| Literature DB >> 31179177 |
Patcharawadee Thongkumkoon1,2, Siriwadee Chomdej1, Jatupol Kampuansai1, Waranee Pradit1, Pimubon Waikham1, Stephen Elliott1,3, Sutthathorn Chairuangsri1,3, Dia Panitnard Shannon1,3, Prasit Wangpakapattanawong1,2, Aizhong Liu4.
Abstract
Restoring isolated patches of forest ecosystems in degraded landscapes could potentially lead to genetic loss and inbreeding. Therefore, this study determined the occurrence of genetic diversity among the tree species Castanopsis tribuloides, C. calathiformis, and Lithocarpus polystachyus all of which were proven previously to be effective native tree species in the restoration of upland evergreen forests in northern Thailand when using the seed sample collection method. We tested our hypothesis as to whether the genetic diversity of a plant population that had been planted from the seeds of 4-6 adult trees would be lower and whether incidences of fixation index (Fis) would be higher among the second generation seedlings of these three Fagaceae species in isolated forest restoration trial plots. Microsatellite primers were selected from the entire genome sequence of C. tribuloides and the genetic sequences of C. tribuloides, L. polystachyus, and C. calathiformis were analyzed. Our results indicated a high degree of genetic diversity (He) in C. tribuloides (0.736) and C. calathiformis (0.481); however, a low level of genetic diversity was observed in L. polystachyus (0.281) within the restored forest. The fixation index for the second generation of L. polystachyus and C. calathiformis in the restored forest showed evidence of inbreeding. These results imply the efficiency of the seed sample collection method and verify that it does not reduce the level of genetic diversity in C. tribuloides and C. calathiformis. However, it may result in incidences of an inbreeding phenomena, suggesting the need to increase the number of adult trees used at the seed collection stage.Entities:
Keywords: Chiang Mai; Forest restoration; Framework tree species; Genetic diversity; Microsatellite markers
Year: 2019 PMID: 31179177 PMCID: PMC6544010 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.6958
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PeerJ ISSN: 2167-8359 Impact factor: 2.984
Sample collections and genetic information for L. polystachyus, C. tribuloides, and C. calathiformis in the natural forest and restoration plots from Ban Mae Sa Mai, Mae Rim District, Chiang Mai.
| Ho | He | Fis | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Natural forest | 51 | 0.377 | 0.550 | 0.314 | |
| • Adult tree | 26 | 0.356 | 0.564 | 0.369 | |
| • Seedling | 25 | 0.398 | 0.537 | 0.258 | |
| Restored area | 15 | 0.171 | 0.281 | 0.432 | |
| • Adult tree (Plots 1998 and 2006) | 5 | 0.200 | 0.302 | 0.337 | |
| • Seedling (Plot 2000) | 10 | 0.142 | 0.261 | 0.457 | |
| Natural forest | 39 | 0.691 | 0.731 | 0.056 | |
| • Adult tree | 10 | 0.658 | 0.722 | 0.088 | |
| • Seedling | 29 | 0.724 | 0.739 | 0.025 | |
| Restored area | |||||
| • Adult tree (Plots 2000 and 2006) | 18 | 0.824 | 0.776 | −0.062 | |
| Restored area (Plots 1998.1–1998.3 and 2006) | 135 | 0.331 | 0.481 | 0.332 | |
| • Adult tree | 17 | 0.356 | 0.416 | 0.144 | |
| • Seedling | 118 | 0.331 | 0.481 | 0.441 | |
Notes.
Sample size (N), observed heterozygosity (Ho), expected heterozygosity (He), Fis (Fixation index).
significant at P < 0.05.
Figure 1Map of sample collection sites.
Three Fagaceae species were collected at Ban Mae Sa Mai, Mae Rim District, Chiang Mai, Thailand. DSR, Dong-Seng ridge line. DSU, Dong-Seng upper line. DSM, Dong-Seng middle line. Restoration plots planted in the year 1998 (1998.1–1998.3), 2000, and 2006. The figure was generated via the QGIS program (QGIS Development Team, 2014) and using the picture from Google Earth, DigitalGlobe, 2019.
Twelve microsatellite loci were developed for SSR markers and their amplification in the three species tested (Waikham et al., 2018).
| CT097 | (ATT) | F: HEX-CGACTTTGGGAAGGAAATAAAGG | 140–152 | 139–175 | 126–144 |
| R: TGGACTTCAACTTGCCATAGTG | |||||
| CT110 | (TGT) | F: TAMRA-TTCTTCAGTTAGCCACATCG | 172–184 | 169–205 | 173–179 |
| R: CGCTAAGTCCATACATACAACAG | |||||
| CT113 | (TTC) | F: HEX-CCACTCGTAGCAGCCAATAATA | 114–195 | 144–171 | 115–175 |
| R: CCACTCGTAGCAGCCAATAATA | |||||
| CT127 | (AGA) | F: TAMRA-CCCAGAAAACGTATGATCTTTG | 191–254 | 207–246 | 172–250 |
| R: CCATGCAACACTACCTCGTC | |||||
| CT128 | (TCA) | F: TAMRA-CCCTTGGCAGACAAACTAGATA | 168–186 | 160–244 | 172–193 |
| R: GGCGCAACAACATATGAAGAAT | |||||
| CT132 | (AT) | F: TAMRA-TGACCCGAGCATGGTTTAT | 158–203 | 126–174 | 178–208 |
| R: GGACGTTAGGCCTGTACATT | |||||
| CT135 | (TGA) | F: FAM-GCCTAGCTTATGGAGTGGTT | 116–146 | 124–160 | 123–165 |
| R: GTCTTTGTGCAAGTGCTC | |||||
| CT149 | (TCT) | F: FAM-GCGCGTGACTTAGGCTCTTCAC | 142–166 | 144–150 | 140–161 |
| R: CTTCTCTGTTGGCATTTCTTGC | |||||
| CT159 | (TCT) | F: FAM-ATCCATGTCCACTTCTTCAA | 132–159 | 130–193 | 133–148 |
| R: CGTTTCCAAAACGAAGAAC | |||||
| CT161 | (CAC) | F: FAM-AACGATACTAGCGACCTTGA | 145–166 | 136–166 | 139–166 |
| R: GCGAAAAACGCTCTCCAAC | |||||
| CT164 | (CAC) | F: HEX-ACAACACACCTAACATCACAAC | 146–164 | 129–174 | 132–159 |
| R: GAATGTTGCTCAGCGAAG | |||||
| CT165 | (CTT) | F: HEX-AGCGCCTTCTTAATAGAACC | 153–186 | 112–149 | 119–161 |
| R: TGGTGACCATTACTTGTTGA | |||||
Figure 2STRUCTURE analysis of three Fagaceae species in restoration areas and nearest natural forest.
(A) L. polystachyus at K = 2. (B) C. tribuloides at K = 3. (C) C. calathiformis at K = 2.