Cargando…

Biogeography of the xerophytic genus Anabasis L. (Chenopodiaceae)

AIM: Using the extremophile genus Anabasis, which includes c. 28 succulent, xerophytic C(4) species, and is widely distributed in arid regions of Northern Africa, Arabia, and Asia, we investigate biogeographical relationships between the Irano‐Turanian floristic region (ITfr) and its neighboring reg...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lauterbach, Maximilian, Veranso‐Libalah, Marie Claire, Sukhorukov, Alexander P., Kadereit, Gudrun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6434574/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30962909
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.4987
_version_ 1783406500666933248
author Lauterbach, Maximilian
Veranso‐Libalah, Marie Claire
Sukhorukov, Alexander P.
Kadereit, Gudrun
author_facet Lauterbach, Maximilian
Veranso‐Libalah, Marie Claire
Sukhorukov, Alexander P.
Kadereit, Gudrun
author_sort Lauterbach, Maximilian
collection PubMed
description AIM: Using the extremophile genus Anabasis, which includes c. 28 succulent, xerophytic C(4) species, and is widely distributed in arid regions of Northern Africa, Arabia, and Asia, we investigate biogeographical relationships between the Irano‐Turanian floristic region (ITfr) and its neighboring regions. We test whether the spread of arid and semi‐arid biomes in Eurasia coincides with the biogeography of this drought‐adapted genus, and whether the ITfr acted as source area of floristic elements for adjacent regions. LOCATION: Deserts and semi‐deserts of Northern Africa, Mediterranean, Arabia, West and Central Asia. METHODS: Four cpDNA markers (rpL16 intron, atpB‐rbcL, trnQ‐rps16, and ndhF‐rpL32 spacers) were sequenced for 58 accessions representing 21 Anabasis species. Phylogenetic relationships and divergence times were inferred using maximum likelihood and a time‐calibrated Bayesian approach. To document the extant distribution of Anabasis, material from 23 herbaria was surveyed resulting in 441 well‐documented collections used for the coding of eight floristic regions. Using this coded data, ancestral range was estimated using “BioGeoBEARS” under the DEC model. RESULTS: Anabasis originated during the Late Miocene and the ancestral range was probably widespread and disjunct between Western Mediterranean and the Irano‐Turanian regions. Diversification started with two divergence events at the Miocene/Pliocene boundary (5.1 and 4.5 mya) leading to Asian clade I with ITfr origin which is sister to a slightly younger Asian clade II, which originated in the Western ITfr, and a Mediterranean/North African clade with an origin in the Western Mediterranean. MAIN CONCLUSIONS: Anabasis did not follow aridification and continuously expanded its distribution area, in fact its probably wide ancestral distribution area seems to have been fragmented during the very Late Miocene and the remnant lineages then expanded into neighboring arid regions. This genus supports the role of the ITfr as source area for xerophytic elements in the Mediterranean and Central Asia.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6434574
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64345742019-04-08 Biogeography of the xerophytic genus Anabasis L. (Chenopodiaceae) Lauterbach, Maximilian Veranso‐Libalah, Marie Claire Sukhorukov, Alexander P. Kadereit, Gudrun Ecol Evol Original Research AIM: Using the extremophile genus Anabasis, which includes c. 28 succulent, xerophytic C(4) species, and is widely distributed in arid regions of Northern Africa, Arabia, and Asia, we investigate biogeographical relationships between the Irano‐Turanian floristic region (ITfr) and its neighboring regions. We test whether the spread of arid and semi‐arid biomes in Eurasia coincides with the biogeography of this drought‐adapted genus, and whether the ITfr acted as source area of floristic elements for adjacent regions. LOCATION: Deserts and semi‐deserts of Northern Africa, Mediterranean, Arabia, West and Central Asia. METHODS: Four cpDNA markers (rpL16 intron, atpB‐rbcL, trnQ‐rps16, and ndhF‐rpL32 spacers) were sequenced for 58 accessions representing 21 Anabasis species. Phylogenetic relationships and divergence times were inferred using maximum likelihood and a time‐calibrated Bayesian approach. To document the extant distribution of Anabasis, material from 23 herbaria was surveyed resulting in 441 well‐documented collections used for the coding of eight floristic regions. Using this coded data, ancestral range was estimated using “BioGeoBEARS” under the DEC model. RESULTS: Anabasis originated during the Late Miocene and the ancestral range was probably widespread and disjunct between Western Mediterranean and the Irano‐Turanian regions. Diversification started with two divergence events at the Miocene/Pliocene boundary (5.1 and 4.5 mya) leading to Asian clade I with ITfr origin which is sister to a slightly younger Asian clade II, which originated in the Western ITfr, and a Mediterranean/North African clade with an origin in the Western Mediterranean. MAIN CONCLUSIONS: Anabasis did not follow aridification and continuously expanded its distribution area, in fact its probably wide ancestral distribution area seems to have been fragmented during the very Late Miocene and the remnant lineages then expanded into neighboring arid regions. This genus supports the role of the ITfr as source area for xerophytic elements in the Mediterranean and Central Asia. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-02-19 /pmc/articles/PMC6434574/ /pubmed/30962909 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.4987 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Lauterbach, Maximilian
Veranso‐Libalah, Marie Claire
Sukhorukov, Alexander P.
Kadereit, Gudrun
Biogeography of the xerophytic genus Anabasis L. (Chenopodiaceae)
title Biogeography of the xerophytic genus Anabasis L. (Chenopodiaceae)
title_full Biogeography of the xerophytic genus Anabasis L. (Chenopodiaceae)
title_fullStr Biogeography of the xerophytic genus Anabasis L. (Chenopodiaceae)
title_full_unstemmed Biogeography of the xerophytic genus Anabasis L. (Chenopodiaceae)
title_short Biogeography of the xerophytic genus Anabasis L. (Chenopodiaceae)
title_sort biogeography of the xerophytic genus anabasis l. (chenopodiaceae)
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6434574/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30962909
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.4987
work_keys_str_mv AT lauterbachmaximilian biogeographyofthexerophyticgenusanabasislchenopodiaceae
AT veransolibalahmarieclaire biogeographyofthexerophyticgenusanabasislchenopodiaceae
AT sukhorukovalexanderp biogeographyofthexerophyticgenusanabasislchenopodiaceae
AT kadereitgudrun biogeographyofthexerophyticgenusanabasislchenopodiaceae