Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-wxhwt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-09T22:32:34.789Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

New insights into the species diversity of Bartramia Hedw. (Bryophyta) in Antarctica

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 July 2019

Paulo E.A.S. Câmara Open the ORCID record for Paulo E.A.S. Câmara [Opens in a new window] ,
Abel E.R. Soares ,
Diego Knop Henriques ,
Denilson Fernandes Peralta ,
Juçara Bordin ,
Micheline Carvalho-Silva  and
Michael Stech
Paulo E.A.S. Câmara*
Affiliation:
Universidade de Brasília, Departamento de Botânica, Campus Universitário Darcy Ribeiro, Asa Norte, Brasilia, DF, Brazil, 70910-900
Abel E.R. Soares
Affiliation:
Universidade de Brasília, Departamento de Botânica, Campus Universitário Darcy Ribeiro, Asa Norte, Brasilia, DF, Brazil, 70910-900
Diego Knop Henriques
Affiliation:
Universidade de Brasília, Departamento de Botânica, Campus Universitário Darcy Ribeiro, Asa Norte, Brasilia, DF, Brazil, 70910-900
Denilson Fernandes Peralta
Affiliation:
Instituto de Botânica, Av. Miguel Stéfano, 3687, São Paulo, SP, Brazil, 04301-902
Juçara Bordin
Affiliation:
Universidade Estadual do Rio Grande do Sul, Unidade Litoral Norte-Osório, Rua Machado de Assis, 1456, RS, Brazil, 95520-000
Micheline Carvalho-Silva
Affiliation:
Universidade de Brasília, Departamento de Botânica, Campus Universitário Darcy Ribeiro, Asa Norte, Brasilia, DF, Brazil, 70910-900 Universidade Federal dos Vales do Jequitinhonha e Mucuri, Instituto de Ciências Agrárias, Av. Vereador João Narciso, 1380, Unaí, MG, Brazil, 38610-000
Michael Stech
Affiliation:
Naturalis Biodiversity Center, PO Box 9517, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands
*
paducamara@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In Antarctica, the genus Bartramia has been restricted to a single polymorphic species, B. patens. Its status as a separate species or a subspecies of the Northern Hemisphere B. ithyphylla was debated. In the present paper, we combine analyses of chloroplast (trnS–rps4–trnT–trnL–trnF region) and nuclear ITS sequences with a reinvestigation of morphological characteristics to infer the identity of Antarctic Bartramia. Phylogenetic and Automatic Barcode Gap Discovery (ABGD) species delimitation analyses indicate that the species diversity of Bartramia in Antarctica has been underestimated, since two species were identified, both belonging to Bartramia sect. Pyridium. Of these, B. subsymmetrica is a new record of the species for Antarctica, as it has previously only been recorded from Livingston Island, South Shetlands. The other species is B. patens, which is separated from B. ithyphylla by newly inferred morphological characteristics and is a sister species to the latter in the molecular phylogenetic analyses. Consequently, we consider B. ithyphylla to be a Northern Hemisphere instead of a bipolar species. The suggested conspecificity of both taxa into one species in the ABGD analysis is considered to result from overlumping by this species delimitation method. The delimitation of the three species of section Bartramia (B. halleriana, B. mossmaniana and B. pomiformis) and the circumscription of the genus Bartramia are discussed.

Keywords

Bartramia ithyphyllaBartramia patensBartramia subsymmetricabipolar speciesmosses
Type
Biological Sciences
Information
Antarctic Science , Volume 31 , Issue 4 , August 2019 , pp. 208 - 215
Copyright
Copyright © Antarctic Science Ltd 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Biersma, E.M., Jackson, J.A., Bracegirdle, T.J., Griffiths, H., Linse, K. & Convey, P. 2018a. Low genetic variation between South American and Antarctic populations of the bank-forming moss Chorisodontium aciphyllum (Dicranaceae). Polar Biology, 41, 599–610.Google Scholar
Biersma, E.M., Jackson, J.A., Stech, M., Griffiths, H., Linse, K. & Convey, P. 2018b. Multi-million year presence of Antarctic endemic species in the moss genus Schistidium. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 6, 10.3389/fevo.2018.00077.Google Scholar
Câmara, P.E.A.S., Carvalho-Silva, M., Henriques, D.K., Guerra, J., Gallego, M.T., Rios Poveda, D. & Stech, M. 2018a. Pylaisiaceae (Bryophyta) revisited. Journal of Bryology, 40, 251–264.Google Scholar
Câmara, P.E.A.S., Valente, D.V., Amorim, E.T., Henriques, D.K., Carvalho-Silva, M., Convey, P. & Stech, M. 2018b. Integrated analysis of intraspecific diversity in the bipolar moss Roaldia revoluta (Mitt.) P.E.A.S. Câmara & M. Carvalho-Silva (Bryophyta) in Antarctica. Polar Biology, 42, 485–496.Google Scholar
Cardot, J. 1907. Mousses. In Expédition antarctique française (1903–1905) commandée par le Dr Jean Charcot. Sciences Naturelles: Documents Scientifiques. Botanique. Paris: Masson et Cie, 9 pp.Google Scholar
Cardot, J. 1908. La flore bryologique des terres magellaniques, de la Géorgie du Sud et de l'Antarctide. In Wissenschaftliche Ergebnisse der Schwedischen Südpolar-Expedition 1901–1903 unter Leitung von Dr. Otto Nordenskjöld. Stockholm: Lithographisches Institut des Generalstabs, 298 pp.Google Scholar
Cardot, J. 1911a. Note sur les mousses rapportées par la seconde expédition antarctique française, sur le commandement du Dr Jean Charcot. Revue Bryologique, 38, 124–127.Google Scholar
Cardot, J. 1911b. Sur les mousses rapportées par l'Expédition antarctique du Pouquoi-Pas? Comptes Rendus Hebdomadaires des Séances de l'Académie des Sciences, 153, 559–663.Google Scholar
Cardot, J. 1913. Mousses: In Deuxiéme Expédition Antarctique Française (1908–1910) commandée par le Dr Jean Charcot. Sciences Naturelles: Documents Scientifiques. Paris: Masson et Cie, 31 pp.Google Scholar
Damayanti, L., Muñoz, J, Wicke, S., Symmank, L., Shaw, B., Frahm, J.-P. & Quandt, D. 2012. Common but new: Bartramia rosamrosiae, a ‘new’ widespread species of apple mosses (Bartramiales, Bryophytina) from the Mediterranean and western North America. Phytotaxa, 73, 37–59.Google Scholar
Dellicour, S. & Flot, J.-F. 2018. The hitchhiker's guide to single-locus species delimitation. Molecular Ecology Resources, 18, 1234–1246.Google Scholar
Doyle, J.J. & Doyle, J.L. 1987. A rapid DNA isolation procedure for small quantities of fresh leaf tissue. Phytochemistry Bulletin, 19, 11–15.Google Scholar
Fransén, S. 2004a. A taxonomic revision of Bartramia Hedw. section Bartramia. Lindbergia, 29, 113–122.Google Scholar
Fransén, S. 2004b. A taxonomic revision of extra-Neotropical Bartramia section Vaginella C. Müll. Lindbergia, 29, 73–107.Google Scholar
Frey, W. & Stech, M. 2009. Marchantiophyta, Bryophyta, Anthocerotophyta. In Frey, W., ed. Syllabus of plant families. A. Engler's syllabus der Pflanzenfamilien, 13th ed., Part 3 Bryophytes and seedless vascular plants. Stuttgart: Gebr. Borntraeger, 13–263.Google Scholar
Hassel, K., Pedersen, B. & Söderström, L. 2005. Changes in life-history traits in an expanding moss species: phenotypic plasticity or genetic differentiation? A reciprocal transplantation experiment with Pogonatum dentatum. Ecography, 28, 71–80.Google Scholar
Hernandez-Maqueda, R., Quandt, D., Werner, O. & Muñoz, J. 2008. Phylogenetic relationships and generic classification of the Grimmiaceae. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 46, 863–877.Google Scholar
Higgins, D.G. & Sharp, P.M. 1988. CLUSTAL: a package for performing multiple sequence alignment on a microcomputer. Gene, 73, 237–244.Google Scholar
Ignatov, M.S. & Afonina, O.M. 1992. Checklist of mosses of the former USSR. Arctoa, 1, 1–85.Google Scholar
Lewis, L.R., Ickert-Bond, S.M., Biersma, E.M., Convey, P., Goffinet, B., Hassel, K., et al. 2017. Future directions and priorities for Arctic bryophyte research. Arctic Science, 3, 475–497.Google Scholar
Matteri, C.M. 1984. Sinopsis de las especies Andino-Patagónicas, Antarcticas y Subantarcticas de los géneros Bartramia, Bartramidula y Conostomum (Bartramiaceae, Musci). Darwiniana, 25, 143–162.Google Scholar
Matteri, C.M. 1985. Bartramiaceae. In Guerrera, S.A., Gamundi de Amos, I. & Rabinowich de Halperin, D., eds. Flora criptogâmica de Tierra del Fuego. Buenos Aires: Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas & Técnicas de la Republica Argentina, 7–57.Google Scholar
Müller, K. 2005. SeqState - primer design and sequence statistics for phylogenetic DNA datasets. Applied Bioinformatics, 4, 65–69.Google Scholar
Ochyra, R. 1992. Amblyodon dealbatus (Musci, Meesiaceae) – a bipolar disjunct. Fragmenta Floristica et Geobotanica, 37, 251–259.Google Scholar
Ochyra, R., Lewis Smith, R.I. & Bednarek-Ochyra, H. 2008. The illustrated moss flora of Antarctica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 704 pp.Google Scholar
Pisa, S., Werner, O., Vanderpoorten, A., Magdy, M. & Ros, R.M. 2013. Elevational patterns of genetic variation in the cosmopolitan moss Bryum argenteum (Bryaceae). American Journal of Botany, 100, 2000–2008.Google Scholar
Posada, D. 2008. jModeltest: phylogenetic model averaging. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 25, 1253–1256.Google Scholar
Puillandre, N., Lambert, A., Brouillet, S. & Achaz, G. 2012. ABGD, automatic barcode gap discovery for primary species delimitation. Molecular Ecology, 21, 1864–1877.Google Scholar
Renner, M.A.M, Heslewood, M.H., Patzak, S.D.F., Schäfer-Verwimp, A. & Heinrichs, J. 2017. By how much do we underestimate species diversity of liverworts using morphological evidence? An example from Australasian Plagiochila (Plagiochilaceae: Jungermanniopsida). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 107, 576–593.Google Scholar
Robinson, H. 1972. Observations on the origin and taxonomy of the Antarctic moss flora. Antarctic Research Series, 20, 163–177.Google Scholar
Ronquist, F., Teslenko, M., Van Der Mark, P., Ayres, D.L., Darling, A., Hohna, S.H., et al. 2012. MrBayes 3.2: efficient Bayesian phylogenetic inference and model choice across a large model space. Systematic Biology, 61, 539–542.Google Scholar
Schofield, W.B. 1974. Bipolar disjunctive mosses in the Southern Hemisphere, with particular reference to New Zealand. Journal of the Hattori Botanical Laboratory, 38, 13–32.Google Scholar
Simmons, M.P. & Ochoterena, H. 2000. Gaps as characters in sequence-based phylogenetic analyses. Systematic Biology, 49, 369–381.Google Scholar
Stamatakis, A. 2006. RAxML-VI-HPC: maximum likelihood-based phylogenetic analyses with thousands of taxa and mixed models. Bioinformatics, 22, 2688–2690.Google Scholar
Swofford, D.L. 2002. PAUP*. Phylogenetic Analyses using parsimony (*and other methods), version 4.0. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
Taberlet, P., Gielly, L., Pautou, G. & Bouvet, J. 1991. Universal primers for amplification of three non-coding regions of chloroplast DNA. Plant Molecular Biology, 17, 1105–1109.Google Scholar
Virtanen, V. 2000. Taxonomic studies of the Bartramiaceae, Bryopsida. Publications in Botany from the University of Helsinki, 31, 1–34.Google Scholar
Virtanen, V. 2003. Phylogeny of the Bartramiaceae (Bryopsida) based on morphology and on rbcL, rps4, and trnL–trnF sequence data. The Bryologist, 106, 280–296.Google Scholar