| Literature DB >> 30621593 |
Els L R De Keyzer1,2, Zoë De Corte3,4, Maarten Van Steenberge5,3,4, Joost A M Raeymaekers5,6, Federico C F Calboli5, Nikol Kmentová7, Théophile N'Sibula Mulimbwa8, Massimiliano Virgilio3, Carl Vangestel4, Pascal Masilya Mulungula8, Filip A M Volckaert5, Maarten P M Vanhove5,9,7,10,11.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clupeid fisheries in Lake Tanganyika (East Africa) provide food for millions of people in one of the world's poorest regions. Due to climate change and overfishing, the clupeid stocks of Lake Tanganyika are declining. We investigate the population structure of the Lake Tanganyika sprat Stolothrissa tanganicae, using for the first time a genomic approach on this species. This is an important step towards knowing if the species should be managed separately or as a single stock. Population structure is important for fisheries management, yet understudied for many African freshwater species. We hypothesize that distinct stocks of S. tanganicae could be present due to the large size of the lake (isolation by distance), limnological variation (adaptive evolution), or past separation of the lake (historical subdivision). On the other hand, high mobility of the species and lack of obvious migration barriers might have resulted in a homogenous population.Entities:
Keywords: East Africa; Fish; Freshwater; Great Lakes; High-throughput sequencing; Panmixis; Population genomics; RAD sequencing; SNP; Stock management
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30621593 PMCID: PMC6323704 DOI: 10.1186/s12862-018-1325-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Evol Biol ISSN: 1471-2148 Impact factor: 3.260
Fig. 1Map of Lake Tanganyika with sampling sites for Stolothrissa tanganicae. Uvira and Uvira2 are located in the northern subbasin, Kalemie in the central subbasin and Mpulungu and Kalambo Lodge are in the southern subbasin. Map made with Simple Mapper (http://research.amnh.org/pbi/maps/)
Sampling information on Stolothrissa tanganicae
| Site | n | Subbasin | Date | Longitude | Latitude |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Uvira | 16 | northern | 11/08/2016 | −3.333539 | 29.189359 |
| Uvira2 | 16 | northern | 11/08/2016 | −3.395340 | 29.162933 |
| Kalemie | 32 | central | 12/08/2016 | −5.947490 | 29.196633 |
| Mpulungu | 16 | southern | 19/08/2016 | −8.762340 | 31.110506 |
| Kalambo Lodge | 16 | southern | 20/08/2016 | −8.653927 | 31.195447 |
Sample size (n), subbasin, date of sampling and coordinates for the five sampling site. Sites represent the landing sites where fresh fish were purchased
Fig. 2Haplotype network of COI sequences of Stolothrissa tanganicae (n = 96). Median Joining Network (ε = 0) created in PopART v1.7. Each circle represents a haplotype, the size of circles corresponds to the number of individuals with the haplotype. Colors indicate sampling sites. Bars indicate the number of mutations between two haplotypes. Small black circles indicate hypothetical haplotypes, predicted by the model. Uvira and Uvira 2 are in the northern basin, Kalemie is in the central basin and Mpulungu and Kalambo Lodge are in the southern basin
Pairwise genetic differentiation (FST) between sampling sites of Stolothrissa tanganicae
| FST | Uvira | Uvira 2 | Kalemie | Mpulungu | Kalambo lodge |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Uvira | 0.0077 [− 0.0621, 0.1302] | 0.0316 [− 0.0368, 0.1496] | 0.0206 [− 0.0579, 0.1609] | 0.03267 [− 0.0358, 0.1498] | |
| Uvira 2 | 0.0044 [0.0023, 0.0066] | −0.0200 [− 0.0650, 0.0551] | − 0.0275 [− 0.0720, 0.0641] | −0.0247 [− 0.0787, 0.0803] | |
| Kalemie | 0.0250 [0.0215, 0.0281] | 0.0045 [0.0029,0.0066] | −0.0136[− 0.051, 0.0463] | −0.0035[− 0.0485, 0.0524] | |
| Mpulungu | 0.0166 [0.0140, 0.0194] | 0.0017 [-0.0001, 0.0041] | 0.0014 [-0.0005, 0.0030] | −0.0219 [− 0.0782, 0.0584] | |
| Kalambo Lodge | -0.0012 [-0.0028, 0.0001] | -0.0005 [-0.0024, 0.0010] | 0.0100 [0.0085, 0.0010] | 0.0031 [0.0014, 0.0051] |
Values below the diagonal are from the nuclear DNA, above the diagonal from mitochondrial data. The values in brackets represent 95% confidence intervals based on 100 bootstraps over loci
Nuclear genetic diversity of Stolothrissa tanganicae by sampling site
| Sample size | He (mean ± SE) | Ho (mean ± SE) | AR (mean ± SE) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Uvira | 15 | 0.2605 ± 0.0024 | 0.2619 ± 0.0029 | 1.8716 ± 0.0041 |
| Uvira2 | 15 | 0.2301 ± 0.0024 | 0.2213 ± 0.0025 | 1.8401 ± 0.0044 |
| Kalemie | 22 | 0.2088 ± 0.0025 | 0.1920 ± 0.0026 | 1.7831 ± 0.0046 |
| Mpulungu | 15 | 0.2529 ± 0.0023 | 0.2565 ± 0.0026 | 1.9047 ± 0.0033 |
| Kalambo Lodge | 16 | 0.2232 ± 0.0025 | 0.2181 ± 0.0027 | 1.8408 ± 0.0040 |
Expected and observed heterozygosity (H and H ) and allelic richness (AR) by sampling site. Sample size is the number of individuals used for the analysis of the RADseq data, after exclusion of low quality samples. SE: standard error
Fig. 3PCoA based on kinship of nuclear DNA. Each dot represents one S. tanganicae individual. Dots that are closer together have more similar genotypes. Colors represent the five sampling sites. a. all individuals, PC1 explains 9.30% of the variation and PC2 1.72% of the variation. b. Plot with only the individuals from the larger cluster, PC1 2.47% explains of the variation and PC2 explains 2.44% of the variation. Made with ADEGENET v2.1.0 package in R
Fig. 4Discriminant analysis of principal components (DAPC) with a priori grouping corresponding to the sampling sites of Stolothrissa tanganicae. Scatterplot of DAPC data based on nuclear DNA
Fig. 5FineRADstructure analysis for visualization of patterns of haplotype similarity: co-ancestry matrix based on a reduced dataset of 1255 SNPs. Colors indicate scale of relatedness between individuals, with yellow being low relatedness and blue/black indicating high relatedness. No structuring per sampling site is visible. A cluster of individuals is apparent in the upper right of the graph. These individuals correspond to the individuals that score high on the first axis of the PCoA plot, and are spread over the different sampling sites. Made with the fineRADstructure software [62]
Fig. 6Autocorrelation (r) showing genetic similarity over geographical distance. Error bars bound the 95% confidence interval as determined by bootstrap resampling. Over a distance of 400 km, 95% CI include zero, showing that random processes like stochastic drift overcome the homogenizing effect of gene flow. Analysis done in GenAlEx v6.501 [66]