Genomic resources for the Neotropical tree genus Cedrela (Meliaceae) and its relatives.


Journal

BMC genomics
ISSN: 1471-2164
Titre abrégé: BMC Genomics
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100965258

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
18 Jan 2019
Historique:
received: 17 08 2018
accepted: 16 12 2018
entrez: 20 1 2019
pubmed: 20 1 2019
medline: 30 4 2019
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Tree species in the genus Cedrela P. Browne are threatened by timber overexploitation across the Neotropics. Genetic identification of processed timber can be used to supplement wood anatomy to assist in the taxonomic and source validation of protected species and populations of Cedrela. However, few genetic resources exist that enable both species and source identification of Cedrela timber products. We developed several 'omic resources including a leaf transcriptome, organelle genome (cpDNA), and diagnostic single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that may assist the classification of Cedrela specimens to species and geographic origin and enable future research on this widespread Neotropical tree genus. We designed hybridization capture probes to enrich for thousands of genes from both freshly preserved leaf tissue and from herbarium specimens across eight Meliaceae species. We first assembled a draft de novo transcriptome for C. odorata, and then identified putatively low-copy genes. Hybridization probes for 10,001 transcript models successfully enriched 9795 (98%) of these targets, and analysis of target capture efficiency showed that probes worked effectively for five Cedrela species, with each species showing similar mean on-target sequence yield and depth. The probes showed greater enrichment efficiency for Cedrela species relative to the other three distantly related Meliaceae species. We provide a set of candidate SNPs for species identification of four of the Cedrela species included in this analysis, and present draft chloroplast genomes for multiple individuals of eight species from four genera in the Meliaceae. Deforestation and illegal logging threaten forest biodiversity globally, and wood screening tools offer enforcement agencies new approaches to identify illegally harvested timber. The genomic resources described here provide the foundation required to develop genetic screening methods for Cedrela species identification and source validation. Due to their transferability across the genus and family as well as demonstrated applicability for both fresh leaves and herbarium specimens, the genomic resources described here provide additional tools for studies examining the ecology and evolutionary history of Cedrela and related species in the Meliaceae.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Tree species in the genus Cedrela P. Browne are threatened by timber overexploitation across the Neotropics. Genetic identification of processed timber can be used to supplement wood anatomy to assist in the taxonomic and source validation of protected species and populations of Cedrela. However, few genetic resources exist that enable both species and source identification of Cedrela timber products. We developed several 'omic resources including a leaf transcriptome, organelle genome (cpDNA), and diagnostic single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that may assist the classification of Cedrela specimens to species and geographic origin and enable future research on this widespread Neotropical tree genus.
RESULTS RESULTS
We designed hybridization capture probes to enrich for thousands of genes from both freshly preserved leaf tissue and from herbarium specimens across eight Meliaceae species. We first assembled a draft de novo transcriptome for C. odorata, and then identified putatively low-copy genes. Hybridization probes for 10,001 transcript models successfully enriched 9795 (98%) of these targets, and analysis of target capture efficiency showed that probes worked effectively for five Cedrela species, with each species showing similar mean on-target sequence yield and depth. The probes showed greater enrichment efficiency for Cedrela species relative to the other three distantly related Meliaceae species. We provide a set of candidate SNPs for species identification of four of the Cedrela species included in this analysis, and present draft chloroplast genomes for multiple individuals of eight species from four genera in the Meliaceae.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Deforestation and illegal logging threaten forest biodiversity globally, and wood screening tools offer enforcement agencies new approaches to identify illegally harvested timber. The genomic resources described here provide the foundation required to develop genetic screening methods for Cedrela species identification and source validation. Due to their transferability across the genus and family as well as demonstrated applicability for both fresh leaves and herbarium specimens, the genomic resources described here provide additional tools for studies examining the ecology and evolutionary history of Cedrela and related species in the Meliaceae.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30658593
doi: 10.1186/s12864-018-5382-6
pii: 10.1186/s12864-018-5382-6
pmc: PMC6339301
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

58

Subventions

Organisme : National Science Foundation
ID : 1257976
Organisme : United States Agency for International Development
ID : 19318814Y0010-140001

Références

Forensic Sci Int Genet. 2015 Sep;18:152-9
pubmed: 25795277
Front Plant Sci. 2016 Apr 21;7:484
pubmed: 27148310
Am J Bot. 2003 Mar;90(3):471-80
pubmed: 21659140
Plant Cell. 2004 Aug;16(8):2089-103
pubmed: 15269332
Nucleic Acids Res. 2017 Feb 28;45(4):e18
pubmed: 28204566
Bioinformatics. 2011 Aug 1;27(15):2156-8
pubmed: 21653522
Science. 2006 Sep 15;313(5793):1596-604
pubmed: 16973872
Bioinformatics. 2012 Dec 1;28(23):3150-2
pubmed: 23060610
Bioinformatics. 2006 Jul 1;22(13):1658-9
pubmed: 16731699
G3 (Bethesda). 2016 Nov 8;6(11):3485-3495
pubmed: 27621377
BMC Genomics. 2012 Sep 09;13:464
pubmed: 22958331
Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2009 Aug;52(2):461-9
pubmed: 19348956
Mol Ecol. 2003 Nov;12(11):2875-83
pubmed: 14629369
Am J Bot. 2012 Feb;99(2):291-311
pubmed: 22312117
Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2011 Dec;61(3):639-49
pubmed: 21930224
Appl Plant Sci. 2014 Aug 29;2(9):
pubmed: 25225629
Gigascience. 2012 Dec 27;1(1):18
pubmed: 23587118
Mol Biol Evol. 2013 Apr;30(4):772-80
pubmed: 23329690
PeerJ. 2015 Aug 06;3:e1066
pubmed: 26290780
Bioinformatics. 2010 Mar 1;26(5):589-95
pubmed: 20080505
Front Plant Sci. 2015 Sep 17;6:710
pubmed: 26442024
New Phytol. 2012 Jan;193(1):261-275
pubmed: 21883239
Int J Genomics. 2016;2016:6735209
pubmed: 27376077
Theor Appl Genet. 1993 Oct;87(1-2):122-8
pubmed: 24190203
Genome Res. 2005 Jan;15(1):184-94
pubmed: 15590941
Genome Res. 2010 Sep;20(9):1297-303
pubmed: 20644199
Nucleic Acids Res. 2001 Jan 1;29(1):37-40
pubmed: 11125043
Bioinformatics. 2014 Aug 1;30(15):2114-20
pubmed: 24695404
Bioinformatics. 2014 May 1;30(9):1312-3
pubmed: 24451623
Genome Res. 2016 Aug;26(8):1134-44
pubmed: 27252236
Int J Mol Sci. 2018 Mar 01;19(3):
pubmed: 29494509
Toxicon. 2004 Dec 15;44(8):829-35
pubmed: 15530964
Mol Ecol Resour. 2011 Mar;11 Suppl 1:109-16
pubmed: 21429167
Plant J. 2013 Jul;75(1):146-156
pubmed: 23551702
J Agric Food Chem. 2003 Jan 15;51(2):369-74
pubmed: 12517097
BMC Genomics. 2019 Jan 18;20(1):58
pubmed: 30658593
Bioinformatics. 2011 Nov 1;27(21):2957-63
pubmed: 21903629
Bioinformatics. 2009 Nov 1;25(21):2872-7
pubmed: 19528083
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1995 Jan 3;92(1):280-4
pubmed: 7816833
Mol Ecol. 1999 Dec;8(12):2137-40
pubmed: 10632865
PLoS Biol. 2014 Jun 24;12(6):e1001889
pubmed: 24959919
BMC Genomics. 2008 Feb 08;9:75
pubmed: 18261238
Nat Biotechnol. 2009 Feb;27(2):182-9
pubmed: 19182786
Proc Biol Sci. 2002 May 22;269(1495):1039-46
pubmed: 12028761
Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2016 Sep;102:45-55
pubmed: 27215942
Bioinformatics. 2012 Jun 15;28(12):1647-9
pubmed: 22543367
Am J Bot. 2013 Sep;100(9):1800-10
pubmed: 24018859
Mol Ecol. 2003 Jun;12(6):1451-60
pubmed: 12755874
Curr Protoc Bioinformatics. 2009 Mar;Chapter 4:4.10.1-4.10.14
pubmed: 19274634
BMC Genomics. 2014 Mar 27;15:238
pubmed: 24673733
Syst Biol. 2012 Oct;61(5):717-26
pubmed: 22232343
Am J Bot. 2016 Feb;103(2):307-16
pubmed: 26838366
Theor Appl Genet. 1995 Dec;91(8):1253-6
pubmed: 24170054
Brief Bioinform. 2019 Jul 19;20(4):1160-1166
pubmed: 28968734
Genome Res. 1999 Sep;9(9):868-77
pubmed: 10508846
Genome Biol. 2013 Dec 13;14(12):R134
pubmed: 24330842
Evolution. 1984 Nov;38(6):1358-1370
pubmed: 28563791
Appl Plant Sci. 2014 Feb 06;2(2):
pubmed: 25202605
Mol Ecol Resour. 2011 May;11(3):450-60
pubmed: 21481203
Bioinformatics. 2009 Aug 15;25(16):2078-9
pubmed: 19505943
Genome Res. 2009 Jun;19(6):1117-23
pubmed: 19251739
Am J Bot. 2010 Mar;97(3):511-8
pubmed: 21622412
Plant Physiol. 2012 Feb;158(2):590-600
pubmed: 22198273

Auteurs

Kristen N Finch (KN)

Department of Botany and Plant Pathology, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, 97331, USA.

F Andrew Jones (FA)

Department of Botany and Plant Pathology, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, 97331, USA.
Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Balboa, Ancon, Republic of Panama.

Richard C Cronn (RC)

USDA Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station, Corvallis, Oregon, 97331, USA. rcronn@fs.fed.us.

Articles similaires

Genome, Chloroplast Phylogeny Genetic Markers Base Composition High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing
Animals Hemiptera Insect Proteins Phylogeny Insecticides
Amaryllidaceae Alkaloids Lycoris NADPH-Ferrihemoprotein Reductase Gene Expression Regulation, Plant Plant Proteins

Classifications MeSH