Microsatellite cross-species amplification and utility in southern African elasmobranchs: A valuable resource for fisheries management and conservation

BMC Research Notes

Aletta E Bester-van der Merwe¹  Rouvay Roodt-Wilding¹  Charné Rossouw¹  Simo N Maduna¹ 

[1] Department of Genetics, Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Matieland 7602, South Africa

关键词: Conservation management;    Species identification;    Genetic diversity;    Multiplex assays;    Microsatellites;    Cross-species amplification;   

Others  :  1132506
DOI  :  10.1186/1756-0500-7-352

 received in 2014-02-07, accepted in 2014-06-02,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Similarly to the rest of the world, southern Africa’s diverse chondrichthyan fauna is currently experiencing high fishing pressures from direct and non-direct fisheries to satisfy market demands for shark products such as fins and meat. In this study, the development of microsatellite markers through cross-species amplification of primer sets previously developed for closely related species is reported as an alternative approach to de novo marker development. This included the design of four microsatellite multiplex assays and their cross-species utility in genetic diversity analysis of southern African elasmobranchs. As this study forms part of a larger project on the development of genetic resources for commercially important and endemic southern African species, Mustelus mustelus was used as a candidate species for testing these multiplex assays in down-stream applications.

Results

Thirty five microsatellite primer sets previously developed for five elasmobranch species were selected from literature for testing cross-species amplification in 16 elasmobranch species occurring in southern Africa. Cross-species amplification success rates ranged from 28.6%-71.4%. From the successfully amplified microsatellites, 22 loci were selected and evaluated for levels of polymorphism, and four multiplex assays comprising of the 22 microsatellites were successfully constructed, optimised and characterised in a panel of 87 Mustelus mustelus individuals. A total of 125 alleles were observed across all loci, with the number of alleles ranging from 3–12 alleles. Cross-species amplification of the four optimised multiplex assays was further tested on 11 commercially important and endemic southern African elasmobranch species. Percentage of polymorphism ranged from 31.8%-95.5% in these species with polymorphic information content decreasing exponentially with evolutionary distance from the source species.

Conclusions

Cross-species amplification of the 35 microsatellites proved to be a time- and cost-effective approach to marker development in elasmobranchs and enabled the construction of four novel multiplex assays for characterising genetic diversity in a number of southern African elasmobranch species. This study successfully demonstrated the usefulness of these markers in down-stream applications such as genetic diversity assessment and species identification which could potentially aid in a more integrative, multidisciplinary approach to management and conservation of commercially important cosmopolitan and endemic elasmobranch species occurring in southern Africa.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Maduna et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Corrigan S, Beheregaray LB: A recent shark radiation: molecular phylogeny, biogeography and speciation of wobbegong sharks (family: Orectolobidae). Mol Phyl Evol 2009, 52:205-216.
• [2]Worm B, Davis B, Kettemer L, Ward-Paige CA, Chapman D, Heithaus MR, Kessel ST, Gruber SH: Global catches, exploitation rates, and rebuilding options for sharks. Mar Policy 2013, 40:194-204.
• [3]Stevens JD, Bonfil R, Dulvy NK, Walker PA: The effects of fishing on sharks, rays, and chimaeras (chondrichthyans), and the implications for marine ecosystems. ICES J Mar Sci 2000, 57:476-494.
• [4]Shivji M, Clarke S, Pank M, Natanson L, Kohler N, Stanhope M: Genetic identification of pelagic shark body parts for conservation and trade monitoring. Conserv Biol 2002, 16:1036-1047.
• [5]Nei M, Maruyama T, Chakraborty R: Bottleneck effect and genetic variability in populations. Evolution 1975, 29:1-10.
• [6]Glenn TC, Stephan W, Braun MJ: Effects of a population bottleneck on whooping crane mitochondrial DNA variation. Conserv Biol 1999, 13:1097-1107.
• [7]Hoelzel AR, Shiviyi MS, Magnussen J, Francis MP: Low worldwide genetic diversity in the basking shark. Biol Lett 2006, 2:630-642.
• [8]Pereyra S, García G, Miller P, Oviedo S, Domingo A: Low genetic diversity and population structure of the narrownose shark (Mustelus schmitti). Fish Res 2010, 106:468-473.
• [9]Myers RA, Worm B: Rapid worldwide depletion of predatory fish communities. Nature 2003, 423:280-283.
• [10]Barker MJ, Schluessel V: Managing global shark fisheries: suggestions for prioritising management strategies. Aquat Conserv Mar and Freshwat Ecosyst 2005, 15:325-347.
• [11]Petersen SL, Honig MB, Ryan PG, Underhill LG, Compagno LJV: Pelagic shark bycatch in the pelagic longline fishery off Southern Africa. In Understanding and Mitigating Vulnerable Bycatch in Southern African Trawl and Longline Fisheries Edited by Petersen SL, Nel DC, Ryan PG, Underhill LG. 2008. WWF South Africa Report Series - 2008/Marine/002
• [12]Attwood CG, Peterson SL, Kerwath SE: Bycatch in South Africa's inshore trawl fishery as determined from observer records. ICES J Mar Sci 2011, 68:2163-2174.
• [13]Pank M, Shivji MS, Stanhope M, Natanson L, Kohler N: Rapid and simultaneous identification of body parts from the morphologically similar sharks Carcharhinus obscurus and Carcharhinus plumbeus (Carcharhinidae) using multiplex PCR. Mar Biotechnol 2001, 3:231-240.
• [14]Domingues RR, de Amorim AF, Hilsdorf AWS: Genetic identification of Carcharhinus sharks from the southwest Atlantic Ocean (Chondrichthyes: Carcharhiniformes). J Appl Ichthyol 2013, 29:738-742.
• [15]Abercrombie DL, Clarke SC, Shivji MS: Global-scale genetic identification of hammerhead sharks: Application to assessment of the international fin trade and law enforcement. Conserv Genet 2005, 6:775-788.
• [16]Farrell ED, Clarke MW, Mariani S: A simple genetic identification method for northeast Atlantic smoothhound sharks (Mustelus spp.). ICES J Mar Sci 2009, 66:561-565.
• [17]Naylor GJP, Caira JN, Jensen K, Rosana KAM, White WT, Last PR: A DNA sequence based approach to the identification of shark and ray species and its implications for global elasmobranch diversity and parasitology. Bull Am Mus of Nat Hist 2012, 367:1-262.
• [18]Da Silva C, Bürgener M: South Africa’s demersal shark meat harvest. Traffic Bulletin 2007, 21:55-65.
• [19]Clarke SC: Understanding pressures on fishery resources through trade statistics: A pilot study of four products in the Chinese dried seafood market. Fish Fish 2004, 5:53-74.
• [20]Tautz D: Hypervariability of simple sequences as a general source for polymorphic DNA markers. Nucleic Acids Res 1989, 17:6463-6471.
• [21]Weber JL, Wong C: Mutation of human short tandem repeats. Hum Mol Genet 1993, 2:1123-1128.
• [22]Edwards CJ, Soulsbury CD, Statham MJ, Ho SYW, Wall D, Dolf D, Iossa G, Baker PJ, Harris S, Sacks BN, Bradley DG: Temporal genetic variation of the red fox, Vulpes vulpes, across western Europe and the British Isles. Quat Sci Rev 2012, 57:95-104.
• [23]Ozerov MY, Veselov AE, Lumme J, Primmer CR: Temporal variation of genetic composition in Atlantic salmon populations from the Western White Sea Basin: influence of anthropogenic factors? BMC Genet 2013, 14:88.
• [24]Urian KW, Hofmann S, Wells RS, Read AJ: Fine-scale population structure of bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) in Tampa Bay, Florida. Mar Mamm Sci 2009, 25:619-638.
• [25]Mourier J, Mills SC, Planes S: Population structure, spatial distribution and life‒history traits of blacktip reef sharks Carcharhinus melanopterus. J Fish Biol 2013, 82:979-993.
• [26]Mobley KB, Amundsen T, Forsgren E, Svensson PA, Jones AG: Multiple mating and low incidence of cuckoldry for nest-holding males in the two-spotted goby, Gobiusculus flavescens. BMC Evol Biol 2009, 9:6. BioMed Central Full Text
• [27]Boomer JJ, Harcourt RG, Francis MP, Walker TI, Braccini JM, Stow AJ: Frequency of multiple paternity in gummy shark, Mustelus antarcticus, and rig, Mustelus lenticulatus, and the implications of mate encounter rate, postcopulatory influences, and reproductive mode. J Hered 2013, 104:371-379.
• [28]Martin AP, Pardini AT, Noble LR, Jones CS: Conservation of a dinucleotide simple sequence repeat locus in sharks. Mol Phyl Evol 2002, 23:205-213.
• [29]Costa M, Fernandes C, Rodrigues M, Santos-Reis M, Bruford MW: A panel of microsatellite markers for genetic studies of European polecats (Mustela putorius) and ferrets (Mustela furo). Eur J Wildl Res 2012, 58:629-633.
• [30]Sekino M, Hara M: Individual assignment tests proved genetic boundaries in a species complex of Pacific abalone (genus Haliotis). Conserv genet 2007, 8:823-841.
• [31]Dudgeon CL, Blower DC, Broderick D, Giles JL, Holmes BJ, Kashiwagi T, Krück NC, Morgan JAT, Tillett BJ, Ovenden JR: A review of the application of molecular genetics for fisheries management and conservation of sharks and rays. J Fish Biol 2012, 80:1789-1843.
• [32]Boomer JJ, Stow AJ: Rapid isolation of the first set of polymorphic microsatellite loci from the Australian gummy shark, Mustelus antarticus and their utility across divergent shark taxa. Conserv Genet Resour 2010, 2:393-395.
• [33]Barbara T, Palma-Silva C, Paggi GM, Bered F, Fay MF, Lexer C: Cross-species transfer of nuclear microsatellite markers: potential and limitations. Mol Ecol 2007, 16:3759-3767.
• [34]Rico C, Rico I, Hewitt G: 470 million years of conservation of microsatellite loci among fish species. Proc R Soc Lond B 1996, 263:549-557.
• [35]Primmer CR, Painter JN, Koskinen MT, Palo JU, Merilä J: Factors affecting avian cross-species microsatellite amplification. J Avian Biol 2005, 36:348-360.
• [36]Compagno LJV: An overview of chondrichthyans systematics and biodiversity in Southern Africa. Trans R Soc S Afr 2000, 54:75-120.
• [37]Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF): South Africa’s National Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks [http://www.daff.gov.za/doaDev/topMenu/DRAFT_NPOA_SHARKS.pdf webcite]
• [38]Navigating Global Shark Conservation: Current Measures and Gaps [http://www.pewenvironment.org/uploadedFiles/PEG/Publications/Report/Navigating%20Global%20Shark%20Conservation_Current%20Measures%20and%20Gaps%207%206%2012.pdf webcite]
• [39]Namibia's National Plan of Action to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing [http://209.88.21.36/opencms/export/sites/default/grnnet/MFMR/downloads/docs/Namibia_NPOA_IUU_Final.pdf webcite]
• [40]Pierce SJ, Trerup M, Williams C, Tilley A, Marshall AD, Raba N: Shark fishing in Mozambique: A preliminary assessment of artisanal fisheries. Maputo: Eyes on the Horizon; 2008:1-28.
• [41]Karaiskou N, Buggiotti L, Leder E, Primmer CR: High degree of transferability of 86 newly developed zebra finch EST-linked microsatellite markers in 8 bird species. J Hered 2008, 99:688-693.
• [42]FitzSimmons NN, Moritz C, Moore S: Conservation and dynamics of microsatellite loci over 300 million years of marine turtle evolution. Mol Biol Evol 1995, 12:432-440.
• [43]Primmer CR, Møller AP, Ellegren H: A wide-range survey of cross-species microsatellite amplification in birds. Mol Ecol 1996, 5:365-378.
• [44]Kang J, Park J, Jo H: Rapid development of microsatellite markers with 454 pyrosequencing in a vulnerable fish, the mottled skate, Raja pulchra. Int J Mol Sci 2012, 13:7199-7211.
• [45]Griffiths AM, Casane D, McHugh M, Wearmouth VJ, Sims DW, Genner MJ: Characterisation of polymorphic microsatellite loci in the small-spotted catshark (Scyliorhinus canicula L.). Conserv Genet Resour 2011, 3:705-709.
• [46]Zane L, Bargelloni L, Patarnello T: Strategies for microsatellite isolation: a review. Mol Ecol 2002, 11:1-16.
• [47]Primmer CR, Ellegren H: Patterns of molecular evolution in avian microsatellites. Mol Biol Evol 1998, 15:997-1008.
• [48]Angers B, Bernatchez L: Complex evolution of a salmonid microsatellite locus and its consequences in inferring allelic divergence from size information. Mol Biol Evol 1997, 14:230-238.
• [49]Giresi M, Renshaw MA, Portnoy DS, Gold JR: Isolation and characterization of microsatellite markers for the dusky smoothhound shark, Mustelus canis. Conserv Genet Resour 2012, 4:101-104.
• [50]Chabot C, Nigenda S: Characterization of 13 microsatellite loci for the tope shark, Galeorhinus galeus, discovered with next generation sequencing and their utility for eastern Pacific smooth-hound sharks (Mustelus). Conserv Genet Resour 2011, 3:553-555.
• [51]Castoe TA, Poole AW, Gu W, Jason De Koning AP, Daza JM, Smith EN, Pollock DD: Rapid identification of thousands of copperhead snake (Agkistrodon contortrix) microsatellite loci from modest amounts of 454 shotgun genome sequence. Mol Ecol Res 2010, 10:341-347.
• [52]Dawson DA, Horsburgh GJ, Küpper C, Stewart IR, Ball AD, Durrant KL, Burke T: New methods to identify conserved microsatellite loci and develop primer sets of high cross-species utility–as demonstrated for birds. Mol Ecol Res 2010, 10:475-494.
• [53]Hoffman JI, Nichols HJ: A novel approach for mining polymorphic microsatellite markers in silico. PLoS One 2011, 6:e23283.
• [54]Human BA: A taxonomic revision of the catshark genus Haploblepharus Garman 1913 (Chondrichthyes: Carcharhiniformes: Scyliorhinidae). Zootaxa 2007, 1451:1-40.
• [55]Saghai-Maroof MA, Solima KM, Jorgenson RA, Allard RW: Ribosomal DNA spacerlength polymorphisms in barley: Mendelian inheritance, chromosomal location, and population dynamics. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1984, 81:8014-8018.
• [56]Chabot CL: Characterization of 11 microsatellite loci for the brown smooth-hound shark, Mustelus henlei, discovered with next-generation sequencing. Conserv Genet Resour 2012, 4:23-25.
• [57]Byrne RJ, Avis JC: Genetic mating system of the brown smoothhound shark (Mustelus henlei), including a literature review of multiple paternity in other elasmobranch species. Mar Biol 2012, 159:749-756.
• [58]Guichoux E, Lagache L, Wagner S, Chaumeil P, Léger P, Lepais O, Lepoittevin C, Malaus T, Revardel E, Salin F, Petit RJ: Current trends in microsatellite genotyping. Mol Ecol Resour 2011, 11:591-611.
• [59]Van Oosterhout C, Hutchinson WF, Wills DPM, Shipley P: MICROCHECKER: software for identifying and correcting genotyping errors in microsatellite data. Mol Ecol Notes 2004, 4:535-538.
• [60]Rousset F: GENEPOP’007: a complete re-implementation of the GENEPOP software for Windows and Linux. Mol Ecol Resour 2008, 8:103-106.
• [61]Slatkin M: An exact test for neutrality based on the Ewens sampling distribution. Genet Res 1994, 64:71-74.
• [62]Excoffier L, Laval G, Schneider S: Arlequin ver. 3.0: an integrated software package for population genetics data analysis. Evol Bioinform Online 2005, 1:47-50.
• [63]Peakall R, Smouse PE: GenAlEx 6.5: genetic analysis in Excel: population genetic software for teaching and research – an update. Bioinformatics 2012, 28:2537-2539.
• [64]Park S: The Excel microsatellite toolkit. [http://animalgenomics.ucd.ie/sdepark/ms-toolkit webcite]
• [65]Botstein D, White RL, Skolnick M, Davis RW: Construction of a genetic linkage map in man using restriction fragment length polymorphisms. Am J Hum Genet 1980, 32:314-331.
• [66]Tamura K, Peterson D, Peterson N, Stecher G, Nei M, Kumar S: MEGA5: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis using maximum likelihood, evolutionary distance, and maximum parsimony methods. Mol Biol Evol 2011, 28:2731-2739.