Literature DB >> 35169641

Exploring the diversity of andean berries from northern Peru based on molecular analyses.

Daniel Tineo1, Danilo E Bustamante1,2, Martha S Calderon1,2, Eyner Huaman1.   

Abstract

More than 12,000 species have been listed under the category of berries, and most of them belong to the orders Ericales and Rosales. Recent phylogenetic studies using molecular data have revealed disagreements with morphological approaches mainly due to diverse floral arrangements, which has proven to be a problem when recognizing species. Therefore, the use of multilocus sequence data is essential to establish robust species boundaries. Although berries are common in Andean cloud forests, diversity of these taxa has not been extensively evaluated in the current context of DNA-based techniques. In this regard, this study characterized morphologically and constructed multilocus phylogenies using four molecular markers, two chloroplast markers (matK and rbcL) and two nuclear markers (ITS and GBSSI-2). Specimens did not show diagnostic features to delimit species of berries. A total of 125 DNA-barcodes of andean berries were newly generated for the four molecular markers. The multilocus phylogenies constructed from these markers allowed the identification of 24 species grouped into the order Ericales (Cavendishia = 1, Clethra = 2, Disterigma = 2, Gaultheria = 4, Thibaudia = 4, Vaccinium = 3) and Rosales (Rubus = 8), incorporating into the Peruvian flora four new records (Disterigma ecuadorense, Disterigma synanthum, Vaccinium meridionale and Rubus glabratus) and revealing the genus Rubus as the most diverse group of berries in the Amazonas region. The results of this study showed congruence in all the multilocus phylogenies, with internal transcribed spacer (ITS) showing the best resolution to distinguish the species. These species were found in coniferous forests, dry and humid forests, rocky slopes, and grasslands at 2,506-3,019 masl from Amazonas region. The integration of morphological and DNA-based methods is recommended to understand the diversity of berries along the Peruvian Andean cloud forest. Abstract in Quechua language Qhawarqan astawan chunka iskayniyuq waranqa especiekuna bayasmanta huch'uy mit'a maypichus hatun rak'i chayaqi ordenkunata Ericaleswan Rosaleswan. Chayraqpi Khuski filogeneticamanta rurachiy allincharqan chanikuna molecularkuna willarqan ayñi rikunawanta morfologicokunamanta, qaylla llapan rantichay t'ika tiktutaywan ñawray, ima kay kaqta qhawacgirqan kay huk champay pachaman riqsiypa especiekunamanta. Hina kaqtintaq, chanikuna qatikipaykunamanta multilocus hat'alliy tiksipmi takyachiypaq saywakuna sinchikuna especiekunamanta. Pana bayaskuna kanku allatinkuna sach'a-sach'api phuyusqa anti runap, ñawran manan karqan achka kamaykuy kunan pacha allwiyaraykupi takyasqakuna ADN. Chayrayku, Noqanchispa taqwi allincharqan huk filogenia multilocus, rarachikupúnmi tawa molecular marcadorkuna, caspa iskay markadorkunawan cloroplastomanta (matK, rbcL) iskay markadorkunawan nuclearkunamanta (ITS, GBSSI-2). Kaykunawan filogeniamanta huniqamuran kikinchay iskay chunka tawayoq especies ima tantaqamuran q'anchis generospi (Cavendishia=1, Clethra=2, Disterigma=2, Gaultheria=4, Thibaudia=4, Vaccinium=3, Rubus=8), kaykunata huñuyqamuranta piruwanu llacha kamay tawa musuq quillqakamachikuta (Disterigma ecuadorense, Disterigma synanthum, Vaccinium meridionale, Rubus glabratus). Nocaykuq lluqsisqan kuwirinti rikuchirurqan llapankuna filogeniaspi multilocusmanta, kaspa espaciador transcrito interno (ITS) pi rikuchina kutuwi mihur rantichay riqsiypaq especiekunata. Abstract in Awajun language Dekanauwai juú weantug 12000 sag nagkaikiut, júna nejég tente ainawai nuintushkam kuashtai Ericales nuigtu Rosales weantui. Molecularesjai takasmaug juki filogeneticos augtus yamá dekai antugnaiñasmauwa nuna Morfologicosjai disa umikmaug, juka waignawai kuashag yagkunum, juwai dekaata tamanum kuashat utugchata ama nunuka. Nunui asamtai multilocus takasmauwa nujai dekanui wajukut ainawa pipish tumaig aidaush. Tujashkam kuashtai tentee nejég ainaug ikam naig yujagkim amuamua nunuig, wajupá kuashtakit tusajig ashi dekapasjig ADNjain dischamui. Nuni tamaugmak, ii augtusag duka takasé filogenia multilocus dekamua nujai, takasji ipák usumat marcadores molecularesjai, jimag marcadores cloroplastosjai (matK nuigtu rbcL) nuigtu jimag marcadores nuclearesjai (ITS nuigtu GBSSI-2). Juu filogenias dekaji 24 sag nagkaikiut tuwaka 7 generosnug tuwaka awa nunu (Cavendishia=1, Clethra=2, Disterigma=2, Gaultheria=4, Thibaudia=4, Vaccinium=3, Rubus=8), juui dekanai yamajam ipák usumat ajag perunum awanunu (Disterigma ecuadorense, Disterigma synanthum, Vaccinium meridionale nuigtu Rubus glabratus).
© 2022 The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Amazonas; Andes; Berries; DNA barcoding; Ericales; Rosales

Year:  2022        PMID: 35169641      PMCID: PMC8829587          DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e08839

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Heliyon        ISSN: 2405-8440


Introduction

Botanically, berries refer to small, rounded, shiny, sweet, sour, multiseeded fruits from different ovaries of a single flower (Mazzoni et al., 2017). In common usage, the meaning of 'berry' certainly differs from this scientific definition. For instance, strawberries, raspberries, and blackberries are considered berries, but these are excluded by botanical circumscription since they are aggregate fruits (Xiang et al., 2017). Berries are consumed worldwide mainly because of the high concentrations of various phytochemicals, such as phenolic compounds, anthocyanins, and flavonoids (Mazzoni et al., 2017; López et al., 2021; Hotchkiss et al., 2021). Regarding diversity, approximately 12,000 species have been listed under the category of berries (Rose et al., 2018), and most of them belong to the orders Ericales and Rosales (Phipps, 2014; Chase et al., 2016). The larger genera includes species of berries in Ericales are Impatiens (∼1000 spp.), Rhododendron (∼1,000 spp.), Diospyros (∼700 spp.), Erica (∼700 spp.), Vaccinium (∼500 spp.), and Primula (∼400 spp.) (Bouchenak-Khelladi et al., 2015; Schwery et al., 2015). These genera include many well-known tropical and temperate groups that are biogeographically widespread as pantropical and cosmopolitan (Chartier et al., 2017), mainly due to long-distance dispersal or vicariance scenarios (Thomas et al., 2015). In Rosales, the highest diversity of berries includes genera within the family Rosaceae (3,000 species), such as Rubus (∼750 spp.), Potentilla (∼400 spp.), Alchemilla (∼400 spp.), and Prunus (∼200 spp.) (Focke, 1911; Kalkman, 1993; Phipps, 2014). The great diversity of this group is due to polyploidy, agamospermy and constant hybridization of closely related species (Song and Hancock, 2011; Pedraza-Peñalosa and Luteyn, 2011; Mimura and Suga, 2020). Berry diversity in Rosaceae has a wide distribution, particularly in the temperate forests of the Northern Hemisphere (Hummer and Janick, 2009). The Andean orogeny is considered one of the most significant events for radiation of vascular plants and the biogeographic history of neotropical species (including andean berries) in South America (Barthlott et al., 2011; Luebert and Weigend, 2014). This is clearly observed in Andean cloud forest ecosystems where high levels of biodiversity and endemism have been reported among different group of vascular plants (Ledo et al., 2012). Additionally, in the Peruvian Andes, the highest number of endemic plants has been found on slopes between 2,500 and 3,000 masl (Van der Werff and Consiglio, 2004). Currently, 113 species of berries in Rosaceae (Rosales) and 385 in Ericales have been reported from Peru (Ulloa-Ulloa et al., 2004; León, 2006a), and most of these species have been reported on the basis of morphological analyses alone (Coico et al., 2016). Many of these species are considered endemic and distributed in meso-andean and montane forest regions and others in natural areas (León, 2006a). However, this diversity has not been confirmed molecularly since phenomena such as high phenotypic plasticity or crypticism might over or under represent diversity, respectively (Calderon et al., 2021). Recent phylogenetic studies of berries within Ericales have revealed disagreement with morphological approaches, such as those reporting wide floral diversity among species (Schönenberger et al., 2010; Rose et al., 2018). Accordingly, the proper taxonomic positions of these species and families were mainly resolved using molecular data (Chartier et al., 2017). The initial classification in Rosales (Rosaceae) was based on morphology and the number of chromosomes (Potter et al., 2002, 2007); however, intergeneric hybridization occurring within subfamilies and tribes has proven to be problematic when delimiting species (Hummer and Janick, 2009). To correct this incongruence, molecular analyses (e.g., plastidial markers, plastomes) are an effective tool for examining systematics (Soltis et al., 2011; Rose et al., 2018; Diaz-Garcia et al., 2021). The molecular markers for phylogenetic analyses that have been most commonly used in berries (Rosales and Ericales) are those corresponding to plastidial regions (matK, ndhF, and rbcL), plastidial intergenic spacers (trnL-trnF, trnS-trnG, psbA-trnH), and nuclear regions (nrITS, GBSSI-2) (Kron et al., 2002; Powell and Kron, 2003; Potter et al., 2007; Soltis et al., 2011; Wang et al., 2016). These barcodes have provided information for testing hypotheses on morphology, genetics and evolutionary relationships in phenotypically diverse groups of Ericales and Rosales (Xiang et al., 2017; Okada et al., 2020). Although berries are common in Andean cloud forests, the diversity of berries has not been extensively evaluated in the current context of DNA-based techniques. Only few reports on the basis of anatomical observations has been presented. Accordingly, the novelty of this study is to characterize molecularly and determine the phylogenetic positions of berries collected from northern Peru, analyzing the evolutionary relationships of these taxa based on two chloroplast markers (matK and rbcL), the internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region, and nuclear granule-bound starch synthase (GBSSI-2). This is the first integrated study using morphology and the generation of DNA-barcodes to explore the diversity of andean berries from Amazonas region.

Materials and methods

Specimen collection

A total of 48 specimens of Andean berries were sampled from eight localities throughout the province of Chachapoyas, Amazonas, in northern Peru (Molinopampa, Granada, Levanto, Chachapoyas, Maino, Leymebamba, La Jalca, and Huancas; Figure 1). A permit for scientific research on wild flora (RDG N° D000394-2020-MIDAGRI-SERFOR-DGGSPFFS, with authorization code N° AUT-IFL-2020-061) was provided by Servicio Nacional Forestal y de Fauna Silvestre (SERFOR). Tissue samples of approximately 50 mm2 were taken from leaf tips for molecular analyses and placed in prelabeled 1.5 mL Safelock Eppendorf tubes. For each site, the date, time, and GPS coordinates were recorded. Photographs were taken to record sampling locations and site features. In addition, inflorescences, leaves, and fruits were collected for morphological examination. Samples were morphologically characterized according to Focke (1910, 1911); Middleton and Wilcock (1990); Sleumer (1967); Middleton (1991); Smith (1933); Kron et al. (2002) and Vander and Dickinson (2009) and were deposited in the herbarium of Universidad Nacional Toribio Rodríguez de Mendoza (KUELAP), Peru (Table 1) (Thiers, 2016). Furthermore, the records and morphologies of berries were revised and contrasted from databases and collections such as the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (https://www.gbif.org/), Tropicos from Missouri Botanical Garden (http://www.tropicos.org), the New York Botanical Garden Steere herbarium (http://sweetgum.nybg.org/science), and JSTOR Global Plants (https://plants.jstor.org).
Figure 1

Map showing the sampling of Andean berry specimens from Region Amazonas, northern Peru.

Table 1

List of samples of Andean berries collected in northern Peru including genomic DNA QC using fluorometer.

SpeciesCodeHerbarium VoucherPlaceDateElevation (m.a.s.l)Latitude (South)Longitude (West)DNA concen. (ng/μL)
Cavendishia punctataIARAN006KUELAP–267La Palma5/07/201729346°43′26.36″77°50′42.30″50.20
Cavendishia punctataIARAN018KUELAP–279Olmal13/07/201725066°10′54.69″77°47′07.72″56.10
Cavendishia punctataIARAN032KUELAP–293Opelele5/08/201725726°15′18.68″77°48′05.35″86.30
Cavendishia punctataIARAN050KUELAP–311Santa Rosa14/08/201727946°18′06.26″77°53′51.48″80.70
Cavendishia punctataIARAN046KUELAP–307Maino14/08/201725986°19′35.92″77°52′36.40″81.02
Clethra ovalifoliaIARAN021KUELAP–282Sonche23/07/201725076°10′40.69″77°47′09.79″43.00
Clethra retiveniaIARAN034KUELAP–295Chachapoyas5/08/201726276°15′35.49″77°47′59.39″25.00
Disterigma ecuadorenseIARAN024KUELAP–285La Jalca28/07/201728516°32′13.45″77°47′42.39″93.30
Disterigma synanthumIARAN014KUELAP–275Espadilla13/07/201725366°13′16.64″77°40′51.62″21.30
Disterigma synanthumIARAN003KUELAP–264La Palma5/07/201728876°43′28.98″77°50′45.47″12.00
Gaultheria secundaIARAN017KUELAP–278Espadilla13/07/201725426°13′16.92″77°40′52.56″21.00
Gaultheria secundaIARAN005KUELAP–266La Palma5/07/201729126°43′28.99″77°50′43.98″8.70
Gaultheria secundaIARAN023KUELAP–284Olmal23/07/201724966°10′56.73″77°47′08.38″46.56
Gaultheria secundaIARAN027KUELAP–288La Jalca28/07/201728376°29′23.55″77°48′47.56″42.05
Gaultheria secundaIARAN040KUELAP–301Opelele5/08/201728276°15′30.71″77°48′24.23″94.72
Gaultheria sp. 1IARAN041KUELAP–302Levanto14/08/201727206°18′09.99″77°53′51.59″56.08
Gaultheria sp. 2IARAN047KUELAP–308Levanto14/08/201727706°18′11.66″77°53′51.18″79.00
Gaultheria sp. 3IARAN028KUELAP–289La Jalca28/07/20172,7006°29′12.74″77°49′19.11″17.00
Thibaudia angustifoliaIARAN022KUELAP–283Olmal23/07/201725096°10′44.94″77°47′11.12″95.01
Thibaudia moricandiIARAN037KUELAP–298Opelele5/08/201726256°16′04.98″77°46′53.43″76.30
Thibaudia obovataIARAN011KUELAP–272Espadilla13/07/201725026°13′11.16″77°40′48.18″19.03
Thibaudia ovalifoliaIARAN038KUELAP–299Tañapampa5/08/201723726°13′56.99″77°51′13.92″22.08
Vaccinium floribundumIARAN001KUELAP–262La Palma5/07/201729426°43′31.76″77°50′42.14″7.40
Vaccinium floribundumIARAN004KUELAP–265La Palma5/07/201729066°43′28.99″77°50′43.94″21.20
Vaccinium floribundumIARAN007KUELAP–268La Palma5/07/201730196°43′21.11″77°50′33.62″7.30
Vaccinium floribundumIARAN012KUELAP–273Espadilla13/07/201725156°13′13.72″77°40′49.62″23.00
Vaccinium floribundumIARAN016KUELAP–277Espadilla13/07/201725446°13′17.18″77°40′52.96″38.09
Vaccinium floribundumIARAN020KUELAP–281Sonche23/07/201724946°10′47.96″77°47′07.36″49.86
Vaccinium floribundumIARAN026KUELAP–287Leymebamba28/07/201728576°43′03.77″77°47′44.91″12.43
Vaccinium floribundumIARAN029KUELAP–290Huancaurco2/08/201726806°07′59.65″77°52′34.45″86.09
Vaccinium floribundumIARAN031KUELAP–292Huancaurco2/08/201726996°08′10.84″77°52′27.79″32.00
Vaccinium floribundumIARAN036KUELAP–297Opelele5/08/201726266°15′24.92″77°47′58.95″43.32
Vaccinium floribundumIARAN051KUELAP–312Santa Rosa14/08/201725976°19′38.43″77°52′36.31″14.00
Vaccinium mathewsiiIARAN002KUELAP–263La Palma5/07/201729066°43′31.46″77°50′43.66″64.30
Vaccinium mathewsiiIARAN025KUELAP–286Leymebamba28/07/201728556°43′03.79″77°47′45.14″23.10
Vaccinium mathewsiiIARAN039KUELAP–300Opelele5/08/201728276°15′30.87″77°48′24.53″65.30
Vaccinium mathewsiiIARAN030KUELAP–291Huancaurco2/08/201727276°07′58.84″77°52′39.03″32.20
Vaccinium meridionaleIARAN009KUELAP–270Espadilla13/07/201723996°13′04.40″77°40′19.82″24.90
Vaccinium meridionaleIARAN013KUELAP–274Espadilla13/07/201725196°13′14.60″77°40′49.79″78.00
Vaccinium meridionaleIARAN019KUELAP–280Sonche23/07/201725146°10′48.38″77°47′07.56″56.00
Rubus adenothallusIR003KUELAP–256Granada4/04/201928226°06′07.01″77°38′28.79″129.20
Rubus andicolaIR001KUELAP–254Izcuchaca4/04/201921886°20′15.31″77°31′06.41″111.00
Rubus floribundusIR002KUELAP–255Izcuchaca4/04/201921566°20′15.30″77°31′06.40″130.00
Rubus glabratusIR008KUELAP–261Calla Calla4/04/201928876°43′19.29″77°50′45.41″143.60
Rubus lechleriIR005KUELAP–258Granada4/04/201929236°07′34.69″77°38′59.81″110.20
Rubus loxensisIR006KUELAP–259Granada4/04/201929496°07′34.92″77°38′59.97″160.00
Rubus sparsiflorusIR007KUELAP–260Granada4/04/201930686°07′56.21″77°38′59.97″132.10
Rubus weberbaueriIR004KUELAP–257Molinopampa4/04/201932516°08′59.48″77°40′16.09″120.00
Map showing the sampling of Andean berry specimens from Region Amazonas, northern Peru. List of samples of Andean berries collected in northern Peru including genomic DNA QC using fluorometer.

DNA sequencing and alignment preparation

Genomic DNA was extracted from leaf tissue using the NucleoSpin Plant II Kit (Macherey-Nagel, Düren, Germany) following the Tineo et al. (2020). Briefly, samples were homogenized in a freeze-crush apparatus (SK-100, Funakoshi, Japan). 550 μl of lysis buffer was added and incubated at 65 °C overnight and then centrifuged at 11000 rpm for 60s. Then, 480 μl of binding buffer was added and centrifuged at 11000 rpm for 60s. Then, two washing steps of 600 μl of washing buffer was performed and centrifuged at 13000 rpm for 60s. Finally, 50 μl of elution buffer was added and centrifuged at 11000 rpm for 60s. DNA concentration was quantified by a Quantus™ Fluorometer (Promega, Madison, USA) (Table 1), and quality was measured by 1% agarose gel electrophoresis and visualized on a photodocumenter (SmartView Pro UVCI-1000, Major Science, Saratoga, USA) (Figure 2). Two chloroplast markers (matK and rbcL) and two nuclear markers (nrITS and GBSSI-2) were sequenced. Each gene was amplified using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) with MasterMix (Promega, Wisconsin, USA) in the following reaction mixture: 10 ng of DNA and 0.25–0.5 pmol of forward and reverse primers for a total volume of 10 μl. The PCR protocols followed Bustamante et al. (2021) and Tineo et al. (2020), and primer combinations are summarized in Table 2. Amplicons were purified using the NucleoSpin™ Gel and PCR Clean-up Kit protocol (Macherey-Nagel™, Düren, Germany). The sequences of the forward and reverse strands were determined commercially by Macrogen Inc. (Macrogen, Seoul, Korea). The sequences were manually edited with Chromas V.2.6.6 software. The 125 newly generated sequences (DNA-barcodes) from the four markers (matK, rbcL, nrITS and GBSSI-2) were deposited in GenBank. These sequences and others obtained from GenBank (Table 3) were initially aligned with Muscle algorithms (Thompson et al., 1994) and were adjusted manually with MEGA10 software (Kumar et al., 2018) (Figure 3).
Figure 2

Genomic DNA QC using standard Gel Electrophoresis for Andean berries specimens from Region Amazonas, northern Peru.

Table 2

Sets of primer combinations for matK, rbcL, nrITS and GBSSI-2 markers used for specimens from Ericales and Rosales (listed 5′→ 3′).

Gene or spacer regionAmplified length (bp)Primers sequence (5′–3′)References
GBSSI–2550F: 5′–TGGTCTTGGTGATGTTCTTGG–3′Rousseau–Gueutin et al., 2009
R: 5′– GTGTAGTTGGTTGTCCTTGTAATCC–3′Rousseau–Gueutin et al., 2009
ITS650F: 5′–GGAAGTAAAAGTCGTAACAAGG–3′White et al., 1990
R: 5′–TCCTCCGCTATATGATATGC–3′White et al., 1990
rbcL1600F: 5′–ATGTCACCACAAACAGAAACTAAAGC–3′Chase et al. (2016)
R: 5′– CTTTTAGTAAAAGATTGGGCCGAG–3′Chase et al. (2016)
matK1500F: 5′–CTATATCCACTTATCTTTCAGGAGT–3′Ooi et al. (1995)
R: 5′–AAAGTTCTAGCACAAGAAAGTCGA–3′Ooi et al. (1995)
Table 3

List of taxa used in molecular analyses along with voucher numbers followed by GenBank accession numbers. Sequences generated in the present study are in bold.

SpeciesVoucher/N° TaxonITSmatKrbcL
Cavendishia angustifoliaPedraza 1749KJ788223KJ788254
Cavendishia arizonensisLuteyn 15286KP729914
Cavendishia bomareoidesPedraza 1752KJ788224KJ788255
Cavendishia bracteataLuteyn 14223AY331867AY331894
Cavendishia callistaClarke 5241KP729912MF786429
Cavendishia capitulataPowell 10AY331868AY331895
Cavendishia complectensPedraza 1749KM209386
Cavendishia grandifoliaNY/L. 8023AY331869AY331896
Cavendishia iserniiSalinas 707KP729959
Cavendishia leucanthaPedraza 1768KJ788226
Cavendishia lindauianaPedraza 1766KJ788227KJ788258
Cavendishia mariaeLuteyn 15198KP729960KP729913
Cavendishia martiiLuteyn 15443AF382658AF382747
Cavendishia micayensisPedraza 1888KJ788228AF382748
Cavendishia nobilisLewis 3414KP729961KP729916
Cavendishia pilosaPedraza 1743KJ788229KJ788260
Cavendishia pubescensPedraza 1038KJ788230KJ788261
Cavendishia punctataKUELAP–267OL361763OL706727OL707640
Cavendishia punctataKUELAP–311OL361767OL706731OL707644
Cavendishia punctataKUELAP–307OL361766OL706730OL707643
Cavendishia punctataKUELAP–293OL361765OL706729OL707642
Cavendishia punctataKUELAP–279OL361764OL706728OL707641
Cavendishia queremePedraza 1707KJ788231KJ788262
Cavendishia tarapotanaPedraza 1958KJ788232KP729915
Cavendishia zamorensisSalina 721KP729966KP729917
Cavendishia litensisAY331890
Thibaudia floribundaAF382709
Thibaudia parvifolia

AF382713


Clethra acuminataLeonard et al., 1849AY190572JQ594906
Clethra alnifoliaCCDB–20334–D03AY190571MF350258MG224565
Clethra alnifoliaCCDB–20334–C04MG220127AJ429281MG222185
Clethra arboreaHedenas & Bisang s.AY190569
Clethra arfakanaSleumer & Vink 4380AY190568
Clethra barbinervisAnderberg & Lundin 11AY190573AB697681AF421089
Clethra canescens224281AY190564
Clethra castaneifoliaS.V&D. 9109AY190567
Clethra cubensisRova et al., 2248AY190560
Clethra delavayiAldén et al., 1717AY190570
Clethra fimbriataHarling 27133AY190563
Clethra hartwegiiH.S.Gaultheria 2135AY190574
Clethra mexicanaC&V 1831AY190558JQ591083
Clethra ovalifoliaH&A.21905AY190561
Clethra ovalifoliaKUELAP–282OL361761OL706732OL707645
Clethra pachyphyllaEmanuelsson 261AY190565
Clethra peruvianaS.V et al., 10006AY190566
Clethra retiveniaKUELAP–295OL361762OL706733OL707646
Clethra revolutaPersson 515AY190562
Clethra scabraOliveira 297AY190559MG833484
Clethra vicentinaW&M 23234AY190557
Ternstroemia sp.HQ437950
Franklinia alatamahaAF380082MF349693
Diospyros aculeata


MG201641

Disterigma acuminatumPP1098FJ001669
Disterigma agathosmoidesL15190KC175470
Disterigma alaternoidesL15074FJ001672AY331901
Disterigma appendiculatumPP1113FJ001673
Disterigma balsleviiPP998FJ001674
Disterigma bracteatumPP1016FJ001675
Disterigma chocoanumPP1121FJ001696
Disterigma codonanthumL15117FJ001677
Disterigma cryptocalyxL14993FJ001678
Disterigma dumontiiL15177FJ001679
Disterigma ecuadorenseKUELAP–285OL361760OL706736OL707648
Disterigma empetrifoliumCP7FJ001680
Disterigma hiatumPP1112FJ001681
Disterigma humboldtiiP1075FJ001684
Disterigma luteyniiLPP14797FJ001687
Disterigma micranthumPP1229FJ001688
Disterigma noyesiaePP1155FJ001690
Disterigma ollacehumPP1528FJ001697
Disterigma ovatumLPP15457FJ001692AY331902
Disterigma pallidumPP1506AF382674
Disterigma parallelinerveJB12532KC175459
Disterigma pentandrumL15085FJ001693KC175465
Disterigma pernettyoidesL15441AF382762
Disterigma pseudokillipiellaPP1143FJ001694KC175471
Disterigma rimbachiiPP1018FJ001695AY331903
Disterigma staphelioidesPP1062FJ001698
Disterigma stereophyllumL15206FJ001699
Disterigma synanthumKUELAP–264OL706734OL707647
Disterigma synanthumKUELAP–275OL361759OL706735
Disterigma trimerumL15568FJ001700
Disterigma uleiPP1515FJ001701
Disterigma verruculatumPP1138FJ001703
Notopora schomburgkiiAF382683AF382768
Orthaea venamensisAF382687AF382772
Orthaea apophysata

AF382685


Gaultheria acuminata1091527JF801586JF801333
Gaultheria adenothrix586107FJ010595
Gaultheria antipoda672075JF801617JF801372KT626709
Gaultheria borneensisVacciniumK.2101092, ACADJF801598AF366629JF941568
Gaultheria bracteata1091528JF801593JF801341
Gaultheria buxifolia1091526JF801359
Gaultheria cardiosepalaLuLu–06–0022–1JF976341HM597394JF941573
Gaultheria corvensis1091531JF801614
Gaultheria cumingianaVacciniumK.3101092, ACADAF358882
Gaultheria cuneataS.D. Z&L. Lu 031543HM597250
Gaultheria discolorGLGS32542HM597366JN098404
Gaultheria dolichopodaL. Lu et al., 060005HM597318HM597405
Gaultheria domingensis679020JF801594JF801342
Gaultheria dumicolaLuLu–GLGS20245HM597346JF941588
Gaultheria eciliataLuLu–LL–07149–1HM597421
Gaultheria erectaL.13813, NYJF801585AF366631
Gaultheria eriophylla763043, RBGEU61317L12618
Gaultheria foliolosaL.15075, NYJF801610
Gaultheria glomerataL.15327, NYJF801592AF366633
Gaultheria gracilis1091532JF801587JF801335
Gaultheria hapalotricha1091533JF801596
Gaultheria heteromeraL. Lu et al., 07316AHM597358
Gaultheria hispidulaVacciniumK.s.n., ACADJF801562AF366634MG223840
Gaultheria hookeriS.D. Z&W.B. Yu 009HM597364
Gaultheria humifusaFF132FJ665708JF801346KX678317
Gaultheria hypochloraLuLu–GLGS16817–1JF976381HM597410JF941640
Gaultheria insana672082JF801604JF801354
Gaultheria lanigeraL.15062, NYJF801590
Gaultheria leucocarpaVacciniumK. 318896, ACADJF976385JF801306
Gaultheria macrostigma176244FJ665711JF801369
Gaultheria megalodonta157515AF358890AF366639
Gaultheria miqueliana1636–77, AAAF358891AF124590
Gaultheria mucronata586115FJ010604FJ010622
Gaultheria myrsinoidesL.14814, NYAF358892AF366640
Gaultheria notabilisL. Lu et al., 07005HM597370
Gaultheria nubigena672084JF801600JF801350
Gaultheria ovatifoliaCCDB–23363–F06JF801597MG222845
Gaultheria parvula672087FJ665715JF801371
Gaultheria praticola861407JF801383
Gaultheria procumbensPowell s.n., WFUAF366643MG222887
Gaultheria prostrataS.D.Z&W.B.Yu ZY011JF801603JF801348JN098405
Gaultheria pseudonotabilisGLGS 16565HM597382
Gaultheria pyroloides95633HM597252JF801349
Gaultheria reticulataL.15077, NYAF358897AF366645
Gaultheria schultesii586118FJ010601
Gaultheria sclerophyllaL.5331, NYAF358898AF366646
Gaultheria secundaKUELAP–278OL706744OL707650
Gaultheria secundaKUELAP–284OL361752OL706738OL707651
Gaultheria secundaKUELAP–301OL361754OL706741OL707654
Gaultheria secundaKUELAP–288OL361753OL706739OL707652
Gaultheria secundaKUELAP–266OL361751OL706737OL707649
Gaultheria semi–inferaL. Lu et al., 07312HM597388
Gaultheria serrata1091539JF801595JF801343
Gaultheria shallonDNA 185, WFUJF801581JF801329MG221678
Gaultheria sleumeriana1091540JF801613
Gaultheria stramineaL. Lu et al., 07306HM597390
Gaultheria strigosaL.15358, NYJF801608AF366647
Gaultheria suborbicularis1045346JF801563
Gaultheria tasmanica1977–5050, RBGKAF358901JF801370
Gaultheria thymifolia586120HM597396
Gaultheria tomentosaL.15076, NYAF358902AF366648
Gaultheria trichophyllaLuLu–ZY–013–1HM597416JF941727
Gaultheria vaccinioides1091543JF801331
Gaultheria viridicarpa1842756KU564802
Gaultheria sp. 01KUELAP–302OL361755OL706742OL707655
Gaultheria sp. 02KUELAP–308OL706743OL707656
Gaultheria sp. 03KUELAP–289OL706740OL707653
Leucothoe griffithianaFJ010598FJ010616
Leucothoe tonkinensisMH558159
Leucothoe davisiae

JF801553
FJ010617

Thibaudia ovalifoliaKUELAP–299OL361758YesOL707660
Thibaudia moricandiKUELAP–298YesOL707659
Thibaudia obovataKUELAP–272OL361756OL707657
Thibaudia costaricensisWFU/EAP016AY331887AY331914
Thibaudia densifloraMM001AF382790
Thibaudia diphyllaNY/L15459AY331888AY331915
Thibaudia floribundaNY/L15090AF382709
Thibaudia inflataNY/L15029AY331916
Thibaudia jahnii180744AF382792
Thibaudia litensisNY/L15020AY331890
Thibaudia macrocalyxNY/L15444AF382711AF382793
Thibaudia martinianaNY/L15028AY331891AY331918
Thibaudia angustifoliaKUELAP–283OL361757OL706745OL707658
Thibaudia pachyanthaNY/L15189AF382712
Thibaudia parvifoliaNY/L5212AF382713
Thibaudia tomentosaNY/L15502AY331892AY331919
Vaccinium poasanumAF382736JQ594910
Disterigma trimerum

FJ001700


Vaccinium alvareziiKIG, HGG, P–659–LKM209414
Vaccinium amamianumTI:Ohi–Toma s.nLC168877
Vaccinium ambivalensC.Koster BW 13699–LKM209415
Vaccinium andersoniiRG–9104–LKM209418
Vaccinium arboreumFLAS:M–4609KM209419KY626810
Vaccinium arctostaphylosACAD/VK–23991AF419774AF419702
Vaccinium berberidifoliumFRF–51757–LKM209424
Vaccinium boninense1004256AB623168
Vaccinium bulleyanum1633929LC168878
Vaccinium caespitosumACAD/VK–313887AF419775AF419703KX678256
Vaccinium calycinumACAD/VacciniumK–630886AF419776AF419704
Vaccinium caudatifoliumRBGE 1993–4020AF382715AF382797
Vaccinium cercidifoliumRBGE 1982–0845AF382716
Vaccinium cereumACAD/VacciniumK–316992KM209431AF419705
Vaccinium ciliatum445570AB623188
Vaccinium corymbosumACAD/VacciniumK–ABS7AF419778AF419706MG223027
Vaccinium crassifoliumWFU/K&P–DNA208AF382718
Vaccinium crenatumNY/L14171AF382719
Vaccinium cruentum1633933KM209436
Vaccinium cylindraceum180753AF382720AF382800_
Vaccinium deliciosumACAD/VK–529879AF419790AF419707KX678227
Vaccinium dentatumRBGE 1011085AF382721AF382801
Vaccinium emarginatum174252AB623166
Vaccinium erythrocarpumACAD/VK–81981AF419779AF419710
Vaccinium exul1633938KU568131
Vaccinium filiformeRBGE 1980–1411AF382722
Vaccinium floribundum180757AF382804
Vaccinium floribundumKUELAP–312OL707676
Vaccinium floribundumKUELAP–268OL706747OL707663
Vaccinium floribundumKUELAP–273OL707665
Vaccinium floribundumKUELAP–281OL360763OL706752OL707668
Vaccinium floribundumKUELAP–265OL360759OL706746OL405713
Vaccinium floribundumKUELAP–277OL360761OL706750OL707667
Vaccinium floribundumKUELAP–287OL707625OL707670
Vaccinium floribundumKUELAP–262OL707661
Vaccinium floribundumKUELAP–290OL360765OL706753OL707671
Vaccinium floribundumKUELAP–297OL360768OL707628OL707674
Vaccinium floribundumKUELAP–292OL360767OL707627OL707673
Vaccinium fragileACAD/VacciniumK–128796AF382725AF382805
Vaccinium gaultheriifoliumRBGE 1992–0332AF382726LC168880
Vaccinium hirsutumACAD/VacciniumK–83981AF419780AF419709
Vaccinium hirtumRBGE 1921–9886AB623185AB623169
Vaccinium horizontale180761AF382808
Vaccinium latissimum1633959KM209449
Vaccinium leucobotrys1633944KM209451
Vaccinium macrocarpon13750AF382730U61316MG221913
Vaccinium madagascarienseLB–11063–LKM209442
Vaccinium mathewsiiKUELAP–286OL360764OL707624OL707669
Vaccinium mathewsiiKUELAP–300OL360769OL707629OL707675
Vaccinium mathewsiiKUELAP–263OL707662
Vaccinium mathewsiiKUELAP–291OL360766OL707626OL707672
Vaccinium membranaceumACAD/VK–133979AF419782AF419711MH926046
Vaccinium meridionaleACAD/VacciniumK–s.n.AF382731AF124576
Vaccinium meridionaleKUELAP–274OL360760OL706749OL707666
Vaccinium meridionaleKUELAP–270OL706748OL707664
Vaccinium meridionaleKUELAP–280OL360762OL706751
Vaccinium moupinenseS.M, A.F. 079KM209457
Vaccinium myrtillusS/Anderberg s.n.AF382732AF382810MG221208
Vaccinium nummularia180764LC168882
Vaccinium oldhamiiACAD/VacciniumK–426886AF419783AB623174
Vaccinium ovalifoliumACAD/VK–1419886AF419784KX679055
Vaccinium ovatumERM1383FJ001692KX678497
Vaccinium oxycoccosHERB0230LC168883KX677905
Vaccinium padifoliumACAD/VK–5141090AF382734AF382812
Vaccinium phillyreoides989263–LKM209465
Vaccinium praestansACAD/VK–Vacc813AF419785AF419714
Vaccinium pratenseSCBGP385_2KP092616
Vaccinium reticulatumACAD/VacciniumK–324992AF382737AF382814
Vaccinium scopariumACAD/VacciniumK–731883AF419787AF419716MG222739
Vaccinium sieboldiiTNS:175ws–20100513AB623191AB623175
Vaccinium smalliiACAD/VK–725886AF382739AB623170
Vaccinium summifaucisRBGE 1963–0610AF382740AF382817
Vaccinium tenellumWFU/K& P–DNA209AF382741AF382818
Vaccinium uliginosumACAD/VK–217995AF419788AF419717KX677950
Vaccinium varingifolium229200AY274564
Vaccinium vitis idaeaRBGE 1977–3274AAH011361MN150141MG222697
Vaccinium wrightii1004259AB623192
Vaccinium yakushimense1004255AB623183
Vaccinium yatabeiACAD/VK–419886AF419789AF419718
Z. pulverulenta (Outgroup)AF358906AF124571
A. polifolia (Outgroup)

AF358872
LC168873

Species
Voucher/N° Taxon
ITS
GBSSI
rbcL
Rubus acuminatusR2007KU881197
Rubus adenothallusKUELAP–256OL348471OL707633OL707678
Rubus amabilisR01–14–SICUAFJ472909KU926726KU881200
Rubus andicolaKUELAP–254OL348470OL707636OL707677
Rubus assamensisR0118AH006024KU926729KU881203
Rubus australisGardner 1539, MOH006022
Rubus biflorusR2504KU881063KU926733KU881207
Rubus bifronsAlice 98–9, MAF055775
Rubus bolleiBol_col14KM037227
Rubus caesiusKarlen 243, S/75065AF055776FN689382
Rubus calycinusR2519KU881065KU926735KU881209
Rubus canadensisA&C 98–10, M/MOBOT.S.27940AF055777KY427303
Rubus caudifoliusR2021KU881067KU926737KU881211
Rubus chamaemorusAlice, R17, MAF055740
Rubus chingiiR2128KU881068KU881212
Rubus corchorifoliusPDBK 2008–0160MH593651
Rubus coreanus321593MT078683KU926741MN732644
Rubus cuneifoliusAlice 5, M/A.22485AF055778KJ773846
Rubus deliciosusAlice, 98–1, MAF055733
Rubus ellipticusR2512/R0112KU881060KU926746KU881223
Rubus eucalyptusR2354KU926749KU881226
Rubus eustephanusR2518KU881083KU926750KU881227
Rubus loxensisKUELAP–259OL348474OL707635OL707679
Rubus flagellarisAlice 61:WKU/BM 2008/273AY083372HM850313
Rubus foliosusFol_col08KM037335
Rubus floribundusKUELAP–255OL351854OL707632
Rubus geoidesDudley et al., 1538a, MOAF055799
Rubus glabratusRubus5132 QCAHM453950
Rubus glabratusKUELAP–261OL348476OL707639OL707681
Rubus glaucusPI 548906AY083361
Rubus gracilisGrac_co0l5KM037377
Rubus gunnianusWells 96–1, MAF055749
Rubus hirsutusODdo/R2225AY818208KU926758KU881236
Rubus hypomalacusHma_col07KM037395
Rubus hypopitysR2533KU881094KU881238
Rubus idaeusAlice, R8, MAINEAF055755JX848533
Rubus lasiococcusMerello et al., 827, MOAF055750
Rubus lechleriKUELAP–258OL348473OL707637OL707682
Rubus macilentusR2501KU881118KU926783KU881262
Rubus macraei59494AF055763
Rubus matsumuranusPDBK 2012–0085MH593654
R, moorreiStreimann 8207, GHAF055765
Rubus mesogaeusALTA:120202KU881122KU926787KU881266
Rubus moschusMos01_col04KM037437
Rubus niveusR0101KU881126KU926791KU881270
Rubus nubigenus1257, NCGRAF055769
Rubus odoratusAlice, R14, MAF055734
Rubus parviflorusRichards, 666, MAF055735
Rubus parvifoliusR2035KU881132KU926797GU363802
Rubus parvusAlice 97–3, M/CHR:688824AF055766KT626843
Rubus pectinellus680–MOAF055797
Rubus pedemontanusMartensen s.n.AF055783
Rubus pentagonusR0223KU926801KU881280
Rubus phoenicolasiusAlice, 96–2, MAF055759KU926803
Rubus pinfaensisR0102KU926811KU881291
Rubus platyphyllusSva_col04KM037581
Rubus praecoxPra01_col01KM037481
Rubus pungensR2337KU881153KU926818KU881297
Rubus radulaRad_col06KM037522
Rubus reflexusS.1033I/S.0492LJN407524JN407362
Rubus robustusSteinbach 247, GHAF055771
Rubus roseusL&14402, MAF055770
Rubus sanctusThibaudia Eriksson 714, SAF055785
Rubus saxatilisThibaudia Eriksson 719, SAF055746
Rubus schizostylusTKM201536KT634247
Rubus schleicheriSchl_col05KM037537
Rubus scissoides1546356KM037543
Rubus setosusAlice 113, MAINEAF055787
Rubus silvaticusSil_col08KM037557
Rubus simplexR2321KU926832KU881312
Rubus sparsiflorusKUELAP–260OL348475OL707638OL707680
Rubus sulcatusMartensen 1325.12AF055789
Rubus sumatranusR2111KU881182KU926845KU881326
Rubus tephrodesYao, 9231, MOAF055767
Rubus thibetanusQ186MH711174
Rubus trifidusC, 3.001/A, 98–2, MAF055737
Rubus trilobusRuiz, 889, MOAF055738
Rubus trivialisAlice 55, M/Abbott 26055AF055790KJ773847
Rubus ursinus197, NCGR/Alice 98–8, MAF055794
Rubus vigorosusMartensen 2518.32AF055793
Rubus weberbaueriKUELAP–257OL348472OL707634OL707683
Fullgaria paradoxaU90805AM116869U06802
Waldsteinia fragarioidesU90822
Geum urbanumAM116871U90802
Figure 3

Experimental procedures for sampling, identification, DNA extraction, amplification, purification and data analysis for Andean berries specimens from Region Amazonas, northern Peru.

Genomic DNA QC using standard Gel Electrophoresis for Andean berries specimens from Region Amazonas, northern Peru. Sets of primer combinations for matK, rbcL, nrITS and GBSSI-2 markers used for specimens from Ericales and Rosales (listed 5′→ 3′). List of taxa used in molecular analyses along with voucher numbers followed by GenBank accession numbers. Sequences generated in the present study are in bold. Experimental procedures for sampling, identification, DNA extraction, amplification, purification and data analysis for Andean berries specimens from Region Amazonas, northern Peru.

Phylogenetic analysis of concatenated sequence data

The phylogenies were based on concatenated data of the four molecular markers (Table 2). An exploratory phylogeny consisting of Ericales and Rosales (340 sequences) was performed to identify the main lineages where Andean berries were embedded. Additionally, separate phylogenies for each lineage were evaluated. Selection of the best-fitting nucleotide substitution model was conducted using PartitionFinder (Lanfear et al., 2012) for exploratory analysis (using the four partitions matK, rbcL, nrITS and GBSSI-2) and for separate phylogenies (using three partitions each) (Table 4). The best partition strategy and model of sequence evolution were selected based on the Bayesian information criterion (BIC) for each phylogeny (Table 4). Maximum likelihood (ML) analyses were conducted with the RAxML HPC-AVX program (Stamatakis, 2014), implemented in the raxmlGUI 1.3.1 interface (Silvestro and Michalak, 2012) using Table 4 models with 1000 bootstrap replications. Bayesian inference (BI) was performed with MrBayes v. 3.2.6 software (Ronquist et al., 2012) using Metropolis-coupled MCMC and the Table 4 models. Two runs each with four chains (three hot and one cold) were conducted for 10,000,000 generations, sampling trees every 1,000 generations.
Table 4

Evolutionary models for phylogenetic analyses of specimens from Ericales and Rosales.

GroupBayesian inferencesMaximum likelihood
Exploratory phylogenyFigure S1GTR + I+GGTRGAMMAI
Separate phylogeniesFigure 2GTRK81
Figure 3TRNEF+GTRNEF+G
Figure 4GTRK81UF+I+G
Figure 5GTR+I+GGTR+I+G
Figure 6GTR+I+GGTR+I+G
Figure 7GTRK81UF+G
Figure 8GTR+I+GGTR+I+G
Evolutionary models for phylogenetic analyses of specimens from Ericales and Rosales. Phylogenetic tree of the Cavendishia lineage based on maximum likelihood inference of combined matK, rbcL, and ITS data. Maximum likelihood bootstrap values (BS; ≥ 50%)/Bayesian posterior probabilities (BPP; ≥ 0.9) are indicated above branches. Values lower than 50% (BS) or 0.90 (BPP) are indicated by hyphens (-). The scale bar indicates the number of nucleotide substitutions per site. Phylogenetic tree of the Clethra lineage based on maximum likelihood inference of combined matK, rbcL, and ITS data. Maximum likelihood bootstrap values (BS; ≥ 50%)/Bayesian posterior probabilities (BPP; ≥ 0.9) are indicated above branches. Values lower than 50% (BS) or 0.90 (BPP) are indicated by hyphens (-). The scale bar indicates the number of nucleotide substitutions per site. Phylogenetic tree of the Disterigma lineage based on maximum likelihood inference of combined matK and ITS data. Maximum likelihood bootstrap values (BS; ≥ 50%)/Bayesian posterior probabilities (BPP; ≥ 0.9) are indicated above branches. Values lower than 50% (BS) or 0.90 (BPP. are indicated by hyphens (-)). The scale bar indicates the number of nucleotide substitutions per site. Phylogenetic tree of the Gaultheria lineage based on maximum likelihood inference of combined matK, rbcL, and ITS data. Maximum likelihood bootstrap values (BS; ≥ 50%)/Bayesian posterior probabilities (BPP; ≥ 0.9) are indicated above branches. Values lower than 50% (BS. or 0.90 (BPP. are indicated by hyphens (-)). The scale bar indicates the number of nucleotide substitutions per site. Phylogenetic tree of the Thibaudia lineage based on the maximum likelihood inference of combined matK, rbcL, and ITS data. Maximum likelihood bootstrap values (BS; ≥ 50%)/Bayesian posterior probabilities (BPP; ≥ 0.9) are indicated above branches. Values lower than 50% (BS) or 0.90 (BPP. are indicated by hyphens (-)). The scale bar indicates the number of nucleotide substitutions per site.

Results

A total of 125 DNA-barcodes of andean berries were newly generated for the four molecular markers that allowed the construction of multilocus phylogenies. In the exploratory phylogeny, the analyzed data matrix included a total of 3,324 base pairs (bp) (1,487 bp for matK, 666 bp for rbcL, 716 bp for ITS, and 455 bp for GBSSI) from 340 individuals (Table 3). This multilocus phylogeny obtained from the ML and BI analyses molecularly confirmed 24 species from 48 specimens embedded in the order Ericales and Rosales. This exploratory phylogenetic tree showed six monophyly lineages belonging to Ericales [Cavendishia Lindl., Clethra L., Disterigma (Klotzsch) Nied, Gaultheria L., Thibaudia Ruiz & Pav., and Vaccinium L.] and one belonging to Rosales (Rubus L.) (Figure S1).

Cavendishia

The phylogeny of Cavendishia included concatenated data (1,265 bp for matK, 551 bp for rbcL, and 631 bp for ITS) from 25 individuals. The specimens KUELAP-211, KUELAP-267, KUELAP-279, KUELAP-293, and KUELAP-307 were recognized as Ca. punctata (Ruiz & Pav. ex J.St.-Hil.) Sleumer. This species is characterized by pink peduncles, dark-red pedicels, pinkish-red calyx, and pale green flowers (Figure 9A, Table 5). This species was placed in sistership with Ca. bracteata (Ruiz & Pav. ex A.St.-Hil.) Hoerold. The genetic divergences between these species were over 0.9% for matK and 0.4% for ITS (Figures 4, S2, S3). The intraspecific divergences of Ca. punctata were 0.7% for matK, 0.3% for rbcL, and 0.2% for ITS.
Figure 9

Phylogenetic tree of the Vaccinium lineage based on maximum likelihood inference of combined matK, rbcL, and ITS data. Maximum likelihood bootstrap values (BS; ≥ 50%)/Bayesian posterior probabilities (BPP; ≥ 0.9) are indicated above branches. Values lower than 50% (BS. or 0.90 (BPP. are indicated by hyphens (-)). The scale bar indicates the number of nucleotide substitutions per site.

Table 5

Morphological comparisons among species of the genus Cavendishia.

SpeciesHabitatAltitude (masl)Height (m)Immature fruitMature fruitFlowersCorollaReferences
Cavendishia bracteataShrub1400–35001–3GreenBlackLilacPinkLuteyn (1983)
WCVP (2021)
Cavendishia iserniiShrub terrestrial660–12001.8–3Reddish–greenGreenish–whiteLilacLuteyn (1983)
Cavendishia punctataShrub2000–30002–3.5Reddish–greenPurplePedicel and garnet calyxGreenishLuteyn (1983), this study
Cavendishia sirensisShrub hemi–epiphyte600–17001.5–3GreenPurpleWhite, red calyxTubularLuteyn (1983)
Cavendishia tarapotanaShrub1200–15002.5–5LilacFuchsia redRose–yellow, white–yellowLuteyn (1983)
Figure 4

Phylogenetic tree of the Cavendishia lineage based on maximum likelihood inference of combined matK, rbcL, and ITS data. Maximum likelihood bootstrap values (BS; ≥ 50%)/Bayesian posterior probabilities (BPP; ≥ 0.9) are indicated above branches. Values lower than 50% (BS) or 0.90 (BPP) are indicated by hyphens (-). The scale bar indicates the number of nucleotide substitutions per site.

Phylogenetic tree of the Vaccinium lineage based on maximum likelihood inference of combined matK, rbcL, and ITS data. Maximum likelihood bootstrap values (BS; ≥ 50%)/Bayesian posterior probabilities (BPP; ≥ 0.9) are indicated above branches. Values lower than 50% (BS. or 0.90 (BPP. are indicated by hyphens (-)). The scale bar indicates the number of nucleotide substitutions per site. Morphological comparisons among species of the genus Cavendishia.

Clethra

The multilocus phylogeny of Clethra (1,323 bp for matK, 532 bp for rbcL, and 716 bp for ITS) included 21 individuals. Two species were identified among the specimens, Cl. ovalifolia Turcz (KUELAP-282) and Cl. retivenia Sleumer (KUELAP-295) (Figure 5). Cl. ovalifolia was characterized by oval leaves with stipules in the edges (Figure 9B), while Cl. retivenia was diagnosed with pubescent leaves and ferruginous back side leaves (Figure 9C, Table 6). Cl. retivenia resolved sistership to the clade composed of Cl. fimbriata Kunth, Cl. ovalifolia and Cl. revoluta (Ruiz & Pav.) Spreng., and genetic divergences were over 0.5% for ITS (Figure S4).
Figure 5

Phylogenetic tree of the Clethra lineage based on maximum likelihood inference of combined matK, rbcL, and ITS data. Maximum likelihood bootstrap values (BS; ≥ 50%)/Bayesian posterior probabilities (BPP; ≥ 0.9) are indicated above branches. Values lower than 50% (BS) or 0.90 (BPP) are indicated by hyphens (-). The scale bar indicates the number of nucleotide substitutions per site.

Table 6

Morphological comparisons among species of the genus Clethra.

SpeciesHabitatAltitude (masl)Height (m)Leaf shapeImmature fruitMature fruitFlowersCorollaReferences
Clethra fimbriatasubshrub2800–36002–3CoriaceousBrownBrownWhiteWhiteLeón, 2006a, León, 2006b, Sleumer (1967)
Clethra ovalifoliaShrub2000–31001–3BrownCreamWhiteSleumer (1967)
Clethra retiveniaShrub1500–32003CoriaceousWhiteWhiteLeón, 2006a, León, 2006b, this study
Clethra revolutaTree235010–16CoriaceousWhiteWhiteSleumer (1967)
Clethra scabraTree1700–20004–8GreenBrown– ReddishPinkPinkSleumer (1967)
Morphological comparisons among species of the genus Clethra.

Disterigma

The phylogeny of Disterigma included concatenated data (1274 bp for matK and 686 bp for ITS) from 32 individuals. Based on the multilocus tree obtained from the ML and BI analyses (Figure 6), the specimens were identified as D. synanthum Pedraza (KUELAP-264, KUELAP-275) and D. ecuadorense Luteyn (KUELAP-285). The former species was characterized by pale green floral bracts and a white corolla (Figure 9D). This species was sister to D. alaternoides (Kunth) Nied (BS/BI = 85/1.0), differing by 0.2% for the ITS. Additionally, D. ecuadorense was characterized by a green calyx, pink corolla, and white berry (Figure 9E, Table 7). This species was sister to D. ulei Sleumer, differing by 2.3% for ITS (Figures S5, S6).
Figure 6

Phylogenetic tree of the Disterigma lineage based on maximum likelihood inference of combined matK and ITS data. Maximum likelihood bootstrap values (BS; ≥ 50%)/Bayesian posterior probabilities (BPP; ≥ 0.9) are indicated above branches. Values lower than 50% (BS) or 0.90 (BPP. are indicated by hyphens (-)). The scale bar indicates the number of nucleotide substitutions per site.

Table 7

Morphological comparisons among species of the genus Disterigma.

SpeciesHabitatAltitude (masl)Height (m)CalyxImmature fruitMature fruitFlowersCorollaReferences
Disterigma synanthumShrub–epiphyte2500–30000.5–1Green paleGreen paleBrownWhite–pinkwhite, style whitePedraza–Peñalosa (2008), this study
Disterigma alaternoidesShrub terrestrial1500–29601.5–2GreenWhitish–greenBrownWhite–pinkWhite tubularLeón, 2006a, León, 2006b, Pedraza–Peñalosa (2008)
Disterigma ecuadorenseShrub terrestrial2500–30001GreenWhiteWhiteWhitish–pinkSmith (1933), León, 2006a, León, 2006b, this study
Disterigma uleiEpiphytic grass, Shrub terrestrial2000–28000.5–1Light greenLight greenOcbonicos lilacGreenishPedraza–Peñalosa (2008), Smith (1933)
Morphological comparisons among species of the genus Disterigma.

Gaultheria

The multilocus phylogeny of Gaultheria (1487 bp for matK, 550 bp for rbcL and 659 bp for ITS) included 67 individuals (Figure 7). The materials comprise four species within Gaultheria. One of this species was identified as G. secunda J. Rémy (KUELAP-266, KUELAP-278, KUELAP-284, KUELAP-288, KUELAP-301) based on the red calyx and pale-white corolla (Figure 9F, Table 8). This species was resolved in sistership to the clade composed of G. foliolosa Benth and G. mucronata (L. fil.) J.Rémy. The intraspecific divergences of G. secunda were 0.2% for matK, 0.2% for rbcL, and 2.4% for ITS (Figures S7, S8, S9). The other three species remained unidentified. Gaultheria sp. 1 (KUELAP-289) (Figure 9G) resolved sister to G. myrsinoides Kunth. Additionally, Gaultheria sp. 2 (KUELAP-308) (Figure 9H) and Gaultheria sp. 3 (KUELAP-302) (Figure 9I) were sister species, and both were sister to G. glomerata (Cav.) Sleumer.
Figure 7

Phylogenetic tree of the Gaultheria lineage based on maximum likelihood inference of combined matK, rbcL, and ITS data. Maximum likelihood bootstrap values (BS; ≥ 50%)/Bayesian posterior probabilities (BPP; ≥ 0.9) are indicated above branches. Values lower than 50% (BS. or 0.90 (BPP. are indicated by hyphens (-)). The scale bar indicates the number of nucleotide substitutions per site.

Table 8

Morphological comparisons among species of the genus Gaultheria.

SpeciesHabitatAltitude (masl)Height (m)CalyxImmature fruitMature fruitFlowersCorollaReferences
Gaultheria foliolosaShrub terrestrial2000–30000.5–3Cream-Blue–blackWhiteCreamMiddleton (1990, 1991)
Gaultheria glomerataShrub terrestrial1000–30000.5–3Red–roseGreenishBlackLilac, redMiddleton (1990, 1991)
Gaultheria myrsinoidesShrub terrestrial2000–28001–2GreenGreenPurpleWhiteWhiteMiddleton (1990, 1991)
Gaultheria mucronataShrub terrestrial2000–31201–2GreenGreenLilacPinkCream at base rose distallyMiddleton (1990, 1991)
Gaultheria secundaShrub, half–terrestrial2500–35001–2Rose–redGreenRed–roseRose–pinkPale pinkish–whiteMiddleton (1990, 1991), WCVP (2021), this study
Gaultheria sp 1Shrub2000–27201–2Rose–redGreenRed–roseRose–pinkPale pinkish–whiteThis study
Gaultheria sp 2Shrub2000–27001–2Rose–redGreenRed–roseRose–pinkPale pinkish–whiteThis study
Gaultheria sp 3Shrub2000–27001–2Rose–redGreenRed–roseRose–pinkPale pinkish–whiteThis study
Morphological comparisons among species of the genus Gaultheria.

Thibaudia

The phylogeny of Thibaudia included concatenated data (1,262 bp for matK, 551 bp for rbcL and 650 bp for ITS) from 18 individuals. The materials comprised four species in Thibaudia (Figure 8). T. ovalifolia A.C.Sm. (KUELAP-299) and T. moricandi Dunal (KUELAP-298) were recognized as sister species, and both differed by 0.1% for matK and 0.1% for rbcL. T. ovalifolia was characterized by glabrous flowers and rugose calyxes (Figure 9L), whereas T. moricandi was characterized by a pubescent corolla (Figure 9K, Table 9). These two species were sister to T. obovata A.C.Sm. (KUELAP-272), and both differed from the latter by over 0.1% for rbcL and 0.1% for ITS (Figures S10, S11). T. obovata was characterized by obovate-oblong leaves, pilose calyx and pedicels, and tomentose corolla (Figure 9M). Moreover, the clade composed of these three species and T. nutans Klotzsch ex Mansf. was closely related to T. angustifolia Hook (KUELAP-283). T. angustifolia was diagnosed by the presence of a bright red corolla and purple berries (Figure 9J).
Figure 8

Phylogenetic tree of the Thibaudia lineage based on the maximum likelihood inference of combined matK, rbcL, and ITS data. Maximum likelihood bootstrap values (BS; ≥ 50%)/Bayesian posterior probabilities (BPP; ≥ 0.9) are indicated above branches. Values lower than 50% (BS) or 0.90 (BPP. are indicated by hyphens (-)). The scale bar indicates the number of nucleotide substitutions per site.

Table 9

Morphological comparisons among species of the genus Thibaudia.

SpeciesHabitatAltitude (masl)Height (m)CalyxFlowersCorollaReferences
Thibaudia angustifoliaShrub2000–28000.5–2Red–roseBright redBright redLeón, 2006a, León, 2006b, WCVP (2021), this study
Thibaudia diphyllaShrub1000–24002–4Pale–pinkWhite pinkRich pinkLeón, 2006a, León, 2006b, WCVP (2021)
Thibaudia moricandiiShrub1500–26000.5–2RedRedPubescent, throat, lobes whiteLeón, 2006a, León, 2006b, this study
Thibaudia nutansHerbaceous–bush1000–19000–5 – 3GreenCauliflorousDark–redLeón, 2006a, León, 2006b
Thibaudia ovalifoliaShrub2100–27000.5–2Rugoseglabrous flowersLeón, 2006a, León, 2006b, WCVP (2021), this study
Thibaudia obovataShrub1600–22001–3Pilose pedicelsTomentoseLeón, 2006a, León, 2006b, WCVP (2021), this study
Thibaudia tomentosaShrub terrestrial0.5–1.5Globose bell–shapedBright red, curvedOrangeLeón, 2006a, León, 2006b
Morphological comparisons among species of the genus Thibaudia.

Vaccinium

The multilocus phylogeny of Vaccinium (1,253 bp for matK, 551 bp for rbcL and 673 bp for ITS) included 79 individuals. In this collection, three species were recognized in this genus, namely, V. meridionale Sw, V. mathewsii Sleumer, and V. floribundum Kunth. The former species (KUELAP-270, KUELAP-274, KUELAP-280) was characterized by dark berries and a bitter taste (Figure 9N). V. meridionale was sister to V. arboreum Marshall and genetically differed by 0.3% in rbcL and by 3.5% in the ITS. V. mathewsii (KUELAP-263, KUELAP-286, KUELAP-291, KUELAP-300) was morphologically characterized by a pinkish-white corolla and blue–black fruit (Figure 9O, Table 10). V. mathewsii was closely related to V. crenatum (G. Don) Sleumer, and genetic divergence of these taxa was 5.7% for ITS. V. floribundum (KUELAP-262, KUELAP-265, KUELAP-267, KUELAP-268, KUELAP-273, KUELAP-277, KUELAP-281, KUELAP-287, KUELAP-290, KUELAP-292, KUELAP-312) was diagnosed by having leathery leaves with pinkish-white flowers and dark berries (Figure 9P) and showed high intraspecific divergences (1.2% for matK, 0.3% for rbcL, and 3.7% for ITS), while the general appearance remained identical among all specimens of this study, suggesting cryptic diversity. V. floribundum was sister to V. ovatum Pursh, differing by 0.7% for rbcL (Figures S12, S13, S14).
Table 10

Morphological comparisons among species of the genus Vaccinium.

SpeciesHabitatAltitude (masl)Height (m)Immature fruitMature fruitFlowersCorollaReferences
Vaccinium arboreumShrub-2–5GreenBlackWhiteWhiteBracko and Zurucchi (1993), León et al. (2017)
Vaccinium crenatumShrub terrestrial1000–2800GreenReddish, blue–blackWhite–pinkRose–redVander Kloet and Dickinson (2009), León et al. (2017)
Vaccinium floribundumShrub2000–30000.5–1Greenblue–blackWhite, red tipswhiteBracko and Zurucchi (1993), León et al. (2017), this study
Vaccinium mathewsiiShrub2000–30001–2Greenblue–blackpinkish–whitePinkish–whiteBracko and Zurucchi (1993), León et al. (2017), this study
Vaccinium meridionaleShrub1800–28000.5–2Green–reddishdarkWhite–pinkWhiteVander Kloet and Dickinson (2009), this study
Vaccinium ovatumShrub--GreenredWhite–pinkPinkBracko and Zurucchi (1993), León et al. (2017)
Morphological comparisons among species of the genus Vaccinium.

Rubus

The phylogeny of Rubus (666 bp for rbcL, 455 bp for GBSSI, and 639 bp for ITS) included 81 individuals. In this collection, eight species were recognized in Rubus and grouped into two subgenera (Orobatus ans Rubus, Figure 10). The subgenus Orobatus consisted of R. andicola Focke, R. glabratus Kunth, R. lecheri Focke, R. sparsiflorus J.F. Macbr, and R. weberbaueri Focke, whereas the subgenus Rubus consisted of R. adenothallus Focke, R. floribundus J.F.Macbr. and R. loxensis Benth. These two subgenera were distinguished by glands without flexible bristles (Orobatus) and inflorescences in panicle or subracemose forms (Rubus). In the subgenera Orobatus (Figure 11); R. andicola (KUELAP-254) was characterized by elongated branches, spines with short, curved and compressed trichomes, with leaves pubescent on the underside (Figure 11C); R. glabratus (KUELAP-261) by having pink-rose petals and reddish-orange immature fruits (Figure 11A); R. lechleri (KUELAP-258) by its bristly pubescence on the back sides of leaves and purple petals (Figure 11E); R. sparsiflorus (KUELAP-260) by the presence of flowers in dense clusters, crepe-like petals and a pink corolla (Figure 11B); and R. weberbaueri (KUELAP-257) by having veins and spines on the back sides of the leaves, magenta flowers, and black fruits (Figure 11D, Table 11). Genetically, R. weberbaueri and R. lechleri were sister species, differing by 1.0% for rbcL and 0.2% for ITS. These two species were closely related to R. roseus, and the three species differed by over 0.2% for ITS. R. andicola was sister to the clade composed of these tree species, differing over 0.9% for rbcL and 0.2% for ITS. R. sparsiflorus was closely related to the clade composed of these four species and diverged over 0.9% for rbcL and 0.3% for ITS. R. glabratus was closely related to the clade composed of six species of the sugenus Orobatus and differed over 0.9% for rbcL and 0.8% for ITS. Conversely, in the subgenus Rubus, R. floribundus (KUELAP-255) was recognized as a sister species to R. robustus, and both differed by 0.9% for the ITS. R. floribundus had dense inflorescences with pyramidal-shaped paniculata extraaxillaris that tapered toward the lower branches (Figure 11F). These species were sister to the clade composed of R. adenothallus (KUELAP-256) and R. loxensis (KUELAP-259). R. loxensis had creeping-climbing stems and slightly ovate petals and sepals (Figure 11G), whereas R. adenothallus was characterized by small greenish-white flowers and elongated red–black baya (Figure 11H). R. adenothallus and R. loxensis differed by 0.3% for rbcL (Figures S15, S16, S17).
Figure 10

Phylogenetic tree of the Rubus lineage based on maximum likelihood inference of combined rbcL, GBSSI, and ITS data. Maximum likelihood bootstrap values (BS; ≥ 50%)/Bayesian posterior probabilities (BPP; ≥ 0.9) are indicated above branches. Values lower than 50% (BS) or 0.90 (BPP) are indicated by hyphens (-). The scale bar indicates the number of nucleotide substitutions per site.

Figure 11

Diversity of Andean berries belonging to Ericales. A. Cavendishia punctata. B. Clethra ovalifolia. C.Clethra retivenia. D.Disterigma synanthum. E.Disterigma ecuadorense. F.Gaultheria secunda.G.Gaultheria sp. 01. H.Gaultheria sp. 02. I.Gaultheria sp. 03. J.Thibaudia angustifolia.K.Thibaudia moricandi.L.Thibaudia ovalifolia. M.Thibaudia obovata. N. Vaccinium meridionale. O. Vaccinium mathewsii. P.Vaccinium floribundum.

Table 11

Morphological comparisons among species of the genus Rubus.

SpeciesHabitAltitude (masl)Height (m)CalyxImmature fruitMature fruitFlowersCorollaReferences
Rubus andicolaShrub800–25002–3GreenGreen whit trichomesRedWhite–pinkPinkFocke (1910, 1911), Mendoza and León (2006), this study
Rubus adenothallusShrub terrestrial2000–35002–5GreenLight greenRed–black, redgreenish–whiteGreenish–whiteFocke (1910, 1911), Mendoza and León (2006), this study
Rubus floribundusShrub1500–20001–3GreenGreenBecoming blackWhitePinkFocke (1910, 1911), Mendoza and León (2006), this study
Rubus glabratusTrailing–shrublet2000–34000.5–1GreenReddish–orange-Pink, redPink–roseFocke (1910, 1911), Mendoza and León (2006), this study
Rubus lechleriShrub2000–36002–4GreenGreenRedWhite–purplePurpleFocke (1910, 1911), Mendoza and León (2006), this study
Rubus loxensisShrub2000–30002–3.5Green–reddishGreen, redRedGreenish, lilacSlightly ovateFocke (1910, 1911), Mendoza and León (2006), this study
Rubus nubigenusSupporting– shrub2000–35002–3GreenGreen–reddishDark fruitsWhite–greenish, pinkWhiteFocke (1910, 1911), Mendoza and León (2006)
Rubus robustusShrub1000–30001–2-BlackWhite–pinkWhite–pinkFocke (1910, 1911), Mendoza and León (2006)
Rubus roseusclimbing shrub1600–30001–3Green, purplish tintRedWhite–pinkReddish–violetFocke (1910, 1911), Mendoza and León (2006)
Rubus sparsiflorusShrub2000–35001–4Green, red–brownRed–purple, blackBlackCrepe–linke pink, style redFocke (1910, 1911), Mendoza and León (2006), this study
Rubus weberbaueriShrub terrestrial2400–36001.5–2.5Lead–greenBlackPink–reddishMagentaFocke (1910, 1911), Mendoza and León (2006), this study
Phylogenetic tree of the Rubus lineage based on maximum likelihood inference of combined rbcL, GBSSI, and ITS data. Maximum likelihood bootstrap values (BS; ≥ 50%)/Bayesian posterior probabilities (BPP; ≥ 0.9) are indicated above branches. Values lower than 50% (BS) or 0.90 (BPP) are indicated by hyphens (-). The scale bar indicates the number of nucleotide substitutions per site. Diversity of Andean berries belonging to Ericales. A. Cavendishia punctata. B. Clethra ovalifolia. C.Clethra retivenia. D.Disterigma synanthum. E.Disterigma ecuadorense. F.Gaultheria secunda.G.Gaultheria sp. 01. H.Gaultheria sp. 02. I.Gaultheria sp. 03. J.Thibaudia angustifolia.K.Thibaudia moricandi.L.Thibaudia ovalifolia. M.Thibaudia obovata. N. Vaccinium meridionale. O. Vaccinium mathewsii. P.Vaccinium floribundum. Morphological comparisons among species of the genus Rubus.

Discussion

Most berries from mountainous habitats tend to be more diverse than those from lowland habitats (Powell and Kron, 2003) due to the interactions of UV radiation with environmental (climate) and geographic (relief) factors, which evoke species-specific responses leading to adaptation and diversification (Sedej et al., 2020). Using molecular markers, this study identified 24 species of andean berries (Cavendishia = 1, Clethra = 2, Disterigma = 2, Gaultheria = 4, Thibaudia = 4, Vaccinium = 3, Rubus = 8) from the Amazonas region. The majority of these species were found in coniferous forests, dry and humid forests, rocky slopes, and grasslands at 2,506–3,019 masl (Figure 12).
Figure 12

Diversity of andean berries belonging to Rosales. A. Rubus glabratus.B. Rubus sparsiflorus.C. Rubus andicola. D. Rubus weberbaueri. E. Rubus lechleri.F. Rubus floribundus. G.Rubus loxensis.H. Rubus adenothallus.

Diversity of andean berries belonging to Rosales. A. Rubus glabratus.B. Rubus sparsiflorus.C. Rubus andicola. D. Rubus weberbaueri. E. Rubus lechleri.F. Rubus floribundus. G.Rubus loxensis.H. Rubus adenothallus. The genus Cavendishia has approximately 130 species distributed throughout the Andes of South America, and most of these species are endemic to Colombia (Pedraza-Peñalosa et al., 2015; WCVP, 2021). Only nine species of Cavendishia have been reported from Peru (León, 2006a; Pedraza-Peñalosa et al., 2015; WCVP, 2021), and two of these were from the Amazonas region. In addition to Ca. isernii Sleumer and Ca. sirensis Luteyn (León, 2006a; Salinas, 2015), this study confirms the presence of Ca. punctata (KUELAP-267, KUELAP-279, KUELAP-293, KUELAP-307, KUELAP-311) in cold and humid habitats in the Amazonas region. Ca. punctata was already recorded from central (Junín and Pasco) and southern Peru (Cusco) at 1,800–2,360 masl, forming sympatric populations with C. bracteata (Pedraza–Peñalosa and Luteyn, 2011). This study also confirms the wider distribution of Ca. punctata along the Peruvian Andes (Table 5). The genus Clethra consists of 85 species distributed in Africa, America, and Asia (Sleumer, 1967; Fior et al., 2003; WCVP, 2021). Six of the 12 species reported from Peru were registered in the Amazonas region (Cl. castaneifolia Meisn., Cl. ovalifolia, Cl. pedicellaris Turcz., Cl. peruviana Szyszyl, Cl. retivenia and Cl. revoluta Ruiz & Pav) (WCVP, 2021; León, 2006b). This study confirmed the presence of Cl. ovalifolia (KUELAP-282) and Cl. retivenia (KUELAP-295) in Amazonas using molecular data (matK, rbcL and ITS). These species were previously recorded from Cajamarca (northern Peru) and Ucayali (southern Peru) (León, 2006b), and this study found that they occurred in similar habitats (i.e., temperate to humid tropical environments, 2,507–2,800 masl) coexisting with V. floribundum and V. meridionale (Table 6). Disterigma includes 37 species distributed along cold mountain ecosystems of Central and South America (Pedraza-Peñalosa, 2008, 2009). Of these, 11 species were reported from Peru (Pedraza-Peñalosa, 2008, 2009; WCVP, 2021), and only three species were reported in the Amazonas region (i.e., D. baguense Pedraza; D. ulei Sleumer and D. weberbaueri Hoerold) (Pedraza-Peñalosa, 2009; WCVP, 2021). This study found two new reports of Disterigma for the Peruvian flora, namely, D. ecuadorense (KUELAP-285) and D. synanthum (KUELAP-264, KUELAP-275) (Figure 6). Although D. ecuadorense was considered endemic to Ecuador and D. synanthum to Colombia (Pedraza-Peñalosa, 2008), the analyses of this study confirmed the wider distribution of these species. D. ecuadorense and D. synanthum were found in cold to humid tropical environments at 2,500–3,000 masl and coexisting with V. floribundum (Table 7). The genus Gaultheria is composed of 130 species from America and Asia (Middleton, 1991; Powell and Kron, 2001; WCVP, 2021). Sixteen species of Gaultheria have been reported from the tropical Andes of Peru (Middleton, 1991; Powell and Kron, 2001). In the Amazonas region, only three species of Gaultheria have been recorded (i.e., G. erecta Vent., G. rigida Kunth, G. secunda J. Rémy) (León, 2006a). Using molecular markers, the presence of G. secunda (KUELAP-278, KUELAP-284, KUELAP-301, KUELAP-288, KUELAP-266) was confirmed from Amazonas. Compared with the average intraspecific divergence observed in other species of the genus (as 0.3% for ITS in G. leucarpa and 0.3% for matK in G. appressa) (Fritsch et al., 2011; Lu et al., 2010), this taxon showed high intraspecific genetic divergence (2.4% for ITS), suggesting the presence of a species complex. Phenotypic plasticity of leaf anatomy (i.e., ovate to elliptic, leaf margins with sharp to rounded apex) among specimens of G. secunda was also observed. These phenomena have been previously reported in Gaultheria under scenarios of a high rate of reticulate evolution and hybrid speciation (Lu et al., 2010; Fritsch et al., 2011; Ocaña-Pallarés et al., 2019). G. secunda was found in wet grasslands and coniferous forest at 2,500–3,500 masl, coexisting with D. synanthum, T. obovata, V. floribundum, and V. mathewsii. This species has also been reported in Cusco, Pasco, Puno, Junin, and Ayacucho (central Peru). Additionally, another three species of Gaultheria (KUELAP-289, KUELAP-302, KUELAP-308) were found and this was not able to assign a species name because only one specimen was found and the diagnostic features of each species were not in good condition (Table 8). These unidentified species need further analyses with additional sampling and molecular markers to confirm their taxonomic status. The genus Thibaudia consists of 73 species distributed in cloud forests from North to South America (Kron et al., 2002; Powell and Kron, 2003; WCVP, 2021). Approximately 29 species are distributed along areas of grass and shrubs (locally referred to as “pajonales”) and montane forests of the Peruvian Andes (2,500–4,000 masl) (León, 2006a, León, 2006b; WCVP, 2021). Although six of these species have been previously reported from the Amazonas region (Powell and Kron, 2003; León, 2006a, León, 2006b; WCVP, 2021), this study confirmed T. angustifolia (KUELAP-283), T. moricandi (KUELAP-298), T. obovata (KUELAP-272), and T. ovalifolia (KUELAP-299). The latter species was considered endemic to Junin (Central Peru) (León, 2006a). Ecologically, these species inhabit montane forests (2,000–2,800 masl), coexisting with C. punctata, G. secunda, V. floribundun, V. meridionale, and V. mathewsii (Table 9). The genus Vaccinium consists of ∼400 species distributed worldwide, except Australia (Asturizaga et al., 2006; Vander and Dickinson, 2009). Fifteen species have been reported from the tropical Andes and humid forests of Peru (Pedraza-Peñalosa and Luteyn, 2011; Coico et al., 2016; León et al., 2017; Mostacero et al., 2017; WCVP, 2021). Nine of these species have been recorded in the Amazonas region along steep rocky slopes and montane forests (León, 2006a; Coico et al., 2016). This study confirms the presence of V. floribundum and V. mathewsii and adds one new record of Vaccinium (i.e., V. meridionale) to the Peruvian flora. Although V. meridionale was originally reported as an endemic species from Colombia (Pedraza-Peñalosa and Luteyn, 2011), this study found it in montane forests from northern Peru (2,000–2,800 masl), suggesting that this species has a wider distribution along the Andes. Ecologically, V. meridionale shares the same habitat and coexists with C. punctata, D. synanthum, G. secunda, V. florifundun, and V. mathewsii. Previous intraspecific divergence reported on Vaccinium ranged from 0-0.1% for ITS in V. reticulatum (Kron et al., 2002), while molecular analyses of this study revealed higher distance values within V. floribundum (3.7% for ITS). This could suggest high cryptic genetic diversity, although no morphological differences were found among specimens (Table 10). Sequencing additional markers or plastid genomes might reveal hidden taxa or overlooked interspecific introgression, which has been commonly reported in Vaccinium (Tsutsumi, 2011). The genus Rubus encompasses ∼700 species distributed worldwide (Focke, 1914; Thompson, 1995; Lu and Boufford, 2003; WCVP, 2021), and only 20 species have been reported from the montane and humid rainforests of Peru (Mendoza and León, 2006; WCVP, 2021). Previously, six species have been recorded from the Amazonas region (Mendoza and León, 2006). This study confirmed R. adenothallus and R. weberbaueri and reported the addition of six species of Rubus from the Amazonas region. Although R. andicola, R. floribundus, R. glabratus, R. lechleri, R. loxensis, and R. spasiflorus were reported from distant regions such as Ayacucho (Central Peruvian Andes), Cusco (South Peruvian Andes) and San Martin (East Peruvian Andes), they inhabited Amazonas. Additionally, R. glabratus was originally described from Ecuador (Mendoza and León, 2006), and this study confirmed this species as having a wider distribution along the Andes. R. adenothallus, R. lechleri, R. loxensis, and R. spasiflorus share the same habitat in humid forests above 3,300 masl. R. andicola, R. floribundus, and R. weberbaueri occur in the mountain undergrowth (sotobosque) at 1,800–2,500 masl. R. glabratus, R. glaucus, and R. robustus are found from montane rainforests to moorlands. The findings of this study reveal the genus Rubus as the most diverse group of berries in the Amazonas region (Table 11). In the last decade, several of these species have been threatened by the high rate of deforestation, a serious concern that will eventually result in loss of biodiversity and uncontrolled genetic erosion of species with economic and ecological importance (Montesinos-Tubée, 2020; Walker et al., 2021). This study highlights not only the importance of sequencing several molecular markers in applying and validating the names of Andean berries, but also the need to integrate morphological and DNA-based methods to understand the diversity along the Peruvian Andean cloud forest (Bustamante et al. 2021, 2021, 2021; Tineo et al., 2020). The characterization of berries biodiversity is an important element in any future strategy to develop ambitious commitments and tackle research, monitoring and protection programs across the Amazonas region (Sánchez et al., 2021).

Conclusions

This study reported 24 species of andean berries distributed in coniferous forests, dry and humid forests, rocky slopes, and grasslands at 2,506–3,019 masl from the Amazonas region. These species are grouped into seven genera and included four new reports on the Peruvian flora. A total of 125 DNA-barcodes of andean berries were generated for four molecular markers (i.e., GBSSI-2, ITS, matK, rbcL). The results of this study suggest that the genetic marker ITS showed better resolution to distinguish species of the genera Clethra, Disterigma, Thibaudia, and Rubus, whereas the combination of the plastidial marker matK and the ITS properly resolved the relationships among species of the genera Cavendishia, Gaultheria, and Vaccinium. Accordingly, an initial screening regarding the diversity of andean berries should include amplification of these markers. This study also confirmed that morphological observations and mainly multilocus phylogeny are needed to reveal diversity of andean berries.

Declarations

Author contribution statement

Daniel Tineo, Danilo E. Bustamante & Martha S. Calderon: Conceived and designed the experiments; Performed the experiments; Analyzed and interpreted the data; Contributed reagents, materials, analysis tools or data; Wrote the paper. Eyner Huaman: Contributed reagents, materials, analysis tools or data.

Funding statement

This work was supported by SNIP (312252 - FISIOVEG).

Data availability statement

Data associated with this study has been deposited at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genbank/.

Declaration of interests statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

No additional information is available for this paper.
  25 in total

1.  Reticulate evolution, cryptic species, and character convergence in the core East Asian clade of Gaultheria (Ericaceae).

Authors:  Lu Lu; Peter W Fritsch; Boni C Cruz; Hong Wang; De-Zhu Li
Journal:  Mol Phylogenet Evol       Date:  2010-06-15       Impact factor: 4.286

2.  Tracking the evolutionary history of polyploidy in Fragaria L. (strawberry): new insights from phylogenetic analyses of low-copy nuclear genes.

Authors:  M Rousseau-Gueutin; A Gaston; A Aïnouche; M L Aïnouche; K Olbricht; G Staudt; L Richard; B Denoyes-Rothan
Journal:  Mol Phylogenet Evol       Date:  2009-01-04       Impact factor: 4.286

3.  Type specimen sequencing, multilocus analyses, and species delimitation methods recognize the cosmopolitan Corallina berteroi and establish the northern Japanese C. yendoi sp. nov. (Corallinaceae, Rhodophyta).

Authors:  Martha S Calderon; Danilo E Bustamante; Paul W Gabrielson; Patrick T Martone; Katharine R Hind; Soren Huber; Andres Mansilla
Journal:  J Phycol       Date:  2021-07-26       Impact factor: 2.923

4.  MEGA X: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis across Computing Platforms.

Authors:  Sudhir Kumar; Glen Stecher; Michael Li; Christina Knyaz; Koichiro Tamura
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2018-06-01       Impact factor: 16.240

5.  Effect of UV radiation and altitude characteristics on the functional traits and leaf optical properties in Saxifraga hostii at the alpine and montane sites in the Slovenian Alps.

Authors:  Tadeja Trošt Sedej; Tina ErznoŽnik; Jerneja Rovtar
Journal:  Photochem Photobiol Sci       Date:  2020-02-19       Impact factor: 3.982

6.  Chromosome-Level Genome Assembly of the American Cranberry (Vaccinium macrocarpon Ait.) and Its Wild Relative Vaccinium microcarpum.

Authors:  Luis Diaz-Garcia; Luis Fernando Garcia-Ortega; Maria González-Rodríguez; Luis Delaye; Massimo Iorizzo; Juan Zalapa
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2021-02-10       Impact factor: 5.753

7.  MrBayes 3.2: efficient Bayesian phylogenetic inference and model choice across a large model space.

Authors:  Fredrik Ronquist; Maxim Teslenko; Paul van der Mark; Daniel L Ayres; Aaron Darling; Sebastian Höhna; Bret Larget; Liang Liu; Marc A Suchard; John P Huelsenbeck
Journal:  Syst Biol       Date:  2012-02-22       Impact factor: 15.683

8.  Evolution of Rosaceae Fruit Types Based on Nuclear Phylogeny in the Context of Geological Times and Genome Duplication.

Authors:  Yezi Xiang; Chien-Hsun Huang; Yi Hu; Jun Wen; Shisheng Li; Tingshuang Yi; Hongyi Chen; Jun Xiang; Hong Ma
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 16.240

9.  An integrative approach reveals five new species of highland papayas (Caricaceae, Vasconcellea) from northern Peru.

Authors:  Daniel Tineo; Danilo E Bustamante; Martha S Calderon; Jani E Mendoza; Eyner Huaman; Manuel Oliva
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-12-10       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  1 in total

1.  Antioxidants from Hyeronima macrocarpa Berries Loaded on Nanocellulose: Thermal and Antioxidant Stability.

Authors:  Andrés Felipe Alzate-Arbelaez; Farid B Cortés; Benjamín A Rojano
Journal:  Molecules       Date:  2022-10-07       Impact factor: 4.927

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.