| Literature DB >> 36101349 |
Di-An Fang1,2, Miao He2, Ya-Fei Ren1, Hui Luo2, Yan-Feng Zhou1, Shu-Lun Jiang1, Yang You1.
Abstract
The salangid Neosalanx taihuensis (Salangidae) is a commercially important economical fish endemic to China and restricted to large freshwater systems with a wide-ranging distribution. This fish species has continuous distribution ranges and a long-introduced aquaculture history in Chinese basins. However, the research on its population genetic differentiation within and between basins is very limited. In this regard, 197 individuals were sampled from 11 populations in the Nenjiang River Basin (A1-A4), Songhua River Basin (B1), Yellow River Basin (C1-C2), Yangtze River Basin (D1), Lanchang River Basin (E1-E2) and Huaihe River Basin (F1). Based on the COI sequence, the N.taihuensis population's genetic difference within and between river basins was investigated. The haplotypes and their frequency distributions were strongly skewed, with most haplotypes (n = 13) represented only in single samples each and thus restricted to a single population. The most common haplotype (H4, 67/197) was found in all individuals. The analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA) revealed a random pattern in the distribution of genetic diversity, which is inconsistent with contemporary hydrological structure. The mismatch between the distribution and neutrality tests supported the evidence of a population expansion, which occurred during the late Pleistocene (0.041-0.051 million years ago). Significant levels of genetic subdivision were detected among populations within basins rather than between the six basins. Population history dynamics showed that N. taihuensis experienced an expansion during the glacial period in the late Pleistocene. Therefore, different populations should be considered as different management units to achieve effective conservation and management purposes. These results have great significance for the evaluation and exploitation of the germplasm resources of N. taihuensis.Entities:
Keywords: Neosalanx taihuensis; aquatic ecology; diversity assessment; germplasm resources; population genetic structure
Year: 2022 PMID: 36101349 PMCID: PMC9311889 DOI: 10.3390/biology11070968
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biology (Basel) ISSN: 2079-7737
Figure 1Map showing sampling locations of N. taihuensis in six different river basins in China. Note: NjRB: Nenjiang River Basin, A1 to A4 represents Huoshaohei lake (HSH), Amuta lake (AMT), Yamenqi lake (YMQ), Longhupao lake (LHP), respectively; ShRB: Songhua River Basin, B1: Xinlicheng reservoir (XLC); YeRB: Yellow River Basin, C1: Xiaolangdi reservoir (XLD), C2: Luhun reservoir (LH); YzRB: Yangtze River Basin, D1: Taihu lake (TH); LcRB: Lanchang River Basin, E1; Chenghai (CH), E2: Fuxian lake (FX) and HhRB: Huaihe River Basin, F1: Hongze lake (HZ).
The average nucleotide composition of N. taihuensis in different populations.
| Populations Codes | T (%) | C (%) | A (%) | G (%) | T + A (%) | C+G (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nenjiang River Basin | ||||||
| A1 (Huoshaohei lake, HSH) | 21.45 | 19.20 | 26.15 | 33.20 | 47.60 | 52.40 |
| A2 (Amuta lake, AMT) | 21.45 | 19.20 | 26.13 | 33.21 | 47.58 | 52.41 |
| A3 (Yamenqi lake, YMQ) | 21.48 | 19.17 | 26.15 | 33.19 | 47.63 | 52.36 |
| A4 (Longhupao lake, LHP) | 21.47 | 19.19 | 26.11 | 33.25 | 47.58 | 52.44 |
| Songhua River Basin | ||||||
| B1 (Xinlicheng reservoir, XLC) | 21.46 | 19.20 | 26.12 | 33.24 | 47.58 | 52.44 |
| Yellow River Basin | ||||||
| C1 (Xiaolangdi reservoir, XLD) | 21.47 | 19.18 | 26.21 | 33.14 | 47.68 | 52.32 |
| C2 (Luhun reservoir, LH) | 21.43 | 19.22 | 26.05 | 33.30 | 47.48 | 52.52 |
| Yangtze River Basin | ||||||
| D1 (Taihu lake, TH) | 21.44 | 19.21 | 25.99 | 33.37 | 47.43 | 52.58 |
| Lanchang River Basin | ||||||
| E1 (Chenghai, CH) | 21.36 | 19.30 | 25.95 | 33.41 | 47.31 | 52.71 |
| E2 (Fuxian lake, FX) | 21.39 | 19.27 | 25.92 | 33.42 | 47.31 | 52.69 |
| Huaihe River Basin | ||||||
| F1 (Hongze lake, HZ) | 21.42 | 19.20 | 25.99 | 33.40 | 47.41 | 52.60 |
| Total average | 21.43 | 19.22 | 26.04 | 33.32 | 47.47 | 52.54 |
Variable sites of mitochondrial DNA COI gene haplotypes in N. taihuensis.
| Haplotype | Variable Sites | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 35 | 75 | 303 | 315 | 393 | 453 | 483 | 507 | 645 | 646 | 647 | |
| Hap1 | C | T | A | A | A | G | T | T | T | C | C |
| Hap2 | C | T | G | A | A | G | T | T | T | C | C |
| Hap3 | C | T | G | A | A | G | T | C | T | C | C |
| Hap4 | C | T | G | A | A | G | T | T | T | C | C |
| Hap5 | C | T | G | G | A | G | C | C | T | C | C |
| Hap6 | C | T | G | A | G | G | T | T | T | C | C |
| Hap7 | C | C | G | A | A | G | T | T | T | C | C |
| Hap8 | C | T | G | A | A | A | A | T | T | C | C |
| Hap9 | C | T | G | A | A | G | T | T | T | C | C |
| Hap10 | T | T | A | A | A | G | T | T | T | C | C |
| Hap11 | C | T | A | A | A | G | T | T | C | G | A |
| Hap12 | C | T | G | A | A | G | T | T | C | C | C |
| Hap13 | C | T | G | A | A | G | T | T | T | C | T |
Genetic diversity indices of different N. taihuensis populations.
| Population | H1 | H2 | H3 | H4 | H5 | H6 | H7 | H8 | H9 | H10 | H11 | H12 | H13 | N | Hd | s | k | π |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nenjiang River Basin | 40 | 0.724 | 4 | 1.186 | 0.0018 | |||||||||||||
| A1 (Huoshaohei lake) | 6 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 10 | 0.644 | 4 | 1.467 | 0.0022 | |||||||||
| A2 (Amuta lake) | 5 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 10 | 0.733 | 3 | 1.444 | 0.0022 | |||||||||
| A3 (Yamenqi lake) | 2 | 8 | 10 | 0.356 | 1 | 0.356 | 0.0006 | |||||||||||
| A4 (Longhupao lake) | 4 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 10 | 0.733 | 3 | 1.289 | 0.0020 | |||||||||
| Songhua River Basin | 31 | 0.753 | 4 | 1.290 | 0.0020 | |||||||||||||
| B1 (Xinlicheng reservoir) | 12 | 6 | 4 | 8 | 1 | 31 | 0.753 | 4 | 1.290 | 0.0020 | ||||||||
| Yellow River Basin | 19 | 0.754 | 5 | 1.684 | 0.0026 | |||||||||||||
| C1 (Xiaolangdi reservoir) | 8 | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0.533 | 4 | 0.956 | 0.0015 | ||||||||||
| C2 (Luhun reservoir) | 4 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 9 | 0.861 | 5 | 2.222 | 0.0034 | |||||||||
| Yangtze River Basin | 30 | 0.789 | 6 | 1.120 | 0.0017 | |||||||||||||
| D1 (Taihu lake) | 6 | 5 | 13 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 30 | 0.789 | 6 | 1.120 | 0.0017 | |||||||
| Lanchang River Basin | 47 | 0.826 | 6 | 1.576 | 0.0024 | |||||||||||||
| E1 (Chenghai) | 8 | 4 | 11 | 23 | 0.771 | 3 | 1.296 | 0.0020 | ||||||||||
| E2 (Fuxian lake) | 4 | 5 | 2 | 12 | 1 | 24 | 0.880 | 6 | 1.819 | 0.0028 | ||||||||
| Huaihe River Basin | 30 | 0.777 | 7 | 1.407 | 0.0022 | |||||||||||||
| F1 (Hongze lake) | 6 | 6 | 2 | 12 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 30 | 0.777 | 7 | 1.407 | 0.0022 | |||||
| Entire region (all samples) | 59 | 38 | 19 | 67 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 197 | 0.724 | 9 | 1.237 | 0.0022 |
Note: N, number of individuals; Hd, haplotype diversity; S, number of segregating sites; k, mean pairwise nucleotide; π, nucleotide diversity.
Frequency in each population and basin of COI gene haplotypes in N. taihuensis.
| Haplotype | Hap1 | Hap2 | Hap3 | Hap4 | Hap5 | Hap6 | Hap7 | Hap8 | Hap9 | Hap10 | Hap11 | Hap12 | Hap13 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NjRB | 0.2881 | 0.2368 | 0.2105 | 0.1194 | 0.5 | ||||||||
| ShRB | 0.2034 | 0.1316 | 0.2105 | 0.1194 | 0.5 | ||||||||
| YeRB | 0.2034 | 0.0263 | 0.1053 | 0.0448 | 1 | ||||||||
| YzRB | 0.1579 | 0.2632 | 0.1940 | 1 | 1 | 1 | |||||||
| LcRB | 0.2034 | 0.2368 | 0.1053 | 0.3433 | 0.5 | ||||||||
| HhRB | 0.1017 | 0.1579 | 0.1053 | 0.1791 | 0.5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | |||||
| HSH | 0.1017 | 0.0526 | 0.0299 | 0.5 | |||||||||
| AMT | 0.0847 | 0.0263 | 0.1053 | 0.0299 | |||||||||
| YMQ | 0.0339 | 0.2105 | |||||||||||
| LHP | 0.0678 | 0.0263 | 0.0526 | 0.0597 | |||||||||
| XLC | 0.2034 | 0.1579 | 0.2105 | 0.1194 | 0.5 | ||||||||
| XLD | 0.1356 | 0.0263 | 0.0526 | ||||||||||
| LH | 0.0678 | 0.0526 | 0.0448 | 1 | |||||||||
| TH | 0.1579 | 0.2632 | 0.1940 | 1 | 1 | 1 | |||||||
| CH | 0.1356 | 0.1053 | 0.1642 | ||||||||||
| FX | 0.0678 | 0.1316 | 0.1053 | 0.1791 | 0.5 | ||||||||
| HZ | 0.1017 | 0.1579 | 0.1053 | 0.1791 | 0.5 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
The FST value (below diagonal) and genetic distance (above diagonal) among 11 populations of N. taihuensis based on COI sequence data.
| Populations | NjRB | ShRB | YeRB | YzRB | LcRB | HhRB | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A1 (HSH) | A2 (AMT) | A3 (YMQ) | A4 (LHP) | B1 (XLC) | C1 (XLD) | C2 (LH) | D1 (TH) | E1 (CH) | E2 (FX) | F1 (HZ) | |
| Nenjiang River Basin | |||||||||||
| A1 (HSH) | 0.0021 | 0.0018 | 0.0020 | 0.0021 | 0.0018 | 0.0023 | 0.0026 | 0.0019 | 0.0022 | 0.0024 | |
| A2 (AMT) | −0.0862 | 0.0017 | 0.0020 | 0.0020 | 0.0018 | 0.0023 | 0.0024 | 0.0020 | 0.0020 | 0.0023 | |
| A3 (YMQ) | 0.2146 ** | 0.1818 ** | 0.0016 | 0.0016 | 0.0014 | 0.0021 | 0.0021 | 0.0014 | 0.0016 | 0.0018 | |
| A4 (LHP) | −0.0598 | −0.0847 | 0.2094 ** | 0.0019 | 0.0019 | 0.0022 | 0.0021 | 0.0017 | 0.0018 | 0.0020 | |
| Songhua River Basin | |||||||||||
| B1 (XLC) | −0.0285 | −0.0545 | 0.1278 * | −0.0633 | 0.0019 | 0.0022 | 0.0022 | 0.0018 | 0.0019 | 0.0021 | |
| C1 (XLD) | 0.0253 | 0.0678 * | 0.3687 ** | 0.1756 ** | 0.1446 * | 0.0023 | 0.0031 | 0.0018 | 0.0023 | 0.0024 | |
| C2 (LH) | −0.0702 | −0.0871 | 0.2454 ** | −0.0916 | −0.0472 | 0.1617 ** | 0.0024 | 0.0021 | 0.0022 | 0.0024 | |
| Yangtze River Basin | |||||||||||
| D1 (TH) | 0.3035 ** | 0.2458 ** | 0.4443 ** | 0.1610 ** | 0.1966 ** | 0.5387 ** | 0.1544 ** | 0.0019 | 0.0018 | 0.0021 | |
| Lanchang River Basin | |||||||||||
| E1 (CH) | 0.0074 | −0.0103 | 0.1920 ** | −0.0633 | −0.0187 | 0.2391 * | −0.0127 | 0.1908 ** | 0.0016 | 0.0019 | |
| E2 (FX) | 0.0869 * | 0.0399 | 0.2441 ** | −0.0321 | 0.0157 | 0.3401 ** | −0.0049 | 0.0718 * | −0.0052 | 0.0019 | |
| Huaihe River Basin | |||||||||||
| F1 (HZ) | 0.0524 * | 0.0155 | 0.1614 ** | −0.0391 | 0.0054 | 0.2584 ** | −0.0102 | 0.0948 * | −0.0137 | −0.0286 | |
Note: Asterisks * indicate significant values after Bonferroni correction. * (0.01 < p < 0.05), ** (p < 0.01).
Figure 2UPGMA phylogenetic trees of N. taihuensis from the 11 populations. The AMOVA results revealed that 90.37% of genetic variation occurred within populations, whereas 9.63% of genetic variation occurred among populations. An AMOVA of the 11 populations yielded an Fst value of 0.6452 (p < 0.01), which suggested significant genetic variation among the 11 populations (Table 4).
Figure 3Haplotype network trees of N. taihuensis in different populations.
Figure 4NJ tree of N. taihuensis in different populations by the Kimura 2-parameter model. Note: Numbers at nodes represent bootstrap values.
Figure 5The observed pairwise difference and the expected mismatch distributions of N. taihuensis.
AMOVA of N. taihuensis populations.
| Source of Variation | d. f. | Sum of Squares | Variance Components | Percentage of Variation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Among population | 10 | 16.673 | 0.06215Va | 9.63 |
| Within population | 186 | 108.450 | 0.58307Vb | 90.37 |
| Total | 196 | 125.122 | 0.6452 | |
| Fixation | Fst | 0.6452 |