| Literature DB >> 29132298 |
Bo Xu1,2, Guoli Sun1, Xuemin Wang1, Jingwei Lu1, Ian J Wang3, Zan Wang4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Understanding how landscape factors, including suites of geographic and environmental variables, and both historical and contemporary ecological and evolutionary processes shape the distribution of genetic diversity is a primary goal of landscape and conservation genetics and may be particularly consequential for species involved in ecological restoration. In this study, we examine the factors that shape the distribution of genetic variation in a leguminous shrub (Caragana microphylla) important for restoration efforts on the Mongolian Plateau in China. This region houses several major bioclimatic gradients, and C. microphylla is an important restoration species because it stabilizes soils and prevents advancing desertification on the Inner Mongolia Plateau caused by ongoing climate change.Entities:
Keywords: Ecological niche; Isolation by distance; Isolation by environment; Plant ecology; Population genetic structure; Restoration ecology
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29132298 PMCID: PMC5683519 DOI: 10.1186/s12870-017-1147-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Plant Biol ISSN: 1471-2229 Impact factor: 4.215
Fig. 1Population locations for the 10 sites sampled in our study and their associated genetic diversity. The pie charts next to each population indicate their proportions of assignment to two genetic clusters based on Structure analysis, for our microsatellite (a) and GBS (c) datasets, or their haplotype diversity, for our cpDNA dataset (b). Panel B also includes a haplotype network in which the sizes of the colored circles are proportional to the frequencies of the they represent
Summary of genetic variation in C. microphylla populations detected in microsatellites (SSR), chloroplast DNA sequences (cpDNA), and genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS)
| Population | SSR | cpDNA | GBS | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Na | Ho | He | Ha |
|
| Ho | He | ||
| SZW | 7.73 | 0.63 | 0.65 | 5 | 0.771 | 0.47 | – | – | |
| ZXB | 8.00 | 0.61 | 0.67 | 6 | 0.554 | 0. 35 | 0.280 | 0.307 | |
| DL | 7.41 | 0.58 | 0.64 | 6 | 0.766 | 0. 86 | 0.262 | 0.289 | |
| XH | 7.55 | 0.65 | 0.66 | 3 | 0.598 | 0. 32 | 0.303 | 0.308 | |
| QYH | 6.86 | 0.69 | 0.66 | 3 | 0.692 | 0.35 | 0.268 | 0.256 | |
| XU | 7.18 | 0.46 | 0.58 | 2 | 0.368 | 0. 27 | 0.228 | 0.287 | |
| DU | 8.09 | 0.68 | 0.71 | 2 | 0.294 | 0. 11 | 0.269 | 0.281 | |
| EWK | 6.73 | 0.62 | 0.62 | 1 | 0.000 | 0. 00 | 0.261 | 0.261 | |
| CB | 6.32 | 0.42 | 0.53 | 1 | 0.000 | 0. 00 | 0.196 | 0.247 | |
| XBY | 5.32 | 0.43 | 0.49 | 1 | 0.000 | 0. 00 | 0.219 | 0.250 | |
Na, the average number alleles per locus; Ho, observed heterozygosity; He, expected heterozygosity; Ha, number of haplotypes; Hd, haplotype diversity; π, nucleotide diversity
Fig. 2Results of Structure analysis for our microsatellite (a) and GBS (b) datasets. In each panel, each vertical bar represents the probabilities of assignment to two distinct genetic clusters for each individual. Individuals are grouped into the populations from which they were sampled
Fig. 3Predicted distributions of C. microphylla in China (a) at the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM; c. 21kya), (b) at present (1950–2000), and (c) in the future (2080). Each panel represents the probability of occurrence of C. microphylla in each cell on the map based on ecological niche modelling analysis
Results of Multiple Matrix Regression with Randomization (MMRR) analysis for each of our three molecular datasets
| Model | IBD | PC1 | PC2 | PC3 | IBE | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2 |
| β |
| β |
| β |
| β |
| β |
| |
| SSR |
| <0.01 |
| <0.01 |
| <0.01 | 0.006 | 0.94 | 0.159 | 0.31 |
| <0.01 |
| cpDNA |
| <0.01 |
| 0.02 |
| <0.01 | 0.080 | 0.30 | 0.211 | 0.08 |
| <0.01 |
| GBS |
| <0.01 |
| <0.01 |
| <0.01 | 0.059 | 0.36 | 0.060 | 0.50 |
| <0.01 |
The overall model fit (R2) and significance (p), regression coefficients (β) and p-values for each predictor variable (geographic distance [IBD] and environmental PCs [PC1, PC2, and PC3]), and cumulative coefficient of IBE (for all PCs) are shown. Significant values are in bold
Fig. 4Scatterplots of genetic distance vs. geographic (left) and environmental distances (right) for each of our molecular datasets: microsatellites (a), cpDNA (b), and GBS (c). Each panel includes a simple, univariate regression line
Results of generalized dissimilarity modeling (GDM) analysis
| Model | IBD | PC1 | PC2 | PC3 | IBE | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dev. |
| β |
| β |
| β |
| β |
| β |
| |
| SSR |
| <0.01 |
| 0.01 |
| 0.02 | 0.008 | 0.62 | 0.088 | 0.14 |
| 0.02 |
| cpDNA |
| <0.01 |
| <0.01 |
| <0.01 | 0.000 | 0.94 | 0.031 | 0.14 |
| <0.01 |
| GBS |
| <0.01 |
| <0.01 |
| <0.01 | 0.014 | 0.48 | 0.071 | 0.07 |
| <0.01 |
GDM provides a coefficient (β) for each predictor variable that estimates the contribution of that variable to explaining variation in a response variable, in this case genetic distance. The predictor variables used in our analysis included geographic distance (D) and the first three PC axes resulting from PCA analysis on 19 bioclimatic variables at each sampling site (PC1, PC2, and PC3). βE represents the total contribution of environmental distance (the sum of the coefficients for each PC axis)
The overall model fit (Deviance Explained: Dev.) and significance (p), regression coefficients (β) and p-values for each predictor variable (geographic distance [IBD] and environmental PCs [PC1, PC2, and PC3]), and cumulative coefficient of IBE (for all PCs) are shown. Significant values are in bold
Fig. 5Predicted spatial genetic turnover in C. microphylla, based on generalized dissimilarity modelling (GDM) analysis for each of our molecular datasets: microsatellites (a), cpDNA (b), and GBS (c). The color of each cell on the map reflects its predicted genetic composition, and greater differences in the colors between cells indicate greater predicted genetic differences. Squares represent our sampling localities