Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Genetic discrimination of middle Mississippi River Scaphirhynchus sturgeon into pallid, shovelnose, and putative hybrids with multiple microsatellite loci

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Conservation Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The pallid sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus albus), which is protected under the US endangered species act, and shovelnose sturgeon (S. platorhynchus), which is legally harvested in some locations, are sympatric throughout the range of pallid sturgeon. There is considerable morphological overlap between the species making discrimination problematic. The inability to reliably differentiate between species across all life stages has hampered pallid sturgeon recovery efforts. Furthermore, the two species are believed to hybridize. This study used allele frequency data at multiple microsatellite loci to perform Bayesian and likelihood-based assignment testing and morphological measures and meristics to discriminate pallid, shovelnose, and putative hybrid sturgeons from the middle Mississippi River. Bayesian model-based clustering of the genetic data indicated that two natural genetic units occur in the region. These units correspond to morphologically identified pallid and shovelnose sturgeon. Some individuals were morphologically intermediate and many of these failed to strongly assign genetically as either pallid or shovelnose sturgeon, suggesting they may be hybrids. These data indicate that pallid sturgeon and shovelnose sturgeon are genetically distinct in the middle Mississippi River (F ST = 0.036, P < 0.0001) and suggest that hybridization between pallid sturgeon and shovelnose sturgeon has occurred in this region with genetic distance estimates indicating the greatest distance is between pallid and shovelnose sturgeon, while hybrid sturgeon are intermediate but closer to shovelnose. This study demonstrates that assignment testing with multiple microsatellite markers can be successful at discriminating pallid sturgeon and shovelnose sturgeon, providing a valuable resource for pallid sturgeon recovery and conservation.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The use of trade and product names throughout text does not imply endorsement by the United States Government.

References

  • Allendorf FW, Leary RF, Spruell P, Wenburg JK (2001) The problems with hybrids: setting conservation guidelines. TREE 16:613–622

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey RM, Cross FB (1954) River sturgeons of the American genus Scaphirhynchus: characters, distribution, and synonymy. Pap Mich Acad Sci Arts & Lett 36:169–208, 54

    Google Scholar 

  • Birstein VJ (1993) Sturgeons and paddlefishes: threatened fishes in need of conservation. Conserv Biol 7:773–787

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bischof R, Szalanski AL (2000) Mitochondrial-DNA variation in pallid and shovelnose sturgeons, Scaphirhynchus (Pisces: Acipenseridae). Trans Nebr Acad Sci 26:19–21

    Google Scholar 

  • Campton DE, Bass AL, Chapman FA, Bowen BW (2000) Genetic distinction of pallid, shovelnose, and Alabama sturgeon: emerging species and the US Endangered Species Act. Conserv Genet 1:17–32

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty R, Jin L (1993) A unified approach to study hypervariable polymorphisms: statistical considerations of determining relatedness and population distances. In: Chakraborty R, Epplen JT (eds) DNA fingerprinting: state of the science. AJ Jefferys Birkhauser, Verlag

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson DM, Pflieger WL, Trial L, Haverland PS (1985) Distribution, biology and hybridization of Scaphirhynchus albus and S. platorhynchus in the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers. Environ Biol Fish 14:51–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dryer MP, Sandoval AJ (1993) Recovery plan for the pallid sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus albus). US Fish and Wildlife Service, Denver, 55 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Evanno G, Regnaut S, Goudet J (2005) Detecting the number of clusters of individuals using the software structure: a simulation study. Mol Ecol 14:2611–2620

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Forbes SA, Richardson RE (1905) On a new shovelnose sturgeon from the Mississippi River. Bull Illinois State Lab Nat Hist 7:37–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Falush D, Stephens M, Pritchard JK (2003) Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data: linked loci and correlated allele frequencies. Genetics 164:1567–1587

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Goudet J (2001) FSTAT, a program to estimate and test gene diversities and fixation indices (version 2.9.3). Available from http://www.unil.ch/izea/softwares/ fstat.html. Updated from Goudet (1995). Cited Feb 2002

  • Goudet J (1995) FSTAT (vers. 1.2): a computer program to calculate F-statistics. J Hered 86:485–486

    Google Scholar 

  • Goudet J, Raymond M, Demeeus T, Rousset F (1996) Testing differentiation in diploid populations. Genetics 144:1933–1940

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen MM, Kenchington E, Nielsen EE (2001) Assigning individual fish to populations using microsatellite DNA markers. Fish Fish 2:93–121

    Google Scholar 

  • Keenlyne KD (1997) Life history and status of the shovelnose sturgeon, Scaphirhynchus platorhynchus. Environ Biol Fish 48:291–298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhajda BR, Mayden RL (2001) Morphological comparisons of hatchery-reared specimens of Scaphirhynchus albus, S. platorhynchus, and S. albus  ×  S. platorhynchus hybrids. Final Report US Fish and Wildlife Service Bismarck, North Dakota, 119 pp

  • Langella O (2002) Populations 1.2.28 (available at http://www.cnrs-gif.fr/pge/bioinfo/populations/index.php?lang = en#ancre-bibliographie. Cited 5 Dec 2002

  • Lewis PO, Zaykin D (2001) Genetic data analysis: computer program for the analysis of allelic data. Version 1.0 (d16c). Free program distributed by the authors over the internet from http://lewis.eeb.uconn.edu/lewishome/ software.html. Cited 2001

  • Manel S, Gaggiotti OE, Waples RS (2005) Assignment methods: matching biological questions with appropriate techniques. TREE 20:136–142

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miller LM, Kapuscinski AR (2003) Genetic guidelines for hatchery supplementation programs. In: Hallerman EM (ed) Population genetics: principles and applications for fisheries scientists. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MD

    Google Scholar 

  • McQuown EC, Sloss BL, Sheehan RJ, Rodzen J, Tranah GJ, May B (2000) Microsatellite analysis of genetic variation in sturgeon: new primer sequences for Scaphirhynchus and Acipenser. Trans Am Fish Soc 129:1380–1388

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Paetkau D, Slade R, Burden M, Estoup A (2004) Genetic assignment methods for direct, real-time estimation of migration rate: a simulation-based exploration of accuracy and power. Mol Ecol 13:55–65

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Paetkau D, Calvert W, Stirling I, Strobeck C (1995) Microsatellite analysis of population structure in Canadian polar bears. Mol Ecol 4:347–354

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Phelps SR, Allendorf FW (1983) Genetic identity of pallid and shovelnose sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus albus and S. platorhynchus). Copeia 1983:696–700

  • Piry S, Alapetite A, Cornuet J-M, Paetkau D, Baudouin L, Estoup A (2004) GeneClass2. A software for genetic assignment and first-generation migrant detection. J Hered 95:536–539

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnelly P (2000) Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155:945–959

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rannala B, Mountain J (1997) Detecting immigration using multilocus genotypes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94: 9197–9201

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rice WR(1989) Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution 43:223–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhymer JM, Simberloff D (1996) Extinction by hybridization and introgression. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 27:83–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Straughan DJ, Burnham-Curtis ME, Fain SR (2002) Experimental search for forensically useful markers in the genus Scaphirhynchus. J App Ichthyol 18: 621–628

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tranah G, Campton DE, May B (2004) Genetic evidence for hybridization of pallid and shovelnose sturgeon. J Hered 95:474–480

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tranah GJ, Kincaid HL, Krueger CC, Campton DE, May B (2001) Reproductive isolation in sympatric populations of pallid and shovelnose sturgeon. N Am J Fish Manage 21:367–373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaha JP, Primmer CR (2006) Efficiency of model-based Bayesian methods for detecting hybrid individuals under different hybridization scenarios and with different numbers of loci. Mol Ecol 15:63–72

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Weir BS, Cockerham CS (1984) Estimating F-statistics for the analysis of population structure. Evolution 38:1258–1370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wills PS, Sheehan RJ, Heidinger R, Sloss BL, Clevenstine R (2002) Differentiation of pallid sturgeon and shovelnose sturgeon using an index based on meristics and morphometrics. Am Fish Soc Symp 28:249–258

    Google Scholar 

  • Wirgin II, Stabile JE, Waldman JR (1997) Molecular analysis in the conservation of sturgeons and paddlefish. Environ Biol Fish 48:385–398

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the United States Fish and Wildlife Service Section 3, United States Army Corps of Engineers St. Louis District, and the North American Native Fishes Association for funding this research. The efforts of all researchers who provided samples (CEWES, MDC LTRM, SIU River Team) are greatly appreciated. Dr. P. Wills is acknowledged for his assistance and cooperation in comparing and contrasting the CI values. We thank Dr. G. Moyer and Dr. M. Bagley for reviewing an earlier draft of this manuscript, as well as three anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Fisheries and Illinois Aquaculture Center and Department of Zoology, Southern Illinois University Carbondale, Life Science II Room 173, 1125 Lincoln Drive, Carbondale, IL, 62901-6511, USA

    A. W. Schrey, R. J. Sheehan, R. C. Heidinger & E. J. Heist

  2. US Geological Survey, Wisconsin Cooperative Fisheries Research Unit, College of Natural Resources, University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point, Stevens Point, WI, 54481, USA

    B. L. Sloss

Authors
  1. A. W. Schrey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. B. L. Sloss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. R. J. Sheehan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. R. C. Heidinger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. E. J. Heist
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. W. Schrey.

Appendix

Appendix

Appendix Allele frequencies for each of the sixteen microsatellite loci screened in putative pallid (PS), shovelnose (SS), and intermediate sturgeon (IS)
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schrey, A.W., Sloss, B.L., Sheehan, R.J. et al. Genetic discrimination of middle Mississippi River Scaphirhynchus sturgeon into pallid, shovelnose, and putative hybrids with multiple microsatellite loci. Conserv Genet 8, 683–693 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10592-006-9215-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10592-006-9215-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation