| Literature DB >> 31826015 |
Łukasz Walas1, Petros Ganatsas2, Grzegorz Iszkuło1,3, Peter A Thomas4,5, Monika Dering1,6.
Abstract
Horse-chestnut (Aesculus hippocastanum L.) is an endemic and relict species from the Mediterranean biodiversity hotspot and a popular ornamental tree. Knowledge about the evolutionary history of this species remains scarce. Here, we ask what historical and ecological factors shaped the pattern of genetic diversity and differentiation of this species. We genotyped 717 individuals from nine natural populations using microsatellite markers. The influence of distance, topography and habitat variables on spatial genetic structure was tested within the approaches of isolation-by-distance and isolation-by-ecology. Species niche modeling was used to project the species theoretical range through time and space. The species showed high genetic diversity and moderate differentiation for which topography, progressive range contraction through the species' history and long-term persistence in stable climatic refugia are likely responsible. A strong geographic component was revealed among five genetic clusters that are connected with very limited gene flow. The environmental variables were a significant factor in the spatial genetic structure. Modeling results indicated that future reduction of the species range may affect its survival. The possible impact of climate changes and high need of in situ conservation are discussed.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31826015 PMCID: PMC6905551 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0226225
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Location and clonal structure of the studied populations.
| Population | Voucher | Latitude | Longitude | Altitude [m a.s.l.] | Number of individuals | Number of genotypes | R |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| KOR 51216 | 39°42' N | 21°21' E | 1029 | 84 | 83 | 0.99 | |
| No voucher | 39°48' N | 21°16' E | 1371 | 23 | 23 | 1.00 | |
| KOR 51230 | 38°37' N | 22°26' E | 1239 | 46 | 46 | 1.00 | |
| KOR 51217 | 40°20' N | 21°05' E | 1463 | 48 | 48 | 1.00 | |
| No voucher | 39°12' N | 21°42' E | 1089 | 33 | 29 | 0.88 | |
| No voucher | 39°25' N | 21°25' E | 1028 | 78 | 75 | 0.96 | |
| KOR 51280 | 39°48' N | 22°45' E | 705 | 50 | 50 | 1.00 | |
| KOR 51280 | 39°48' N | 22°45' E | 705 | 114 | 94 | 0.82 | |
| No voucher | 39°50' N | 22°42' E | 950 | 46 | 46 | 1.00 | |
| No voucher | 39°50' N | 22°42' E | 950 | 22 | 22 | 1.00 | |
| KOR 51226 | 39°58' N | 21°11' E | 915 | 95 | 95 | 1.00 | |
| KOR 51226 | 39°58' N | 21°11' E | 915 | 78 | 75 | 0.96 |
R–level of clonality
Parameters of genetic diversity of the studied populations.
| Population | N | A | Ae | Ar | Ap | Null | Ho | He | FIS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 83 | 9.63 | 4.68 | 7.22 | 1 | 0.052 | 0.590 | 0.670 | 0.0305 | |
| 23 | 6.00 | 3.82 | 5.93 | 0 | 0.096 | 0.449 | 0.644 | 0.1520 | |
| 46 | 7.00 | 2.77 | 5.95 | 0 | 0.063 | 0.442 | 0.533 | 0.0742 | |
| 48 | 9.00 | 4.48 | 7.73 | 4 | 0.053 | 0.536 | 0.623 | 0.0510 | |
| 29 | 8.63 | 4.97 | 8.10 | 3 | 0.060 | 0.573 | 0.705 | 0.1093 | |
| 75 | 10.75 | 5.34 | 8.44 | 2 | 0.068 | 0.636 | 0.746 | 0.0435 | |
| 94 | 11.00 | 5.64 | 8.35 | 1 | 0.050 | 0.593 | 0.677 | 0.0410 | |
| 50 | 9.25 | 4.37 | 7.61 | 0 | 0.070 | 0.543 | 0.664 | 0.1014 | |
| 22 | 6.63 | 3.69 | 6.56 | 0 | 0.041 | 0.536 | 0.605 | 0.0238null | |
| 46 | 8.13 | 3.72 | 6.66 | 1 | 0.050 | 0.521 | 0.603 | 0.1016 | |
| 75 | 9.63 | 3.96 | 7.22 | 1 | 0.081 | 0.593 | 0.711 | 0.0144null | |
| 95 | 9.13 | 2.83 | 6.48 | 0 | 0.069 | 0.504 | 0.607 | 0.0200null | |
N–number of samples, A–average number of alleles, Ae−effective number of alleles, Ar−allelic richness, Ap−number of private alleles, Null–frequency of null alleles, Ho−observed heterozygosity, He−expected heterozygosity, FIS−fixation index.
***—departure from HWE at P<0.001.
null***—the random mating model was more probable than the full model.
Fig 1Location of the sampled populations with results of clustering analyses made with STRUCTURE.
Fig 2Genetic cluster inferred with DAPC analysis.
Fig 3Theoretical range of Aesculus hippocastanum, estimated using MAXENT.
A—period of the maximum glaciation (c. 22,000 years ago); B—current conditions; C—future conditions estimated for RCP 4.5 scenario of the climate changes.
Percent contribution of the most important bioclimatic variables in the tested climate models.
| Model | Bio8 | Bio19 | Bio14 | Bio3 | Bio15 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Current conditions | 29.8 | 18.3 | 20.1 | 14.5 | 12.4 |
| LGM | 30.8 | 19.6 | 19.4 | 13.7 | 11.2 |
| Middle Holocene | 29.0 | 22.1 | 19.2 | 13.8 | 11.7 |
| Future conditions, RCP 2.6 | 28.8 | 20.3 | 19.6 | 14.0 | 12.5 |
| Future conditions, RCP 4.5 | 27.9 | 23.1 | 18.6 | 13.7 | 11.9 |
| Future conditions, RCP 8.5 | 27.9 | 23.1 | 18.6 | 13.7 | 11.9 |
Bio8 –mean temperature of wettest quarter; Bio19 –precipitation of coldest quarter; Bio14 –precipitation of driest month; Bio3 –isothermality; Bio15 –precipitation seasonality.