Plant Systematics and Evolution

, Volume 194, Issue 1–2, pp 69–81 | Cite as

Variation within and among the chloroplast genomes ofMelaleuca alternifolia andM. linariifolia (Myrtaceae)

  • P. A. Butcher
  • M. Byrne
  • G. F. Moran
Article
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:

Abstract

Melaleuca alternifolia andM. linariifolia are commercially important Australian species harvested for their essential oils. Both species have relatively narrow and disjunct distributions on the central coast of eastern Australia. Variation in the chloroplast genome was assessed for eight individuals from each of twelve populations, representing the species' geographic range. Low nucleotide diversity withinM. alternifolia contrasted with high nucleotide diversity inM. linariifolia. CpDNA data are consistent with the southern population ofM. alternifolia being a hybrid population withM. linariifolia. The two species are sympatric in this region. Variation inM. linariifolia was geographically structured, with northern populations differing from southern populations by seven restriction site mutations, five length mutations and an inversion. There was no evidence of hybridisation of the cp genome of northernM. linariifolia with the partially sympatric speciesM. trichostachya. Intra- and interspecific variation in the chloroplast genomes ofM. alternifolia, M. linariifolia, andM. trichostachya indicate considerable potential for the use of intraspecific cpDNA studies in examining phylogenetic relationships in melaleucas.

Key words

Myrtaceae Melaleuca alternifolia Melaleuca linariifolia Genetic diversity phylogenetics chloroplast DNA 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baker, R. T., Smith, H. G., 1906: The Australian melaleucas and their essential oils. Part 1. — J. Proc. Roy. Soc. New South Wales40: 60–69.Google Scholar
  2. —, —, 1910: On the Australian melaleucas and their essential oils. Part 3. — J. Proc. Roy. Soc. New South Wales44: 592–615.Google Scholar
  3. Barlow, B. A., 1988: Patterns of differentiation in tropical species ofMelaleuca L. (Myrtaceae). — Proc. Ecol. Soc. Austral.15: 239–247.Google Scholar
  4. Bentham, G., 1867: Flora Australiensis,3. — London: Reeve.Google Scholar
  5. Birky, C. W., 1988: Evolution and variation in plant chloroplast and mitochondrial genomes. — InGottlieb, L. D., Jain, S. K., (Eds): Plant evolutionary biology, pp. 23–53. — New York: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
  6. Butcher, P. A., Bell, J. C., Moran, G. F., 1992: Patterns of genetic diversity and nature of the breeding system inMelaleuca alternifolia (Myrtaceae). — Austral. J. Bot.40: 365–375.Google Scholar
  7. —,Doran, J. C., Slee, M. U., 1994: Intraspecific variation in leaf oils ofMelaleuca alternifolia. — Biochem. Syst. Ecol.22: 419–430.Google Scholar
  8. Byrne, M., Moran, G. F., Tibbits, W., 1993: Restriction map and maternal inheritance of chloroplast DNA inEucalyptus nitens. — J. Heredity84: 218–220.Google Scholar
  9. —, —, —, 1994: Population divergence in the chloroplast genome ofEucalyptus nitens. — Heredity73: 18–28.Google Scholar
  10. Byrnes, N. B., 1985: A revision ofMelaleuca L. (Myrtaceae) in northern and eastern Australia, 2. — Austrobaileya2: 131–146.Google Scholar
  11. Carrick, J., Chorney, K., 1979: A review ofMelaleuca L. (Myrtaceae) in South Australia. — J. Adelaide Bot. Gard.1: 281–319.Google Scholar
  12. Cheel, E., 1924: Notes onMelaleuca, with descriptions of two new species and a new variety. — J. Proc. Roy. Soc. New South Wales58: 189–197.Google Scholar
  13. Doyle, J. J., Doyle, J. L., Grace, J. P., Brown, A. H. D., 1990: Reproductively isolated polyploid races ofGlycine tabacina (Leguminosae) had different chloroplast genome donors. — Syst. Bot.15: 173–181.Google Scholar
  14. Feinberg, A. P., Vogelstein, B., 1983: A technique for radiolabelling DNA restriction endonuclease fragments to high specific activity. — Analyt. Biochem.132: 6–13.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Harris, S. A., Ingram, R., 1991: Chloroplast DNA and biosystematics: the effects of intraspecific diversity and plastid transmission. — Taxon40: 393–412.Google Scholar
  16. Hooglander, N., Lumaret, R., Bos, M., 1993: Inter-intraspecific variation of chloroplast DNA of EuropeanPlantago spp. — Heredity70: 322–334.Google Scholar
  17. Kim, K. J., Jansen, R. K., Turner, B. L., 1992: Evolutionary implications of interspecific chloroplast DNA variation in dwarf dandelions (Krigia; Asteraceae). — Amer. J. Bot.79: 708–715.Google Scholar
  18. Lavin, M., Mathews, S., Hughes, C., 1991: Chloroplast DNA variation inGliricidia sepium (Leguminosae): Intraspecific phylogeny and tokogeny. — Amer. J. Bot.78: 1576–1585.Google Scholar
  19. Lynch, M., Crease, T. J., 1990: The analysis of population survey data on DNA sequence variation. — Mol. Biol. Evol.7: 377–394.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Maiden, J. H., Betche, E., 1904: Notes from the Botanic Gardens, Sydney. — J. Proc. Linn. Soc. New South Wales29: 734–750.Google Scholar
  21. Manning, K., 1991: Isolation of nucleic acids from plants by differential solvent precipitation. — Analyt. Biochem.195: 45–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Nei, M., 1977: F-statistics and analysis of gene diversity in subdivided populations. — Ann. Human Genet.41: 225–233.Google Scholar
  23. Palmer, J. D., 1987: Chloroplast DNA evolution and biosystematic uses of chloroplast DNA variation. — Amer. Naturalist130: S 6-S 29.Google Scholar
  24. —,Zamir, D., 1982: Chloroplast DNA evolution and phylogenetic relationships inLycopersicon. — Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA79: 5006–5010.Google Scholar
  25. —,Jorgensen, R. A., Thompson, W. F., 1985: Chloroplast DNA variation and evolution inPisum: patterns of change and phylogenetic analysis. — Genetics109: 195–213.Google Scholar
  26. —,Jansen, R. K., Michaels, H. J., Chase, M. W., Manhart, F. R., 1988: Chloroplast DNA variation and plant phylogeny. — Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard.75: 1180–1206.Google Scholar
  27. Rieseberg, L. H., Soltis, D. E., Palmer, J. D., 1988: A molecular re-examination of introgression betweenHelianthus annuus andH. bolanderi (Compositae). — Evolution42: 227–238.Google Scholar
  28. Sandbrink, J. M., Geurts, L. J. N. M., Gadella, T. W. J., Van Brederode,.J., 1989: Chloroplast DNA variation inSilene sectionElisanthe demonstratesSilene noctiflora L. is not properly classified. — Biochem. Syst. Ecol.19: 559–567.Google Scholar
  29. Shaw, D. D., Marchant, N. C., Arnold, F. G., Kohlmann, B. C., 1993: Genomic and environmental determinants of a narrow hybrid zone: cause or coincidence? — InHarrison, R. G., (Ed.): Hybrid zones and evolutionary processes, pp. 165–195. — New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Shinozaki, K., Ohme, M., Tanaka, M., Wakasugi, T., Hayashiuda, N., Matsubayashi, T., Zaita, N., Chunwongse, J., Obokata, J., Yamaguchi-Shinosake, K., Ohto, C., Torazawa, K., Meng, B. Y., Sugita, M., Deno, H., Kamagashira, T., Yamada, K., Kusada, J., Takaiwa, F., Kato, A., Tohdoh, N., Shimada, H., Sugiura, M., 1986: The complete nucleotide sequence of the tobacco chloroplast genome: its gene organization and expression. — EMBO J.5: 2043–2049.Google Scholar
  31. Soltis, D. E., Mayer, M. S., Soltis, P. S., Edgerton, M., 1991: Chloroplast DNA variation inTellima grandiflora (Saxifragaceae). — Amer. J. Bot.78: 1379–1390.Google Scholar
  32. —,Soltis, P. S., Milligan, B. G., 1992: Intraspecific chloroplast DNA variation: systematic and phylogenetic implications. — InSoltis, P. E., Soltis, D. E., Doyle, J. J., (Eds): Molecular systematics of plants, pp. 117–150. — New York: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
  33. Sugiura, M., Shinozaki, K., Zaita, N., Kusada, M., Kumano, M., 1986: Clone bank of the tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum) chloroplast genome as a set of overlapping restriction endonuclease fragments; mapping of eleven ribosomal protein genes. — Pl. Sci.44: 211–216.Google Scholar
  34. Swofford, D. L., 1984: PAUP. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony. — Champaign: Illinois Natural History Survey.Google Scholar
  35. Sytsma, K. J., Schaal, B. A., 1985: Phylogenetics of theLisianthius skinneri (Gentianaceae) species complex in Panama utilizing DNA restriction fragment analysis. — Evolution39: 594–608.Google Scholar
  36. —,Gottlieb, L. D., 1986: Chloroplast DNA evolution and phylogenetic relationships inClarkia sect.Peripetasma (Onagraceae). — Evolution40: 1248–1261.Google Scholar
  37. Wendel, J. F., Stewart, J. McD., Rettig, J. H., 1991: Molecular evidence for homoploid reticulate evolution among Australian species ofGossypium. — Evolution45: 694–711.Google Scholar
  38. Wilson, P. G., 1991:Melaleuca. — InHarden, G. J., (Ed.): Flora of New South Wales, pp. 173–179. — Kensington: NSW University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Wolfe, K. H., Li, W.-H., Sharp, P. M., 1987: Rates of nucleotide substitution vary greatly among plant mitochondrial, chloroplast and nuclear DNAs. — Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA84: 9054–9058.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. A. Butcher
    • 1
  • M. Byrne
    • 2
  • G. F. Moran
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of ForestryAustralian National UniversityCanberraAustralia
  2. 2.CSIRO Division of ForestryCanberraAustralia

Personalised recommendations