Content uploaded by Guillaume Evanno
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Guillaume Evanno
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Guillaume Evanno
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Guillaume Evanno
Content may be subject to copyright.
TECHNICAL NOTE
Characterization of thirteen microsatellite markers in river
and brook lampreys (Lampetra fluviatilis and L. planeri)
Arnaud Gaigher
•
Sophie Launey
•
Emilien Lasne
•
Anne-Laure Besnard
•
Guillaume Evanno
Received: 8 August 2012 / Accepted: 13 August 2012 / Published online: 24 August 2012
Ó Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012
Abstract We describe the development based on 454
pyrosequencing technology of thirteen microsatellite
markers for two closely related species of lamprey: Lam-
petra fluviatilis and L. planeri. The number of alleles per
locus ranged from 2 to 5 in L. fluviatilis and from 2 to 6 in
L. planeri. Gene diversity ranged from 0.062 to 0.718 in L.
fluviatilis and from 0.322 to 0.677 in L. planeri. These
markers will be helpful to study population genetic struc-
ture of both species and resolve their taxonomic status as
separate species or ecotypes of a single species.
Keywords Lampetra fluviatilis Lampetra planeri
Microsatellites Gene flow Genetic structure
The river lamprey Lampetra fluviatilis and brook lamprey
L. planeri are two aquatic agnathans distributed throughout
Europe. L. fluviatilis is anadromous with a parasite feeding
style, while L. planeri is sedentary in freshwater and non-
parasitic. These species have undergone a significant
decline throughout Europe (Renaud 1997) and are listed in
Appendix III of the Bern convention. In France the river
lamprey is listed as vulnerable while the brook lamprey is
classified as least concern (UICN 2010). At the adult stage
both species are morphologically very similar and mostly
differ by their size with L. fluviatilis being larger than L.
planeri. In addition, they often coexist on the same
spawning sites (Lasne et al. 2010) and they cannot be
discriminated at the larval stage. They were classified as
distinct species due to their distinct life histories and
morphological differences (Hardisty and Potter 1971).
However, some studies based on mitochondrial DNA or
allozymes failed to reveal a strong divergence between
them, hence the hypothesis that they may in fact be two
ecotypes of a single species (Schreiber and Engelhorn
1998; Espanhol et al. 2007). Here we describe the devel-
opment of thirteen microsatellite markers that will be
useful to infer gene flow and disentangle two hypotheses:
(1) a recent divergence resulting in two closely related
species or (2) the existence of two ecotypes within a single
species. The distinction between both hypotheses may have
important consequences for the management of L. fluvia-
tilis and L. planeri populations.
Genomic DNA was extracted using the DNeasy Blood
and Tissue Kit (Qiagen) on tissues of 3 L. fluviatilis and 3 L.
planeri adults collected in France. The six samples were
pooled to make a microsatellite library common to both
species. We used a procedure combining DNA enrichment
and high throughput pyrosequencing (GS-FLX, Roche
Diagnostics) recently developed by Malausa et al. (2011).
The program QDD was used to identify and select micro-
satellites sequences and to design primer pairs (Megle
´
cz
et al. 2010). A total of 208 microsatellites were identified by
the Genoscreen company (Lille, France) and 48 loci were
selected based on their relatively high number of repetitions.
A. Gaigher S. Launey A.-L. Besnard G. Evanno (&)
INRA, UMR 985 Ecologie et Sante
´
des Ecosyste
`
mes,
35042 Rennes, France
e-mail: guillaume.evanno@rennes.inra.fr
A. Gaigher S. Launey A.-L. Besnard G. Evanno
Agrocampus Ouest, UMR ESE, 65 rue de Saint-Brieuc,
35042 Rennes, France
A. Gaigher
Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Lausanne,
1015 Lausanne, Switzerland
E. Lasne
Muse
´
um National d’Histoire Naturelle, CRESCO, 35800 Dinard,
France
123
Conservation Genet Resour (2013) 5:141–143
DOI 10.1007/s12686-012-9753-z
Table 1 Characteristics of thirteen microsatellites developed for Lampetra fluviatilis and Lampetra planeri
Locus/GenBank accession Primer sequence (5
0
–3
0
) Repeat motif Fluorescent label/
multiplex panel
Allele size
range (bp)
L. fluviatilis (n = 32) L. planeri (n = 35)
Na Ho He Na Ho He
LP-003/ F: M13-TCACGTACGCGTTAACTCCA (CA)
8
6-FAM/1 111–115 2 0.406 0.448 3 0.371 0.322
JX468083 R: TTCCTTAATTGGTCTGCCTCA
LP-006/ F: M13-TGCCCACACGTGATAGACAT (AG)
8
PET/1 147–151 3 0.469 0.523 2 0.543 0.501
JX468084 R: GGCGATCGTCATAAATAGCC
LP-009/ F: M13-AACTCCCACGTGCAAAATTC (TG)
7
NED/4 206–210 3 0.563 0.597 3 0.400 0.341
JX468085 R: AGGCATCACTCCTAACGACG
LP-018/ F: M13-TTAAAAGTGCGGCGAAATCT (TG)
8
PET/3 245–251 5 0.594 0.675 6 0.629 0.637
JX468086 R: TGTTCCATAACCACTGCTCG
LP-022/ F: M13-GACAGCTCGCTCAAGGCTAC (AGG)
7
PET/1 232–238 3 0.313 0.304 2 0.457 0.504
JX468087 R: TCGTCGTGGTCACAGTCATC
LP-027/ F: M13-ACAGTCAACCTCCGACATCC (ATC)
7
PET/2 212–224 5 0.563 0.540 4 0.382 0.476
JX468088 R: AGCCCATGATGATTCCATTC
LP-028/ F: M13-AGAACTCTGTGGACGTTCCG (ATC)
5
6-FAM/2 250–259 4 0.781 0.718 4 0.571 0.646
JX468089 R: TCTCAAGAAATGAGTTCTCAATCG
LP-030/ F: M13-TGAGGGGAAAATGGAAACAG (CAT)
5
NED/4 259–268 4 0.563 0.626 3 0.543 0.560
JX468090 R: TTCAGGATGATAGCACTGCC
LP-037/ F: M13-GGATAATCGTCGCTGGTGTT (CA)
7
VIC/2 156–160 2 0.063 0.062 2 0.400 0.437
JX468091 R: GCACAAGCTTGATGTGACAAA
LP-039/ F: M13-GCACTTCCAACAAAGCCAGT (AC)
6
PET/4 159–178 5 0.375 0.484 4 0.743 0.677
JX468092 R: TATTTCAGCCACTTGGGCAT
LP-043/ F: M13-CTCCATTATACACGGGGACAG (TA)
6
NED/1 164–166 2 0.375 0.381 2 0.343 0.388
JX468093 R: TGAACCTTGGTGCTGAGATG
LP-045/ F: M13-AGAGGTGTTTCGCGTGCTAT (GTT)
6
VIC/3 190–196 3 0.531 0.558 2 0.429 0.466
JX468094 R: AAGGAGAGAGGAGGTTTCGG
LP-046/ F: M13-ACCGCAAACTCATCAGGAAC (CAC)
6
PET/3 154–166 3 0.688 0.670 4 0.457 0.487
JX468095 R: AAGCGGATTTAGAAGCGACA
M13 sequence: 5
0
-CACGACGTTGTAAAACGAC-3
0
The annealing temperature is the same for all loci (see the main text)
n number of samples, Na number of alleles, Ho observed heterozygosity, He expected heterozygosity
142 Conservation Genet Resour (2013) 5:141–143
123
PCR conditions were optimized for these loci using 17 L.
fluviatilis and 12 L. planeri. Genomic DNA was extracted
from tissue in a 10 % Chelex
Ò
solution (Sigma-Aldrich)
with 1 mg/ml Proteinase K and 1X TE (Tris/EDTA), heated
at 55 °C for 2 h followed by 99 °C for 10 min (modified
from Estoup et al. 1996). The amplification followed the
M13 method developed by Schuelke (2000). PCR was per-
formed in a 6 ll total volume containing approximately
15 ng DNA, 0.06 U Taq DNA polymerase, 5X PCR buffer
(GoTaq, Promega), 208 lM each dNTP, 2.17 mM MgCl
2
,
0.055 lM forward primer with a tail extented M13, 0.55 lM
reverse primer and 0.57 lM M13 primer labeled with a
fluorochrome (6-FAM, VIC, NED or PET). A Touchdown
PCR program was applied as follows: initial denaturation of
4 min at 94 °C, then 20 cycles including denaturation of 30 s
at 94 °C, annealing of 30 s starting at 65 °C then decreasing
of 0.5 °C per cycle and extension of 1 min at 72 °C; then, 10
cycles with denaturation of 30 s at 94 °C, annealing of 30 s
at 55 °C and extension of 1 min at 72 °C; and a final
extension step of 5 min at 72 °C. PCR products from dif-
ferent markers were pooled into four multiplexes before
migration (Table 1). Fragments were size fractionated on an
ABI Prism 3130xl Genetic Analyzer using the size standard
GeneScan 500 LIZ. Allele sizes were determined with
GeneMapper 3.7 (Applied Biosystems).
Thirteen markers were chosen based on successful
amplification and we assessed their polymorphism on 32 L.
fluviatilis from the Loire River (France) and 35 L. planeri
from the Oir River (France) (Table 1). The number of
alleles per locus (Na) and observed and expected hetero-
zygosities (Ho and He) were calculated using G
ENETIX
4.05.2 (Belkhir et al. 1996–2004). All loci were polymor-
phic (Table 1) and the number of alleles per locus ranged
from 2 to 5 for L. fluviatilis (mean 3.4) and 2 to 6 for L.
planeri (mean 3.2). The expected heterozygosity ranged
from 0.062 to 0.718 for L. fluviatilis and 0.322 to 0.677 for
L. planeri.
No null alleles or genotyping errors were found using
M
ICRO-CHECKER 2.2.3 (Van Oosterhout et al. 2004). Devi-
ations from Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium (HWE) and
linkage disequilibrium between loci were tested using
G
ENEPOP 4.1 (Rousset 2008). No linkage disequilibrium
was found and no deviation from HWE was detected after
sequential Bonferroni correction (Rice 1989).
These loci can be amplified in both species and will thus
be useful to assess the distribution of genetic diversity
within and between species and to clarify their taxonomic
status.
Acknowledgments We thank our colleagues from the INRA ‘U3E’
unit who helped us with samples’ collection. This study was funded
by the European Regional Development Fund (Transnational program
Interreg IV, Atlantic Aquatic Resource Conservation Project) and by
the French Ministry of Ecology and Sustainable Development (project
‘Amphihalins, cohe
´
rence du re
´
seau N2000 en mer’).
References
Belkhir K, Borsa P, Chikhi L, Raufaste N, Bonhomme F (1996–2004)
GENETIX 4.05, logiciel sous windows TM pour la ge
´
ne
´
tique
des populations. http://www.univ-montp2.fr/* genetix/genetix.
htm
Espanhol R, Almeida PR, Alves MJ (2007) Evolutionary history of
lamprey paired species Lampetra fluviatilis (L.) and Lampetra
planeri (Bloch) as inferred from mitochondrial DNA variation.
Mol Ecol 16:1909–1924
Estoup A, Largiader CR, Perrot E, Chourrout D (1996) Rapid one-
tube DNA extraction for reliable PCR detection of fish
polymorphic markers and transgenes. Mol Mar Biol Biotechnol
5:295–298
Hardisty MW, Potter IC (1971) The biology of lampreys, vol 1.
Academic Press, London
Lasne E, Sabatie
´
MR, Evanno G (2010) Communal spawning of
brook and river lampreys (Lampetra planeri and L. fluviatilis)is
common in the Oir river (France). Ecol Freshw Fish 19:323–325
Malausa T, Gilles A, Megle
´
cz E et al (2011) High-throughput
microsatellite isolation through 454 GS-FLX titanium pyrose-
quencing of enriched DNA libraries. Mol Ecol Resour 11:
638–644
Megle
´
cz E, Costedoat C, Dubut V, Gilles A, Malausa T, Pech N,
Martin JF (2010) QDD: a user-friendly program to select
microsatellite markers and design primers from large sequencing
projects. Bioinformatics 26:403–404
Renaud CB (1997) Conservation status of northern hemisphere
lampreys (Petromyzontidae). J Appl Ichthyol 13:143–148
Rice WR (1989) Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution
43:223–225
Rousset F (2008) GENEPOP’007: a complete re-implementation of
the GENEPOP software for Windows and Linux. Mol Ecol
Resour 8:103–106
Schreiber A, Engelhorn R (1998) Population genetics of a cyclostome
species pair, river lamprey (Lampetra fluviatilis L.) and brook
lamprey (Lampetra planeri bloch). J Zool Syst Evol Res 36:
85–99
Schuelke M (2000) An economic method for the fluorescent labeling
of PCR fragments. Nat Biotechnol 18:233–234
UICN France, MNHN, SFI, ONEMA (2010) La Liste rouge des
espe
`
ces menace
´
es en France - Chapitre Poissons d’eau douce de
France me
´
tropolitaine. Paris, France. Available at www.uicn.
fr/IMG/pdf/Liste_rouge_France_Poissons_d_eau_douce_de_
metropole.pdf
Van Oosterhout C, Hutchinson WF, Wills DPM, Shipley P (2004)
MICRO-CHECKER: software for identifying and correcting
genotyping errors in microsatellite data. Mol Ecol Notes 4:
535–538
Conservation Genet Resour (2013) 5:141–143 143
123