| Literature DB >> 34107871 |
Xuan Li1,2, Gaoming Wei1,3, Yousry A El-Kassaby4, Yanming Fang5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hybridization and introgression are vital sources of novel genetic variation driving diversification during reticulated evolution. Quercus is an important model clade, having extraordinary diverse and abundant members in the Northern hemisphere, that are used to studying the introgression of species boundaries and adaptive processes. China is the second-largest distribution center of Quercus, but there are limited studies on introgressive hybridization.Entities:
Keywords: Hybridization; Introgression; NSSR; Section Cerris; Section Quercus
Year: 2021 PMID: 34107871 PMCID: PMC8188795 DOI: 10.1186/s12870-021-03007-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Plant Biol ISSN: 1471-2229 Impact factor: 4.215
Genetic statistics of 17 nuclear microsatellite loci used in this study
| Null | c | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| QM58TGT | 0.011 | 21 | 17.2 | 0.980 | 0.944 | 9.9 | 0.980 | 0.939 | 0.095* | 0.096 | 0.088* | 2.24 |
| quru-GA-0I01 | 0.097 | 20 | 10.3 | 0.390 | 0.904 | 9.7 | 0.383 | 0.895 | 0.081* | 0.053 | 0.074* | 2.35 |
| quru-GA-0M05 | 0.078 | 26 | 16.8 | 0.450 | 0.942 | 12.9 | 0.452 | 0.937 | 0.046* | 0.043 | 0.042* | 3.64 |
| quru-GA-0M07 | 0.073 | 16 | 10.8 | 0.420 | 0.909 | 10.1 | 0.416 | 0.900 | 0.076* | 0.061 | 0.070* | 2.49 |
| Quru-GA-Oi21 | 0.109 | 18 | 7.6 | 0.267 | 0.870 | 8.7 | 0.254 | 0.857 | 0.161* | 0.132 | 0.151* | 1.19 |
| Quru-GA-1H14 | 0.019 | 29 | 15.9 | 0.797 | 0.939 | 14.2 | 0.794 | 0.934 | 0.047* | 0.048 | 0.042* | 4.01 |
| Quru-GA-1i15 | 0.076 | 25 | 9.3 | 0.483 | 0.894 | 11.0 | 0.487 | 0.885 | 0.084* | 0.062 | 0.079* | 2.27 |
| MSQ16 | 0.045 | 29 | 13.9 | 0.567 | 0.930 | 13.7 | 0.571 | 0.924 | 0.047* | 0.038 | 0.042* | 3.80 |
| ssrQpZAG1/5 | 0.086 | 21 | 13.7 | 0.393 | 0.929 | 11.9 | 0.389 | 0.922 | 0.038* | 0.033 | 0.033* | 4.20 |
| ssrQpZAG15 | 0.054 | 21 | 12.0 | 0.483 | 0.918 | 10.4 | 0.485 | 0.911 | 0.112* | 0.086 | 0.098* | 1.87 |
| ssrQpZAG36 | 0.027 | 25 | 14.6 | 0.673 | 0.933 | 11.3 | 0.665 | 0.928 | 0.123* | 0.096 | 0.111* | 1.72 |
| ssrQrZAG 7 | 0.036 | 19 | 12.3 | 0.697 | 0.920 | 13.2 | 0.698 | 0.920 | 0.037* | 0.033 | 0.034* | 4.60 |
| ssrQrZAG 31 | 0.047 | 21 | 11.6 | 0.560 | 0.916 | 11.7 | 0.563 | 0.916 | 0.128* | 0.102 | 0.114* | 1.64 |
| ssrQrZAG 74 | 0.057 | 16 | 6.4 | 0.360 | 0.844 | 7.1 | 0.358 | 0.844 | 0.204* | 0.168 | 0.190* | 0.95 |
| ssrQrZAG 87 | 0.051 | 12 | 9.2 | 0.667 | 0.893 | 7.6 | 0.663 | 0.892 | 0.152* | 0.141 | 0.150* | 1.27 |
| ssrQrZAG 96 | 0.091 | 20 | 11.2 | 0.330 | 0.913 | 8.5 | 0.324 | 0.912 | 0.156* | 0.105 | 0.142* | 1.29 |
| ssrQrZAG112 | 0.025 | 22 | 14.7 | 0.870 | 0.933 | 9.7 | 0.872 | 0.933 | 0.148* | 0.144 | 0.130* | 1.50 |
| overall | 0.058 | 21 | 12.2 | 0.552 | 0.914 | 10.7 | 0.550 | 0.909 | 0.099 | 0.085 | 0.093* | 2.41 |
NA number of alleles, NE effective number of alleles, AR allelic richness with rarefaction to the common sample size of 10, HO observed heterozygosity averaged across loci, HE expected heterozygosity averaged across loci, HS genetic diversity within populations averaged across loci, PIC polymorphism information content, FST genetic differentiation index (Weir and Cockerham 1984), cFST corrected genetic differentiation index using the “exclusion null alleles” (ENA) method (Chapuis & Estoup 2007), G'ST standardized genetic differentiation index (Hedrick 2005), TA annealing temperature, null null allele frequency averaged across populations; *indicates statistical significance (P < 0.001) based on 10,000 permutations implemented in ARLEQUIN
Genetic statistics of the studied 10 oak populations
| Population | Null | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BY-A | 0.140a | 12.8 | 7.9 | 0.579 | 0.844 | 11.8 | 0.848 | 0.317* | 0.027 |
| BY-V | 0.170a | 10.2 | 6.3 | 0.505 | 0.791 | 9.6 | 0.797 | 0.366* | 0.008 |
| LT-F | 0.102a | 12.6 | 7.1 | 0.692 | 0.854 | 11.1 | 0.856 | 0.192* | 0.005a |
| LT-B | 0.110a | 11.3 | 6.6 | 0.610 | 0.821 | 11.2 | 0.831 | 0.267* | 0.042 |
| ZW-V | 0.181a | 9.3 | 5.8 | 0.465 | 0.777 | 8.7 | 0.782 | 0.406* | 0.018 |
| ZW-B | 0.169a | 11.1 | 6.1 | 0.516 | 0.817 | 10.2 | 0.822 | 0.373* | 0.021a |
| ZJ-A | 0.106a | 11.6 | 6.6 | 0.492 | 0.828 | 10.6 | 0.834 | 0.410 | 0.186 |
| ZJ-V | 0.188a | 11.6 | 6.3 | 0.443 | 0.818 | 10.8 | 0.824 | 0.463* | 0.065 |
| ZJ-F | 0.137a | 12.6 | 7.4 | 0.579 | 0.858 | 11.5 | 0.862 | 0.328* | 0.035 |
| ZJ-B | 0.111a | 11.6 | 6.7 | 0.621 | 0.826 | 11.0 | 0.830 | 0.252* | 0.023 |
| mean | 11.5 | 6.7 | 0.550 | 0.753 | 10.7 | 0.829 |
NA number of alleles, NE effective number of alleles, AR allelic richness with rarefaction to the common sample size of 10, HO observed heterozygosity averaged across loci, HE expected heterozygosity averaged across loci, HS genetic diversity within populations averaged across loci, FIS inbreeding coefficient, FIS' corrected inbreeding coefficient estimated in INEST version 2.2 (Chybicki and Burczyk 2009) based on the nfb model (where n = null alleles, f = inbreeding coefficient and b = genotyping failures). aDeviance information criterion (DIC) values support the significance of null alleles or inbreeding in the nfb model; *P < 0.05
Fig. 1Pairwise FST in sympatric and allopatric populations of four oak species (a: the red box represents sympatric populations and the yellow box represents the same species). and principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) based on pairwise population FST values implemented in GENALEX 6.5 (b-d)
Comparison of genetic statistics among the four Quercus. L groups
| Value of genetic statistics | Two-sided | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| group pair | |||||||||
| BY vs LT | 0.642 | 0.154 | 0.390 | 0.708 | |||||
| Group BY | 10.7 | 0.543 | 0.823 | 0.085 | BY vs ZW | 0.205 | 0.569 | 0.453 | 0.331 |
| Group LT | 11.2 | 0.662 | 0.847 | 0.067 | BY vs ZJ | 0.761 | 0.893 | 0.537 | 0.837 |
| Group ZW | 9.5 | 0.490 | 0.802 | 0.131 | LT vs ZW | 0.066 | 0.033* | 0.072 | 0.152 |
| Group ZJ | 11.0 | 0.533 | 0.838 | 0.092 | LT vs ZJ | 0.794 | 0.057 | 0.750 | 0.518 |
| ZW vs ZJ | 0.041* | 0.573 | 0.099 | 0.261 | |||||
| Group (AV) | 10.3 | 0.497 | 0.817 | 0.090 | |||||
| Group (FB) | 11.0 | 0.607 | 0.842 | 0.062 | AV vs FB | 0.223 | 0.014* | 0.139 | 0.078 |
| Subgroup | A vs V | 0.074 | 0.437 | 0.097 | 0.611 | ||||
| Group A | 11.2 | 0.536 | 0.841 | 0.07 | A vs F | 0.892 | 0.231 | 0.523 | 0.609 |
| Group V | 9.7 | 0.471 | 0.801 | 0.089 | A vs B | 0.724 | 0.635 | 0.619 | 0.863 |
| Group F | 11.3 | 0.640 | 0.859 | 0.050 | V vs F | 0.040* | 0.014* | 0.007** | 0.330 |
| Group B | 10.9 | 0.578 | 0.827 | 0.062 | V vs B | 0.127 | 0.121 | 0.210 | 0.286 |
| F vs B | 0.657 | 0.447 | 0.211 | 0.769 | |||||
AR allelic richness with rarefaction to a common sample size of 10, HO observed heterozygosity, H genetic diversity within populations, FST genetic differentiation index. *P < 0.05. **P < 0.01. Two-sided P-value was obtained after 10,000 permutations and taken as the proportion of random data sets giving larger statistics than the observed statistics
Analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA) among the four Quercus. L groups
| Source of variation | Degree of freedom | Sum of squares | Variance components | Percentage of variation | Fixation indices |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Among regions | 3 | 197.815 | 0.0821 | 1.04 | |
| Among populations within regions | 6 | 315.516 | 0.76946 | 9.78 | |
| Within populations | 590 | 4137.551 | 7.0128 | 89.17 | |
| Among species | 3 | 269.453 | 0.3212 | 4.06 | |
| Among populations within species | 6 | 243.878 | 0.56879 | 7.2 | |
| Within populations | 590 | 4137.551 | 7.0128 | 88.74 | |
FCT, FSC and FST: genetic differences among regions (sub-regions), among populations within regions (sub-regions), and among all populations, respectively. *P < 0.00, **P < 0.0001. P-value was obtained through 10,000 permutations
The gene flow (N) among the 10 oak populations
| Populationa | BY-A | BY-V | LT-F | LT-B | ZW-V | ZW-B | ZJ-A | ZJ-V | ZJ-F | ZJ-B |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BY-A | – | |||||||||
| BY-V | 4.02 | – | ||||||||
| LT-F | 3.79 | 2.87 | – | |||||||
| LT-B | 3.19 | 2.64 | 5.08 | – | ||||||
| ZW-V | 2.95 | 2.82 | 2.65 | 2.37 | – | |||||
| ZW-B | 2.88 | 2.48 | 4.53 | 6.22 | 2.68 | – | ||||
| ZJ-A | 4.81 | 3.60 | 3.49 | 3.00 | 3.06 | 3.09 | – | |||
| ZJ-V | 4.33 | 3.97 | 3.17 | 2.93 | 5.51 | 3.29 | 4.98 | – | ||
| ZJ-F | 3.71 | 3.06 | 6.85 | 5.48 | 2.75 | 5.74 | 3.79 | 3.34 | – | |
| ZJ-B | 3.00 | 2.30 | 4.91 | 3.92 | 2.46 | 5.89 | 2.88 | 3.10 | 7.32 | – |
asee text for population code; N = estimate of gene flow from GST, N = 0.5(1—GST)/GST
Fig. 2Molecular and phenotypic cluster analysis of 300 oak individuals. a NJ dendrogram showing genetic relationships implemented in MEGA 7.0 and b cluster analysis based on phenotypic traits variation
Fig. 3Molecular and phenotypic cluster analysis of 10 oak populations. a NJ cluster analysis implemented in MEGA 7.0 (Sudhir et al. 2016) based on the Nei’s unbiased genetic distances (Nei 1978). b Cluster analysis based on phenotypic traits variation
Fig. 4STRUCTURE clustering results for 300 oak species individuals from 10 populations (each color represents a genetic cluster)
Identification results of interspecies introgression between oak species
| Populationa | HT | NH (F1) | NH (backcross) | Hr (%) | N |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BY-A | A-F | 1 | 3 | 12.90 | 31 |
| BY-V | A-V-B | 29 | 0 | 100.00 | 29 |
| LT-F | F-B | 1 | 2 | 7.90 | 38 |
| LT-B | B-F | 8 | 13 | 95.50 | 22 |
| ZW-V | A-V | 5 | 3 | 27.00 | 30 |
| ZW-B | F-B | 1 | 26 | 90.00 | 30 |
| ZJ-A | A-V | 1 | 6 | 23.30 | 30 |
| ZJ-V | V-A | 10 | 19 | 96.70 | 30 |
| ZJ-F | F-B | 7 | 26 | 100.00 | 33 |
| ZJ-B | B-F | 4 | 23 | 100.00 | 27 |
| Overall | - | 67 | 121 | 62.77 | 300 |
asee text for population code; HT, hybrid type; NH, number of hybrids; Hr, hybridization rate; N, sample size
Rate of hybridization per population: (NHF1 + NHB)/Npop; Rate of hybridization per species: (NHF1 + NHB)/Nspecies; Overall hybridization rate: (NHF1 + NHB)/Noverall
Fig. 5Geographic distribution of the sampled four oak plots. Pie charts with different color represent different species (Q. acutissima: blue; Q. variabilis: green; Q. fabri: yellow; Q. serrata: red). Pie area is proportional to the sample size