| Literature DB >> 28877669 |
Stephan Ntie1,2, Anne R Davis2, Katrin Hils3,4, Patrick Mickala1, Henri A Thomassen4, Katy Morgan2, Hadrien Vanthomme5, Mary K Gonder6, Nicola M Anthony7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study aims to assess the role that Pleistocene refugia, rivers and local habitat conditions may have played in the evolutionary diversification of three central African duiker species (Cephalophus dorsalis, C. callipygus and Philantomba monticola). Genetic data from geo-referenced feces were collected from a wide range of sites across Central Africa. Historical patterns of population genetic structure were assessed using a ~ 650 bp fragment of the mitochondrial control region and contemporary patterns of genetic differentiation were evaluated using 12 polymorphic microsatellite loci.Entities:
Keywords: Africa; Barriers; Cephalophus; Ecological gradients; Ecotone; Generalized dissimilarity models; Philantomba; Phylogeography; Pleistocene; Refugia; Riverine
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28877669 PMCID: PMC5585889 DOI: 10.1186/s12862-017-1054-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Evol Biol ISSN: 1471-2148 Impact factor: 3.260
Fig. 1Sites where fecal samples were collected and identified to species level. Arrows indicate the name of the corresponding river. Stippled areas represent hypothesized Pleistocene refugia. Inset to the right shows the location of central Africa in relation to the reset of the continent. Site locations are indicated using a 2–4 digit code which is referenced in Additional file 1: Table S1
Sampling locations, sites and number of samples identified to species level at each site
| Country | Number of sites |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cameroon | 14 | 39 | 37 | 81 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 177 |
| Central African Republic | 1 | 4 | 0 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 |
| Democratic Republic of Congo | 2 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 13 |
| Equatorial Guinea | 2 | 6 | 6 | 37 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 52 |
| Gabon | 14 | 72 | 360 | 165 | 31 | 1 | 14 | 67 | 37 | 761 |
| Nigeria | 1 | 0 | 6 | 35 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 42 |
| Republic of Congo | 5 | 6 | 61 | 33 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 115 |
| Republic of Guinea | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| South Africa | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Unknown | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Total | 42 | 131 | 475 | 370 | 39 | 5 | 16 | 71 | 39 | 1146 |
The among group component of the total variance (FCT) for hypothesized C. dorsalis, C. callipygus, and P. monticola groupings
| Models |
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Gulf of Guinea refugium versus all other sites | −0.026 (2) | 0.195* (2) | 0.283‡ (2) |
| Central African refugia versus all other sites | 0.027 (4) | 0.055 (4) | −0.008 (5) |
| Sanaga fluvial refugium versus all other sites | 0.000 (2) | −0.012 (2) | 0.064* (2) |
| Ogooué River barrier: Ogooué north versus Ogooué south | 0.145 (2) | −0.012 (2) | −0.034 (2) |
| Sanaga River barrier: Sanaga north versus Sanaga south | −0.026 (2) | NT | −0.103 (2) |
| Sanaga and Ogooué River barriers: Sanaga north versus Sanaga south and Ogooué North versus Ogooué south | 0.008 (3) | −0.003 (3) | 0.100* (3) |
Numbers in parenthesis indicate the number of groups for each tested hypothesis
Asterisk indicates significance levels: ‡ marginally significant (P < 0.10); *significant (P < 0.05)
NT: not tested
Percentage of genetic differentiation explained in the GDM models
| Model | Percentage of genetic differentiation explained | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |
| Random variables (null model) | 83.06 | 8.35 | 20.82 |
| Geographic distances only | 54.00 | 11.96 | 17.33 |
| IBR distances only | 63.22 | 6.80 | 13.92 |
| Hypothesized refugia only | 63.62 | 0.01 | 0.09 |
| Significant environmental variables onlya | 81.25 | 60.13 | 72.85 |
| Significant environmental variablesa and geographic distances | 81.25 | 60.87 | 72.68 |
| Significant environmental variables, geographic distance and IBR distances | 83.18 | 60.87 | 72.68 |
| Hypothesized refugia with significant environmental variables and geographic distance | 81.25 | 60.87 | 73.88 |
aSee Additional file 1: Table S2 for explanation of environmental variables
Fig. 2Maps of the generalized dissimilarity models for a) C. callipygus and b) P. monticola. Pairwise comparison of colors between any two points in the landscape indicates the genetic differentiation between those points: larger color differences correspond to larger genetic differences. Areas in white indicate where the species is not predicted to occur