| Literature DB >> 32362914 |
Yan-Xia Yao1, Xing-Pu Shang1, Jun Yang1, Ruo-Zhu Lin1, Wen-Xia Huai1, Wen-Xia Zhao1.
Abstract
Invasive species often cause serious economic and ecological damage. Despite decades of extensive impacts of invasives on bio-diversity and agroforestry, the mechanisms underlying the genetic adaptation and rapid evolution of invading populations remain poorly understood. The black locust gall midge, Obolodiplosis robiniae, a highly invasive species that originated in North America, spread widely throughout Asia and Europe in the past decade. Here, we used 11 microsatellite DNA markers to analyze the genetic variation of 22 O. robiniae populations in China (the introduced region) and two additional US populations (the native region). A relatively high level of genetic diversity was detected among the introduced populations, even though they exhibited lower diversity than the native US populations. Evidence for genetic differentiation among the introduced Chinese populations was also found based on the high Fst value compared to the relatively low among the native US populations. Phylogenetic trees, structure graphical output, and principal coordinate analysis plots suggested that the Chinese O. robiniae populations (separated by up to 2,540 km) cluster into two main groups independent of geographical distance. Genetic variation has been observed to increase rapidly during adaptation to a new environment, possibly contributing to population establishment and spread. Our results provide insights into the genetic mechanisms underlying successful invasion, and identify factors that have contributed to colonization by an economically important pest species in China. In addition, the findings improve our understanding of the role that genetic structure plays during invasion by O. robiniae.Entities:
Keywords: genetic differentiation; genetic diversity; genetic structure; invasion success; population colonization
Year: 2020 PMID: 32362914 PMCID: PMC7180195 DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2020.00387
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Genet ISSN: 1664-8021 Impact factor: 4.599
FIGURE 1Geographic locations of the 22 Chinese Obolodiplosis robiniae populations sampled. Population codes are listed in Table 1. (The source map was downloaded from the website http://www.webmap.cn/commres.do?method=dataDownload).
Location of Obolodiplosis robiniae populations and the sample size used in this study.
| Number | Code | Site | Latitude (N) | Longitude (E) | Altitude | Sample size |
| (1) | BJ | Beijing | 40°00.184′ | 116°14.363′ | 76 | 20 |
| (2) | CC | Changchun, Jilin | 43°53.851′ | 125°16.329′ | 218 | 20 |
| (3) | CD | Chengdu, Sichuan | 30°38.245′ | 104°07.334′ | 510 | 20 |
| (4) | DD | Dandong, Liaoning | 40°06.906′ | 124°21.536′ | 33 | 20 |
| (5) | DL | Dalian, Liaoning | 38°58.531′ | 121°36.800′ | 67 | 20 |
| (6) | DY | Dongying, Shandong | 37°26.366′ | 118°34.448′ | 17 | 20 |
| (7) | GY | Guiyang, Guizhou | 26°33.531′ | 106°45.003′ | 1090 | 20 |
| (8) | HF | Hefei, Anhui | 31°52.824′ | 117°11.639′ | 39 | 20 |
| (9) | NJ | Nanjing, Jiangsu | 32°03.426′ | 118°50.820′ | 90 | 20 |
| (10) | QD | Qingdao, Shandong | 36°03.367′ | 120°20.934′ | 24 | 20 |
| (11) | QH | Qinhuangdao, Hebei | 39°56.161′ | 119°35.411′ | 17 | 20 |
| (12) | SY | Shenyang, Liaoning | 41°50.438′ | 123°25.690′ | 51 | 20 |
| (13) | TA | Taian, Shandong | 36°12.225′ | 117°07.104′ | 208 | 20 |
| (14) | TS | Tianshui, Gansu | 34°21.405′ | 106°00.034′ | 1460 | 20 |
| (15) | TY | Taiyuan, Shanxi | 37°54.592′ | 112°31.811′ | 798 | 20 |
| (16) | WH | Wuhan, Hubei | 30°36.733′ | 114°17.772′ | 40 | 20 |
| (17) | XA | Xian, Shaanxi | 34°15.474′ | 108°58.938′ | 428 | 20 |
| (18) | YA | Yanan, Shaanxi | 36°35.633′ | 109°29.535′ | 1121 | 20 |
| (19) | YC | Yinchuan, Ningxia | 38°28.933′ | 106°11.983′ | 1115 | 20 |
| (20) | YK | Yingkou, Liaoning | 40°12.432′ | 122°04.413′ | 15 | 20 |
| (21) | YT | Yantai, Shandong | 37°32.024′ | 121°25.657′ | 9 | 20 |
| (22) | ZZ | Zhengzhou, Henan | 34°48.509′ | 113°42.266′ | 95 | 16 |
| (23) | US_f | Finger Lakes, NY, United States | 42°45′ | −76°41.4′W | – | 5 |
| (24) | US_g | Goat Island, NY, United States | 43°48′ | −79°42′W | – | 3 |
Polymorphism of microsatellite loci across Chinese O. robiniae populations.
| Locus | ||||||||
| W3 | 14 | 54 | 7.9971 | 0.8755 | 2.2573 | 0.7477 | 0.8760 | 0.8627 |
| W5 | 14 | 42 | 5.8768 | 0.8295 | 1.9743 | 0.7067 | 0.8308 | 0.8085 |
| W6 | 4 | 6 | 2.2687 | 0.5601 | 0.9575 | 0.3471 | 0.5599 | 0.4973 |
| W8 | 7 | 18 | 4.3609 | 0.7712 | 1.6184 | 0.3701 | 0.7716 | 0.7367 |
| W31 | 5 | 14 | 4.2747 | 0.7661 | 1.5224 | 0.6697 | 0.7669 | 0.7281 |
| W33 | 7 | 20 | 3.6391 | 0.7249 | 1.4660 | 0.6506 | 0.7260 | 0.6835 |
| W82 | 5 | 12 | 3.3448 | 0.7010 | 1.3193 | 0.3532 | 0.7018 | 0.6487 |
| W83 | 2 | 4 | 1.4087 | 0.2901 | 0.4767 | 0.3005 | 0.2905 | 0.2494 |
| W107 | 2 | 3 | 1.6205 | 0.3829 | 0.5710 | 0.2271 | 0.3833 | 0.3096 |
| W126 | 4 | 6 | 2.0018 | 0.5005 | 0.7223 | 0.4398 | 0.5010 | 0.3809 |
| W132 | 8 | 23 | 4.1874 | 0.7603 | 1.6214 | 0.4207 | 0.7621 | 0.7284 |
| Mean | 6.5 | 18.3636 | 3.7255 | 0.6511 | 1.3188 | 0.4757 | 0.6518 | 0.6031 |
Genetic diversity of the O. robiniae populations across 11 microsatellite loci.
| Code | Sample size | |||||||
| BJ | 40 | 3.3636 | 2.375 | 0.868 | 0.4591 | 0.4928 | 0.4805 | 0.0445 |
| CC | 40 | 3.7273 | 2.5568 | 0.9673 | 0.4364 | 0.5425 | 0.529 | 0.1751 |
| CD | 40 | 3.4545 | 2.1684 | 0.8976 | 0.4136 | 0.531 | 0.5177 | 0.2011 |
| DD | 40 | 3.5455 | 2.651 | 1.016 | 0.5591 | 0.5895 | 0.5748 | 0.0273 |
| DL | 40 | 3.1818 | 2.3375 | 0.8675 | 0.5636 | 0.5026 | 0.49 | –0.1503 |
| DY | 40 | 3.2727 | 2.2412 | 0.7847 | 0.4409 | 0.4279 | 0.4172 | –0.0569 |
| GY | 40 | 3.5455 | 2.0894 | 0.8164 | 0.3864 | 0.4705 | 0.4588 | 0.1578 |
| HF | 40 | 3.1818 | 2.5997 | 0.9554 | 0.4909 | 0.5742 | 0.5599 | 0.1232 |
| NJ | 40 | 3.8182 | 2.4202 | 0.9633 | 0.4364 | 0.5408 | 0.5273 | 0.1724 |
| QD | 40 | 3.3636 | 2.2096 | 0.8265 | 0.3682 | 0.4647 | 0.4531 | 0.1874 |
| QH | 40 | 3.6364 | 2.2661 | 0.9192 | 0.5318 | 0.5233 | 0.5102 | –0.0423 |
| SY | 40 | 3.7273 | 2.797 | 1.058 | 0.5455 | 0.6157 | 0.6003 | 0.0914 |
| TA | 40 | 3.3636 | 2.0576 | 0.8347 | 0.439 | 0.4792 | 0.4672 | 0.0603 |
| TS | 40 | 4.0909 | 2.8428 | 1.1103 | 0.5045 | 0.6162 | 0.6008 | 0.1602 |
| TY | 40 | 3.6364 | 2.3278 | 0.9101 | 0.5273 | 0.5253 | 0.5122 | –0.0295 |
| WH | 40 | 3.7273 | 2.5723 | 0.9797 | 0.5256 | 0.5599 | 0.5459 | 0.0371 |
| XA | 40 | 3.5455 | 2.535 | 0.9503 | 0.5182 | 0.5492 | 0.5355 | 0.0323 |
| YA | 40 | 3.8182 | 2.7608 | 0.9798 | 0.4199 | 0.5355 | 0.5221 | 0.1958 |
| YC | 40 | 3.8182 | 2.4284 | 0.9586 | 0.467 | 0.5369 | 0.5234 | 0.1078 |
| YK | 40 | 4.4545 | 2.6524 | 1.0623 | 0.4682 | 0.567 | 0.5528 | 0.1531 |
| YT | 40 | 4.2727 | 2.9205 | 1.0761 | 0.5081 | 0.5825 | 0.5677 | 0.1049 |
| ZZ | 30 | 3.4545 | 2.3364 | 0.912 | 0.4516 | 0.5346 | 0.5168 | 0.1261 |
| CN mean | 40 | 3.6363 | 2.4612 | 0.9415 | 0.4755 | 0.5346 | 0.5192 | – |
| US_f | 10 | 4.0909 | 3.2336 | 1.1472 | 0.5 | 0.6544 | 0.5875 | 0.1489 |
| US_g | 6 | 3.0909 | 2.6363 | 0.9632 | 0.5152 | 0.6606 | 0.5505 | 0.0642 |
| US mean | 8 | 3.5909 | 2.935 | 1.0552 | 0.5076 | 0.6575 | 0.569 | – |
Summary of F statistics and gene flow for each locus.
| Locus | |||
| W3 | –0.0037 | 0.1487 | 1.4307 |
| W5 | 0.0026 | 0.1460 | 1.4629 |
| W6 | 0.0040 | 0.3770 | 0.4130 |
| W8 | 0.2929 | 0.3198 | 0.5317 |
| W31 | –0.0441 | 0.1603 | 1.3093 |
| W33 | –0.0364 | 0.1357 | 1.5921 |
| W82 | 0.3364 | 0.2379 | 0.8007 |
| W83 | –0.1980 | 0.1367 | 1.5792 |
| W107 | 0.3182 | 0.1402 | 1.5337 |
| W126 | –0.0165 | 0.1379 | 1.5634 |
| W132 | 0.2870 | 0.2230 | 0.8745 |
| Mean | 0.0873 | 0.1994 | 1.0036 |
Population genetic variance revealed by 11 microsatellite loci through AMOVA analysis.
| Source | Degree of freedom | Sum of squared deviations | Mean squared deviations | Variance component estimates | Percentage of variation |
| Among populations | 21 | 622.846 | 29.659 | 0.665 | 18% |
| Among individuals | 414 | 1371.394 | 3.313 | 0.353 | 10% |
| Within individuals | 436 | 1136.500 | 2.607 | 2.607 | 72% |
| Total | 871 | 3130.740 | 3.624 | 100% | |
| 0.183 | 0.001 | ||||
| 1.113 | |||||
| <0.001 | |||||
| Among populations | 1 | 7.496 | 7.496 | 0.354 | 9% |
| Among individuals | 6 | 29.067 | 4.844 | 1.047 | 25% |
| Within individuals | 8 | 22.000 | 2.750 | 2.750 | 66% |
| Total | 15 | 58.563 | 4.151 | 100% | |
| 0.085 | |||||
| 2.685 | |||||
| <0.03 | |||||
FIGURE 2Unrooted neighbor-joining dendrogram of the 24 O. robiniae populations based on Nei’s distance using the allele frequencies of 11 microsatellite loci. Green represents the subpopulations of group 1, red represents the subpopulations of group 2, and blue represents the US populations.
FIGURE 3Graphical output of the STRUCTURE analysis representing hierarchical data analyses to determine the number of genetic subpopulations (K) of O. robiniae. Each individual is represented by a single vertical bar.
FIGURE 4Principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) of 436 Chinese O. robiniae individuals showing two distinct clusters of populations. Each population is represented by a diamond. Coord.1 (39.51%) and Coord.2 (17.63%) refer to the first and second principal component, respectively.