| Literature DB >> 29630653 |
Gulzar Khan1, Paulianny M Ribeiro1, Isabel A S Bonatelli1, Manolo F Perez1, Fernando F Franco1, Evandro M Moraes1.
Abstract
Succulent cacti (Cactaceae) are among the most threatened taxonomic groups assessed to date. Here we evaluated the genetic diversity and population structure of a narrow endemic columnar cactus Pilosocereus aureispinus. This species is only found in a small area of c. 300 km2 of rocky savanna from eastern Brazil and it is currently classified as vulnerable (VU) on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) red list. Eight microsatellite loci were genotyped for 91 individuals from four localities of the known P. aureispinus range. In contrast with expectations for narrow endemic species, we found relatively high levels of genetic diversity (e.g., HE = 0.390 to 0.525; HO = 0.394 to 0.572) and very low population structure based on the variation of six loci. All the analyzed individuals were clustered in one unique genetic group in assignment tests. We also generated the sequences of two plastid markers (trnT-trnL and psbD-trnT) and found no variation on a subsample of 39 individuals. We used Landsat 8 images and Normalized Difference Vegetation Index to estimate a potential extent of occurrence of c. 750 km2 for this species. Our results showed that P. aureispinus is not suffering from erosion of nuclear genetic variability due to its narrow distribution. However, we advocate that because of the extremely limited extent of occurrence, the ongoing anthropogenic disturbances in its habitat, and phylogenetic distinctiveness of P. aureispinus, this species should be classified as endangered (EN) on the IUCN Red List.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29630653 PMCID: PMC5890996 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0195475
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Geographic distribution of known occurrence sites for P. aureispinus (sampled sites are shown coded according to Table 1) and extent of occurrence estimates.
a) Map of eastern Brazil showing the studied area (red inset), the São Francisco River course in blue and main biomes. b) Natural colour Landsat 8 image. c) NDVI image with healthy vegetation in light grey and exposed soil in dark grey showing the minimum convex polygon encompassing all occurrence points in blue. d) NDVI image showing, inside the blue contour, the estimated extent of occurrence by setting a NDVI threshold. Locality and geographic coordinates of the samples IBO1 and IBO2: Ibotirama, Bahia state, S12°05’ W43°09’ and S12°16’ W43°10’, respectively; OLB1 and OLB2: Oliveira dos Brejinhos, Bahia state, S12°22’ W42°55’ and S12°20’ W42°56’, respectively. The unsampled site IBO3 is located at Ibotirama, Bahia state, S12°13’ W43°18’.
Genetic diversity parameters estimated for P. aureispinus on six microsatellite loci.
| Locus | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 24 | 2 | 1.1 | 0.083 | 0.080 | -0.043 | |
| 24 | 3 | 1.3 | 0.292 | 0.254 | -0.147 | |
| 24 | 1 | 1.0 | 0.000 | 0.000 | N/D | |
| 24 | 5 | 3.3 | 0.667 | 0.702 | 0.051 | |
| 24 | 8 | 4.2 | 0.625 | 0.760 | 0.178 | |
| 23 | 4 | 2.2 | 0.696 | 0.542 | -0.284 | |
| Overall loci (SE) | 23.8 (0.1) | 3.8 (1.0) | 2.2 (0.5) | 0.394 (0.13) | 0.390 (0.13) | -0.049 (0.07) |
| 27 | 3 | 1.1 | 0.074 | 0.072 | -0.029 | |
| 27 | 2 | 1.8 | 0.333 | 0.456 | 0.269 | |
| 27 | 1 | 1.0 | 0.000 | 0.000 | N/D | |
| 27 | 7 | 2.8 | 0.704 | 0.650 | -0.082 | |
| 27 | 9 | 5.6 | 0.889 | 0.821 | -0.083 | |
| 27 | 5 | 3.0 | 0.704 | 0.664 | -0.060 | |
| Overall loci (SE) | 27.0 (0.0) | 4.5 (1.2) | 2.5 (0.7) | 0.451 (0.15) | 0.444 (0.14) | 0.003 (0.06) |
| 28 | 3 | 1.5 | 0.429 | 0.357 | -0.200 | |
| 27 | 3 | 1.8 | 0.333 | 0.442 | 0.247 | |
| 28 | 2 | 1.2 | 0.214 | 0.191 | -0.120 | |
| 28 | 6 | 4.2 | 0.750 | 0.760 | 0.013 | |
| 28 | 8 | 5.4 | 0.964 | 0.816 | -0.182 | |
| 27 | 4 | 2.4 | 0.741 | 0.585 | -0.266 | |
| Overall loci (SE) | 27.6 (0.2) | 4.3 (0.9) | 2.7 (0.7) | 0.572 (0.12) | 0.525 (0.10) | -0.085 (0.07) |
| 12 | 2 | 1.2 | 0.167 | 0.153 | -0,091 | |
| 12 | 4 | 1.8 | 0.583 | 0.451 | -0,292 | |
| 12 | 3 | 1.4 | 0.167 | 0.292 | 0,429 | |
| 12 | 6 | 3.9 | 0.833 | 0.747 | -0,116 | |
| 11 | 7 | 4.7 | 1.000 | 0.789 | -0,267 | |
| 11 | 4 | 2.1 | 0.364 | 0.533 | 0,318 | |
| Overall loci (SE) | 11.6 (0.2) | 4.3 (0.7) | 2.5 (0.6) | 0.519 (0.14) | 0.494 (0.10) | -0.003 (0.12) |
N indicates sample size; A, number of alleles per locus; nE, effective number of alleles; HO, observed heterozygosity; HE, expected heterozygosity; FIS, inbreeding coefficient; N/D, non-determined; SE, standard error.
Mean allele diversity and expected heterozygosity reported for both microendemic threatened cactus species1 and for campo rupestre plant species2 in studies using microsatellite markers till December 2017*.
The results of Wilcoxon’s rank sum tests (WRST) comparing whether the genetic diversity estimates of Pilosocereus aureispinus is significantly (P ≤ 0.05) larger (>), smaller (<) or not different (≈) to the reported species is shown.
| Family/Species | WRST( | WRST( | Study | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 5.9 (1.6) | < | 0.695 (0.069) | < | Terry et al. 2012 [ |
| 1 | 8.5 (3.4) | < | 0.632 (0.180) | ≈ | Terry et al. 2006 [ |
| 1 | 5.6 (1.2) | ≈ | 0.511 (0.160) | ≈ | Hugues et al. 2008 [ |
| 1 | 3.3 (1.6) | ≈ | 0.508 (0.160) | ≈ | Hardesty et al. 2008 [ |
| 1 | 8.8 (3.4) | < | 0.758 (0.158) | < | Solórzano et al. 2009 [ |
| 1 | 8.0 (2.1) | < | 0.765 (0.060) | < | Solórzano and Dávila 2015 [ |
| 1 | n/a | n/a | 0.772 (0.022) | < | Maya-García et al. 2017 [ |
| 1 | 8.2 (0.9) | < | 0.764 (0.024) | < | Solórzano et al. 2014 [ |
| 1,2 | 4.0 (2.3) | n/a | 0.463 (0.276) | n/a | This work |
| 2 | 5.4 (3.4) | ≈ | 0.551 (0.293) | ≈ | Bonatelli et al. 2014 [ |
| 2 | 4.4 (3.1) | ≈ | 0.478 (0.288) | ≈ | Bonatelli et al. 2014 [ |
| 2 | 4.2 (2.6) | ≈ | 0.488 (0.270) | ≈ | Bonatelli et al. 2014 [ |
| 1,2 | 3.8 (1.3) | ≈ | 0.465 (0.230) | ≈ | Moraes et al. 2012 [ |
| 2 | 4.2 (3.2) | ≈ | 0.438 (0.320) | ≈ | Bonatelli et al. 2014 [ |
| 1,2 | 6.0 (2.5) | < | 0.690 (0.135) | < | Moraes et al.2014 [ |
| 2 | 7.9 (4.0) | < | 0.663 (0.210) | < | Leal et al. 2014 [ |
| 2 | n/a | n/a | 0.324 (0.106) | ≈ | Collevatti et al. 2012 [ |
| 2
| 9.7 (1.5) | ≈ | 0.720 (0,051) | ≈ | Leal et al. 2016 [ |
| 2 | 2.7 (0.3) | > | 0.460 (0.076) | ≈ | Moreira et al. 2010 [ |
| 2 | 6.1 (1.5) | < | 0.753 (0.180) | < | Martins et al. 2012 [ |
*, two studies in this category [76, 77], dealing with the triploid species Haageocereus tenuis Ritter were not included here;
#, mean and SE were calculated from by-locus (when available) or by-sample values reported in each study; A, mean number of allele per locus; HE, expected heterozygosity; SE, standard error; n/a, not available or not applicable.
Population differentiation estimates per loco.
| Locus | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.055 | 0.007 | 0.061 | 0.009 | |
| 0.069 | 0.019 | 0.112 | 0.018 | |
| 0.068 | 0.005 | 0.068 | 0.005 | |
| 0.078 | 0.002 | 0.295 | 0.002 | |
| 0.051 | 0.001 | 0.237 | 0.001 | |
| 0.095 | 0.001 | 0.248 | 0.001 | |
| Overall | 0.070 | 0.005 | 0.172 | 0.006 |
Results of AMOVA on the microsatellite variation of P. aureispinus.
| Hypothesis | Source of Variation | % variation | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Single population | Among sites | 3.07 | 0.000 | |
| Within sites | 96.93 | |||
| Two groups (IBO1-IBO2; OLB1-OLB2) | Among groups | -0.94 | 0.000 | |
| Among sites within groups | 7.50 | 0.000 | ||
| Within sites | 93.45 | 0.000 |
Results of the migrant detection analysis.
| Migrant Individual | Sampling Population | GENECLASS |
|---|---|---|
| S21A17 | IBO1 | OLB1 |
| S21A20 | IBO1 | OLB1 |
| S49A1 | IBO2 | IBO1 |
| S49A2 | IBO2 | OLB1 |
| S118A1 | OLB2 | IBO2 |
| S118A2 | OLB2 | unknown |
*The probable source populations according to GENECLASS [36] estimates.