| Literature DB >> 30847085 |
Lucian Pârvulescu1, Jorge L Pérez-Moreno2, Cristian Panaiotu3, Lucian Drăguț4, Anne Schrimpf5, Ioana-Diana Popovici1,5, Claudia Zaharia6, András Weiperth7, Blanka Gál7,8, Christoph D Schubart9, Heather Bracken-Grissom2.
Abstract
Crayfish can be used as model organisms in phylogeographic and divergence time studies if reliable calibrations are available. This study presents a comprehensive investigation into the phylogeography of the European stone crayfish (Austropotamobius torrentium) and includes samples from previously unstudied sites. Two mitochondrial markers were used to reveal evolutionary relationships among haplogroups throughout the species' distributional range and to estimate the divergence time by employing both substitution rates and geological calibration methods. Our haplotype network reconstruction and phylogenetic analyses revealed the existence of a previously unknown haplogroup distributed in Romania's Apuseni Mountains. This haplogroup is closely related to others that are endemic in the Dinarides, despite their vast geographical separation (~600 km). The separation is best explained by the well-dated tectonic displacement of the Tisza-Dacia microplate, which started in the Miocene (~16 Ma) and possibly carried part of the A. torrentium population to the current location of the Apuseni Mountains. This population may thus have been isolated from the Dinarides for a period of ca. 11 m.y. by marine and lacustrine phases of the Pannonian Basin. The inclusion of this geological event as a calibration point in divergence time analyses challenges currently accepted crayfish evolutionary time frames for the region, constraining the evolution of this area's crayfish to a much earlier date. We discuss why molecular clock calibrations previously employed to date European crayfish species divergences should therefore be reconsidered.Entities:
Keywords: Apuseni Mountains; Tisza–Dacia mega‐unit; biogeographical pattern; divergence time estimates; endemic lineages; freshwater species distribution; molecular clock
Year: 2019 PMID: 30847085 PMCID: PMC6392496 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.4888
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ecol Evol ISSN: 2045-7758 Impact factor: 2.912
Figure 1Geographical distribution of Austropotamobius torrentium phylogroups in Europe. Bold circles indicate the new sampling sites selected for this study as they cover the entire species range
Figure 2Haplotype networks of Austropotamobius torrentium mitochondrial loci (16S and COI). Node diameter and annotation denote sample sizes. Colors represent haplogroup, as illustrated in the legend of Figure 1
Figure 3Maximum‐Likelihood phylogram estimated using concatenated mitochondrial gene data (16S and COI) showing the genetic structuring among A. torrentium populations. Nodes are annotated with bootstrap support values and with the posterior probabilities obtained from the equivalent Bayesian analysis
Figure 4Divergence times (x‐axis in millions of years) of Austropotamobius torrentium as estimated with the proposed geological calibration (a) and arthropod substitution rate (b) in BEAST. Nodes with support values over 0.5 are annotated as indicated in the legend. Node bars depict the 95% highest posterior density (HPD) interval of the divergence between the labeled haplogroups
Mantel r coefficients describing the monotonic association between genetic and geographical distances for each haplogroup, and corresponding one‐tailed p‐values (null hypothesis: r ≤ 0), computed by using 10,000 permutations
| Haplogroup |
|
|
|---|---|---|
| GK | 0.545 | 0.0116 |
| ŽPB | 0.837 | 0.0003 |
| SB | 0.338 | 0.0133 |
| CSE | 0.137 | 0.0135 |
| CSE > 0 | 0.357 | 0.0007 |
Figure 5Paleogeographical reconstruction and Austropotamobius torrentium lineage evolution from the estimated species origin (a), followed by NCD and APU lineages separation during the tectonic displacement of the Tisza–Dacia mega‐unit (b), SB to CSE divergence and spread limited by the Pannonian Lake (c), to the current distribution after the formation of the paleo‐Danube (d). Maps used with permission of Colorado Plateau Geosystems Inc. (https://deeptimemaps.com), slightly modified after Kováč et al. (2016) and Magyar et al. (2013)
Figure 6Comparison of HPD divergence time chronogram estimates for the native European astacids obtained (1) in this study using (a) tectonic calibration, and (b) arthropod substitution rate, with those from other previous studies (2) by Klobučar et al. (2013) using (a) arthropod substitution rate, (b) crustacean substitution rate, and (c) geological calibration; (3) by Jelić et al. (2016) using (a) arthropod substitution rate, and (b) geological calibration; (4) by Trontelj et al. (2005) using crustacean substitution rate; and (5) by Bracken‐Grissom et al. (2014) using a BPBP model. For details of the methods, the reader is referred to the above‐mentioned papers and references therein. For information on geological events in the figure, see Schmid et al. (2008), Balázs et al. (2016), and Kováč et al. (2016)