| Literature DB >> 33859872 |
Yutaro Yamashita1, Gustavo Sanchez2, Kentaro Kawai1, Satoshi Tomano3, Hiroki Fujita1, Tetsuya Umino1,2.
Abstract
The black sea bream Acanthopagrus schlegelii (Bleeker, 1854) is a commercially important species in Japanese waters. Assessing its population structure is essential to ensure its sustainability. In the Northwestern Pacific, historical glacial and interglacial periods during the Pleistocene have shaped the population structure of many coastal marine fishes. However, whether these events affected the population of black sea bream remains unknown. To test this hypothesis and to assess the population structure of black sea bream, we used 1,046 sequences of the mitochondrial control region from individuals collected throughout almost the entire Japanese coastal waters and combined them with 118 sequences from populations distributed in other marginal seas of the Northwestern Pacific Ocean. As in other coastal marine fish with similar distribution, we also found evidence that the glacial refugia on the marginal seas prompted the formation of three lineages in black sea bream. These lineages present signatures of population growth that coincided with the interglacial periods of the Pleistocene. While the origin of Lineages B and C remains unclear, the higher relative frequency of Lineage A in the southernmost location suggests its origin in the South China Sea. The non-significant pairwise ΦST and AMOVA of Japanese populations and the presence of these three lineages mixed in Japanese waters; strongly suggest that these lineages are homogenized in both the Sea of Japan and the Pacific Ocean. Our results indicate that the black sea bream should be managed as a single stock in Japan until the strength of connectivity in contemporary populations is further addressed using non-coding nuclear markers. ©2021 Yamashita et al.Entities:
Keywords: Black sea bream; Genetic structure; Mitochondrial control region; Northwestern Pacific Ocean; Pleistocene; Refugia
Year: 2021 PMID: 33859872 PMCID: PMC8020869 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11001
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PeerJ ISSN: 2167-8359 Impact factor: 2.984
Figure 1Collection sites of A. schlegelii specimens used in this study. Fully details of populations are described in Table 1.
Marginal Seas and Pacific side, locations, collection dates, sample size, and codes of black sea bream populations.
| Sea of Japan | Syonai, Yamagata Pref. | Jun. 2017 | 81 | YS |
| Nanao Bay, Ishikawa Pref. | Jan. 2018 | 32 | IN | |
| Wakasa Bay, Fukui Pref. | Apr. 2017 | 64 | FW | |
| Sakaiminato, Tottori Pref. | May. 2016–Apr. 2017 | 109 | TS | |
| Pacific Ocean region | Ushimado, Okayama Pref. | Jul. 2016, Jun. 2017 | 63 | OU |
| Hiroshima Bay, Hiroshima Pref. | May. 2015–Sep. 2017 | 118 | HH | |
| Tokuyama Bay, Yamaguchi Pref. | Mar. 2016 , Oct 2017 | 49 | YT | |
| Omaezaki, Shizuoka Pref. | Sep–Nov. 2017 | 100 | SO | |
| Toba, Mie Pref. | Nov–Dec. 2016 | 79 | MT | |
| Sukumo Bay, Kochi Pref. | Apr. 2016–Jul. 2017 | 125 | KS | |
| East China Sea | Kagoshima Bay, Kagoshima Pref. | Mar. 2017–Jan. 2018 | 66 | KK |
| Sasebo, Nagasaki Pref. | Mar. 2017 | 94 | NS | |
| Goto Islands, Nagasaki Pref. | Aug. 2015–Sep. 2017 | 66 | NG | |
| Hangzhou Bay, Zhejiang | Mar. 2011 | 29 | DJ | |
| Miaoli, Taiwan | Oct. 2018 | 30 | TM | |
| South China Sea | Bias Bay, Guangdong | Mar. 2012 | 29 | AT |
| Hainan Island, Hainan | Mar. 2012 | 30 | WN |
Notes.
Sequences reported in Shi et al. (2015).
Pairwise ΦST estimation (below diagonal) and its associated probability (above diagonal) between all populations.
Values in bold indicate significant difference at the 5% level after false discovery rate correction (q = 0.0091).
| 0.216 | 0.557 | 0.323 | 0.620 | 0.207 | 0.256 | 0.226 | 0.298 | 0.221 | 0.547 | 0.381 | 0.075 | 0.020 | |||||
| 0.004 | 0.415 | 0.174 | 0.651 | 0.122 | 0.229 | 0.154 | 0.180 | 0.365 | 0.152 | 0.270 | 0.384 | 0.185 | 0.049 | 0.017 | |||
| −0.002 | −0.001 | 0.175 | 0.956 | 0.596 | 0.301 | 0.232 | 0.191 | 0.236 | 0.257 | 0.420 | 0.140 | 0.026 | 0.011 | ||||
| 0.001 | 0.006 | 0.004 | 0.253 | 0.076 | 0.159 | 0.295 | 0.780 | 0.836 | 0.666 | 0.725 | 0.025 | 0.018 | 0.009 | ||||
| −0.003 | −0.005 | −0.008 | 0.002 | 0.483 | 0.283 | 0.189 | 0.209 | 0.417 | 0.227 | 0.617 | 0.146 | 0.033 | 0.010 | ||||
| 0.002 | 0.010 | −0.003 | 0.006 | −0.001 | 0.478 | 0.210 | 0.128 | 0.062 | 0.127 | 0.588 | |||||||
| 0.002 | 0.005 | 0.002 | 0.005 | 0.002 | −0.002 | 0.361 | 0.142 | 0.097 | 0.145 | 0.240 | 0.016 | 0.013 | |||||
| 0.002 | 0.008 | 0.003 | 0.001 | 0.004 | 0.002 | 0.000 | 0.894 | 0.175 | 0.322 | 0.432 | 0.026 | 0.027 | |||||
| 0.001 | 0.006 | 0.004 | −0.003 | 0.003 | 0.005 | 0.007 | −0.005 | 0.636 | 0.558 | 0.650 | 0.068 | 0.053 | 0.011 | ||||
| 0.002 | 0.000 | 0.002 | −0.003 | 0.000 | 0.006 | 0.008 | 0.003 | −0.002 | 0.452 | 0.426 | 0.037 | 0.030 | 0.022 | ||||
| −0.002 | 0.008 | 0.003 | −0.003 | 0.003 | 0.005 | 0.007 | 0.001 | −0.002 | −0.001 | 0.370 | 0.026 | 0.060 | 0.019 | ||||
| 0.000 | 0.003 | −0.001 | −0.003 | −0.003 | −0.002 | 0.003 | −0.001 | −0.003 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.038 | 0.015 | |||||
| 0.009 | 0.000 | 0.006 | 0.013 | 0.006 | 0.026 | 0.016 | 0.010 | 0.011 | 0.015 | 0.012 | 0.100 | 0.016 | 0.018 | ||||
| 0.025 | 0.009 | 0.030 | 0.026 | 0.025 | 0.044 | 0.026 | 0.018 | 0.020 | 0.017 | 0.029 | 0.014 | 0.163 | 0.208 | ||||
| 0.024 | 0.036 | 0.031 | 0.036 | 0.033 | 0.022 | 0.025 | 0.029 | 0.011 | 0.071 | 0.269 | |||||||
| 0.022 | |||||||||||||||||
| 0.034 | 0.055 | 0.045 | 0.049 | 0.027 | 0.008 | 0.006 |
Analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA).
| All sites | Among populations | 16 | ΦST = 0.01228 | 0 | 1.23 |
| Within populations | 1,147 | 98.77 | |||
| Japanese groups | Among populations | 12 | ΦST = 0.00271 | 0.05865 | 0.27 |
| Within populations | 1,033 | 99.73 | |||
| BAPS lineages | Among populations | ΦST = 0.4193 | 0 | 41.29 | |
| Within populations | 58.71 | ||||
| Marginal Sea groups | Among groups | 3 | ΦCT = 0.00761 | 0.0039 | 0.76 |
| Within groups | 13 | ΦSC = 0.00695 | 0.0013 | 0.69 | |
| Within populations | 1,147 | ΦST = 0.01451 | 0 | 98.55 |
Notes.
Three clusters calculated in BAPS.
Figure 2Three different mitochondrial lineages in A. schlegelii populations of the Northwestern Pacific calculated by BAPS, and the haplotype network.
(A) Relative frequency (in %) of each lineage in each sampling locations (codes are available in Table 1), and (B) the TCS haplotype network, where slash represents a single mutation step, black circles a missing haplotype, and colored circles the haplotype for each lineage with their size proportional to the number of individuals with similar sequences.
Genetic diversity, neutrality test, and the time of expansion calculated for each lineage inferred by BAPS.
| 282 | 194 | 119 | 0.995 | 0.0097 | −32.577 (0 | −2.852 (0 | −2.873 (0 | −2.034 (0 | 0.026 (0 | 6.223 | 252 | |
| 463 | 210 | 121 | 0.959 | 0.0048 | −32.419 (0 | −4.619 (0 | −5.546 (0 | −2.438 (0 | 0.013 (0.001) | 2.557 | 100 | |
| 419 | 177 | 105 | 0.957 | 0.0043 | −32.151 (0 | −3.981 (0 | −4.351 (0 | −2.425 (0 | 0.013 (0 | 2.917 | 116 |
Notes.
number of individuals
number of haplotypes
number of polymorphic sites
haplotype diversity
nucleotide diversity
Fu’s Fs
Fu’s and Li’s F*
Fu’s and Li’s D*
Tajima’s D
Ramos-Onsins and Rozas’ R2
The parameter of population growth tau (τ) and the calculated expansion time (T) (in thousand years before present (kya) using the mutation rate of 3.6% Myr-1 and 4 years of generation time).
The significance of tests with P < 0.001.
Figure 3(A) Mismatch distribution and (B) Bayesian skyline plot for Lineage A, B, and C.