| Literature DB >> 31717798 |
Zifeng Zhan1,2,3, Ju Li1,3, Kuidong Xu1,2,3,4.
Abstract
Metabarcoding and high-throughput sequencing methods have greatly improved our understanding of protist diversity. Although the V4 region of small subunit ribosomal DNA (SSU-V4 rDNA) is the most widely used marker in DNA metabarcoding of eukaryotic microorganisms, doubts have recently been raised about its suitability. Here, using the widely distributed ciliate genus Pseudokeronopsis as an example, we assessed the potential of SSU-V4 rDNA and four other nuclear and mitochondrial markers for species delimitation and phylogenetic reconstruction. Our studies revealed that SSU-V4 rDNA is too conservative to distinguish species, and a threshold of 97% and 99% sequence similarity detected only one and three OTUs, respectively, from seven species. On the basis of the comparative analysis of the present and previously published data, we proposed the multilocus marker including the nuclear 5.8S rDNA combining the internal transcribed spacer regions (ITS1-5.8S-ITS2) and the hypervariable D2 region of large subunit rDNA (LSU-D2) as an ideal barcode rather than the mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 gene, and the ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 as a candidate metabarcoding marker for ciliates. Furthermore, the compensating base change and tree-based criteria of ITS2 and LSU-D2 were useful in complementing the DNA barcoding and metabarcoding methods by giving second structure and phylogenetic evidence.Entities:
Keywords: DNA barcoding; ITS1-5.8S-ITS2; cryptic species; metabarcode; mitochondrial COI; rDNA; secondary structure
Year: 2019 PMID: 31717798 PMCID: PMC6920991 DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms7110493
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microorganisms ISSN: 2076-2607
Specifications of the Pseudokeronopsis spp. in the present research. Newly obtained sequences are in bold.
| Organisms | Sampling Location | References | Accession Numbers | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SSU rDNA | ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 | LSU rDNA | COI | |||
|
| Yellow Sea, Qingdao, China | Present study |
|
|
| |
|
| Yellow Sea, Qingdao, China | Present study | KU663902 | KU663904 |
| |
|
| Yellow Sea, Qingdao, China | Present study | KU663901 | KU663903 |
| |
| Yellow Sea, Incheon harbor, Korea | [ | JN714476 | - | - | MG594874 | |
| Yellow Sea, Gwangyang, Korea | [ | MG603616 | - | - | MG594875 | |
| Yellow Sea, Qingdao, China | [ | KT984168 | - | - | - | |
| Yellow Sea, Qingdao, China | [ | AY881633 | DQ503580, EF174292-4 | JQ424836 | - | |
| Yellow Sea, Qingdao, China | [ | - | DQ503581 | - | - | |
| Yellow Sea, Qingdao, China | [ | - | DQ503582, EF174295-7 | - | - | |
|
| Estuary, Yancheng, China | Present study |
| |||
|
| Estuary of Pearl River, Guangzhou, China | [ | FJ775723 | JQ424868 | JQ424852 | - |
|
| Estuary of Pearl River, Guangzhou, China | [ | KT984173 | - | - | - |
|
| Freshwater River Yamuna, Delhi, India | Kaur et al., unpublished | MG994990 | - | - | - |
|
| Lake Trasimeno, Perugia, Italy | [ | KX459375 | - | - | - |
|
| Yellow Sea, Qingdao, China | Present study | ||||
|
| Yellow Sea, Qingdao, China | Present study | KY313623 | KY313624 |
|
|
| Sea of Japan, Hwajinpo, Korea | [ | MG603620 | - | MG594873 | ||
| Yellow Sea, Qingdao, China | [ | DQ640314 | DQ640313 | - | - | |
| - | Khan and Shin, unpublished | HM140387 | - | - | - | |
| - | [ | EF535729 | - | - | - | |
| Yellow Sea, Qingdao, China | [ | KT984169 | - | - | - | |
| South China Sea, Guangdong, China | [ | KT984170 | - | - | - | |
| Daya Bay, Guangdong, China | [ | KT984171 | - | - | - | |
| Mangrove wetland, Shenzhen, China | [ | KT984172 | - | - | - | |
| Yellow Sea, Incheon, Korea | Jung et al., unpublished | HQ228548 | HQ228548 | HQ228548 | - | |
|
| Sea of Japan, Pohang-is, Korea | [ | MG603616 | - | - | MG594872 |
|
| South China Sea, Zhanjiang, China | [ | AY881634 | DQ503579 | JQ424835 | - |
|
| Yellow Sea, Qingdao, China | [ | DQ227798 | - | - | - |
|
| Mangrove wetland, Shenzhen, China | [ | KT984174 | - | - | - |
|
| Yellow Sea, Qingdao, China | [ | KT984175 | - | - | - |
|
| - | Khan and Shin, unpublished | HM140386 | - | HM122031 | - |
| Yellow Sea, Qingdao, China | [ | JQ424830 | JQ424859 | JQ424847 | - | |
| Horniman Museum and Gardens Aquarium, London, England | [ | KP793002 | - | - | - | |
* Misidentified or dubious species. C1–5 correspond to the cryptic species (C1) related to P. songi, the cryptic species (C3) related to P. pararubra, and the uncertain species (C2, C4, and C5) in Table 2 and the following phylogenetic trees. SSU rDNA: small subunit ribosomal DNA, LSU rDNA: large subunit ribosomal DNA, COI: cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1.
Emendation for the misidentified or uncertain Pseudokeronopsis sequences in GenBank.
| Sequences | Reference | Morphological Data * | Molecular Analyses | Emendation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [ | Similar to | No difference from |
| |
| [ | Similar to | No difference from |
| |
| [ | Similar to | The ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 genetic distances between C3 and congeners were in the range of 3.23–10.74%, similar to those among congeners (3.68–13.01%), indicating a cryptic species. | Cryptic species related to | |
| [ | Similar to | The ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 genetic distances between C1 and congeners were in the range of 3.46–11.93%, indicating a cryptic species. | Cryptic species related to | |
| [ | Not available | The genetic distances between C4 and congeners were in the range of 13.55–21.54%, indicating an uncertain or cryptic species. | Misidentified, uncertain species | |
| [ | Not available | The COI genetic distance between | ||
| [ | Not available | The ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 genetic distance between JQ424859 and |
| |
| [ | Not available | The COI genetic distance between | Misidentified, uncertain species | |
| Jung et al. (unpublished), Khan & Shin (unpublished) | Not available | The ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 genetic distance between C2 and congeners were in the range of 3.67–9.73%, suggesting it represented an uncertain species. | Misidentified, uncertain species | |
| [ | Not available | Only SSU rDNA and Actin I sequences were available for these populations, showing six, one, and three nucleotide differences of SSU-V4 region from the valid | Dubious | |
| [ | Not available | Only alpha-tubulin gene sequence was available. | Dubious | |
| [ | Not available | Only SSU rDNA sequences were available, showing 1 and 23 nucleotide differences of SSU rDNA from the valid | Dubious |
The morphological data is shown in Figure 10.
Figure 1Genetic distance ranges of ITS1-5.8S-ITS2, ITS2, LSU-D2, SSU-V4, and COI within Pseudokeronopsis.
Figure 2Horizontal bars show the species delimitation results inferred from the morphology and molecular markers (listed on the upper side) for Pseudokeronopsis species. Each color represents a species (online version in color). C1–C5 correspond to the C1–5 taxa marked in the following phylogenetic trees. Dashed line indicates no available data. *, misidentified species.
Figure 3Secondary structure features of the Pseudokeronopsis ITS2 molecule. (A) Consensus secondary structure predicted using the LocARNA Sever. Color bars (0–1) indicate base-pairing probability. (B) Structural model for Pseudokeronopsis. (C) Helix A structures of congeners. Using the structure of P. carnea as a reference, compensating base changes (CBCs) are marked with filled arrows and hemi-CBCs are indicated with hollow arrows. The variable region is marked by a grey box. Newly sequenced species are in bold. *, misidentified.
Figure 4Helix B secondary structures of the Pseudokeronopsis ITS2 molecule. Using the structure of P. carnea as a reference, CBCs are marked with filled arrows and hemi-CBCs are indicated with hollow arrows. Newly sequenced species are in bold. *, misidentified.
Compensating base changes of ITS2 between Pseudokeronopsis species/populations.
| Species/Populations | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0 | ||||||||||
| 2 | 0 | 0 | |||||||||
| 3 | 1 | 1 | - | ||||||||
| 4 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | |||||||
| 5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | - | ||||||
| 6 |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||
| 7 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - | ||||
| 8 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | - | |||
| 9 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ||
| 10 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | |
* Misidentified species. C1–3 correspond to the C1–3 taxa in the ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 tree. Newly obtained sequences are in bold.
Figure 5Secondary structure features of the Pseudokeronopsis LSU-D2 molecule. (A) Consensus secondary structure predicted using the LocARNA Sever. Color bars (0–1) indicate base-pairing probability. (B) Helix II structures of congeners. Using the structure of P. songi as a reference, CBCs are marked with filled arrows and hemi-CBCs are indicated with hollow arrows. The variable regions are marked by grey boxes. Newly sequenced species are in bold. *, misidentified species.
Figure 6Helix III secondary structures of the Pseudokeronopsis LSU-D2 molecule. Using the structure of P. songi as a reference, CBCs are marked with filled arrows and hemi-CBCs are indicated with hollow arrows. The variable regions are marked by grey boxes. Newly sequenced species are in bold. *, misidentified species.
Compensating base changes of LSU-D2 between Pseudokeronopsis species/populations.
| Species/Populations | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0 | |||||||||
| 2 | 0 | 0 | ||||||||
| 3 | 1 | 1 | - | |||||||
| 4 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| 5 |
| 7 | 8 | 7 | 9 | - | ||||
| 6 |
| 5 | 6 | 5 | 8 | 1 | - | |||
| 7 |
| 7 | 8 | 6 | 8 | 2 | 1 | - | ||
| 8 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 1 | 1 | 1 | - | ||
| 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 7 | 5 | 7 | 5 | 0 | |
* Misidentified species. C2–3 correspond to the C2–3 taxa in the ITS1-5.8S-ITS2-5′LSU tree. Newly obtained sequences are in bold.
Figure 7Bayesian inference (BI) trees constructed by ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 (ITS-5.8S) and ITS1-5.8S-ITS2-5′LSU sequences showing phylogenetic relationships among the available pseudokeronopsids. The maximum likelihood (ML) tree and the BI tree of ITS1-5.8S-ITS2-5′LSU are identical in topology, and numbers at the nodes represent BI and ML support values. Newly sequenced species are in bold. *, misidentified species.
Figure 8Bayesian inference (BI) and maximum likelihood (ML) trees based on the COI gene showing phylogenetic relationships among the available pseudokeronopsids. Numbers at the nodes represent BI and ML support values. Newly sequenced species are in bold. *, misidentified species.
Figure 9Genetic distances of ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 from the previous and present studies. Data were obtained from or calculated on the basis of the database of (a) [25], (b) [14], (c) [31], (d) [30], (e) present study, (f) [15], (g) [60] and (h) [33].
Figure 10Putative phylogenetic relationships of all available Pseudokeronopsis species. *, previously misidentified species. Synapomorphies of major clades were numbered. The number 10 indicates the feature that contractile vacuole is located at mid-body or the anterior portion of body. CV, contractile vacuole; Ma, macronuclear nodules; MC, midventral complex; PT, pretransverse cirri; TC, transverse cirri.