| Literature DB >> 31015776 |
Qiang Li1, Jiamin Yao1, Lingda Zeng1, Xiaolan Lin1, Xiaolei Huang1.
Abstract
The morphology of many insect species is usually influenced by environmental factors and therefore high phenotypic variation exists even within a species. This causes difficulty and uncertainty in species taxonomy, which can be remedied by using molecular data and integrative taxonomy. Astegopteryxbambusae and A.bambucifoliae are currently regarded as two closely related aphid species with similar bamboo hosts and overlapping distributions in the oriental region. However, in practice it is hard to distinguish between them. By incorporating molecular data from four mitochondrial and nuclear genes as well as morphological information from an extensive collection of live specimens, the present study indicates that A.bambucifoliae is a junior synonym of A.bambusae. The data also indicate that large-scale geographic patterns of population differentiation may exist within this species.Entities:
Keywords: Hormaphidinae ; DNA barcoding; integrative taxonomy; species delimitation
Year: 2019 PMID: 31015776 PMCID: PMC6443623 DOI: 10.3897/zookeys.833.30592
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Zookeys ISSN: 1313-2970 Impact factor: 1.546
Samples used in this study, with collection information and GenBank accession numbers.
| Species (putative designation) | Host plant | Location | Voucher number | Accession number | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| COI | Cytb | EF | tRNA/COII | ||||
|
| bamboo | Fujian, Fuzhou | HL20160326_4 |
| |||
| bamboo | Fujian, Fuzhou | HL20160326_5 |
| ||||
| bamboo | Fujian, Fuzhou | HL20160409_11 |
| ||||
| bamboo | Fujian, Fuzhou | HL20160417_7 |
| ||||
| bamboo | Fujian, Fuzhou | HL20160512_1 |
|
|
|
| |
| bamboo | Fujian, Fuzhou | HL20161127_3 |
| ||||
| bamboo | Fujian, Fuzhou | HL20161127_4 |
|
|
|
| |
| bamboo | Fujian, Fuzhou | HL20161228_18 |
| ||||
| bamboo | Guangdong, Shenzhen | HL20170205_7 |
|
|
|
| |
| bamboo | Guangdong, Shenzhen | HL20170205_8 |
| ||||
| bamboo | Fujian, Fuding | HL20170403_10 |
|
|
|
| |
| bamboo | Fujian, Fuzhou | HL20170409_2 |
| ||||
| bamboo | Fujian, Fuzhou | HL20170409_3 |
|
|
| ||
| bamboo | Fujian, Fuzhou | HL20170419_4 |
| ||||
| bamboo | Fujian, Fuzhou | HL20170926_23 |
|
|
|
| |
| bamboo | Guangxi, Chongzuo | HLzld20171102_15 |
|
|
| ||
|
| bamboo | Fujian, Fuzhou | HL20150416_14 |
| |||
| bamboo | Fujian, Fuzhou | HL20150510_2 |
| ||||
| bamboo | Fujian, Fuzhou | HL20150530_4 |
| ||||
| bamboo | Fujian, Xiamen | HL20160131_8 |
|
|
|
| |
| bamboo | Hainan, Sanya | HL20160217_1 |
|
|
| ||
| bamboo | Fujian, Fuzhou | HL20160308_1 |
| ||||
| bamboo | Fujian, Fuzhou | HL20160412_5 |
|
|
|
| |
| bamboo | Fujian, Ningde | HL20161004_1 |
|
|
|
| |
| bamboo | Guangdong, Shenzhen | HL20170205_9 |
|
|
|
| |
| bamboo | Fujian, Fuzhou | HL20170226_3 |
| ||||
| bamboo | Fujian, Fuzhou | HL20170318_3 |
| ||||
| bamboo | Fujian, Fuding | HL20170403_13 |
| ||||
| bamboo | Fujian, Fuzhou | HL20170409_4 |
| ||||
| bamboo | Fujian, Fuzhou | HL20170606_8 |
| ||||
| bamboo | Yunnan, Kunming | HL20170806_1 |
|
|
| ||
| bamboo | Guangxi, Chongzuo | HLzld20171103_22 |
| ||||
| bamboo | Yunnan, Kunming | HLzld20171108_6 |
|
|
|
| |
| bamboo | Yunnan, Kunming | HLzld20171108_7 |
| ||||
| bamboo | Yunnan, Kunming | HLzld20171111_3 |
|
|
|
| |
| bamboo | Yunnan, Dali | HLzld20171126_6 |
| ||||
| bamboo | Yunnan, Dali | HLzld20171126_7 |
|
|
| ||
|
| bamboo | Guangxi, Chongzuo | HLzld20171102_16 |
|
|
| |
| bamboo | Guangxi, Chongzuo | HLzld20171103_19 |
|
|
|
| |
| Guizhou | ZMIOZ13322 |
|
| ||||
|
| India, Karnataka | ORP-2010-61 |
| ||||
| Guangxi | ZMIOZ 14592 |
|
|
| |||
|
| India, Bangalore | KBRIIHR-172 |
| ||||
|
| India, Karnataka | KBRIIHR-149 |
| ||||
|
| India, Karnataka | KBRIIHR-148 |
| ||||
|
| India, Karnataka | KBRIIHR-147 |
| ||||
|
| India, Karnataka | KBRIIHR-146 |
| ||||
|
|
| Taiwan, Puli | L27324 | ||||
|
| Taiwan, Sun Moon Lake | L27326 | |||||
* indicates the sequences downloaded from the GenBank.
Genetic distances among and samples based on COI, Cytb, EF-1α, and tRNA/COII sequences.
| Genetic distance | Species | Gene | Range (%) | Mean (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intraspecific |
| COI | 0–0.91 | 0.15 |
| Cytb | 0 | 0 | ||
| EF-1α | 0–0.26 | 0.13 | ||
| tRNA/COII | 0–0.48 | 0.12 | ||
|
| COI | 0–1.46 | 0.56 | |
| Cytb | 0–0.28 | 0.11 | ||
| EF-1α | 0–0.38 | 0.19 | ||
| tRNA/COII | 0–1.46 | 0.61 | ||
| Interspecific | COI | 0–1.46 | 0.38 | |
| Cytb | 0–0.28 | 0.08 | ||
| EF-1α | 0–0.38 | 0.14 | ||
| tRNA/COII | 0–1.46 | 0.38 |
Figure 1.The Neighbor-joining (NJ) trees based on COI (A), Cytb (B), EF-1α (C), tRNA/COII (D), and the combined data of all four genes (E). The ingroup specimens are printed in bold and the bootstrap values higher than 50 are indicated. The sequences are named as putative species name plus specimen voucher number.
Figure 2.Haplotype networks based on COI sequences. The circles represent different haplotypes, while different colors correspond to the geographical origins of samples and sizes represent relative numbers of sequences (H_1: 23; H_2: 1; H_3: 2; H_4: 3; H_5: 7; H_6: 3; H_7: 3; H_8: 1; H_9: 1; H_10: 1). The short line segments indicate mutated positions between haplotypes.
Figure 3.Photographs of live specimens showing high morphological variation among samples. Based on specimen voucher number, these photographs correspond to the following sequences in the phylogenetic trees; 1 HL20170205_7 2 HL20170606_8 3 HL20170409_2 4 HL20170403_13 5 HL20170226_3 6 HL20150416_14 7 HL20160417_7 8 HL20161004_1 9 HL20161228_18 10 HL20150530_4 11 HL20160326_4 12 HL20170403_10 13 HL20160131_8 14 HL20160512_1 15 HL20170318_3 16 HL20170419_4 17 HL20170926_23 18 HL20160217_1 19 HLzld20171102_15 20 HLzld20171103_22 21 HLzld20171108_6 22 HLzld20171108_7 23 HLzld20171111_3 24 HLzld20171126_6 25 HL20170205_8 26 HL20170806_1 27 HL20160412_5 28 HLzld20171102_16.