| Literature DB >> 29299256 |
Guihua Wang1,2, Youming Hou1,2, Xiang Zhang1,2, Jie Zhang1,2, Jinlei Li1,2, Zhiming Chen3.
Abstract
The red palm weevil (RPW), Rhynchophorus ferrugineus (Olivier), was initially reported in China in the 1990s and is now considered one of the most successful invasive pests of palm plants in the country. A total of 14 microsatellite loci and one mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase subunit Ι (cox I) gene fragment were used to investigate the genetic characteristics and structure of R. ferrugineus in southern China. High levels of genetic differentiation among populations and significant correlations between genetic and geographical distances indicated an important role of geographical distance in the distribution of the RPW in southern China. High gene flow between Fujian and Taiwan province populations illustrated the increased effects of frequent anthropogenic activities on gene flow between them. Genetic similarity (i.e., haplotype similarity) indicated that RPW individuals from Taiwan and Fujian invaded from a different source than those from Hainan. To some extent, the genetic structure of the RPW in southern China correlated well with the geographic origins of this pest. We propose that geographical distance, anthropogenic activities, and the biological attributes of this pest are responsible for the distribution pattern of the RPW in southern China. The phylogenetic analysis suggests that the most likely native sources of the RPW in southern China are India, the Philippines, and Vietnam.Entities:
Keywords: Rhynchophorus ferrugineus; anthropogenic activities; gene flow; genetic structure; geographical distance; invasive pest
Year: 2017 PMID: 29299256 PMCID: PMC5743574 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.3599
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ecol Evol ISSN: 2045-7758 Impact factor: 2.912
Genetic diversity measures estimated using microsatellites and the cox I gene of Rhynchophorus ferrugineus populations
| Pop |
| AR | RHo/CHo | RHe/CHe | RFIS/CFIS | P (HEW) | Nh | Nph | Hd | π (%) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FJTA | 2.20 | 2.18 | 0.264/0.280 | 0.320/0.330 | 0.140/0.172 | ns | 3 | 1 | 0.417 | 0.858 | 4.667 |
| FJSM | 2.86 | 2.77 | 0.287/0.302 | 0.350/0.355 | 0.143/0.163 | ns | 3 | 1 | 0.511 | 0.727 | 3.956 |
| TWTZ | 2.57 | 2.40 | 0.250/0.250 | 0.273/0.273 | 0.054/0.088 | ns | 2 | 0 | 0.222 | 0.041 | 0.222 |
| GXNN | 4.50 | 3.79 | 0.621/0.677 | 0.650/0.660 | 0.045/−0.025 | ** | 3 | 2 | 0.625 | 0.437 | 2.375 |
| HNWC1 | 5.08 | 3.84 | 0.484/0.533 | 0.551/0.577 | 0.124/0.079 | ** | 15 | 11 | 0.911 | 0.599 | 3.256 |
| HNWC2 | 4.08 | 3.70 | 0.396/0.440 | 0.493/0.506 | 0.202/0.136 | ** | 6 | 1 | 0.846 | 0.533 | 3.051 |
| GDSZ | 4.64 | 4.02 | 0.560/0.566 | 0.600/0.601 | 0.087/0.060 | ** | 9 | 4 | 0.964 | 2.089 | 11.364 |
| SCXC | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2 | 1 | 0.500 | 1.563 | 8.500 |
Pop, population label; A, number of alleles; AR, allelic richness; RHo, observed heterozygosity calculated by the raw data, CHo, observed heterozygosity calculated by the corrected data; RHe, expected heterozygosity calculated by the raw data, CHe, expected heterozygosity calculated by the corrected data; RFIS, fixation index calculated by the raw data, CFIS, fixation index calculated by the corrected data; Nh, no. haplotypes; Nph, number of private haplotypes; Hd, haplotype diversity; π, nucleotide diversity; k, average number of nucleotide differences; **indicate significant deviations from HWE at p < 0.01
Pairwise F ST values between all populations based on microsatellite data and cox I sequences
| Pop | FJTA | FJSM | TWTZ | GXNN | HNWC1 | HNWC2 | GDSZ | SCXC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FJTA | — |
|
|
|
|
|
| — |
| FJSM | −0.071 | — |
|
|
|
|
| — |
| TWTZ | −0.008 | −0.035 | — |
|
|
|
| |
| GXNN |
|
|
| — |
|
|
| — |
| HNWC1 |
|
|
|
| — |
|
| — |
| HNWC2 |
|
|
|
| −0.011 | — |
| — |
| GDSZ |
|
|
|
|
|
| — | — |
| SCXC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| — |
Bold indicates significant values (p < .05), upper‐right matrix: F ST ENA values of microsatellite data, lower‐left matrix: F ST values of cox I sequences.
Figure 1Bar plot of population structure estimates of microsatellite data for Rhynchophorus ferrugineus samples in southern China. (a) Samples from new populations in this study; (b) Samples from new populations combined with those from Wang et al. (2015). Each individual is represented by a vertical line that is partitioned into various colored components. Clusters are separated by different colored bars
Figure 2Median Joining network analysis of cox I sequences of Rhynchophorus ferrugineus in southern China. Each circle represents a haplotype, and sizes are relative to the number of individuals with a specific haplotype. Haplotypes are labeled according to the population of origin. Arabic numbers above the line represent the number of mutant loci
Figure 3The distribution of seven Rhynchophorus ferrugineus populations in southern China based on their STRUCTURE clusters. Note: Redrawn from the website (https://www.travelchinaguide.com/map/china_map.htm#) using Adobe Illustrator Artwork 17.0 software
Figure 4Unrooted maximum‐likelihood tree showing the phylogenetic relationship of Rhynchophorus ferrugineus populations in China and other countries based on haplotypes. Color schemes of new haplotypes are shown according to Figure 2. Branch I contains haplotypes in GXNN, GDSZ, and SCXC populations; haplotypes of HNWC1 and HNWC2 populations and one FJTA individual are contained in branch II; FJTA, FJSM, and TWTZ haplotypes are contained in branch III. Other haplotypes are as follows: FJ1–FJ8 (Fujian, Wang et al., 2015), H1–H6 (the Middle East, El‐Mergawy et al., 2011), H21–H22, H43 (Thailand, Rugman‐Jones et al., 2013), H28, H30 (the Philippines, Rugman‐Jones et al., 2013), and H37–H42 (Vietnam, Rugman‐Jones et al., 2013)
AMOVA results of Rhynchophorus ferrugineus populations based on microsatellite data and cox I sequences
| Source of variation |
| SS | Variance components | % Variation | Fixation index | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Microsatellite | Among three clusters | 2 | 194.408 | 1.33315 Va | 28.05 | FCT = 0.28050 |
| Among populations within clusters | 4 | 37.791 | 0.22455 Vb | 4.72 | FSC = 0.06567 | |
| Within seven populations | 209 | 667.774 | 3.19509 Vc | 67.23 | FST = 0.32775 | |
|
| Among clusters | 2 | 396.311 | 6.10852 Va | 69.66 | FCT = 0.75749 |
| Among populations within clusters | 5 | 44.405 | 0.60160 Vb | 6.86 | FSC = 0.22615 | |
| Within populations | 93 | 191.443 | 2.05852 Vc | 26.48 | FST = 0.76527 |
Figure 5Scatter plots of genetic isolation by geographical distance and genetic distance among Rhynchophorus ferrugineus populations using microsatellite and mitochondrial sequences