Skip to main content
Log in

DNA barcoding discriminates Pampus minor (Liu et al., 1998) from Pampus species

  • Biology
  • Published:
Chinese Journal of Oceanology and Limnology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although Pampus minor has been classified as a new species, it still remains controversial. Was used a DNA barcoding technique based on homologous sequence analysis of the16S and COI genes to clarify the confusion over the identification of this species. Among 12 individuals whose genetic distance was 0.002, two haplotypes were found. According to the 16S sequences, the genetic distances ranged from 0.121 to 0.133 between P. minor and other Pampus species. Although the same the genetic distance between the two P. minor haplotypes was generated using COI sequences, the haplotype of Pm22-23, Pm28, and Pm32-33 was the same as that of Pci EF607462 and EF607466, while the haplotype of Pm24-27 and Pm29-31 was the same as that of Pci EF607461 and EF607463-65. In addition, the genetic distance ranged only from 0.002 to 0.005 between P. minor and Pa EF607460 and EF607458. Apart from this, the interspecies genetic distances varied from 0.135 to 0.143 between P. minor and other Pampus species according to the COI sequences. Phylogenetic trees, using combined 16S and COI data, strongly support the viewpoint that all the P. minor individuals form one clade that is in a sister position to Pampus sp. individuals (EU357803, FJ434342-FJ434343, and FJ652423-FJ652427).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arnaud S, Bonhomme F, Borsa P. 1999. Mitochondrial DNA analysis of the genetic relationships among populations of scad mackerel (Decapterus macarellus, D. macrosoma, D. russelli) in South-East Asia. Marine Biology, 135: 699–707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ballard J W O, de Whitlock M C. 2004. The incomplete natural history of mitochondria. Mol. Ecol., 13: 729–744.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bensasson D, de Zhang D X, Hartl D L, Hewitt G M. 2001. Mitochondrial pseudogenes: Evolution’s misplaced witnesses. Trends. Ecol. Evol., 16: 314–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng Q T. 1962. Stromateidae, the Fishes of South China Sea. Science Press, Beijing, China. p.759–763. (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Cui Z X, de Liu Y, Liu J, Luan W S. 2010. Molecular identification of Pampus fishes (Perciformes, Stromateidae). Ichthyological Research, 57: 32–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doiuchi R, de Nakabo T. 2006. Molecular phylogeny of the stromateoid fishes (Teleostei: Perciformes) inferred from mitochondrial DNA sequences and compared with morphology-based hypotheses. Mol. Phyt. Evol., 39: 111–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Felsenstein J. 1985. Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution, 39: 783–791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gao T X, de Li J, Wang Q Y, Liu J X. 2003. Sequence analysis on mitochondrial 16S rRNA gene in Fenneropenaeus chinensis. J. Fishery Sciences of China, 10: 59–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant W S, de Bowen B W. 1998. Shallow population histories in deep evolutionary lineages of marine fishes: insights from sardines and anchovies and lesson for conservation. J. Hered, 89: 415–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hajibabaei M, Janzen DH, Burns J M, Hallwachs W, Hebert P D N. 2006. DNA barcodes distinguish species of tropical Lepidoptera. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 103: 968–971.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hajibabaei M, de Singer G A C, Hebert P D N, Hickey D A. 2007. DNA barcoding: how it complements taxonomy, molecular phylogenetics and population genetics. Trends in Genetics, 23: 167–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hebert P D N, de Cywinska A, Ball S L, Waard J R. 2003a. Biological identifications through DNA barcodes. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. (B), 270: 313–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hebert P D N, de Ratnasingham S, Dewaard J R. 2003b. Barcoding animal life: cytochrome c oxidase subunit I divergences among closely related species. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B (Suppl.), 270: 96–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huelsenbeck P, de Ronquist F. 2001. MRBAYES: Bayesian inference of phylogenetic trees. Bioinformatics, 17: 754–755.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kochzius M, de Nölte M, Weber H, Silkenbeumer N, Hjörleifsdottir S, Hreggvidsson G O, Marteinsson V, Kappel K, Planes S, Tinti F, Magoulas A, Garcia Vazquez E, Turan C, Hervet C, Campo Falgueras D, Antoniou A, Landi M, Blohm D. 2008. DNA microarrays for identifying fishes. Mar. Biotechnol., 10: 207–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kong X Y, Yu Z N, Liu Y J, Gao T X, Wu Y F. 2001. Comparative study of mitochondrial COI gene fragment between Chinese mitten crab (Eriocheir sinensis) and Japanese mitten crab (Eriocheir japonica). Journal of Ocean University of Qingdao, 31: 861–866. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakra W S, de Goswami M, Gopalakrishnan A. 2009. Molecular identification and phylogenetic relationships of seven Indian Sciaenids (Pisces: Perciformes, Sciaenidae) based on 16S rRNA and cytochrome c oxidase subunit I mitochondrial genes. Mol. Biol. Rep., 36: 831–839.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu J, de Li C S. 1998. A new pomfret species, Pampus minor sp. nov. (Stromateidae) from Chinese waters. Chin. J. Oceanol. Limnol., 16(4): 280–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu J, de Li C S, Li X S. 2002. Studies on Chinese pomfret fishes of the genus Pampus (Pisces: Stromateidae). Studia Marina Sinica, 44: 240–252. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    Google Scholar 

  • Mai W J, Xie Z Y, Zhang L P, Shen Q, Hu C Q. 2009. Sequence Comparison and Phylogenetic Analysis of mtDNA 16S rRNA and COI gene Fragments in the Chinese Shrimp, Fennerpenaeus chinensis and Five Species of Shrimp. Natural Science Journal of Hainan University, 27: 15–23. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    Google Scholar 

  • Martínez-Navarro E M, de Galián J, Serrano J. 2005. Phylogeny and molecular evolution of the tribe Harpalini (Coleoptera, Carabidae) inferred from mitochondrial cytochrome-oxidase I. Molec. Phylogen. Evol., 35: 127–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neigel J, de Domingo A, Stake J. 2007. DNA barcoding as a tool for coral reef conservation. Coral Reefs, 26: 487–499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palumbi S R. 1996. Nucleic acids II: the polymerase chain reaction. In: Hillis D M, Moritz C, Mable B K ed. Molecular Systematics, Sinauer & Associates Inc., Sunderland, Massachusetts, p. 205–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfunder M, de Holzgang O, Frey J E. 2004. Development of microarray-based diagnostics of voles and shrews for use in biodiversity monitoring studies, and evaluation of mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase I vs. cytochrome b as genetic markers. Mol. Ecol., 13: 1 277–1 286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Posada D, de Crandall K A. 1998. Modeltest: testing the model of DNA substitution. Bioinformatics. 14: 817–818.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rozas J, de Sánchez-DelBarrio J C, Messeguer X, Rozas R. 2003. DnaSP, DNA polymorphism analyses by coalescent and other methods. Bioinformatics, 19: 2 496–2 497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sambrook J, de Russell D W. 2001. Molecular Cloning: a Laboratory Manual. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sparks J S. 2004. Molecular phylogeny and biogeography of the Malagasy and South Asian cichlids (Teleostei: Perciformes: Cichlidae). Molec. Phylogen Evol., 30: 599–614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoeckle M. 2003. Taxonomy, DNA, and the barcode of life. Bio-Science, 53: 2–3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swofford D L. 2002. PAUP: Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony (and Other Methods), Version 4.10. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tamura K, de Dudley J, Nei M, Kumar S. 2007. MEGA4: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis (MEGA) software version 4.0. Mol. Biol. Evol., 24: 1 596–1 599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson J D, de Gibson T J, Plewniak F, Jeanmougin F, Higgins D G. 1997. The ClustalX windows interface: flexible strategies for multiple sequence alignment aided by quality analysis tools. Nucleic Acids Res., 25: 4 876–4 882.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tjensvoll K, de Glover K A, Nylund A. 2006. Sequence variation in four mitochondrial genes of the salmon louse Lepeophtheirus salmonis. Dis. Aquat. Organ., 68: 251–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ursvik A, de Breines R, Christiansen J S, Fevolden S E, Coucheron D H, Johansen S D. 2007. A mitogenomic approach to the taxonomy of pollocks: Theragra chalcogramma and T. wnnmarchica represent one single species. BMC Evol. Biol., 7: 87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward R D, de Zemlak T S, Innes B H, Last P R, Hebert P D N. 2005. DNA barcoding Australia’s fish species. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B., 360: 1 847–1 857.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiao J H, de Xiao H, Huang D W. 2004. DNA barcoding: new approach of biological taxonomy. Acta Zoologica Sinica, 50: 852–855. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang F Y, Ma L B, Shi Z H, Ma C Y. 2008. Sequence variation and molecular phylogeny of mitochondrial COI gene segments from three pomfret species. Journal of Fishery Sciences of China, 15: 392–398. (in Chinese with English abstract)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zhaoxia Cui  (崔朝霞).

Additional information

Supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 40676085)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Guo, E., Liu, Y., Liu, J. et al. DNA barcoding discriminates Pampus minor (Liu et al., 1998) from Pampus species. Chin. J. Ocean. Limnol. 28, 1266–1274 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00343-010-9917-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00343-010-9917-1

Keyword

Navigation