| Literature DB >> 35227218 |
Rui Guo1,2,3,4, Yong-Hua Zhang5, Hua-Jie Zhang1,2, Jacob B Landis6,7, Xu Zhang1,2,3, Heng-Chang Wang1,2, Xiao-Hong Yao8,9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Refugia is considered to be critical for maintaining biodiversity; while discerning the type and pattern of refugia is pivotal for our understanding of evolutionary processes in the context of conservation. Interglacial and glacial refugia have been studied throughout subtropical China. However, studies on refugia along the oceanic-continental gradient have largely been ignored. We used a liana Actinidia eriantha, which occurs across the eastern moist evergreen broad-leaved forests of subtropical China, as a case study to test hypotheses of refugia along the oceanic-continental gradient and 'oceanic' adaptation.Entities:
Keywords: Actinidia eriantha; Climatic fluctuations; Oceanic–continental gradient; Phylogeography; Refugium; Subtropical China; ‘Oceanic’ adaptation
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35227218 PMCID: PMC8883688 DOI: 10.1186/s12870-022-03464-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Plant Biol ISSN: 1471-2229 Impact factor: 4.215
Fig. 1Geographical distribution of A. eriantha cpDNA haplotypes, BEAST-derived chronograms and TCS network. a Geographical locations of the 28 populations and distributions of 23 chloroplast haplotypes of A. eriantha examined in this study (the scale on the map represents meters above sea level). The three dashed lines correspond to the three population groups (“Southeast”, “Southwest” and “Main part”) identified by the program SAMOVA. b BEAST-derived chronogram of A. eriantha based on cpDNA sequences. Blue bars indicate 95% HPD credibility intervals for nodes of particular interest with ages (in Myr ago, Ma). Only bootstrap values higher than 50% are denoted above branches. c TCS-derived network of 23 chloroplast haplotypes. Each circle means a unique haplotype, with circle size reflecting its frequency. Small black circles mean missing haplotypes
Fig. 2The results of bayesian skyline plots (BSP) and mismatch distribution analysis (MDA) of the “Main part” inferred from A. eriantha cpDNA. a Bayesian skyline plots (BSP) estimated using BEAST2 v. 2.4. The thick solid blue line is the median estimate, and the area delimited by the light blue broadband represents the highest posterior density (HPD) 95% confidence intervals for Ne. b Mismatch distribution analysis (MDA) estimated in Arlequin v. 3.5
Fig. 3Genetic landscapes for A. eriantha: a genetic diversity based on Ae (No. of effective alleles); b genetic diversity based on UHe (unbiased expected heterozygosity); c genetic divergence based on FST [FST = (Ht - He) / Ht, Ht means total expected heterozygosity, He means expected Heterozygosity]. The values of Ae, UHe, FST have been standardized as [0,1]
Fig. 4Population genetic structure of Actinidia eriantha.a Histogram of the Bayesian assignment for 28 populations (629 individuals) and the hierarchical Bayesian assignment for 17 populations (293 individuals) of A. eriantha based on genetic variation at 31 neutral EST-SSR loci using STRUCTURE. Each vertical bar represents one individual and its probability of membership for each of the K = 2 and hierarchical K = 4 clusters. b Geographic origin of the 28 A. eriantha populations and their color-coded grouping according to the STRUCTURE analysis. c The un-rooted NJ tree of 28 population revealed by 31 neutral nSSR data. d Principal coordinates analysis (PCoA) of A. eriantha based on their genetic distances (DA) derived from 31 neutral nSSRs
Fig. 5Seven evolutionary scenarios for five clusters of A. eriantha tested with approximate Bayesian computation (ABC) analyses using DIYABC. Prior distributions of model parameters were set for effective population size of five sampled clusters (N1–N5) and 4 founder clusters (N1F–N5F, except for N3F), duration of bottleneck after colonization event (DB) and relative timing of events in number of generations (t1–t4). Posterior probabilities of the seven scenarios obtained by logistic regression of 1% of the closest simulated datasets are shown on the top of each scenario. Scenario outlined in red is the best option
Results of Multiple Matrix Regression with Randomization (MMRR) analysis and partial Mantel test for SSR and cpDNA dataset of Actinidia eriantha
| MMRR | Partial Mantel test | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | IBD | IBE | IBD | IBE | ||||||
| SSR | 0.002 | < 0.001 | 0.139 | 0.228 | < 0.001 | 0.137 | 0.127 | |||
| cpDNA | 0.001 | 0.968 | 0.017 | 0.823 | 0.014 | 0.933 | 0.016 | 0.364 | 0.013 | 0.470 |
IBD Isolation by distance, IBE Isolation by environment
Fig. 6Potential distributions of A. eriantha, West Distribution (WD) and East Distribution (ED) predicted using MaxEnt based on five bioclimatic variables representing the LIG, LGM, current and future climatic conditions, respectively. Warmer colors denote areas with a higher probability of presence. Dots show the extant occurrence points of the A. eriantha
Fig. 7The dispersal corridors for A. eriantha based on chloroplast haplotypes at the LIG, LGM and current, respectively. The values of dispersal route have been standardized as [0,1]
Characteristics of sampled populations of Actinidia eriantha
| Population code | Location | Longitude (E) | Latitude (N) | Altitude (m) | Sample size |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WH | Wuhua County, Guangdong Prov. | 115°23′ | 23°52′ | 686 | 28 |
| LY | Luoyuan County, Fujian Prov. | 119°24′ | 26°27′ | 529 | 35 |
| DH | Dehua County, Fujian Prov. | 118°11′ | 25°40′ | 1001 | 30 |
| JG | Mount Jinggang, Jiangxi Prov. | 114°11′ | 26°36′ | 1000 | 33 |
| LiS | Lishui city, Zhejiang Prov. | 119°46′ | 28°15′ | 365 | 33 |
| SQ | Mount Sanqing, Jiangxi Prov. | 118°03′ | 28°12′ | 589 | 34 |
| AY | Anyuan County, Jiangxi Prov. | 115°23′ | 25°00′ | 433 | 29 |
| RY | Ruyuan County, Guangdong Prov. | 113°03′ | 24°57′ | 820 | 33 |
| RJ | Ruijin City, Jiangxi Prov. | 116°13′ | 25°56′ | 400 | 30 |
| NJ | Nanjing County, Fujian Prov. | 117°12′ | 24°53′ | 695 | 10 |
| WC | Wencheng County, Zhejiang Prov. ProvProvince | 119°52′ | 27°30′ | 400 | 35 |
| XF | Xinfeng County, Guangdong Prov. | 113°03′ | 24°57′ | 594 | 25 |
| CY | Chongyi County, Jiangxi Prov. | 114°14′ | 25°38′ | 478 | 21 |
| YM | Mount Yangming, Hunan Prov. | 111°56′ | 26°7′ | 1179 | 15 |
| SH | Mount Shunhuang, Hunan Prov. | 111°00′ | 26°24′ | 668 | 9 |
| JH | Jianghua County, Hunan Prov. | 111°42′ | 25°13′ | 420 | 15 |
| LS | Mount Lu, Jiangxi Prov. | 115°58′ | 29°33′ | 1080 | 20 |
| WY | Mount Wuyi, Jiangxi Prov. | 117°43′ | 27°20′ | 500 | 33 |
| LC | Lichuan County, Jiangxi Prov. | 116°50′ | 27°05′ | 277 | 30 |
| ShQ | Shiqian County, Guizhou Prov. | 108°08′ | 27°20′ | 977 | 12 |
| LP | Liping County, Guizhou Prov. | 109°25′ | 26°06′ | 450 | 20 |
| CB | Chengbu County, Hunan Prov. | 110°09′ | 26°22′ | 1485 | 5 |
| DK | Dongkou County, Hunan Prov. | 110°40′ | 27°14′ | 535 | 9 |
| GD | Guiding County, Guizhou Prov. | 107°03′ | 26°15′ | 1113 | 8 |
| YP | Yuping County, Guizhou Prov. | 108°52′ | 27°09′ | 506 | 21 |
| QY | Qiyang County, Hunan Prov. | 112°06′ | 26°15′ | 146 | 15 |
| WGS | Mount Wugong, Jiangxi Prov. | 114°13′ | 27°29′ | 619 | 22 |
| HA | Hua’an County, Fujian Prov. | 117°26′ | 24°52′ | 861 | 20 |