Phylogenetic relationships and phylogeography of relevant lineages within the complex Campanulaceae family in Macaronesia

Original ResearchMacaronesia has long been recognized as a natural model for studying evolutionary processes in plant diversification. Several studies have attempted to focus on single lineages, and few have covered the diversification of a family across all the archipelagos. We used a comprehensive sample to clarify the phylogenetic relationships and the biogeographic history of the Macaronesian Campanulaceae. Hypotheses related to the colonization of these archipelagos will be used to examine the diversification patterns of different lineages. We sequenced the ITS region and six cpDNA markers (atpB, matK, petD, rbcL, trnL-F, and psbA-trnH) from 10 Campanulaceae species, including seven endemic species in Macaronesia. The phylogeny of these taxa was reconstructed using maximum parsimony, maximum likelihood, and Bayesian inference. To study the relationships within each lineage, haplotype networks were calculated using NeighborNet and TCS algorithms. Moreover, data were combined with fossil information to construct time-calibrated trees for the Macaronesian Campanulaceae species. The phylogenetic analyses are largely congruent with current taxon circumscriptions, and all the endemic genera formed monophyletic clades, namely Azorina in Azores; Musschia in Madeira; and Campanula in Cape Verde. The Azorina clade and the Cape Verde endemic Campanula may share a common ancestor in North Africa, and the divergence was dated ca. 12.3 million years ago (Mya). The divergence of the Musschia clade began in the Pliocene ca. 3.4 Mya. Moreover, several examples of intraspecific variation were revealed among the native species with a clear geographic structured patterns, suggesting that cryptic diversity might exist within the native Macaronesian Campanulaceae when compared to the close mainland taxa (e.g., Campanula erinus, Trachelium caeruleum), but additional studies are needed to support the molecular data. This study highlights the power of combining data (e.g., phylogeny and divergence times, with species distribution data) for testing diversification hypotheses within the unique Macaronesian flora, providing useful information for future conservation efforts.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

The use of phylogeny to interpret cross-cultural patterns in plant use and guide medicinal plant discovery: an example from Pterocarpus (Leguminosae)

The study of traditional knowledge of medicinal plants has led to discoveries that have helped combat diseases and improve healthcare. However, the development of quantitative measures that can assist our quest for new medicinal plants has not greatly advanced in recent years. Phylogenetic tools have entered many scientific fields in the last two decades to provide explanatory power, but have been overlooked in ethnomedicinal studies. Several studies show that medicinal properties are not randomly distributed in plant phylogenies, suggesting that phylogeny shapes ethnobotanical use. Nevertheless, empirical studies that explicitly combine ethnobotanical and phylogenetic information are scarce.In this study, we borrowed tools from community ecology phylogenetics to quantify significance of phylogenetic signal in medicinal properties in plants and identify nodes on phylogenies with high bioscreening potential. To do this, we produced an ethnomedicinal review from extensive literature research and a multi-locus phylogenetic hypothesis for the pantropical genus Pterocarpus (Leguminosae: Papilionoideae). We demonstrate that species used to treat a certain conditions, such as malaria, are significantly phylogenetically clumped and we highlight nodes in the phylogeny that are significantly overabundant in species used to treat certain conditions. These cross-cultural patterns in ethnomedicinal usage in Pterocarpus are interpreted in the light of phylogenetic relationships.This study provides techniques that enable the application of phylogenies in bioscreening, but also sheds light on the processes that shape cross-cultural ethnomedicinal patterns. This community phylogenetic approach demonstrates that similar ethnobotanical uses can arise in parallel in different areas where related plants are available. With a vast amount of ethnomedicinal and phylogenetic information available, we predict that this field, after further refinement of the techniques, will expand into similar research areas, such as pest management or the search for bioactive plant-based compounds

Domestication Syndrome in Caimito (Chrysophyllum cainito L.): Fruit and Seed Characteristics

Domestication Syndrome in Caimito (Chrysophyllum cainitoL.): Fruit and Seed Characteristics: The process of domestication is understudied and poorly known for many tropical fruit tree crops. The star apple or caimito tree (Chrysophyllum cainito L., Sapotaceae) is cultivated throughout the New World tropics for its edible fruits. We studied this species in central Panama, where it grows wild in tropical moist forests and is also commonly cultivated in backyard gardens. Using fruits collected over two harvest seasons, we tested the hypothesis that cultivated individuals of C. cainito show distinctive fruit and seed characteristics associated with domestication relative to wild types. We found that cultivated fruits were significantly and substantially larger and allocated more to pulp and less to exocarp than wild fruits. The pulp of cultivated fruits was less acidic; also, the pulp had lower concentrations of phenolics and higher concentrations of sugar. The seeds were larger and more numerous and were less defended with phenolics in cultivated than in wild fruits. Discriminant Analysis showed that, among the many significant differences, fruit size and sugar concentration drove the great majority of the variance distinguishing wild from cultivated classes. Variance of pulp phenolics among individuals was significantly higher among wild trees than among cultivated trees, while variance of fruit mass and seed number was significantly higher among cultivated trees. Most traits showed strong correlations between years. Overall, we found a clear signature of a domestication syndrome in the fruits of cultivated caimito in Panama

Phylogeny of the tropical tree family Dipterocarpaceae based on nucleotide sequences of the chloroplast RBCL gene

The Dipterocarpaceae, well-known trees of the Asian rain forests, have been variously assigned to Malvales and Theales. The family, if the Monotoideae of Africa (30 species) and South America and the Pakaraimoideae of South America (one species) are included, comprises over 500 species. Despite the high diversity and ecological dominance of the Dipterocarpaceae, phylogenetic relationships within the family as well as between dipterocarps and other angiosperm families remain poorly defined. We conducted parsimony analyses on rbcL sequences from 35 species to reconstruct the phylogeny of the Dipterocarpaceae. The consensus tree resulting from these analyses shows that the members of Dipterocarpaceae, including Monotes and Pakaraimaea, form a monophyletic group closely related to the family Sarcolaenaceae and are allied to Malvales. The present generic and higher taxon circumscriptions of Dipterocarpaceae are mostly in agreement with this molecular phylogeny with the exception of the genus Hopea, which forms a clade with Shorea sections Anthoshorea and Doona. Phylogenetic placement of Dipterocarpus and Dryobalanops remains unresolved. Further studies involving representative taxa from Cistaceae, Elaeocarpaceae, Hopea, Shorea, Dipterocarpus, and Dryobalanops will be necessary for a comprehensive understanding of the phylogeny and generic limits of the Dipterocarpaceae

Genomic variation in tomato, from wild ancestors to contemporary breeding accessions

[EN] Background: Domestication modifies the genomic variation of species. Quantifying this variation provides insights into the domestication process, facilitates the management of resources used by breeders and germplasm centers, and enables the design of experiments to associate traits with genes. We described and analyzed the genetic diversity of 1,008 tomato accessions including Solanum lycopersicum var. lycopersicum (SLL), S. lycopersicum var. cerasiforme (SLC), and S. pimpinellifolium (SP) that were genotyped using 7,720 SNPs. Additionally, we explored the allelic frequency of six loci affecting fruit weight and shape to infer patterns of selection. Results: Our results revealed a pattern of variation that strongly supported a two-step domestication process, occasional hybridization in the wild, and differentiation through human selection. These interpretations were consistent with the observed allele frequencies for the six loci affecting fruit weight and shape. Fruit weight was strongly selected in SLC in the Andean region of Ecuador and Northern Peru prior to the domestication of tomato in Mesoamerica. Alleles affecting fruit shape were differentially selected among SLL genetic subgroups. Our results also clarified the biological status of SLC. True SLC was phylogenetically positioned between SP and SLL and its fruit morphology was diverse. SLC and “cherry tomato” are not synonymous terms. The morphologically-based term “cherry tomato” included some SLC, contemporary varieties, as well as many admixtures between SP and SLL. Contemporary SLL showed a moderate increase in nucleotide diversity, when compared with vintage groups. Conclusions: This study presents a broad and detailed representation of the genomic variation in tomato. Tomato domestication seems to have followed a two step-process; a first domestication in South America and a second step in Mesoamerica. The distribution of fruit weight and shape alleles supports that domestication of SLC occurred in the Andean region. Our results also clarify the biological status of SLC as true phylogenetic group within tomato. We detect Ecuadorian and Peruvian accessions that may represent a pool of unexplored variation that could be of interest for crop improvement.We are grateful to the gene banks for their collections that made this study possible. We thank Syngenta Seeds for providing genotyping data for 42 accessions. We would like to thank the Supercomputing and Bioinnovation Center (Universidad de Malaga, Spain) for providing computational resources to process the SNAPP phylogenetic tree. This research was supported in part by the USDA/NIFA funded SolCAP project under contract number to DF and USDA AFRI 2013-67013-21229 to EvdK and DF.Blanca Postigo, JM.; Montero Pau, J.; Sauvage, C.; Bauchet, G.; Illa, E.; Díez Niclós, MJTDJ.; Francis, D.... (2015). Genomic variation in tomato, from wild ancestors to contemporary breeding accessions. BMC Genomics. 16(257):1-19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-015-1444-1S11916257Tanksley SD, McCouch SR. Seed banks and molecular maps: unlocking genetic potential from the wild. Science (80-). 1997;277:1063–6.Doebley JF, Gaut BS, Smith BD. The molecular genetics of crop domestication. Cell. 2006;127:1309–21.Gepts P. A comparison between crop domestication, classical plant breeding, and genetic engineering. Crop Sci. 2002;42:1780.Weigel D, Nordborg M. Natural variation in Arabidopsis. How do we find the causal genes? Plant Physiol. 2005;138:567–8.Peralta IE, Spooner DM, Knapp S, Anderson C. Taxonomy of wild tomatoes and their relatives (Solanum sect. Lycopersicoides, sect. Juglandifolia, sect. Lycopersicon; Solanaceae). Syst Bot Monogr. 2008;84:1–186.Rick CM, Fobes JF. Allozyme variation in the cultivated tomato and closely related species. Bull Torrey Bot Club. 1975;102:376–84.Zuriaga E, Blanca J, Nuez F. Classification and phylogenetic relationships in Solanum section Lycopersicon based on AFLP and two nuclear gene sequences. Genet Resour Crop Evol. 2008;56:663–78.Zuriaga E, Blanca J, Cordero L, Sifres A, Blas-Cerdán WG, Morales R, et al. Genetic and bioclimatic variation in Solanum pimpinellifolium. Genet Resour Crop Evol. 2008;56:39–51.Blanca J, Cañizares J, Cordero L, Pascual L, Diez MJ, Nuez F. Variation revealed by SNP genotyping and morphology provides insight into the origin of the tomato. PLoS One. 2012;7:e48198.Rick CM. Natural variability in wild species of Lycopersicon and its bearing on tomato breeding. Genet Agrar. 1976;30:249–59.Rick CM, Holle M. Andean Lycopersicon esculentum var. cerasiforme: genetic variation and its evolutionary significance. Econ Bot. 1990;44:69–78.Nakazato T, Franklin RA, Kirk BC, Housworth EA. Population structure, demographic history, and evolutionary patterns of a green-fruited tomato, Solanum peruvianum (Solanaceae), revealed by spatial genetics analyses. Am J Bot. 2012;99:1207–16.Rick CM, Butler L. Cytogenetics of the Tomato. Adv Genet. 1956;8:267–382. Advances in Genetics.Jenkins JA. The origin of the cultivated tomato. Econ Bot. 1948;2:379–92.Nesbitt TC, Tanksley SD. Comparative sequencing in the genus lycopersicon: implications for the evolution of fruit size in the domestication of cultivated tomatoes. Genetics. 2002;162:365–79.Ranc N, Muños S, Santoni S, Causse M. A clarified position for Solanum lycopersicum var cerasiforme in the evolutionary history of tomatoes (solanaceae). BMC Plant Biol. 2008;8:130.De Candolle A. Origin of cultivated plants. 2nd ed. London: Trench, Paul; 1886.Miller JC, Tanksley SD. RFLP analysis of phylogenetic relationships and genetic variation in the genus Lycopersicon. Theor Appl Genet. 1990;80:437–48.Williams CE, Clair DAS. Phenetic relationships and levels of variability detected by restriction fragment length polymorphism and random amplified polymorphic DNA analysis of cultivated and wild accessions of Lycopersicon esculentum. Genome. 1993;36:619–30.Park YH, West MAL, St Clair DA. Evaluation of AFLPs for germplasm fingerprinting and assessment of genetic diversity in cultivars of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum L). Genome. 2004;47:510–8.Sim S-C, Robbins MD, Van Deynze A, Michel AP, Francis DM. Population structure and genetic differentiation associated with breeding history and selection in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.). Heredity (Edinb). 2011;106:927–35.Sim S-C, Robbins MD, Chilcott C, Zhu T, Francis DM. Oligonucleotide array discovery of polymorphisms in cultivated tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L) reveals patterns of SNP variation associated with breeding. BMC Genomics. 2009;10:466.Sim S-C, Durstewitz G, Plieske J, Wieseke R, Ganal MW, Van Deynze A, et al. Development of a large SNP genotyping array and generation of high-density genetic maps in tomato. PLoS One. 2012;7:e40563.Frary A, Nesbitt TC, Grandillo S, Knaap E, Cong B, Liu J, et al. fw2.2: a quantitative trait locus key to the evolution of tomato fruit size. Science. 2000;289:85–8.Liu J, Van Eck J, Cong B, Tanksley SD. A new class of regulatory genes underlying the cause of pear-shaped tomato fruit. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002;99:13302–6.Xiao H, Jiang N, Schaffner E, Stockinger EJ, van der Knaap E. A retrotransposon-mediated gene duplication underlies morphological variation of tomato fruit. Science. 2008;319:1527–30.Cong B, Barrero LS, Tanksley SD. Regulatory change in YABBY-like transcription factor led to evolution of extreme fruit size during tomato domestication. Nat Genet. 2008;40:800–4.Muños S, Ranc N, Botton E, Bérard A, Rolland S, Duffé P, et al. Increase in tomato locule number is controlled by two single-nucleotide polymorphisms located near WUSCHEL. Plant Physiol. 2011;156:2244–54.Chakrabarti M, Zhang N, Sauvage C, Muños S, Blanca J, Cañizares J, et al. A cytochrome P450 regulates a domestication trait in cultivated tomato. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013;110:17125–30.Rodríguez GR, Muños S, Anderson C, Sim S-C, Michel A, Causse M, et al. Distribution of SUN, OVATE, LC, and FAS in the tomato germplasm and the relationship to fruit shape diversity. Plant Physiol. 2011;156:275–85.Sim S-C, Van Deynze A, Stoffel K, Douches DS, Zarka D, Ganal MW, et al. High-density SNP genotyping of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L) reveals patterns of genetic variation due to breeding. PLoS One. 2012;7:e45520.Sauvage C, Segura V, Bauchet G, Stevens R, Thi Do P, Nikoloski Z, et al. Genome Wide Association in tomato reveals 44 candidate loci for fruit metabolic traits. Plant Physiol. 2014;165:1120–32.Hamilton JP, Sim S-C, Stoffel K, Van Deynze A, Buell CR, Francis DM. Single nucleotide polymorphism discovery in cultivated tomato via sequencing by synthesis. Plant Genome J. 2012;5:17.Patterson NJ, Price AL, Reich D. Population structure and eigenanalysis. PLoS Genet. 2006;2:e190.Price AL, Patterson NJ, Plenge RM, Weinblatt ME, Shadick NA, Reich D. Principal components analysis corrects for stratification in genome-wide association studies. Nat Genet. 2006;38:904–9.Kosman E, Leonard KJ. Similarity coefficients for molecular markers in studies of genetic relationships between individuals for haploid, diploid, and polyploid species. Mol Ecol. 2005;14:415–24.Adler D. vioplot: Violin plot. 2005.Jost L. Gst and its relatives do not measure differentiation. Mol Ecol. 2008;17:4015–26.Excoffier L, Lischer H. Arlequin suite ver 3.5: A new series of programs to perform population genetics analyses under Linux and Windows. Mol Ecol Resour. 2010;10:564–7.Huson DH, Bryant D. Application of phylogenetic networks in evolutionary studies. Mol Ecol Evol. 2006;23:254–67.Knight R, Maxwell P, Birmingham A, Carnes J, Caporaso JG, Easton BC, et al. PyCogent: a toolkit for making sense from sequence. Genome Biol. 2007;8:R171.Szpiech ZA, Jakobsson M, Rosenberg NA. ADZE: a rarefaction approach for counting alleles private to combinations of populations. Bioinformatics. 2008;24:2498–504.Bradbury PJ, Zhang Z, Kroon DE, Casstevens TM, Ramdoss Y, Buckler ES. TASSEL: software for association mapping of complex traits in diverse samples. Bioinformatics. 2007;23:2633–5.Cleveland WS. Robust locally weighted regression and smoothing scatterplots. J Am Stat Assoc. 1979;74:829.R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. 2013.Sinnot RS. Virtues of the haversine. Sky Telesc. 1984;68:159.Hijmans RJ, Etten JV. raster: Geographic data analysis and Modeling. 2013.Bryant D, Bouckaert R, Felsenstein J, Rosenberg NA, RoyChoudhury A. Inferring species trees directly from biallelic genetic markers: bypassing gene trees in a full coalescent analysis. Mol Biol Evol. 2012;29:1917–32.Drummond AJ, Rambaut A. BEAST: Bayesian evolutionary analysis by sampling trees. BMC Evol Biol. 2007;7:214.Rambaut A. Tracer v.1.5. 2009.Huang Z, van der Knaap E. Tomato fruit weight 11.3 maps close to fasciated on the bottom of chromosome 11. Theor Appl Genet. 2011;123:465–74.Guo M, Rupe MA, Dieter JA, Zou J, Spielbauer D, Duncan KE, et al. Cell Number Regulator1 affects plant and organ size in maize: implications for crop yield enhancement and heterosis. Plant Cell. 2010;22:1057–73.Sambrook J, Fritsch EF, Maniatis T. Molecular cloning. New York: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press; 1989.Lin T, Zhu G, Zhang J, Xu X, Yu Q, Zheng Z, et al. Genomic analyses provide insights into the history of tomato breeding. Nat Genet. 2014;46:1220–6.Platt A, Horton M, Huang YS, Li Y, Anastasio AE, Mulyati NW, et al. The scale of population structure in Arabidopsis thaliana. PLoS Genet. 2010;6:e1000843.Pressoir G, Berthaud J. Patterns of population structure in maize landraces from the Central Valleys of Oaxaca in Mexico. Heredity (Edinb). 2004;92:88–94.Koenig D, Jiménez-Gómez JM, Kimura S, Fulop D, Chitwood DH, Headland LR, et al. Comparative transcriptomics reveals patterns of selection in domesticated and wild tomato. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013;110:e2655–62.Nakazato T, Housworth EA. Spatial genetics of wild tomato species reveals roles of the Andean geography on demographic history. Am J Bot. 2011;98:88–98.United States. Office of Experimental Stations. Experimental Station Recod, Volumen 39. Volume 39. Washington, DC, USA: United States. Office of Experimental Stations; 1918.Merk HL, Yames SC, Van Deynze A, Tong N, Menda N, Mueller LA, et al. Trait diversity and potential for selection indeces based on variation among regionally adapted processing tomato germplasm. J Am Soc Hortic Sci. 2012;137:427–37