| Literature DB >> 30828500 |
Dawei Wang1,2, Bingqi Shen1,2, Hede Gong3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Simao pine (Pinus kesiya Royle ex Gordon var. langbianensis (A. Chev.) Gaussen) is one of the most important tree species in the production of timber and resin in China. However, the genetic diversity of the natural populations has not been assessed to date. In this study, sequence related amplified polymorphism (SRAP) markers were used to investigate the genetic composition of natural Simao pine populations.Entities:
Keywords: Conservation implications; Genetic variation; Pinus kesiya Royle ex Gordon var. langbianensis; SRAP markers
Year: 2019 PMID: 30828500 PMCID: PMC6396742 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.6529
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PeerJ ISSN: 2167-8359 Impact factor: 2.984
Figure 1Geographical location of the 11 Natural populations of Simao pine in China.
Locations and geographic characteristics of the sampled Simao pine populations.
| Population name | Population abbreviation | Longitude (°E) | Latitude (°N) | Altitude (m) | Tmean (°C) | Tmax (°C) | Tmin (°C) | Pr (mm) | Prmax (mm) | Prmin (mm) | Number |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mojiang | MJ | 101.62 | 23.40 | 1,578 | 19.0 | 28.2 | 5.9 | 279 | 1,322 | 15 | 30 |
| Ninger | NE | 100.91 | 23.19 | 1,383 | 20.1 | 29.7 | 6.4 | 283 | 1,342 | 13 | 30 |
| Jingdong | JD | 100.76 | 24.59 | 1,485 | 19.0 | 28.5 | 5.3 | 191 | 965 | 13 | 30 |
| Jinggu | JG | 100.98 | 24.01 | 1,525 | 19.8 | 29.5 | 5.8 | 285 | 1,342 | 13 | 30 |
| Zhenyuan | ZY | 100.58 | 23.23 | 1,964 | 16.8 | 25.9 | 3.3 | 238 | 1,144 | 14 | 30 |
| Jiangcheng | JC | 101.93 | 22.73 | 1,263 | 16.9 | 25.6 | 4.4 | 398 | 1,772 | 22 | 30 |
| Lancang | LC | 99.77 | 22.32 | 1,725 | 17.8 | 27.4 | 3.6 | 314 | 1,520 | 12 | 30 |
| Menglian | ML | 99.42 | 22.21 | 1,239 | 18.7 | 28.5 | 4.4 | 283 | 1,449 | 9 | 30 |
| Jinghong | JH | 101.09 | 22.41 | 870 | 20.6 | 30.2 | 7.6 | 290 | 1,434 | 15 | 20 |
| Mengla | Mla | 101.46 | 21.96 | 1,032 | 19.0 | 28.0 | 6.4 | 319 | 1,645 | 20 | 20 |
| Simao | SM | 100.90 | 22.90 | 1,355 | 18.4 | 27.9 | 4.3 | 324 | 1,491 | 14 | 10 |
Primer sequences used for SRAP analysis.
| Primer combination | Sequences (3′–5′) | |
|---|---|---|
| Me1-Em4 | TGAGTCCAAACCGGATA | GACTGCGTACGAATTTGA |
| Me2-Em9 | TGAGTCCAAACCGGAGC | GACTGCGTACGAATTGAG |
| Me4-Em9 | TGAGTCCAAACCGGACC | GACTGCGTACGAATTGAG |
| Me5-Em10 | TGAGTCCAAACCGGAAG | GACTGCGTACGAATTGCC |
| Me6-Em2 | TGAGTCCAAACCGGTAA | GACTGCGTACGAATTTGC |
| Me6-Em3 | TGAGTCCAAACCGGTAA | GACTGCGTACGAATTGAC |
| Me6-Em5 | TGAGTCCAAACCGGTAA | GACTGCGTACGAATTAAC |
| Me6-Em9 | TGAGTCCAAACCGGTAA | GACTGCGTACGAATTGAG |
| Me7-Em1 | TGAGTCCAAACCGGTCC | GACTGCGTACGAATTAAT |
| Me7-Em7 | TGAGTCCAAACCGGTCC | GACTGCGTACGAATTCAA |
| Me8-Em4 | TGAGTCCAAACCGGTGC | GACTGCGTACGAATTTGA |
| Me9-Em6 | TGAGTCCAAACCGGAAC | GACTGCGTACGAATTGCA |
| Me9-Em7 | TGAGTCCAAACCGGAAC | GACTGCGTACGAATTCAA |
| Me9-Em9 | TGAGTCCAAACCGGAAC | GACTGCGTACGAATTGAG |
| Me10-Em3 | TGAGTCCAAACCGGTAG | GACTGCGTACGAATTGAC |
Analysis of SRAP-PCR amplification results.
| Primer combinations | Total number of bands | PB | PPB% | PIC |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| M1-E4 | 9 | 9 | 100 | 0.61 |
| M2-E9 | 9 | 9 | 100 | 0.72 |
| M4-E9 | 7 | 7 | 100 | 0.64 |
| M5-E10 | 10 | 8 | 80 | 0.43 |
| M6-E2 | 8 | 8 | 100 | 0.69 |
| M6-E3 | 7 | 7 | 100 | 0.65 |
| M6-E5 | 7 | 7 | 100 | 0.65 |
| M6-E9 | 9 | 8 | 88.88 | 0.63 |
| M7-E1 | 10 | 9 | 90.00 | 0.51 |
| M7-E7 | 8 | 8 | 100 | 0.56 |
| M8-E4 | 9 | 8 | 88.88 | 0.45 |
| M9-E6 | 12 | 11 | 91.66 | 0.77 |
| M9-E7 | 12 | 12 | 100 | 0.76 |
| M9-E9 | 7 | 7 | 100 | 0.70 |
| M10-E3 | 8 | 8 | 100 | 0.62 |
| Total | 132 | 126 | ||
| Average | 8.8 | 8.4 | 95.45 | 0.63 |
Notes.
Number of Polymorphic Bands
Number of Percentage of polylnorphic bands
Polymorphic Information Content
Genetic diversity of 11 Simao pine populations.
| Pop | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM | 1.7727 | 1.5469 | 77.27 | 0.3089 | 0.4511 | ||||
| NE | 1.9394 | 1.6889 | 93.94 | 0.3862 | 0.5611 | ||||
| MJ | 1.9470 | 1.7274 | 94.70 | 0.4019 | 0.5799 | ||||
| JD | 1.9394 | 1.6818 | 93.94 | 0.3819 | 0.5555 | ||||
| JG | 1.9318 | 1.6759 | 93.18 | 0.3781 | 0.5498 | ||||
| ZY | 1.9091 | 1.6480 | 90.91 | 0.3627 | 0.5288 | ||||
| JC | 2.0000 | 1.8181 | 100.00 | 0.4418 | 0.6310 | ||||
| LC | 1.9545 | 1.7072 | 95.45 | 0.3965 | 0.5754 | ||||
| ML | 1.9545 | 1.6384 | 95.45 | 0.3687 | 0.5430 | ||||
| JH | 1.9773 | 1.7005 | 97.73 | 0.3945 | 0.5750 | ||||
| Mla | 1.9545 | 1.6259 | 95.45 | 0.3600 | 0.5313 | ||||
| Mean | 1.9346 | 1.6781 | 93.46 | 0.3801 | 0.5529 | ||||
| Total | 2.0000 | 1.8516 | 100.00 | 0.4567 | 0.6484 | 0.4580 | 0.3801 | 0.1701 | 2.4403 |
Notes.
observed number of alleles
effective number of alleles
percentage of polymorphic loci
Nei’s gene diversity
Shannon’s information indices
total genetic diversity
genetic diversity within populations
the relative magnitude of genetic differentiation among populations
gene flow among populations
Analyses of molecular variance (AMOVA) for Simao pine by SRAP.
| Source of variation | Sum of squares | Variance compent | Percentage of variation% | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Among Pops | 10 | 1,343.086 | 4.146 | 14% | 0.139 |
| Within Pops | 279 | 7,160.500 | 25.665 | 86% | 0.010 |
| Total | 289 | 8,503.586 | 29.810 | 100% |
Nei’s genetic distances and geographical distances among 11 populations.
| SM | NE | MJ | JD | JG | ZY | JC | LC | ML | JH | Mla | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM | **** | 32.76 | 92.15 | 187.44 | 50.61 | 123.16 | 107.94 | 133.22 | 171.17 | 57.27 | 118.53 |
| NE | 0.0826 | **** | 75.92 | 155.03 | 36.23 | 90.48 | 116.85 | 152.635 | 189.02 | 88.41 | 147.32 |
| MJ | 0.1743 | 0.0788 | **** | 158.33 | 109.97 | 94.52 | 80.35 | 224.71 | 262.28 | 121.92 | 159.41 |
| JD | 0.2025 | 0.1214 | 0.0726 | **** | 151.42 | 97.75 | 237.96 | 271.14 | 297.85 | 243.03 | 299.15 |
| JG | 0.2135 | 0.1499 | 0.124 | 0.0661 | **** | 95.92 | 151.44 | 130.17 | 163.98 | 105.53 | 168.09 |
| ZY | 0.2178 | 0.1296 | 0.0861 | 0.0722 | 0.0741 | **** | 172.16 | 224.62 | 256.23 | 177.05 | 231.72 |
| JC | 0.1855 | 0.1135 | 0.0943 | 0.0927 | 0.0948 | 0.082 | **** | 227.86 | 265.85 | 94.26 | 98.16 |
| LC | 0.2529 | 0.1662 | 0.1883 | 0.1969 | 0.1672 | 0.1808 | 0.099 | **** | 38.31 | 136.48 | 178.92 |
| ML | 0.2433 | 0.1538 | 0.1666 | 0.1835 | 0.1694 | 0.1830 | 0.1142 | 0.0649 | **** | 173.71 | 212.45 |
| JH | 0.2511 | 0.1428 | 0.1228 | 0.1605 | 0.1356 | 0.1480 | 0.0879 | 0.0747 | 0.0769 | **** | 62.84 |
| Mla | 0.2820 | 0.1796 | 0.1959 | 0.1993 | 0.1899 | 0.2265 | 0.1299 | 0.1633 | 0.1924 | 0.1433 | **** |
Notes.
Above diagonal: geographical distances (km); below diagonal: genetic distances.
Figure 2UPGMA cluster analysis of genetic similarity of 11 populations.
Figure 3PCoA of 11 populations based on variability.
Figure 4The proportions of cluster memberships at the individual level in 11 Simao pine populations in the two clusters identified by STRUCTURE.