| Literature DB >> 29777161 |
Nkatha G Muriira1,2,3,4, Alice Muchugi4, Anmin Yu1,2, Jianchu Xu5,6, Aizhong Liu7.
Abstract
The genus Calotropis (Asclepiadaceae) is comprised of two species, C. gigantea and C. procera, which both show significant economic potential for use of their seed fibers in the textile industry, and of their bioactive compounds as new medicinal resources. The available wild-sourced germplasm contains limited genetic information that restricts further germplasm exploration for the purposes of domestication. We here developed twenty novel EST-SSR markers and applied them to assess genetic diversity, population structure and differentiation within Calotropis. The polymorphic information index of these markers ranged from 0.102 to 0.800; indicating that they are highly informative. Moderate genetic diversity was revealed in both species, with no difference between species in the amount of genetic diversity. Population structure analysis suggested five main genetic groups (K = 5) and relatively high genetic differentiation (FST = 0.528) between the two species. Mantel test analysis showed strong correlation between geographical and genetic distance in C. procera (r = 0.875, p = 0.020) while C. gigantea showed no such correlation (r = 0.390, p = 0.210). This study provides novel insights into the genetic diversity and population structure of Calotropis, which will promote further resource utilization and the development of genetic improvement strategies for Calotropis.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29777161 PMCID: PMC5959898 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-26275-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Map showing geographical locations where samples were collected. The marked points are exact points of collection. ArcGIS v10.2.2 (http://www.esri.com/) was used to generate the map.
Summary statistics: genetic diversity estimate at 20 EST-SSR loci for C. gigantea and C. procera. N, sample size; AR-Average allelic richness; HO-Observed Heterozygosity; HS-genetic diversity; F-fixation index.
| Population/Species | N | AR | HO | HS | F |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dongchuan | 30 | 2.6 | 0.13 | 0.157 | 0.23 |
| Honghe | 30 | 2.25 | 0.152 | 0.194 | 0.32 |
| Nepal | 25 | 3.3 | 0.292 | 0.363 | 0.205 |
| Hainan | 30 | 2.4 | 0.22 | 0.25 | 0.192 |
| Total/Mean | 115 | 2.64 | 0.198 | 0.249 | 0.234 |
| Baringo | 28 | 2.15 | 0.211 | 0.196 | 0.139 |
| Tharaka | 30 | 2.45 | 0.187 | 0.199 | 0.098 |
| Kibwezi | 29 | 2.05 | 0.185 | 0.195 | 0.048 |
| Tanzania | 30 | 2.35 | 0.227 | 0.282 | 0.145 |
| Mali K | 27 | 2.55 | 0.244 | 0.278 | 0.18 |
| Mali S | 27 | 2.85 | 0.288 | 0.339 | 0.098 |
| Total/Mean | 171 | 2.4 | 0.223 | 0.248 | 0.117 |
Figure 2Scatter plot of two axes from a PCoA of 286 Genus Calotropis, explaining 64.62% of the total observed variation.
Figure 3Bayesian STRUCTURE bar plot based on probabilities for 286 individuals of 10 populations of Calotropis. Black lines separate populations.
Figure 4Radial Neighbour joining (NJ) tree showing relationships among populations of Calotropis. Bootstrap numbers (>60) were denoted on the lines.
Figure 5Principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) and Neighbour-joining (NJ) tree showing the relationships among populations of C. procera and C. gigantea. (a) PCoA for six populations of C. procera. (b) NJ for six populations of C. procera. (c) PCoA for four populations of C. gigantea. (d) NJ for four populations of C. gigantea. In each case, the colours correspond to the populations in NJ and PCoA.
Figure 6Structure bar plots showing the assignment of individuals into distinct genetic clusters. (a) C. procera (b) C. gigantea.
AMOVA analysis comparing genetic variation within and between species of genus Calotropis (p = value: 0.001).
| Source of variation | Degrees of freedom | Sums of squares | Variance components | Percentage variation | Fixation indices |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| Between species | 1 | 464.919 | 1.66740 Va | 28.32 | FST:0.528 |
| Among populations within species | 284 | 1796.873 | 2.10756 Vb | 35.8 | FIT:0.601 |
| Within populations | 286 | 604 | 2.11189 Vc | 35.87 | FIS:0.156 |
| Among populations | 5 | 434.203 | 1.47379 Va | 36.66 | FST:0.367 |
| Among individuals within populations | 165 | 473.14 | 0.32118 Vb | 7.99 | FIT:0.447 |
| Within individuals | 171 | 380.5 | 2.22515 Vc | 55.35 | FIS:0.126 |
| Among populations | 3 | 564.74 | 3.22907 Va | 57.01 | FST:0.570 |
| Among individuals within populations | 111 | 324.79 | 0.49128 Vb | 8.67 | FIT: 0.658 |
| Within individuals | 115 | 223.5 | 1.94348 Vc | 34.31 | FIS:0.203 |
Figure 7Correlation of geographic distance (in kilometers) and genetic distance (pairwise FST) among 286 individuals of 10 populations of Calotropis, including regression line (Mantel test, R2 = 0.31, P = 0.001 at 1000 randomization).