4.7 Article

Paralogous mitochondrial control region in the giant tiger shrimp, Penaeus monodon (F.) affects population genetics inference: A cautionary tale

Journal

MOLECULAR PHYLOGENETICS AND EVOLUTION
Volume 58, Issue 2, Pages 404-408

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ympev.2010.11.028

Keywords

mtDNA; Numt; Shrimp; Mitochondrial control region; Penaeus

Funding

  1. German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) [SPICE II]
  2. Indonesian Government
  3. TAB (Thuringia, Germany)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The mitochondrial control region (mtCR) is a widely used genetic marker for phylogenetic, phylogeographic and population genetic inference. The analysis of mtCR in 115 Indonesian specimens of the giant tiger shrimp, Penaeus monodon, revealed 26 individuals yielding a second - apparently paralogous sequence in addition to the putatively authentic mitochondrial haplotype. The paralogous haplotypes fell into two major haplogroups that are highly diverged with respect to the authentic mitochondrial haplotypes (average pairwise sequence divergence of 12.5% and 5.0%, respectively). A comparison with published mtCR sequences of P. monodon showed that the paralogous contaminant sequences were inadvertently included in a series of recent population genetic studies, leading to seriously compromised conclusions about genetic diversity and differentiation. The prevalence of the paralogous haplotypes throughout the sampled Indo-Pacific populations is highly skewed: From African and Indian individuals only paralogs have been sequenced, while they are completely absent from Australian individuals. This suggests that geographically unequally distributed allelic variants at binding sites of the primer pair ordinarily used to amplify mtCR in P. monodon suppressed the amplification of authentic mtCR in a wide range of samples. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available