Editorial Type: NOTES AND FIELD REPORTS
 | 
Online Publication Date: 16 Jun 2020

Characterization of Microsatellite Loci for the Razorback Musk Turtle (Sternotherus carinatus) and Their Cross-Amplification in Five Other Species in the Family Kinosternidae

and
Article Category: Research Article
Page Range: 145 – 149
DOI: 10.2744/CCB-1424.1
Save
Download PDF

Abstract

Studies of mud and musk turtles (family Kinosternidae) are underrepresented in the primary turtle literature, particularly with regard to their population genetics. We have isolated microsatellite loci for Sternotherus carinatus, a first for any species in the family, and tested their ability to cross-amplify in 5 other kinosternids. These loci should provide a useful set of tools for future population genetic studies of kinosternid species.

Turtles are among the most imperiled vertebrates on the planet with an estimated 52.2%–61% considered by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) to be extinct or in a threatened category—critically endangered, endangered, or vulnerable (Turtle Taxonomy Working Group [TTWG] 2017; Lovich et al. 2018). Genetic studies have become an important conservation tool in biology by evaluating the genetic health of populations, resolving taxonomic uncertainties, and identifying evolutionarily significant units (Frankham 2003). Microsatellite loci have long been used in biology to address questions of population genetics (Selkoe and Toonen 2006), and they have important applications in the field of conservation biology. While there is a rapidly expanding amount of literature on the biology of turtles, some species are receiving more attention than others (Lovich and Ennen 2013). For instance, the majority of microsatellite loci used in population genetic studies have been optimized for emydid species such as the European pond turtle (Emys orbicularis; Ciofi et al. 2009), the bog turtle (Glyptemys muhlenbergii; King and Julian 2004), the Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii; Osentoski et al. 2002; Libants et al. 2004), and the diamondback terrapin (Malaclemmys terrapin; Hauswaldt and Glenn 2003). The microsatellite loci from these studies have also been tested for cross-amplification and optimized for other species such as the spotted turtle (Clemmys guttata; Davy and Murphy 2014) and several Graptemys species (King and Julian 2004; Selman et al. 2009), but very few (only 3 of 40) of these microsatellite loci have been successfully cross-amplified in a mud or musk turtle species (Hauswaldt and Glenn 2003; Schwartz et al. 2003).

Even though the taxonomy of Kinosternidae (mud and musk turtles) is still a work in progress, as made evident by the recent recognition of cryptic diversity within the genera Sternotherus (Scott et al. 2018) and Kinosternon (López-Luna et al. 2018), there are currently 30 described species within Kinosternidae, making it one of the most diverse families of turtles globally (TTWG 2017). However, mud and musk turtles are among the least-studied turtles in the United States and Canada (Lovich and Ennen 2013), and relatively little work has been conducted on many of the Central and South American varieties. This highlights the need for versatile genetic markers for this group of turtles.

In this study, we identified microsatellite loci for the razorback musk turtle (Sternotherus carinatus), a small to medium-sized (up to 18 cm) turtle with predominately lotic tendencies. It occupies rivers, streams, and oxbows from the Brazos River drainage in Central Texas to the Escatawpa River drainage in Southwestern Alabama and into some Mississippi River drainages in Southeastern Oklahoma and Arkansas (Lindeman 2008). We also tested these loci for cross-amplification in 5 other kinosternid species: the stripe-necked musk turtle (Sternotherus peltifer), the eastern musk turtle (Sternotherus odoratus), the eastern mud turtle (Kinosternon subrubrum), and the striped mud turtle (Kinosternon baurii) as well as the federally protected flattened musk turtle (Sternotherus depressus; US Fish and Wildlife Service 1987), a species endemic to Alabama where it is considered of “High Conservation Concern” as well as critically endangered by IUCN (2011). Identifying variable genetic markers for the razorback musk turtle will provide the tools necessary to help fill gaps in our understanding of the ecology and evolutionary history of this species and others in this overlooked family.

Methods

We trapped razorback musk turtles (Sternotherus carinatus) from the Leaf River in Hattiesburg, Mississippi using 3-ft-diameter hoop nets baited with sardines in soybean oil (Beach Cliff). We collected a 5-mm snippet of interdigital webbing from the hindfoot of each turtle to store as a genetic sample. The sample was preserved in 100% ethanol until total genomic DNA was extracted using a DNeasy Tissue Kit (Qiagen Inc). Genomic DNA from one razorback musk turtle was sent to the Savannah River Ecology Lab Molecular Ecology Lab (SREL MEL), where they prepared an Illumina pair-end shotgun library for sequencing (Lance et al. 2013) and subsequently used PAL_FINDER_v0.02.03 (Castoe et al. 2012) to identify di-, tri-, tetra-, penta-, and hexanucleotide microsatellite sequences (i.e., nucleotide repeat motifs) among the reads. Primer3 (Rozen and Skaletsky 1999) was used to develop primers for 6766 potential microsatellite loci. We screened a total of 60 penta- and tetranucleotide loci, focusing on loci whose sequences only appeared 1–2 times within the sequence reads, to reduce the likelihood of targeting repetitive loci.

We initially screened potential microsatellite loci for amplification success and variability across 5 individuals of Sternotherus carinatus. For those loci that amplified well, we subsequently genotyped 30 Sternotherus carinatus from the Leaf River in Hattiesburg, Mississippi (31°20′16″N, 89°16′48.2″W; WGS84). We also tested all loci for cross-amplification across 5 other kinosternids (Kinosternon baurii [n = 5], K. subrubrum [n = 5], S. depressus [n = 5], S. peltifer [n = 5], and S. odoratus [n = 4]). Amplifications were conducted in a total volume of 12.5 µl using 7.76 µl of dH2O, 1.25 µl 10× standard Taq (Mg-free) buffer (New England Biolabs), 0.75 µl 2 mM dNTPs, 0.75 µl 25 mM MgCl2, 0.25 units Taq polymerase (New England Biolabs), 0.4 µl of 10 mM M13 tailed forward (Boutin-Ganache et al. 2001) and reverse primers, 0.09 µl of 1 µM labeled M-13 primer (LICOR Co.), and 20–50 ng of DNA template. PCR cycling conditions were as follows: initial denaturation at 94°C for 2 min, 35 cycles of 30 sec at 94°C, 30 sec at a locus-specific annealing temperature of 54°C–56°C (see Table 1), and 1 min at 72°C with a final elongation of 10 min at 72°C. Microsatellites alleles were visualized on a polyacrylamide gel using a LICOR 4300 DNA Analyzer. Alleles were sized using GeneProfiler ver. 4.05 (LICOR Co). Some loci required further optimization in terms of PCR conditions with modifications made to the annealing temperature and the amount of Taq polymerase (Table 1). For the additional kinosternid species in this study, we only tested for amplification under standard PCR conditions with an annealing temperature of 56°C. We calculated summary statistics for each locus using GenAlEx 6.5 (Peakall and Smouse 2012), and we tested for Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium within loci and linkage disequilibrium between loci using the probability tests of GENEPOP for the web (Raymond and Rousset 1995; Rousset 2008). We adjusted our alpha values using a sequential Bonferroni correction to account for multiple comparisons (Rice 1989).

Table 1 Characteristics of 40 loci isolated for the razorback musk turtle (Sternotherus carinatus). Forward primers are reported without the M13 tail. Columns include repeat motif, number of individuals out of 30 (n) for which loci amplified, size range of alleles (Size bp), the number of alleles (NA), the observed and expected heterozygosities (HO and HE), and the annealing temperature (T°C) for razorback musk turtles. Those loci marked with an asterisk (*) were optimized with increased Taq (0.1 units) and forward/reverse primers (0.5 µl). Dashes () represent loci that did not amplify in the razorback musk turtle but amplified in other kinosternid taxa at an annealing temperature of 56°C (Table 2).
Table 1
Table 1 Continued.
Table 1

Results

Of the 60 loci we tested, 40 amplified in one or more species (Table 1). Of these, we optimized reaction conditions for 25 microsatellite loci that amplified in Sternotherus carinatus samples (n = 30). Numbers of alleles for these loci ranged from 2 to 15 (mean = 7.6, SE = 3.4) for S. carinatus, with observed heterozygosity values of 0.138 to 0.963 (mean = 0.657, SE = 0.202) and expected heterozygosity values of 0.128 to 0.910 (mean = 0.687, SE = 0.207). Only one locus deviated significantly from Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (Scar24), and no loci exhibited linkage disequilibrium. For the additional kinosternid species in this study, the total number of successfully amplified polymorphic loci was 26 for Sternotherus odoratus, 16 for S. peltifer, 13 for S. depressus, 14 for Kinosternon bauriii, and 6 for K. subrubrum (Table 2).

Table 2 All loci that cross-amplified in at least one kinosternid species. Columns represent species, parentheses indicate number of each species tested, numbers in columns represent number of alleles amplified at a locus. Dashes (—) = no amplification at this locus for the species.
Table 2

Discussion

Mud and musk turtles of the family Kinosternidae are among some of the least-studied turtles in the world (Lovich and Ennen 2013), and this study is the first to optimize microsatellite loci designed specifically for a kinosternid turtle. The loci were designed by using DNA from the razorback musk turtle, but they cross-amplified well in 5 other species of mud and musk turtles. Microsatellite loci remain an affordable and effective method to study population genetics (Selkoe and Toonen 2006). They can be used at relatively little cost, which can be reduced further by multiplexing loci with alleles in different size ranges (e.g., Scar08 and Scar19; Scar24 and Scar36). Furthermore, in contrast to next-generation approaches like RAD-Seq, microsatellite loci are amenable to adding additional individuals to the data set as opportunity and funding allows.

Although populations of most kinosternids are considered stable across the southeastern United States (with the notable exception of the critically endangered Sternotherus depressus), there is still much we do not know about the evolutionary history of these species, as made evident by the recent description of Sternotherus intermedius (Scott et al. 2018). The loci described herein should prove useful for studies evaluating the contemporary and historic levels of connectivity (i.e., gene flow) in kinosternid species as well as for evaluating levels of genetic diversity within and among populations. Because lower genetic diversity has been correlated with lower fitness in turtles (Ennen et al. 2010), it is important to understand gene flow among isolated or fragmented populations that may be susceptible to genetic drift or inbreeding depression, particularly in threatened species (Ennen et al. 2010; Shaffer et al. 2015). A better understanding of the population genetics of these species will allow for more informed management decisions and will benefit the long-term survival of a species. We are currently using these loci to evaluate range-wide population structure in razorback musk turtles and to assess patterns of co-ocurrence and potential hybridization in S. carinatus and S. peltifer (G.J.B., unpubl. data, 2020).

Acknowledgments

This work has been funded by the following grants (in alphabetical order): the American Turtle Observatory, Birmingham Audubon Society, Chicago Herpetological Society, National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship (#1842492), and the Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Grant through the American Museum of Natural History. We thank Rochelle Beasley and Stacey Lance (Savannah River Ecology Lab) for Illumina Sequencing and processing of reads. We thank Cybil C. Huntzinger, Luke S. Pearson, and Gabbie A. Berry for assistance in the field and collection of tissue samples. All tissue samples were collected under a scientific collecting permit, Mississippi Museum of Natural Science (MMNS) No. 090915 in accordance with Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) protocol No. 17101202 from the University of Southern Mississippi.

LITERATURE CITED

  • Boutin-Ganache, I., Raposo, M., Raymond, M., and Deschepper,C.F. 2001. M13-tailed primers improve the readability and usability of microsatellite analyses performed with two different allele sizing methods.BioTechniques31:2428.
  • Castoe, T.A., Poole, A.W., De Koning, A.P.J., Jones, K.L., Tomback, D.F., Oyler-Mccance, S.J., Lance, S.L., Streicher, J.W., and Pollock,D.D. 2012. Rapid microsatellite identification from Illumina paired-end genomic sequencing in two birds and a snake.PLoS ONE7:e30953.
  • Ciofi, C., Tzika, A.C., Natali, C., Chelazzi, G., Naziridis, T., and Milinkovitch,M.C. 2009. Characterization of microsatellite loci in the European pond turtle Emys orbicularis.Molecular Ecology Resources9:189191.
  • Davy, C.M. and Murphy,R.W. 2014. Conservation genetics of the endangered spotted turtle (Clemmys guttata) illustrate the risks of “bottleneck tests.Canadian Journal of Zoology92:149162.
  • Ennen, J.R., Kreiser, B.R., and Qualls,C.P. 2010. Low genetic diversity in several gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) populations in the Desoto National Forest, Mississippi.Herpetologica66:3138.
  • Frankham, R. 2003. Genetics and conservation biology.Comptes Rendus Biologies326:2229.
  • Hauswaldt, J.S. and Glenn,T.C. 2003. Microsatellite DNA loci from the diamondback terrapin (Malaclemys terrapin).Molecular Ecology Notes3:174176.
  • International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). 2011. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Flattened musk turtle (Sternotherus depressus).https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/20824/97383753 (16 May 2020).
  • King, T.L. and Julian,S.E. 2004. Conservation of microsatellite DNA flanking sequence across 13 Emydid genera assayed with novel bog turtle (Glyptemys muhlenbergii) loci.Conservation Genetics5:719725.
  • Lance, S.L., Love, C.N., Nunziata, S.O., O'bryhim, J.R., Scott, D.E., Flynn, R.W., and Jones,K.L. 2013. 32 species validation of a new Illumina paired-end approach for the development of microsatellites.PLoS ONE8:e81853.
  • Libants, S., Kamarainen, A.M., Scribner, K.T., and Congdon,J.D. 2004. Isolation and cross-species amplification of seven microsatellite loci from Emydoidea blandingii.Molecular Ecology Notes4:300302.
  • Lindeman, P.V. 2008. Sternotherus carinatus (Gray 1856)—razorback musk turtle, razor-backed musk turtle.In:Rhodin,A.G.J.,Pritchard,P.C.H.,Van Dijk,P.P.,Saumure,R.A.,Buhlmann,K.A., and Iverson,J.B. (Eds.). Conservation Biology of Freshwater Turtles and Tortoises: A Compilation Project of the IUCN/SSC Tortoise and Freshwater Turtle Specialist Group. Chelonian Research Monographs5:012.1012.6.
  • López-Luna, M.A., Cupul-Magaña, F.G., Escobedo-Galván, A.H., González-Hernández, A.J., Centenero-Alcalá, E., Rangel-Mendoza, J.A., Ramírez-Ramírez M.M., and Cazares-Hernández,E. 2018. A distinctive new species of mud turtle from Western México.Chelonian Conservation Biology17:213.
  • Lovich, J.E. and Ennen,J.R. 2013. A quantitative analysis of the state of knowledge of turtles of the United States and Canada.Amphibia-Reptilia34:1123.
  • Lovich, J.E., Ennen, J.R., Agha, M., and Gibbons,J.W. 2018. Where have all the turtles gone, and why does it matter?BioScience68:771781.
  • Osentoski, M.F., Mockford, S., Wright, J.M., Snyder, M., Herman, T.B., and Hughes,C.R. 2002. Isolation and characterization of microsatellite loci from the Blanding's turtle, Emydoidea blandingii.Molecular Ecology Notes2:147149.
  • Peakall, R. and Smouse,P.E. 2012. GenAlEx 6.5: Genetic analysis in Excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research—an update.Bioinformatics28:25372539.
  • Raymond, M. and Rousset,F. 1995. GENEPOP (version 1.2): population genetics software for exact tests and ecumenicism.Journal of Heredity86:248249.
  • Rice, W.R. 1989. Analyzing tables of statistical tests.Evolution43:223225.
  • Rousset, F. 2008. Genepop'007: a complete re-implementation of the Genepop software for Windows and Linux.Molecular Ecology Resources8:103106.
  • Rozen, S. and Skaletsky,H. 1999. Primer3 on the WWW for general users and for biologist programmers.In:Misener,S. and Krawetz,S.A. (Eds.) Bioinformatics Methods and Protocols.
    Clifton, NJ
    :
    Humana Press
    , pp. 365386.
  • Schwartz, T.S., Osentoski, M., Lamb, T., and Karl,S.A. 2003. Microsatellite loci for the North American tortoises (genus Gopherus) and their applicability to other turtle species.Molecular Ecology Notes3:283286.
  • Scott, P.A., Glenn, T.C., and Rissler,L.J. 2018. Resolving taxonomic turbulence and uncovering cryptic diversity in the musk turtles (Sternotherus) using robust demographic modeling.Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution120:115.
  • Selkoe, K.A. and Toonen,R.J. 2006. Microsatellites for ecologists: a practical guide to using and evaluating microsatellite markers.Ecology Letters9:615629.
  • Selman, W., Ennen, J., Kreiser, B.R., and Qualls,C.P. 2009. Cross-species amplification of emydid microsatellite loci in three Graptemys species and their utility as a conservation tool.Herpetological Review40:3237.
  • Shaffer, H.B., Gidisx, M., Mccartney-Melstad, E., Neal, K.M., Oyamaguchi, H.M., Tellez, M., and Toffelmier,E.M. 2015. Conservation genetics and genomics of amphibians and reptiles.Annual Review of Animal Biosciences3:113138.
  • Turtle Taxonomy Working Group [ Rhodin,A.G.J.,Iverson,J.B.,Bour,R.,Fritz,U.,Georges,A.,Shaffer,H.B., and Van Dijk,P.P. ]. 2017. Turtles of the world: annotated checklist and atlas of taxonomy, synonymy, distribution, and conservation status. Eighth edition.
    Independent Publisher
    .
  • Us Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1987. Determination of threatened status for the flattened musk turtle (Sternotherus depressus).Federal Register52:2241822430.
Copyright: © 2020 Chelonian Research Foundation 2020

Contributor Notes

Corresponding author

Handling Editor: Luca Luiselli

Received: 22 Oct 2020
Accepted: 28 Feb 2020
  • Download PDF