Two decades of DNA barcoding in the genus Usnea (Parmeliaceae): how useful and reliable is the ITS?

Q2 Agricultural and Biological Sciences
R. Lücking, M. R. Nadel, Elena Araujo, Alice Gerlach
{"title":"Two decades of DNA barcoding in the genus Usnea (Parmeliaceae): how useful and reliable is the ITS?","authors":"R. Lücking, M. R. Nadel, Elena Araujo, Alice Gerlach","doi":"10.35535/pfsyst-2020-0025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We present an exhaustive analysis of the ITS barcoding marker in the genus Usnea s.lat., separated into Dolichousnea, Eumitria, and Usnea including the subgenus Neuropogon, analyzing 1,751 accessions. We found only a few low-quality accessions, whereas information on voucher specimens and accuracy and precision of identifications was of subpar quality for many accessions. We provide an updated voucher table, alignment and phylogenetic tree to facilitate DNA barcoding of Usnea, either locally or through curated databases such as UNITE. Taxonomic and geographic coverage was moderate: while Dolichousnea and subgenus Neuropogon were well-represented among ITS data, sampling for Eumitria and Usnea s.str. was sparse and biased towards certain lineages and geographic regions, such as Antarctica, Europe, and South America. North America, Africa, Asia and Oceania were undersampled. A peculiar situation arose with New Zealand, represented by a large amount of ITS accessions from across both major islands, but most of them left unidentified. The species pair Usnea antarctica vs. U. aurantiacoatra was the most sampled clade, including numerous ITS accessions from taxonomic and ecological studies. However, published analyses of highly resolved microsatellite and RADseq markers showed that ITS was not able to properly resolve the two species present in this complex. While lack of resolution appears to be an issue with ITS in recently evolving species complexes, we did not find evidence for gene duplication (paralogs) or hybridization for this marker. Comparison with other markers demonstrated that particularly IGS and RPB1 are useful to complement ITS-based phylogenies. Both IGS and RPB1 provided better backbone resolution and support than ITS; while IGS also showed better resolution and support at species level, RPB1 was less resolved and delineated for larger species complexes. The nuLSU was of limited use, providing neither resolution nor backbone support. The other three commonly employed protein-coding markers, TUB2, RPB2, and MCM7, showed variable evidence of possible gene duplication and paralog formation, particularly in the MCM7, and these markers should be used with care, especially in multimarker coalescence approaches. A substantial challenge was provided by difficult morphospecies that did not form coherent clades with ITS or other markers, suggesting various levels of cryptic speciation, the most notorious example being the U. cornuta complex. In these cases, the available data suggest that multimarker approaches using ITS, IGS and RPB1 help to assess distinct lineages. Overall, ITS was found to be a good first approximation to assess species delimitation and recognition in Usnea s.lat., as long as the data are carefully analyzed, and reference sequences are critically assessed and not taken at face value. In difficult groups, we recommend IGS as a secondary barcode marker, with the option to employ more resource-intensive approaches, such as RADseq, in species complexes involving so-called species pairs or other cases of disparate morphology not reflected in the ITS or IGS. Attempts should be made to close taxonomic and geographic gaps especially for the latter two markers, in particular in Eumitria and Usnea s.str. and in the highly diverse areas of North America and Central America, Africa, Asia, and Oceania.","PeriodicalId":52151,"journal":{"name":"Plant and Fungal Systematics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Plant and Fungal Systematics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35535/pfsyst-2020-0025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Agricultural and Biological Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

We present an exhaustive analysis of the ITS barcoding marker in the genus Usnea s.lat., separated into Dolichousnea, Eumitria, and Usnea including the subgenus Neuropogon, analyzing 1,751 accessions. We found only a few low-quality accessions, whereas information on voucher specimens and accuracy and precision of identifications was of subpar quality for many accessions. We provide an updated voucher table, alignment and phylogenetic tree to facilitate DNA barcoding of Usnea, either locally or through curated databases such as UNITE. Taxonomic and geographic coverage was moderate: while Dolichousnea and subgenus Neuropogon were well-represented among ITS data, sampling for Eumitria and Usnea s.str. was sparse and biased towards certain lineages and geographic regions, such as Antarctica, Europe, and South America. North America, Africa, Asia and Oceania were undersampled. A peculiar situation arose with New Zealand, represented by a large amount of ITS accessions from across both major islands, but most of them left unidentified. The species pair Usnea antarctica vs. U. aurantiacoatra was the most sampled clade, including numerous ITS accessions from taxonomic and ecological studies. However, published analyses of highly resolved microsatellite and RADseq markers showed that ITS was not able to properly resolve the two species present in this complex. While lack of resolution appears to be an issue with ITS in recently evolving species complexes, we did not find evidence for gene duplication (paralogs) or hybridization for this marker. Comparison with other markers demonstrated that particularly IGS and RPB1 are useful to complement ITS-based phylogenies. Both IGS and RPB1 provided better backbone resolution and support than ITS; while IGS also showed better resolution and support at species level, RPB1 was less resolved and delineated for larger species complexes. The nuLSU was of limited use, providing neither resolution nor backbone support. The other three commonly employed protein-coding markers, TUB2, RPB2, and MCM7, showed variable evidence of possible gene duplication and paralog formation, particularly in the MCM7, and these markers should be used with care, especially in multimarker coalescence approaches. A substantial challenge was provided by difficult morphospecies that did not form coherent clades with ITS or other markers, suggesting various levels of cryptic speciation, the most notorious example being the U. cornuta complex. In these cases, the available data suggest that multimarker approaches using ITS, IGS and RPB1 help to assess distinct lineages. Overall, ITS was found to be a good first approximation to assess species delimitation and recognition in Usnea s.lat., as long as the data are carefully analyzed, and reference sequences are critically assessed and not taken at face value. In difficult groups, we recommend IGS as a secondary barcode marker, with the option to employ more resource-intensive approaches, such as RADseq, in species complexes involving so-called species pairs or other cases of disparate morphology not reflected in the ITS or IGS. Attempts should be made to close taxonomic and geographic gaps especially for the latter two markers, in particular in Eumitria and Usnea s.str. and in the highly diverse areas of North America and Central America, Africa, Asia, and Oceania.
二十年来木犀属(Parmeliaceae)的DNA条形码:ITS有多有用和可靠?
我们对Usnea s.lat.属的ITS条形码标记进行了详尽的分析,分为Dolichousnea、Eumitria和Usnea,包括Neuropogon亚属,分析了1751份材料。我们只发现了少数低质量的材料,而凭证样本信息以及鉴定的准确性和准确性对许多材料来说质量较差。我们提供了一个更新的凭证表、比对和系统发育树,以促进Usnea的DNA条形码,无论是本地还是通过策划的数据库,如UNITE。分类和地理覆盖范围适中:虽然Dolichousnea和Neuropogon亚属在ITS数据中有很好的代表性,但Eumitria和Usnea s.str.的采样很少,并且偏向于某些谱系和地理区域,如南极洲、欧洲和南美洲。北美洲、非洲、亚洲和大洋洲的样本不足。新西兰出现了一种特殊的情况,这两个主要岛屿都有大量ITS加入,但其中大多数都没有得到确认。南极Usnea antarctica和Auranticatura是样本最多的分支,包括来自分类学和生态学研究的许多ITS材料。然而,已发表的对高分辨率微卫星和RADseq标记的分析表明,ITS无法正确解析该复合体中存在的两个物种。虽然缺乏分辨率似乎是最近进化的物种复合体中ITS的一个问题,但我们没有发现该标记的基因复制(旁系同源物)或杂交的证据。与其他标记的比较表明,特别是IGS和RPB1有助于补充基于ITS的系统发育。IGS和RPB1都提供了比ITS更好的主干分辨率和支持;虽然IGS在物种水平上也表现出更好的分辨率和支持性,但对于较大的物种复合物,RPB1的分辨率和描绘较少。nuLSU的用途有限,既不提供分辨率,也不提供骨干支持。其他三种常用的蛋白质编码标记物,TUB2、RPB2和MCM7,显示出可能的基因复制和旁系同源物形成的可变证据,特别是在MCM7中,这些标记物应谨慎使用,尤其是在多标记物聚结方法中。难以与ITS或其他标记形成连贯分支的形态物种带来了巨大的挑战,这表明存在不同程度的隐蔽物种形成,最臭名昭著的例子是U.cornuta复合体。在这些情况下,现有数据表明,使用ITS、IGS和RPB1的多标记方法有助于评估不同的谱系。总的来说,ITS被发现是评估Usnea s.lat.物种划界和识别的一个很好的第一近似值,只要仔细分析数据,并严格评估参考序列,而不是从表面上看。在困难群体中,我们建议将IGS作为二级条形码标记,在涉及所谓物种对的物种复合体或ITS或IGS中未反映的其他不同形态的情况下,可以选择使用更资源密集型的方法,如RADseq。应努力缩小分类学和地理上的差距,特别是后两个标记,特别是在Eumitria和Usnea s.str.以及北美洲和中美洲、非洲、亚洲和大洋洲高度多样化的地区。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Plant and Fungal Systematics
Plant and Fungal Systematics Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Plant Science
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信