| Literature DB >> 34993702 |
Julita Minasiewicz1, Emilia Krawczyk2, Joanna Znaniecka3, Lucie Vincenot4, Ekaterina Zheleznaya5,6, Joanna Korybut-Orlowska2, Tiiu Kull7, Marc-André Selosse2,8.
Abstract
Some plants abandoned photosynthesis and developed full dependency on fungi for nutrition. Most of the so-called mycoheterotrophic plants exhibit high specificity towards their fungal partners. We tested whether natural rarity of mycoheterotrophic plants and usual small and fluctuating population size make their populations more prone to genetic differentiation caused by restricted gene flow and/or genetic drift. We also tested whether these genetic characteristics might in turn shape divergent fungal preferences. We studied the mycoheterotrophic orchid Epipogium aphyllum, addressing the joint issues of genetic structure of its populations over Europe and possible consequences for mycorrhizal specificity within the associated fungal taxa. Out of 27 sampled E. aphyllum populations, nine were included for genetic diversity assessment using nine nuclear microsatellites and plastid DNA. Population genetic structure was inferred based on the total number of populations. Individuals from 17 locations were included into analysis of genetic identity of mycorrhizal fungi of E. aphyllum based on barcoding by nuclear ribosomal DNA. Epipogium aphyllum populations revealed high genetic diversity (uHe = 0.562) and low genetic differentiation over vast distances (FST = 0.106 for nuclear microsatellites and FST = 0.156 for plastid DNA). Bayesian clustering analyses identified only two genetic clusters, with a high degree of admixture. Epipogium aphyllum genets arise from panmixia and display locally variable, but relatively high production of ramets, as shown by a low value of rarefied genotypic richness (Rr = 0.265). Epipogium aphyllum genotype control over partner selection was negligible as (1) we found ramets from a single genetic individual associated with up to 68% of the known Inocybe spp. associating with the plant species, (2) and partner identity did not show any geographic structure. The absence of mosaicism in the mycorrhizal specificity over Europe may be linked to preferential allogamous habit of E. aphyllum and significant gene flow, which tend to promote host generalism.Entities:
Keywords: Clonality; Epipogium aphyllum; Gene flow; Genetic structure; Hebeloma; Inocybe; Mycoheterotrophic orchid; Mycorrhizal specificity
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 34993702 PMCID: PMC8894228 DOI: 10.1007/s10265-021-01364-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Plant Res ISSN: 0918-9440 Impact factor: 2.629
Fig. 1Epipogium aphyllum morphology. a inflorescence shoots. b rhizome with long running stolons. c apex of a stolon with bulbils, reprinted from Roy et al. (2009b; scale bar 1 mm). d rhizome with inflorescence buds; cr coralloid rhizome, ib inflorescence bud, s thin stolon, sb bulbil on a stolon
Fig. 2Location of E. aphyllum populations sampled for the study. Inset presents the Asian (Eastern) part of the species range. Three-letter codes refer to population names (see Table S1) with distinct colours for the six geographical regions (see Table S1): Pyrenees, white; Massif Central, grey; Alps, red; Carpathians, pink; Baltic Region, blue; Asia, black. The red line displays the European species disjunctive range from Taylor and Roberts (2011). Three main parts of the range are delineated in red: Western (dashed line), Southern (solid line) and Northern (dotted line)
Genetic diversity of 9 studied E. aphylllum populations ≥ 4 multilocus genotypes (MLG) forming clone-corrected, population data set
| Region | Population | N | N MLG | AR | pAR | Ho | uHe | NH | H | PH | HR | HD | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pyrenees | TVF | 4 | 4 | 2.22 | 0.06 | 0.333 | 0.437 | 0.055 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Massif Central | MOF | 28 | 5 | 2.39 | 0.00 | 0.467 | 0.533 | 0.020 | 20 | 3 | 0 | 1.400 | 0.800 |
| BNF | 4 | 4 | 2.78 | 0.15 | 0.444 | 0.611 | 0.134 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 2.000 | 1.000 | |
| Alps | VUS | 6 | 6 | 2.61 | 0.17 | 0.448 | 0.512 | 0.008 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 1.800 | 0.933 |
| Carpa thians | OPP | 28 | 11 | 2.95 | 0.31 | 0.509 | 0.605 | 0.093 | 25 | 5 | 1 | 1.442 | 0.800 |
| TMP | 29 | 9 | 2.73 | 0.13 | 0.514 | 0.534 | -0.002 | 26 | 5 | 1 | 1.589 | 0.857 | |
| Baltic region | JEE | 7 | 5 | 2.62 | 0.01 | 0.422 | 0.580 | 0.187 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| LDR | 4 | 4 | 2.78 | 0.06 | 0.417 | 0.611 | 0.221 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0.000 | 0.000 | |
| Asia | ZDR | 10 | 8 | 3.14 | 0.27 | 0.583 | 0.633 | 0.014 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 2.000 | 1.000 |
Parameters calculated for nSSR. N number of samples, NMLG number of MLG per population, A allelic richness after rarefaction, pA private allele (alleles specific to population) richness after rarefaction, Ho observed heterozygosity, uH unbiased expected heterozygosity, and FIS inbreeding coefficient
Parameters calculated for plastid DNA: N number of samples, H number of different haplotypes, PH private haplotypes, H haplotype richness, HD haplotype diversity
Genetic diversity of studied E. aphylllum populations (clone-corrected complete data set) grouped in 6 geographic regions
| Regions | NMLG | AR | pAR | Ho | uHe | NH | H | PH | HR | HD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pyrenees | 6 | 2.89 | 0.07 | 0.407 | 0.527 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Massif Central | 15 | 3.08 | 0.22 | 0.474 | 0.563 | 11 | 5 | 1 | 2.229 | 0.764 |
| Alps | 14 | 3.09 | 0.31 | 0.444 | 0.569 | 12 | 9 | 5 | 3.263 | 0.909 |
| Carpathians | 20 | 3.33 | 0.35 | 0.503 | 0.597 | 19 | 7 | 3 | 2.669 | 0.842 |
| Baltic region | 19 | 3.45 | 0.16 | 0.424 | 0.624 | 15 | 4 | 1 | 1.606 | 0.657 |
| Asia | 8 | 3.54 | 0.51 | 0.583 | 0.633 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 4.000 | 1.000 |
Parameters calculated for nSSR: N number of samples, MLG number of MLG per population, A allelic richness, pA private allele (alleles specific to population) richness, H observed heterozygosity, uH unbiased expected heterozygosity
Parameters calculated for plastid DNA: N number of samples, H number of different haplotypes, PH private haplotypes, H haplotype richness, HD haplotype diversity
Fig. 3The 22 plastid haplotypes from E. aphyllum populations over Eurasia. a Frequency and distribution of haplotypes, with frequencies provided as a pie chart per location (for population name see Fig. 2), their colours corresponding with respective haplotype type from the panel b. Circle size reflects the number of unique haplotypes per population (one for the smallest circle to 11 for the biggest). The grey area indicates species disjunctive range from Taylor and Roberts (2011). The map is distorted to include the easternmost population. b Phylogenetic relationship between the 22 haplotypes H1 to H22. Circle size indicates frequency of haplotypes in clone-corrected data. The yellow diamonds indicate undetected, intermediate haplotype states. Cross hatches along the lines connecting the haplotypes indicate the number of mutations required for transitions between haplotypes. c Distribution of haplotypes among the six geographical groups of populations (see Table S1)
Analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA) of E. aphyllum for nuclear microsatellites and plastid DNA for nine populations ≥ 4 MLG and pooled data set into six geographic regions (Pyrenees, Massif Central, Alps, Carpathians, Baltic Region, Asia)
| Molecular marker | Source of variation | df | |
|---|---|---|---|
9 populations ≥ 4 MLG | Among populations | 8 | 0.106*** |
| Within populations | 101 | 0.894 | |
| 6 geographical regions | Among regions | 5 | 0.047*** |
| Within regions | 158 | 0.953 | |
9 populations ≥ 4 MLG | Among populations | 8 | 0.156*** |
| Within populations | 41 | 0.844 | |
| 6 geographical regions | Among regions | 5 | 0.112*** |
| Within regions | 63 | 0.829 | |
***Statistical significance P < 0.001
Fig. 4Clustering analyses of E. aphyllum based on the 82 MLGs data, and considering the six geographical groups of populations (see Table S1). a The two clusters found with the software structure. Bars indicate individual probability of membership in black (cluster #1) and white (cluster #2). b PCoA of nSSR genetic diversity, with regional origin of MLGs
Fig. 5Phylogenetic analysis of E. aphyllum mycorrhizal fungi sampled for this study (bold) and from Roy et al. (2009b) as well as Liebel and Gebauer (2011) together with GenBank and UNITE sequences of fungi obtained from identified fruitbodies (black circle). The tree is based on a Maximum Likelihood analysis from an ITS alignment using model K81uf + I + G DNA (Posada and Crandal 1998). AG numbers on the side refer to alignment groups sensu Ryberg et al. (2008). Numbers indicate bootstrap values (based on 1,000 replicates) of branches, only bootstrap values > 80 are shown