| Literature DB >> 29229912 |
Qifang Geng1,2,3, Lin Sun1,2, Peihua Zhang1,2, Zhongsheng Wang4,5, Yingxiong Qiu6, Hong Liu7, Chunlan Lian8.
Abstract
Detecting how historical and contemporary factors contribute to genetic divergence and genetic structure is a central question in ecology and evolution. We examine this question by intergrating population genetics with ecological niche modelling of Litsea auriculata (Lauraceae), which is endangered and native to east China. Geographical and environmental factors including climatic fluctuations since the last glacial maximum (LGM) have also contribute to population demography and patterns of genetic structure. L. auriculata populations underwent expansion after divergence and dramatically decreased to the current small size with relative population bottlenecks due to climate changes. Populations separated by physical geographical barrier including geographic distance and Yangtze River, as a result contemporary gene flow among L. auriculata populations showed drastic declines in comparison with historical gene flow, resulting in a high level of population divergence. Thus, patterns of genetic structure of L. auriculata can result from both geographic and environmental factors including climate changes. This information is helpful in forming conservation strategies for L. auriculata in China.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29229912 PMCID: PMC5725559 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-16917-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Population genetic diversity revealed by nuclear and chloroplast microsatellite markers for Litsea auriculata eight populations.
| Population | nSSR | cpSSR | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Haplotype | |
|
| |||||||||||||||
| ZT | 34 | 6.13 | 3.79 | 0.13 | 0.422 | 0.568 |
| 27.7 | 1.571 | 1.112 | 0.160 | 0.088 | 0.091 | 57.14 | H1(24), H2(4), H3(1), H4(1), H5(1), H6(1) |
| ZQ | 22 | 5.50 | 3.76 | 0.13 | 0.506 | 0.560 |
| 9.8 | 1.857 | 1.153 | 0.221 | 0.117 | 0.123 | 71.43 | H1(1), H2(2), H7(13), H8(2), H9(1), |
| ZD | 39 | 6.38 | 4.16 | 0.13 | 0.480 | 0.642 |
| 23.9 | 2.143 | 1.250 | 0.281 | 0.158 | 0.162 | 71.43 | H1(1), H2(16), H7(11), H8(1), H9(1), H12(1), |
|
| |||||||||||||||
| AS | 26 | 4.88 | 3.40 | 0.25 | 0.443 | 0.519 |
| 5.9 | 1.714 | 1.296 | 0.286 | 0.182 | 0.189 | 57.14 | H1(3), H2(1), H4(1), H6(8), H7(1), H17(8), |
| AY | 40 | 5.50 | 3.53 | 0.38 | 0.484 | 0.506 | 0.056 | 20.4 | 2.429 | 1.590 | 0.511 | 0.315 | 0.323 | 71.43 | H1(2),H2(1), H3(1), H4(2), H5(1), H6(15), H12(2), H17(1), H19(1), |
|
| |||||||||||||||
| HX | 38 | 5.63 | 3.03 | 0.38 | 0.329 | 0.436 |
| 13.0 | 1.857 | 1.172 | 0.203 | 0.115 | 0.118 | 85.71 | H1(9), H2(24), H6(1), H7(1), H27(2), |
| HJ | 25 | 4.38 | 3.04 | 0.13 | 0.378 | 0.483 |
| 4.2 | 1.714 | 1.191 | 0.208 | 0.122 | 0.128 | 71.43 | H1(11), H2(7), H8(1), |
| HY | 7 | 3.38 | 3.19 | 0.00 | 0.396 | 0.404 | 0.098 | 3.2 | 1.571 | 1.276 | 0.273 | 0.175 | 0.204 | 57.14 | H1(3), H2(3), H15(1) |
| Mean | 23.3 | 5.22 | 3.49 | 0.19 | 0.430 | 0.515 | 0.184 | 13.5 | 1.857 | 1.255 | 0.268 | 0.159 | 0.167 | 67.86 | |
A: mean number of alleles per locus. A R: allelic richness. P A: number of private alleles for all loci. H O and H E are mean observed and expected heterozygotes for all loci, respectively. F IS: mean inbreeding coefficients for all loci, with F IS in bold indicating significant deviation from zero with a sequential Bonferroni correction. N e: effective population size. N a: number of different alleles. N E: number of effective alleles. I: Shannon’s information index. h: diversity. uh: unbiased diversity. P: percentage of Polymorphic Loci. Haplotypes in bold are rare.
Figure 1Map of China showing the sampling locations and geographic distribution of the chloroplast haplotypes found in Litsea auriculata populations [The original map was created by using Google Earth Pro 7.1.2.2041, which was free downloaded from https://google-earth-pro.en.softonic.com/ and the edge of China was drew by using AutoCAD 2010 (https://www.autodesk.com/education/free-software/autocad)]. (a) Pie charts on the map represent the haplotype composition of samples from the corresponding populations. The colour in each chart represents the haplotype, as indicated in the cluster tree; (b) Cluster analysis of 30 haplotypes detected in 231 samples based on the median-joining haplotype network developed using NETWORK 5.0. Haplotype circle sizes are proportional to the frequency of each Haplotype.
Figure 2Population genetic parameters [allelic richness (A r) and expected heterozygosity (H E)] in relation to geographic coordinates (latitude and longitude).
Analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA) in nuclear and chloroplast microsatellite loci across Litsea auriculata populations.
| Source of variation | d.f. | Sum of square | Variance components | Percentage of variation (%) | Fixation indices |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| cpSSR | Among populations | 7 | 50.140 | 0.236 | 28.54 |
| 0.000 |
| Within populations | 223 | 129.742 | 0.590 | 71.46 | |||
| Total | 231 | 179.882 | 0.826 | ||||
| nSSR | Among populations | 7 | 13646.722 | 31.874 | 16.50 |
| 0.000 |
| Within populations | 223 | 72310.851 | 161.251 | 83.50 |
| 0.000 | |
| Total | 231 | 85957.573 | 193.125 |
| 0.000 |
Pairwise genetic differentiation between Litsea auriculata populations.
| Populations | ZT | ZQ | ZD | AS | AY | HX | HJ | HY |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ZT | — | 0.209 | 0.126 | 0.089 | 0.057 | 0.038 | 0.010 | 0.018 |
| ZQ | 0.113 | — | 0.033 | 0.220 | 0.198 | 0.127 | 0.156 | 0.129 |
| ZD | 0.100 | 0.076 | — | 0.160 | 0.140 | 0.041 | 0.074 | 0.058 |
| AS | 0.183 | 0.234 | 0.150 | — | 0.052 | 0.104 | 0.097 | 0.103 |
| AY | 0.180 | 0.260 | 0.177 | 0.149 | — | 0.087 | 0.072 | 0.066 |
| HX | 0.247 | 0.324 | 0.247 | 0.149 | 0.244 | — | 0.013 | 0.015 |
| HJ | 0.210 | 0.190 | 0.162 | 0.265 | 0.281 | 0.340 | — | 0.004NS |
| HY | 0.190 | 0.179 | 0.174 | 0.310 | 0.327 | 0.361 | 0.061NS | — |
Above diagonal, Gregorius (1974) genetic distance using a binary matrix of cpSSR haplotype data; below diagonal, F ST measured from nuclear SSR, NS indicate non-significant population differentiation where P > 0.05.
Figure 3(a) Correlations between Nei’s unbiased genetic distance (G ST) estimated by cpSSR loci and the geographical distance of Litsea auriculata populations. (b) Correlation between the genetic F ST/(1− F ST) estimated by nuclear SSR loci and geographic distances among Litsea auriculata populations.
Figure 4Geographic distribution of the genetic groups detected from STRUCTURE analysis of Litsea auriculata (ΔK = 4) [The original map was created by using Google Earth Pro 7.1.2.2041, which was free downloaded from https://google-earth-pro.en.softonic.com/ and the edge of China was drew by using AutoCAD 2010 (https://www.autodesk.com/education/free-software/autocad)] .
Figure 5Ten demographic scenarios of Litsea auriculata assessed using DIYABC. Time in generations is t (t3 ≥ t2 ≥ t1).
Posterior probabilities of each scenario and 95% confidence intervals tested by approximate Bayesian computation analyses (ABC) on nSSRs data.
| Scenarios | Posterior probability | 95% Credibility Interval |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.9767 | [0.9745,0.9788] |
| 2 | 0.0039 | [0.0032,0.0045] |
| 3 | 0.0009 | [0.0008,0.0011] |
| 4 | 0.0051 | [0.0043,0.0060] |
| 5 | 0.0014 | [0.0012,0.0017] |
| 6 | 0.0012 | [0.0010,0.0013] |
| 7 | 0.0050 | [0.0042,0.0058] |
| 8 | 0.0011 | [0.0010,0.0013] |
| 9 | 0.0006 | [0.0005,0.0007] |
| 10 | 0.0040 | [0.0034,0.0047] |
Recent migration rate estimated from BAYESASS across eight populations of Litsea auriculata
| ZT | ZQ | ZD | AS | AY | HX | HJ | HY | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ZT | — | 0.010 | 0.010 | 0.016 | 0.011 | 0.009 | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| ZQ | 0.034 | — | 0.015 | 0.012 | 0.019 | 0.011 | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| ZD | 0.013 | 0.014 | — | 0.015 | 0.013 | 0.013 | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| AS | 0.011 | 0.018 | 0.011 | — | 0.012 | 0.012 | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| AY | 0.008 | 0.007 | 0.008 | 0.010 | — | 0.012 | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| HX | 0.007 | 0.021 | 0.007 | 0.008 | 0.011 | — | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| HJ | 0.010 | 0.012 | 0.011 | 0.011 | 0.010 | 0.019 | — | 0.010 |
| HY | 0.024 | 0.022 | 0.023 | 0.022 | 0.022 | 0.022 | 0.176 | — |
The first column represents the destination population, while the first row represents the origin population. Values in bold are the proportion of individuals derived from the source population each generation.
Historical migration rate estimated from Migrate-N across eight populations of Litsea auriculata
| ZT | ZQ | ZD | AS | AY | HX | HJ | HY | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ZT | — | 0.126 | 0.041 | 0.099 | 0.102 | 0.082 | 0.199 | 0.072 |
| ZQ | 0.106 | — | 0.246 | 0.085 | 0.103 | 0.141 | 0.131 | 0.070 |
| ZD | 0.106 | 0.066 | — | 0.113 | 0.158 | 0.037 | 0.144 | 0.091 |
| AS | 0.127 | 0.072 | 0.220 | — | 0.176 | 0.181 | 0.099 | 0.094 |
| AY | 0.098 | 0.053 | 0.160 | 0.108 | — | 0.090 | 0.131 | 0.096 |
| HX | 0.097 | 0.102 | 0.132 | 0.133 | 0.118 | — | 0.078 | 0.081 |
| HJ | 0.113 | 0.099 | 0.042 | 0.044 | 0.179 | 0.064 | — | 0.146 |
| HY | 0.367 | 0.157 | 0.090 | 0.110 | 0.084 | 0.110 | 0.251 | — |
The first column represent the population of destination, while the first row represent the population of origin. Values in bold are the proportion of individuals derived from the source population each generation.
Sample locations and two-tailed P values for Wilcoxon signed-rank test for heterozygozity excess or deficiency under three mutation models.
| Population | Location | Latitude (N) | Longitude (E) | Altitude (m) | IAM | SMM | TPM | Mode-shift test |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||||
| ZT | West Tianmu Mountain, Linan City | N30°20.393′ | E119°25.827′ | 1067 | 0.004* | 0.039* | 0.547 | Shifted |
| ZQ | Baishuiwu, Qingliangfen, Linan City | N30°2.899′ | E119°0.09′ | 995 | 0.055* | 0.195 | 0.195 | Shifted |
| ZD | Xikeng, Daming Mountain, Linan City | N30°2.213′ | E118°58.384′ | 980 | 0.008* | 0.027* | 0.055 | Shifted |
|
| ||||||||
| AS | Shucheng, Lu’an City | N31°3.388′ | E116°32.93′ | 576 | 0.027* | 0.195 | 0.313 | Shifted |
| AY | baojia Town, Yuexi, Anqing City | N31°1.89′ | E116°4.183′ | 1056 | 0.004* | 0.004* | 0.004* | Shifted |
|
| ||||||||
| HX | Jigong Mountain, Xinyang City | N31°50.502′ | E114°59.991′ | 476 | 0.004* | 0.004* | 0.008* | Shifted |
| HJ | Jiuya village, Qiaoduan, Nanyang City | N33°32.140′ | E112°0.860′ | 741 | 0.004* | 0.008* | 0.074 | Shifted |
| HY | Yuzang village, Qiaoduan, Nanyang City | N33°31.125′ | E112°0.042′ | 840 | 0.008* | 0.008* | 0.008* | Shifted |
*Significant excesses (in two-tailed Wilcoxon test) in gene diversity compared with expected gene diversity at mutation-drift equilibrium. Under the mode-shift test, a distribution with a shifted mode is expected in a population that has undergone a bottleneck.
Figure 6Predicted distribution of Litsea auriculata based on Ecological niche distribution model. (a) Predicted distribution based on current data; (b) distribution during the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) based on community climate system model (CCSM); (c) distribution during LGM model based on model for interdisciplinary research on climate (MIROC). Ecological niche models were established with current bioclimatic variables on the basis of extant occurrence points of the species using Maxent version 3.4.1. Predicted distribution probabilities are shown in each 2.5 arc-min pixel. The map of China is free downloaded from Global Administrative Areas (http://www.gadm.org/country). The map is made by ArcGIS 10.3 software (http://www.arcgis.com/features/index.html), and then cut by Visio Pro for Office 365 (Trial) (https://products.office.com/zh-cn/visio/visio-professional-free-trial-flowchart-software).