Genes & Genomics

, Volume 41, Issue 4, pp 381–387 | Cite as

Genetic diversity and population structure of Lychnis wilfordii (Caryophyllaceae) with newly developed 17 microsatellite markers

  • Bora Kim
  • Koh Nakamura
  • Saya Tamura
  • Byoung Yoon Lee
  • Myounghai KwakEmail author
Research Article


Lychnis wilfordii (Regel) Maxim. is a perennial plant designated as an endangered species by the Korean government because of rapid reduction in its population size. Thus, a population genetic study of this species is needed to establish the strategy for management and conservation based on scientific evidences. The goals of this study were to develop useful microsatellite markers for L. wilfordii and to understand current genetic status of L. wilfordii in Korean peninsula. Seventeen microsatellite markers were identified using next-generation sequencing and bioinformatic analysis and then analyzed genetic diversity in one hundred forty-five individuals from Korea (KI1, KI2, and KP), China (CX, CF) and Russia (RP). Analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA), principal coordinates analysis (PCoA) and STRUCTURE results consistently showed discontinuity among L. wilfordii populations. AMOVA showed that the percentage of variation among populations was 53%, which was higher than the variation within populations (19%). PCoA showed that the populations were divided into three genetic clusters, (1) Chinese (CX, CF), (2) Russian (RP) populations and Korean populations (KI1, KI2) excluding KP, and (3) the KP population. In particular, KP, the most southern population on the Korean peninsula, showed significantly lower observed and expected heterozygosity, number of effective alleles, and Shannon index (I) than those of KI1 and KI2. L. wilfordii showed high differentiation between populations with low genetic diversity within populations. Among Korean populations, KP is likely to be affected by genetic drift due to small population size, low genetic diversity and limited gene flow.


Lychnis wilfordii Microsatellite Genetic diversity Population structure Genetic drift 



This work was supported by a grant from the National Institute of Biological Resources (NIBR), funded by the Ministry of Environment (MOE) of the Republic of Korea (NIBR201703101). The authors gratefully acknowledge the contributions of Jong-Soo Kang and Jaram Hong at the National Institute of Biological Resources, the late Dr. Kozhevnikov at the Institute of Biology and Soil Science of the Russian Academy of Sciences and Dr. Xian-chun Zhang at Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences for sample collection.


  1. Alcaide M, Serrano D, Negro JJ, Tella JL, Laaksonen T, Müller C (2008) Population fragmentation leads to isolation by distance but not genetic impoverishment in the philopatric Lesser Kestrel: a comparison with the widespread sympatric Eurasian Kestrel. Heredity 102:190–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Caughley G, Gunn A (1996) Conservation biology in theory and practice. Blackwell, Oxford, p 459Google Scholar
  3. Earl DA, von Holdt BM (2012) Structure harvester: a website and program for visualizing structure output and implementing the Evanno method. Conserv Genet Resour 4:359–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ellstrand NC, Elam DR (1993) Population genetic consequences of small population size: implication for plant conservations. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 24:217–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Evanno G, Regnaut S, Goudet J (2005) Detecting the number of clusters of individuals using the software STRUCTURE: a simulation study. Mol Ecol 14:2611–2620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Galeuchet DJ, Husi R, Perret C, Fischer M, Gauyschi B (2002) Characterization of microsatellite loci in Lychnis flos-cuculi (Caryophyllaceae). Mol Ecol Notes 2:491–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gomulkiewicz R, Holt RD (1995) When does evolution by natural selection prevent extinction? Evolution 49:201–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Harvey PH, Pagel MD (1991) The comparative method in evolutionary biology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 1–34Google Scholar
  9. Hedrick PW, Gilpin ME (1997) Genetic effective size of a metapopulation. In: Hanski IA, Gilpin ME (eds) Metapopulation biology: ecology, genetics and evolution. Academic Press, California, pp 165–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hoffmann AA, Blows MW (1994) Species borders: ecological and evolutionary perspectives. Trends Ecol Evol 9:223–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hong SP (2007) Lychnis L. In: Park CW (ed) Flora of Korea. Academy Publishing Co., Seoul, pp 323–325Google Scholar
  12. Jakobsson M, Rosenberg NA (2007) CLUMPP: a cluster matching and permutation program for dealing with label switching and multimodality in analysis of population structure. Bioinformatics 23:1801–1806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kim ZS (2009) Developing sampling strategies for genetic conservation of endangered plant species. In: Proceedings of ‘international symposium on climate change and biodiversity conservation’, Korea National Arboretum, 25–26 May, pp 11–21Google Scholar
  14. Kim ZS, Jo DG, Kim YH, Yoo KO, Cheon KS (2010) Genetic diversity and structure of Pulsatilla tongkangensis as inferred from ISSR markers. Korean J Plant Res 23:360–367Google Scholar
  15. Lawton JH (1993) Range, population abundance and conservation. Trends Ecol Evol 8:409–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lesica P, Allendorf FW (1995) When are peripheral populations valuable for conservation? Conserv Biol 9:753–760CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Liu S, Cantrell RG, McCarty JC, Stewart JMcD (2000) Simple sequence repeat based assessment of genetic diversity in cotton race stock accessions. Crop Sci 40:1459–1469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lu D, Lidén M, Oxelman B (2001) Lychnis Linneaeus. In: Wu Z, Raven PH, Hong D (eds) Flora of China, vol 6. Science Press, Beijing, pp 100–102Google Scholar
  19. McPhail JD (1993) Ecology and evolution of sympatric sticklebacks (Gasterosteus): origins of the species pairs. Can J Zool 71:515–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Nei M, Maruyama T, Chakraborty R (1975) The bottleneck effect and genetic variability in populations. Evolution 29:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Peakall R, Smouse PE (2012) GenAlEx6.5: genetic analysis in Excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research-an update. Bioinformatics 28:2537–2539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Powell W, Machray GC, Provan J (1996) Polymorphism revealed by simple sequence repeats. Trends Plant Sci 1:215–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Raymond M, Rousset F (1995) GENEPOP, version 1.2. Population genetics software for exact tests and ecumenicism. J Hered 86:248–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rosenberg NA (2004) DISTRUCT: a program for the graphical display of population structure. Mol Ecol Notes 4:137–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Takayama K, Lopez SP, Koenig C, Kohl G, Novak J, Stuessy TF (2011) A simple and cost-effective approach for microsatellite isolation in non-model plant species using small-scale 454 pyrosequencing. Taxon 60:1442–1449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Taylor EB, McPhail JD (2000) Historical contingency and ecological determinism interact to prime speciation in sticklebacks gasterosteus. Proc R Soc Lond B 267:2375–2384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 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 4:535–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Varshney RK, Graner A, Sorrells ME (2005) Genic microsatellite markers in plants: features and applications. Trends Biotechnol 23:48–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Zalapa JE, Cuevas H, Zhu H, Steffan S, Senalik D, Zeldin E, McCown B, Harbut R, Simon P (2012) Using nest-generation sequencing approaches to isolate simple sequence repeat (SSR) loci in the plant science. Am J Bot 99:193–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Genetics Society of Korea and Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Plant Resources DivisionNational Institute of Biological ResourcesIncheonRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Botanical Garden, Field Science Center for Northern BiosphereHokkaido UniversitySapporoJapan
  3. 3.Japan Wildlife Research CenterTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations