0.890 | 0.964 | 0.075* | 0.045 | 0.044 | 0.011 |
| Mean | 40 | - | 12.35 | 0.730 | 0.871 | 0.168* | 0.055 | 0.053 | - |
Fig 2Distribution of TESS (2a) and STRUCTURE (2c, d) groups in common ash (Fraxinus excelsior) populations. 2b shows bar plots of clustering based on STRUCTURE for K = 2–5. The shaded gray areas represent the natural distribution range of common ash [29].
Fig 3Principal Coordinates Analysis (PCoA) plot of the first and the second principal coordinates based on the genetic composition at six nuclear microsatellites of 42 population samples of common ash (Fraxinus excelsior).
For population names see S1 Table and S1 Fig. Each population is given the color of the STRUCTURE group (Fig 2C) in which it had the highest proportion of membership (S1 Table).
Pearson’s correlation coefficients (r) between allelic richness (Ar), gene diversity (HE), inbreeding coefficient calculated with INEST (FISINEST), latitude and longitude calculated for populations within: (i) Europe overall, (ii) TESS group 2 (constituting populations from northern and eastern Europe, see S1 Table), and (iii) Norway.
| Group | Variable | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Europe overall | Latitude | -0.285 | -0.222 | |
| (n = 38) | Longitude | 0.110 | 0.055 | |
| 0.088 | ||||
| 0.122 | ||||
| TESS group 2 | Latitude | -0.338 | -0.336 | -0.258 |
| (n = 26) | Longitude | 0.258 | 0.282 | |
| 0.104 | ||||
| 0.203 | ||||
| Norway | Latitude | 0.241 | ||
| (n = 17) | Longitude | -0.049 | -0.071 | 0.343 |
| -0.379 | ||||
| -0.326 |
* and *** denote significant correlations at the 5 and 0.1% levels, respectively.
Fig 4Linear regression between allelic richness and latitude for common ash ( Allelic richness is calculated based on a random set of 13 diploid individuals per population.