1887
Volume 2023, Issue 2
  • EISSN: 2223-506X

Abstract

DNA barcoding allows for species identification and description of genetic diversity. However, in the Middle East, information on genetic diversity is accumulating at a slower pace compared to that of other regions. The COI sequence of 24 lizard and snake species in Qatar that represent major families within the order Squamata were sampled and amplified via PCR using RepCOI primers (apart from one species). Purified amplicons were then aligned, and high- quality sequences were uploaded to BOLD. Using as the outgroup, the phylogenetic analysis was conducted using raxmlGUI software following the maximum likelihood method. The COI sequence from each of the species was obtained and the consensus sequences were submitted to GenBank. In the phylogenetic analysis, a close relationship between members of the Agamidae and Serpentes was confirmed. While members of the same genus often showed sister-taxa relationships, and species in the same family were clustered with reasonably high bootstrap supports, the COI-based phylogeny was not able to resolve the relationships among genera within the families or identify relationships with high resolution at deeper lineages. Although ideal for species identification, COI gene sequencing is limited in phylogenetic inference due to high mutation rates that restrict its effectiveness for resolving relationships at deep phylogenetic levels. However, COI gene sequencing can be combined with nuclear markers for a more in-depth analysis.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5339/connect.2023.4
2023-07-15
2024-07-25
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/connect/2023/2/connect.2023.4.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.5339/connect.2023.4&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Hebert PDN, Cywinska A, Ball SL, DeWaard JR. Biological identifications through DNA barcodes. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2003 Feb 7; 270:(1512):313–321.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Vences M, Nagy ZT, Sonet G, Verheyen E. DNA barcoding amphibians and reptiles. Methods in Molecular Biology. 2012;858:79–107.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Mulcahy DG, Ibáñez R, Jaramillo CA, Crawford AJ, Ray JM, Gotte SW, et al. DNA barcoding of the National Museum of Natural History reptile tissue holdings raises concerns about the use of natural history collections and the responsibilities of scientists in the molecular age. PLoS One. 2022 Mar 1; 17:(3):e0264930.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Nagy ZT, Sonet G, Glaw F, Vences M. First large-scale DNA barcoding assessment of reptiles in the biodiversity hotspot of Madagascar, based on newly designed COI primers. PLoS One. 2012 Mar 30; 7:(3):e34506.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Jeong TJ, Jun J, Han S, Kim HT, Oh K, Kwak M. DNA barcode reference data for the Korean herpetofauna and their applications. Molecular Ecology Resources. 2013;13:1019–1032.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Hawlitschek O, Moriniere J, Dunz A, Franzen M, Rodder D, Glaw F, et al. Comprehensive DNA barcoding of the herpetofauna of Germany. Molecular Ecology Resources. 2016;16:242–253.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Vasconcelos R, Montero-Mendieta S, Simó-Riudalbas M, Sindaco R, Santos X, Fasola M, et al. Unexpectedly high levels of cryptic diversity uncovered by a complete DNA barcoding of reptiles of the Socotra archipelago. PLoS One. 2016 Mar 1;11(3):e0149985.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Uetz P, Koo MS, Aguilar R, Catenazzi A. A quarter century of reptile and amphibian databases. Herpetological Review. 2021;52:246–255. http://www.reptile-database.org
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Mohammed MBH. Survey of the reptiles of Qatar. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of the Arab Republic Egypt; 1988. pp. 17–26.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. El-Sherif G, Al-Thani AS. Record, Histological and Enzyme Histochemical Demonstration of Qatari Reptiles in Relation to Seasonal and Environmental Variations. 2000 p. 1–68.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Valdeón A, Castilla AM, Cogălniceanu D, Gosá A, Alkuwary A, Saifelnasr EOH, et al. On the presence and distribution of the Gulf sandgecko, Pseudoceramodactylus khobarensis Haas, 1957 (Reptilia: Squamata: Gekkonidae) in Qatar. QScience Connect. 2013 Mar; 2013:(1):34.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Cogălniceanu D, Castilla AM, Valdeón A, Gosá A, Al-Jaidah N, Alkuwary A, et al. A preliminary report on the distribution of lizards in Qatar. Zookeys. 2014;373:67–91.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Zheng Y, Wiens JJ. Combining phylogenomic and supermatrix approaches, and a time-calibrated phylogeny for squamate reptiles (lizards and snakes) based on 52 genes and 4162 species. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. 2016 Jan;94:537–547.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Friends of the Environment Centre. Qatar eNature. Doha; 2013. https://enature.qa .
  15. Ivanova NV., Zemlak TS, Hanner RH, Hebert PD. Universal primer cocktails for fish DNA barcoding. Molecular Ecology Notes. 2007 Jul; 7:(4):544–548.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Velo-Antón G, Henrique M, Liz AV, Martínez-Freiría F, Pleguezuelos JM, Geniez P, et al. DNA barcode reference library for the West Sahara-Sahel reptiles. Scientific Data. 2022; 9:(1):459.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Griekspoor A, Groothuis T. View and edit trace files 4PEAKS. 2004. https://nucleobytes.com/4peaks/index.html.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Tamura K, Stecher G, Kumar S. MEGA11. Molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 11. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 2021 Jun 25; 38:(7):3022–3027.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Edler D, Klein J, Antonelli A, Silvestro D. raxmlGUI 2.0: A graphical interface and toolkit for phylogenetic analyses using RAxML. Methods in Ecology and Evolution. 2020 Oct 28; 12:(2):373–377.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Rambaut A, Drummond AJ. FigTree version 1.4.4. 2012. https://github.com/rambaut/figtree/releases (downloaded on 1.x.2022).
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Arnold EN. Reptiles of Saudi Arabia. A review of the lizard genus Stenodactylus (Reptilia: Gekkonidae). Fauna of Saudi Arabia. 1980;2: 368–404.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Cogălniceanu D, Valdeón A, Gosá A, Al-Hemaidi AA, Castilla AM. Shrike predation on the lizard Mesalina adramitana in Qatar; a review of reported reptile and amphibian prey. QScience Connect. 2015 Apr 15; 2015:(1):1–8.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Melnikov D, Melnikov E, Nazarov R, Al-Johany A, Anajeva NB. A new species of Phrynocephalus (Agamidae, Sauria) from al Sharqiyah Sands. Russian Journal of Herpetology [Internet]. 2015; 22:(4):301–309.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Talavera G, Lukhtanov V, Pierce NE, Vila R. DNA barcodes combined with multilocus data of representative taxa can generate reliable higher-level phylogenies. Systematic Biology. 2022 Mar; 71:(2):382–395.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Townsend TM, Larson A, Louis E, Macey JR. Molecular phylogenetics of Squamata: The position of snakes, amphisbaenians, and dibamids, and the root of the squamate tree. Systematic Biology. 2004 Oct 1; 53:(5):735–757.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Kapli P, Botoni D, Ilgaz Ç, Kumlutaş Y, Avcı A, Rastegar-Pouyani N, et al. Molecular phylogeny and historical biogeography of the Anatolian lizard Apathya (Squamata, Lacertidae). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. 2013 Mar 1; 66:(3):992–1001.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Garcia-Porta J, Simó-Riudalbas M, Robison M, Carranza S. Diversification in arid mountains: Biogeography and cryptic diversity of Pristurus rupestris rupestris in Arabia. Journal of Biogeography. 2017; 44:(8):1694–1704.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Grechko VV. The problems of molecular phylogenetics with the example of squamate reptiles: Mitochondrial DNA markers. Molecular Biology. 2013 Jan; 47:(1):55–74.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Naylor GJP, Brown WM. Amphioxus mitochondrial DNA, chordate phylogeny, and the limits of inference based on comparisons of sequences. Systematic Biology. 1998 Mar 1; 47:(1):61–76.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Passoni JC, Benozzati ML, Rodrigues MT. Phylogeny, species limits, and biogeography of the Brazilian lizards of the genus Eurolophosaurus (Squamata: Tropiduridae) as inferred from mitochondrial DNA sequences. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. 2008 Feb 1; 46:(2):403–414.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. O’Meara D, O’Reilly C, Abdullahi AA, Abu Baker M, Yamaguchi N. Phylogeography of desert hedgehogs (Paraechinus aethiopicus) in Qatar: Implications for its intra-specific phylogeny and taxonomy. Journal of Arid Environments. 2021 Oct 1;193:104584.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Saint KM, Austin CC, Donnellan SC, Hutchinson MN. C-mos, a nuclear marker useful for squamate phylogenetic analysis. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. 1998 Oct 1; 10:(2):259–263.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Harris DJ, Marshall JC, Crandall KA. Squamate relationships based on C-mos nuclear DNA sequences: increased tax on sampling improves bootstrap support. Amphibia-Reptilia. 2001 Jan 1; 22:(2):235–242.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Vidal N, Hedges SB. The phylogeny of squamate reptiles (lizards, snakes, and amphisbaenians) inferred from nine nuclear protein- coding genes. Comptes Rendus Biologies. 2005 Oct 1; 328:(10–11):1000–1008.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Wiens JJ, Hutter CR, Mulcahy DG, Noonan BP, Townsend TM, Sites Jr JW, et al. Resolving the phylogeny of lizards and snakes (Squamata) with extensive sampling of genes and species. Biology Letters. 2012 Dec 23; 8:(6):1043–1046.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Fisher-Reid MC, Wiens JJ. What are the consequences of combining nuclear and mitochondrial data for phylogenetic analysis? Lessons from Plethodon salamanders and 13 other vertebrate clades. BMC Evolutionary Biology. 2011 Dec; 11:(1):1–20. https://doi. org/10.1186/1471-2148-11-300
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Rubinoff D, Holland BS. Between two extremes: Mitochondrial DNA is neither the panacea nor the nemesis of phylogenetic and taxonomic inference. Systematic Biology. 2005 Dec 1; 54:(6):952–961. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150500234674
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Desalle R. MtDNA: The small workhorse of evolutionary studies. Frontiers in Bioscience. 2017 Jan 1; 22:(5):873–887. https://doi.org/10.2741/4522
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Allio R, Donega S, Galtier N, Nabholz B. Large variation in the ratio of mitochondrial to nuclear mutation rate across animals: Implications for genetic diversity and the use of mitochondrial DNA as a molecular marker. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 2017 Nov 1; 34:(11):2762–2772.
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.5339/connect.2023.4
Loading
/content/journals/10.5339/connect.2023.4
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): COIlizardMiddle Eastreptile phylogeny and squamates
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error