plants
Article
Intragenomic Polymorphism of the ITS 1 Region of
35S rRNA Gene in the Group of Grasses with
Two-Chromosome Species: Different Genome
Composition in Closely Related Zingeria Species
Alexander V. Rodionov 1,2 , Alexander A. Gnutikov 3 , Nikolai N. Nosov 1 , Eduard M. Machs 1 ,
Yulia V. Mikhaylova 1 , Victoria S. Shneyer 1, * and Elizaveta O. Punina 1
1
2
3
*
Laboratory of Biosystematics and Cytology, Komarov Botanical Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences,
197376 St. Petersburg, Russia; avrodionov@binran.ru (A.V.R.); NNosov@binran.ru (N.N.N.);
emachs@binran.ru (E.M.M.); YMikhaylova@binran.ru (Y.V.M.); EPunina@binran.ru (E.O.P.)
Biological Faculty, St. Petersburg State University, 199034 St. Petersburg, Russia
Department of Genetic Resources of Oat, Barley, Rye, N.I. Vavilov Institute of Plant Genetic Resources (VIR),
190000 St. Petersburg, Russia; a.gnutikov@vir.nw.ru
Correspondence: shneyer@binran.ru
Received: 13 October 2020; Accepted: 22 November 2020; Published: 25 November 2020
Abstract: Zingeria (Poaceae) is a small genus that includes Z. biebersteiniana, a diploid species
with the lowest chromosome number known in plants (2n = 4) as well as hexaploid Z. kochii and
tetraploid Z. pisidica, and/or Z. trichopoda species. The relationship between these species and the other
low-chromosomes species Colpodium versicolor are unclear. To explore the intragenomic polymorphism
and genome composition of these species we examined the sequences of the internal transcribed
spacer 1 of the 35S rRNA gene via NGS approach. Our study revealed six groups of ribotypes in
Zingeria species. Their distribution confirmed the allopolyploid nature of Z. kochii, whose probable
ancestors were Colpodium versicolor and Z. pisidica. Z. pisidica has 98% of rDNA characteristic only for
this species, and about 0.3% of rDNA related to that of Z. biebersteiniana. We assume that hexaploid
Z. kochii is either an old allopolyploid or a homodiploid that has lost most of the rRNA genes obtained
from Z. biebersteiniana. In Z. trichopoda about 81% of rDNA is related to rDNA of Z. biebersteiniana
and 19% of rDNA is derived from Poa diaphora sensu lato. The composition of the ribotypes of the
two plants determined by a taxonomy specialist as Z. pisidica and Z. trichopoda is very different.
Two singleton species are proposed on this base with ribotypes as discriminative characters. So,
in all four studied Zingeria species, even if the morphological difference among the studied species
was modest, the genomic constitution was significantly different, which suggests that these are
allopolyploids that obtained genomes from different ancestors.
Keywords: taxonomy; evolutionary genomics; grasses; allopolyploidy; Zingeria
1. Introduction
Interspecific hybridization, often accompanied by the formation of allopolyploid genomes,
allows plants to bypass the prohibitions on sympatric speciation known from the synthetic theory of
evolution [1,2]. Various genetic processes, such as the loss of all or part of the chromosomes of one of
the parents, the expansion of transposons, translocations and transpositions, and the loss of a part
of the genes of one or both parental genomes, take place in complicated allopolyploid genomes [3,4].
Interspecific hybridization creates unique opportunities for effective positive selection and can be
accompanied by saltation speciation [5,6].
Plants 2020, 9, 1647; doi:10.3390/plants9121647
www.mdpi.com/journal/plants
Plants 2020, 9, 1647
2 of 11
An astonishing example of the formation of alloploid genomes has been found in the small genus
of annual grasses Zingeria P.A. Smirn. One of the species has the lowest chromosome number in
angiosperms. The diploid species Zingeria biebersteiniana (Claus) P.A. Smirn. has only four chromosomes
(2n = 2x = 4) [7]. Two tetraploid species Z. pisidica (Boiss.) Tutin and Z. trichopoda (Boiss.) P.A. Smirn.
have uncertain taxonomic status. Some taxonomists regard them as conspecific, while others believe
that there are two separate species. Their ranges of distribution overlap. Z. trichopoda occurs in
Caucasus, Minor Asia, Syria, Iran, and Iraq; Z. pisidica occurs in Caucasus, Minor Asia, and Romania.
Several distinguishing morphological characters are described [8], but both species are rather rare,
and collected samples are few in number. The sample of tetraploid Zingeria collected in Jermuk,
Armenia, has been shown to be allopolyploid [9]. One its subgenome is related to Z. biebersteiniana,
and the other, of unknown origin [9]. Hexaploid Z. kochii (Mez) Tzvelev, an endemic species from
Armenia is also allopolyploid with karyotype 2n = 12 [10,11]. Its first subgenome comes from
Z. biebersteiniana, the second subgenome derived from Colpodium versicolor (Steven) Schmalh., and the
third subgenome is not identified [11].
Colpodium versicolor is another grass species that has only four chromosomes in its karyotype [12–16].
Based on morphological characters it is suggested that C. versicolor is closely related to Z. biebersteiniana [10].
Despite this, Zingeria and Colpodium were included in the separate tribes Aveneae and Poeae,
respectively [17]. Molecular phylogenetic studies have proven that Zingeria and Colpodium are
closely related genera within the subtribe Coleanthinae of tribe Poeae [11,18–22]. It was shown that
another closely related to Zingeria taxon is Catabrosella araratica (Lipsky) Tzvelev [9,11,18–20].
The genus Zingeria represents a polyploid series including the species with the lowest chromosome
number in angiosperms (and rather large chromosomes convenient for cytogenetic studies), and can
serve as a good model for speciation and evolution studies, so it is important to understand relationships
in this group.
The main approach which allows to determine origin of alloploids is cytogenetic experiments,
first of all GISH [9,11]. Cytogenetic studies require viable seeds, which are often not easily accessible,
especially the seed of rare and endemic plants like Zingeria species. The new sequencing approach
(NGS—next-generation sequencing) opens the opportunity to find intragenomic polymorphism
resulting from interspecific hybridization, using a small amount of herbarium material. The analysis
of rDNA intragenomic polymorphism reveals the hybrid origin of species in Cypripedium [23] and
Sparganium [24]. There are hundreds to thousands tandem copies of rRNA genes in each plant genome,
each copy of rDNA operon includes 5′ ETS (external transcribed spacer), 18S rRNA gene, ITS1 (internal
transcribed spacer), 5.8S rRNA gene, ITS2, 25S rRNA gene, and 3′ ETS [25]. On rDNA RNA polymerase
I transcribes 35S pre-rRNA, which is cleaved by nucleases into 18S, 5.8S, and 25S rRNAs [25]. 35S rDNA
loci are an important evolutional marker, and the number of rDNA loci shows significant positive
correlation with ploidy level [26]. The most informative regions of 35S rDNA are ITS1 and ITS2 because
they have the highest level of intragenomic diversity [27].
The main aim of this work is to investigate genomic origin and subgenomic composition of
Zingeria species and closely related Catabrosella araratica and Colpodium versicolor via the targeted NGS
of the ITS1 region of 35S rDNA. Herbarium vouchers of Z. trichopoda and Z. pisidica used for the
analyses were identified by agrostologist Tzvelev and completely met the morphological criteria of
this species.
2. Results
The fragments of 35S rDNA including the 3′ -end of 18S rRNA gene, the complete sequence of ITS1
region, and the 5′ -end of 5.8S rRNA gene were obtained for six closely related species: four Zingeria
species, Colpodium versicolor, and Catabrosella araratica. The total amount of Illumina reads was ca. 20,000
for each species. The length of processed and aligned fragments was 310 bp. We revealed eight ITS1
ribotypes. Six ribotypes were shared between Zingeria and Colpodium species and two ribotypes were
found in studied Catabrosella species.
Plants 2020, 9, 1647
3 of 11
Ribotype A (Figures 1 and 2) included intragenomic variants of ITS1 from Catabrosella araratica
(Lipsky) Tzvelev. This ribotype included all sequences of Catabrosella araratica from GenBank and formed
a separated network, not connected with ribotypes of Zingeria and Colpodium (Figure 1). Other ITS
sequences of C. variegata as well as C. subornata formed another network and belong to ribotype V
(Figure 1).
Figure 1. System of ITS1 ribotypes of Zingeria, Colpodium versicolor, and Catabrosella. The filled circles
represent intragenomic ribotypes (A, B, C, D, K, P, T, and V), obtained via next-generation sequencing
(NGS). The open circles represent sequences from GenBank.
Ribotypes B, C, T, K, and P joined into one network (Figure 1). Ribotype B was characteristic for
Z. biebersteiniana. Minor quantity (0.2%) of ribotype B was found in the Z. pisidica genome (Figure 1).
Ribotype C was found in Colpodium versicolor, whose ITS1 intragenomic variants consisted of 98%
of ribotype C. This ribotype was closely related to sequences of Colpodium hedbergii and Colpodium
chionogeiton. Besides Colpodium versicolor ribotype C was presented in the Z. kochii genome. The genome
of Z. kochii had about 40% of ITS1 variants belonging to the ribotype C (Figures 1 and 2). Ribotype K
consisted of ITS sequences from cloned sequenced of Z. kochii (FJ1699914, FJ169915 and FJ169916, [11])
and one rare variant of ITS1, obtained from Z. kochii via NGS. Ribotype P included about 99% of
intragenomic ITS1 variants of Z. pisidica (Figure 1). Also, this ribotype was found in Z. kochii and
Z. trichopoda (two sequences from GenBank).
Two different ribotypes, T and D, were found in the allopolyploid Z. trichopoda genome. There were
about 81% of the ribotype T and 18% of the ribotype D in Z. trichopoda. The ribotype T is a closely
related ribotype to a derivate of ribotype B obtained from Z. biebersteiniana HE802184 [28]. Surprisingly,
our NGS analysis revealed that the second ribotype of Z. trichopoda was distant from both the ribotype
B of Z. biebersteiniana and the ribotype C of Colpodium s. str. The sequences of this ribotype D were
related to Poa diaphora (Figures 1 and 2). We found the D ribotype only in Z. trichopoda and did not see
any sign of it in the genomes of other Zingeria species, Colpodium versicolor or Catabrosella araratica.
Plants 2020, 9, 1647
4 of 11
Figure 2. Cladogram and polymorphic nucleotides of ITS1 ribotypes of Zingeria, Colpodium versicolor,
and Catabrosella. The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the
bootstrap (BS) test are shown next to the branches. The intragenomic ribotypes obtained via NGS are
in bold, followed by percentage of the ribotype in the genome and total number of corresponding reads
in the brackets.
All main ribotypes could be identified on the phylogenetic tree (Figure 2). All sequences of
Zingeria fell within the same clade except for the second subgenome of Z. trichopoda that was related
to P. diaphora group (=genus Eremopoa). All ITS1 reads of Z. biebersteiniana and 81% ITS1 reads of
Z. trichopoda formed a single clade with ITS-sequences of Z. biebersteiniana from GenBank (BS=64).
Z. trichopoda had 17–18% of ITS1 sequences closely related (BS=97 and 86) to ITS1 sequences of the
P. diaphora aggregate species. The phylogenetic tree of the ITS1 sequences (Figure 2) was in congruence
with the network data (Figure 3).
Plants 2020, 9, 1647
5 of 11
Figure 3. Network among ITS1 ribotypes of grasses from the Zingeria, Colpodium, and Catabrosella
genera, revealed by the split decomposition algorithm. Intragenomic ITS ribotypes obtained via NGS
are underlined and followed by percentage of the ribotype in genome. Sequences from GenBank
followed by accession number. Groups of ribotypes are labeled by capital letters A, B, C, D, K, P, T,
and V.
The phylogenetic tree (Figure 2) was based on the evolution models, implying a gradual accumulation
of mutations followed by dichotomous branching of phylogenetic trees. However, the evolutionary
scenarios of the allopolyploid plants imply events of backcrossing. Therefore, we used the Neighbor-net
algorithm implemented in the program SplitsTree4, suggested for the reconstruction of reticulate
evolution [29]. The Neighbor-net algorithm builds a network called a split graph. The split graph
(Figure 3) shows several possible ways of grouping DNA sequences with varying degrees of probability,
known as “splits”, and reflects the presence of homoplasy in the data. The reticulate network provides a
picture of evolution of the rRNA genes of the two-chromosome grasses. In the network, the edges
represent lineages of descent or reticulate events such as hybridization, conversion or crossing-over.
All nodes of the network correspond to hypothetical ancestors, whether the product of speciation and
mutation, or hybridization or recombination events [29]. On the network there were eight ribotypes
among the studied species. Ribotypes P and B were closely related, and ribotype K seems to be a result
of recombination between ribotypes B and C (Figure 3).
3. Discussion
NGS allow us to reveal intragenomic polymorphism in Zingeria polyploid species and clarify the
relationships between Zingeria, Colpodium versicolor and Catabrosella araratica. A species C. araratica,
having ribotype A, was originally described as C. araratica Lipsky, type in LE (BIN RAS SPb.) “On the
northern slope of Mount Bolshoi Ararat, 8. VII 1893b V. Lipsky”. Isotype at LE. Later, Woronov proposed
to attribute this species to the genus Colpodium sensu lato [30], then Tzvelev [31], reforming Colpodium,
assigned this species to a special section in the genus Catabrosella, C. araratica, sect. Nevskia. Later,
we showed that this species is only distantly related to other species of the genus Catabrosella and differs
from it in morphology, and therefore deserves to be separated into a new genus Nevskia [19,20]. Recently,
Tkach et al. came to a similar conclusion, proposing a new generic and specific name Hyalopodium
araraticum (Lipsky) Röser & Tkach [32]. If the determination of the number of chromosomes in this
species 2n = 42 [33] is correct, it seems possible that Catabrosella araratica is an “old” hexaploid, in which
rDNA exhibit low level of intragenomic polymorphism (Figure 1), and its rDNA are isogenized.
Plants 2020, 9, 1647
6 of 11
The reticulate evolution could be the reason for the very complicated relationship between species
in the genus Zingeria revealed by the obtained results. Several independent acts of interspecific
hybridization led to the emergence of Z. kochii and plants that were determined by Tzvelev as
Z. pisidica and Z. trichopoda. The hexaploid Z. kochii appears to have arisen relatively recently as the
result of hybridization between C. versicolor and Z. pisidica. Our observations of ITS1 intragenomic
polymorphism are in good agreement with the GISH results [11]. The origin of Z. pisidica remains
unclear—apparently, it is a diploid or an old allopolyploid, 99% of modern rDNA belongs to an
unknown ancestor from the Zingeria biebersteiniana circle of kinship (Figures 1 and 3).
Zingeria trichopoda has a completely different origin. What the differences are between Z. pisidica
and Z. trichopoda is not entirely clear. The species Agrostis pisidica (= Z. pisidica) was described by
Boissier based on plants collected by Colonel Tchihatcheff in Turkey (Anatolia) [34]. Samples of
Milium trichopodum (= Z. trichopoda) were collected in Syria [17,35]. The chromosomal numbers of
Zingeria specimens from Asia Minor are unknown.
First, tetraploid Zingeria was recorded in Romania [36]. Hackel was the first who has shown the
relationship of the species from Romania with one found in Russia, Agrostis biebersteiniana Claus
(= Z. biebersteiniana) and named it A. biebersteiniana Claus var. densior Hack., however, Grecescu believed that
it was an endemic species of the Romanian Plain, A. densior (Hack.) Grecescu [37]. Then Schischkin [38]
classified the Romanian samples as A. pisidica Boiss. (= Z. pisidica), a species described by Boissier [35]
from Anatolia (Turkey). Later, Chrtek [39] included A. densior in the genus Zingeria as Z. densior (Hack.)
Chrtek. Tutin [40] and modern Romanian botanists [41] believe that this species should be called
Z. pisidica (Boiss.) Tutin. Tzvelev, initially assuming that Z. pisidica and Z. trichopoda are synonyms,
considered the Romanian Zingeria to be Z. trichopoda (Boiss.) P.A. Smirn. [17]. According to Tzvelev [42]
and Gabrielian [8], these species differ in the structure of panicles—in Z. trichopoda, they are on average
larger, more spreading, with thinner branches and longer spikelets (5–13 mm) in comparison with
shorter ones (0.7–5 mm) in Z. pisidica.
It was shown that Zingeria samples collected in Georgia and in the Sisian and Jermuk regions
of Armenia, morphologically identified as Z. trichopoda and/or Z. pisidica, have 2n = 8 [9–13,20,44,45].
Z. pisidica and/or Z. trichopoda, both of these species or one of them, have been reported as tetraploid
in “Grasses of U.S.S.R.” [17], “Flora Europaea” [40], “Flora of the Caucasus” [42,45], and “Grasses of
Russia” [46]. However, few diploid Zingeria sp. samples, 2n = 4, morphologically indistinguishable
from the tetraploid race of Z. trichopoda/Z. pisidica were collected in the Sisian region of Armenia and in
Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic of Azerbaijan [12,43].
It was shown by GISH that one of subgenomes of the tetraploid Zingeria collected in Jermuk,
Armenia, is related to Z. biebersteiniana, and the other is of unknown origin designated as Z.trichopoda [9].
Later the authors note [11] that the material specified as Z. trichopoda in cytogenetic studies [7,9,14]
according more recent classifications [42,45] belongs to Z. pisidica. Formely Z. pisidica had been regarded
as part of Z. trichopoda [17], but in later taxonomical treatments Tzvelev [42,45] accepts both Z. trichopoda
and Z. pisidica at species rank.
In the genome of Z. trichopoda we see two ribotypes of completely different origins: there are
about 81% of the ribotype T and 18% of the ribotype D. The ribotype T was inherited from a species
from the kinship circle of two-chromosomal grasses, but the ribotype D could only originate from a
species of Eremopoa (= the Poa diaphora aggregate). How this could have happened remains unclear,
since Poa diaphora has the basic number of chromosomes x = 7. Poa diaphora Trin., known for a long time
as Eremopoa altaica (Trin.) Roshev., was a type species of the genus Eremopoa Roshev. [47]. It was shown
that the divergence of species in the genus is associated with polyploidy: Eremopoa oxiglumis (Boiss.)
Roshev. and E. persica (Trin.) Roshev. are diploids (2n = 14) [43,48–53]. Eremopoa songarica (Schrenk)
Roshev. is a species of tetraploid origin (2n = 28) [43,49–53], and E. altaica (Trin.) Roshev. is hexaploid
(2n = 42) [43,49,52,53]. After Eremopoa was described, most authors accepted the genus [17,40,46,54,55],
however, a comparison of chloroplast trnT-trnL-trnF and nuclear ITS-sequences showed that Eremopoa
lies among Poa species on the phylogenetic tree [21,22,56–60]. To date, P. diaphora has been joined with
Plants 2020, 9, 1647
7 of 11
the species of genus Lindbergia Lehm. ex Link & Otto and P. speluncarum J.R.Edm. as Poa of subgenus
Pseudopoa [57].
Until now we have known only of one case where species with radically different karyotypes have
given viable offspring; these are the hybrids of two deer species, the Indian muntjac Muntiacus munjak
vaginalis Zimmermann 1780 (2n = 6♂and 7♂) and the Reeves’ muntjac M. reevesii Ogilby 1839 (2n = 46).
These hybrids have 2n = 26 for the female and 2n = 27 for the male and are likely to be sterile [61–63].
It can be assumed that hybrids between Poa diaphora aggr. (x = 7) and another hypothetical ancestor of
Z. trichopoda having x = 2 could be reproduced in the first generations only vegetatively, at this time
there was a crossing over or conversion, or translocation with the transfer of ribotype D rDNA to the
chromosomes of the bichromosomal genome. Then, gradually or saltationally, there was a loss of all
Poa chromosomes and a duplication of low-chromosome-number-ancestor chromosomes, as often
happens in distant hybrids [3,4,64].
In 1984, Löwe proposed a genomic criterion for separating species [65]. Here, we show that
even morphologically slightly different plants from the same genus can have different sets of rDNAs,
which suggests that these are allopolyploids with different genomic constitutions and different ancestors.
Differences in the organization of genomes between the samples determined in the Herbarium
LE as Z. trichopoda and Z. pisidica are very significant. Along with this the relationship between the
samples from the Transcaucasian flora, described initially as Z. trichopoda [12,17,43], and later as two
species Zingeria trichopoda and Z. pisidica [42,45,46] are very confusing and vague. For these reasons,
we would suggest to describe the plants studied by us as two new singleton species based on a new
uniquely determined criterion: a fundamental difference in the composition of their ribotypes.
Zingeria tzvelevii Rodionov, Gnutikov, Nosov-sp. nov Type: Z. pisidica: Georgia: Samtskhe– Javakheti
region (mkhare), Ninotsminda District, the coast of Hanchali lake. 12-Jul-1960. Coll. S. K. Cherepanov, N.
N. Tzvelev. Det. N. N. Tzvelev; diploid or tetraploid species, ribotype P, ancestor of Z. kochii.
Zingeria probatovae Rodionov, Gnutikov, Nosov-sp. nov Type: Z. trichopoda: Georgia: Samtskhe–
Javakheti region (mkhare), Borjomi District, near of the Tabithuri Lake. 27-Jun-1980. Coll. T. Popova, Y.
Menitzkiy. Det. N. N. Tzvelev; 2n = 8, ribotypes T and D, whose rDNA contains Zingeria rDNA and
Poa diaphora rDNA.
Singleton species are very common in biodiversity samples, and their discovery is very important [66].
We hope this will further help to untangle the complexities of the case of the Zingeria spp. of Caucasus.
4. Materials and Methods
The following plant materials were used in this study: Z. biebersteiniana (Rakhinka settlement,
Sredneakhtubinsky District, Volgograd Oblast, Russia, N 49.00972◦ , E 44.91166◦ , collected on
21 June 2016 by E. Punina and A. Rodionov); Z. kochii (the left riverside of the Akhuryan River,
Gyumri, Shirak, Armenia, collected on 7 July 1960 by S. K. Cherepanov and N. N. Tzvelev, identified by
N. N. Tzvelev); Z. pisidica (the coast of lake Hanchali, Ninotsminda District, Samtskhe–Javakheti,
Georgia, collected on 12 July 1960 by S. K. Cherepanov and N. N. Tzvelev, identified by N. N. Tzvelev);
Z. trichopoda (lake Tabithuri, Borjomi, Samtskhe–Javakheti, Georgia, collected 27 July 1980 by T. Popova
and Y. Menitzkiy, identified by N. N. Tzvelev); Catabrosella araratica (Aragats Mount, Aragatsotn,
Armenia, 3300 m alt., collected by E. Gabrielyan, identified by A. Ghukasyan); Colpodium versicolor
(the source of the Nazylykol River, Teberda Nature Reserve, Karachay-Cherkessia, Russia, 2500 m alt.,
collected on 21 August 2003 by E. Punina, A. Rodionov, S. Bondarenko, and Y. Punin, identified by
N. N. Tzvelev). All voucher specimens were deposited in the Herbarium of the Komarov Botanical
Institute in St. Petersburg, Russia (LE).
The total genomic DNA was extracted from the herbarium material by the CTAB method [67]
with small modifications or using Qiagen DNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Inc., Valencia, CA, USA).
The DNA extraction was done in The Core Facilities Center “Cell and Molecular Technologies in Plant
Science” at the Komarov Botanical Institute RAS (St. Petersburg, Russia).
Plants 2020, 9, 1647
8 of 11
Library preparation and Illumina MiSeq sequencing were performed at Center of Collective Usage
of All-Russia Institute for Agricultural Microbiology. Marker sequences (3′ part of 28S rRNA gene,
complete sequences of ITS1 and 5′ part of 5.8S rRNA gene) were amplified using primers ITS1P [68] and
ITS2 [69]. The raw sequencing data were processed using software tools FastQC [70], Trimmomatic [71]
and Fastq-join [72]. Plant ribotypes were sorted by frequency and filtered from fungi and bacteria using
BLAST [73]. Selected ribotypes we aligned by MUSCLE algorithm [74] in MEGA 7.0 [75]. In addition to
ribotype data we included in the analysis sequences from GenBank for Zingeria, Colpodium, Catabrosella,
Poa diaphora, and Poa persica (Table S1).
We estimated the relationships between ribotypes using the statistical parsimony method [76]
implemented in the software TCS 1.21 [77]. This method allows us to collapse the sequences into
haplotypes, calculates an absolute distance matrix for all pairwise comparisons of haplotypes and
parsimony connection limit, and constructs haplotype networks. For the analysis, we chose the
e 95% cut-off for the probabilities of parsimony for mutational steps. The obtained network was
visualized in TCSBU [78,79] (https://cibio.up.pt/software/tcsBU/). Neighbor-net splits decomposition
method implemented in SplitsTree 4 [29] was used to check the relative interaction between ribotypes.
This method is proposed for the study of network evolution of genomes [29,80]. The maximum
likelihood (ML) phylogenetic analysis was performed with MEGA 7.0 using the Kimura-2 substitution
model, which was chosen using BIC method. Bootstrap analysis was performed with 1000 replicates.
Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at http://www.mdpi.com/2223-7747/9/12/1647/s1,
Table S1: Taxon names, GenBank accession numbers and sources of the ITS sequences used in this study.
Author Contributions: A.V.R., A.A.G., N.N.N. and E.O.P. conceived and designed the experiments; A.V.R., E.O.P.,
A.A.G., & N.N.N. collected plant material; A.A.G., N.N.N., & E.M.M. performed Sanger and NGS sequensing,
N.N.N., A.A.G., E.M.M., Y.V.M. made a phylogenetic analysis. N.N.N., A.A.G., A.V.R. wrote the draft of the
manuscript. A.V.R., V.S.S., Y.V.M. review & editing the final version of manuscript. All authors have read and
agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: The research was supported by Russian Foundation for Basic Research (RFBR) Grants # 17-00-00337,
# 18-04-01040 and partially by SPbSU Grant 60256916 (bioinformatics and manuscript preparation).
Acknowledgments: The authors thank Elena Krapivskaja for assistance in DNA sequencing. The research was
done using equipment of The Core Facilities Center “Cell and Molecular Technologies in Plant Science” of the
Komarov Botanical Institute RAS and Molecular Biology Center of the All-Russia Institute for Agricultural
Microbiology (St. Petersburg, Russia).
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the
study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to
publish the results.
References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Dobzhansky, T. Genetics and the Origin of Species; Eldredge, N., Gould, S.J., Eds.; Columbia Univ. Press:
New York, NY, USA, 1937.
Stebbins, G.L. Polyploidy, hybridization, and the invasion of new habitats. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 1985, 72,
824–832. [CrossRef]
Soltis, P.S.; Marchant, D.B.; Van de Peer, Y.; Soltis, D.E. Polyploidy and genome evolution in plants. Curr. Opin.
Genet. Dev. 2015, 35, 119–125. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Rodionov, A.V.; Amosova, A.V.; Belyakov, E.A.; Zhurbenko, P.M.; Mikhailova, Y.V.; Punina, E.O.; Shneyer, V.S.;
Loskutov, I.G.; Muravenko, O.V. Genetic Consequences of Interspecific Hybridization, Its Role in Speciation
and Phenotypic Diversity of Plants. Russ. J. Genet. 2019, 55, 278–294. [CrossRef]
Schranz, M.E.; Mohammadin, S.; Edger, P.P. Ancient whole genome duplications, novelty and diversification:
The WGD Radiation Lag-Time Model. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2012, 15, 147–153. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Tank, D.C.; Eastman, J.M.; Pennell, M.W.; Soltis, P.S.; Soltis, D.E.; Hinchliff, C.E.; Brown, J.W.; Sessa, E.B.;
Harmon, L.J. Nested radiations and the pulse of angiosperm diversification: Increased diversification rates
often follow whole genome duplications. New Phytol. 2015, 207, 454–467. [CrossRef]
Tzvelev, N.N.; Zhukova, P.G. On the minimal main chromosome number in the family Poaceae. Bot. Zhurn.
1974, 59, 265–269. (In Russian)
Plants 2020, 9, 1647
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
9 of 11
Gabrielian, E. Zingeria P.A. Smirn. In Flora of Armenia.11. Poaceae; Takhtadjan, A.L., Ed.; A.R.G. Gartner Verlag
KG: Ruggell, Liechtenstein, 2009; pp. 294–298. (In Russian)
Kotseruba, V.; Gernand, D.; Meister, A.; Houben, A. Uniparental loss of ribosomal DNA in the allotetraploid
grass Zingeria trichopoda (2 n = 8). Genome 2003, 46, 156–163. [CrossRef]
Tzvelev, N.N.; Bolkhovskikh, Z.V. On the genus Zingeria P. Smirn. and the closely allied genera of Gramineae
(a karyosystematic study). Bot. Zhurn. 1965, 50, 1317–1320. (In Russian)
Kotseruba, V.; Pistrick, K.; Blattner, F.R.; Kumke, K.; Weiss, O.; Rutten, T.; Fuchs, J.; Endo, T.; Nasuda, S.;
Ghukasyan, A.; et al. The evolution of the hexaploid grass Zingeria kochii (Mez) Tzvel. (2n = 12) was
accompanied by complex hybridization and uniparental loss of ribosomal DNA. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2010,
56, 146–155. [CrossRef]
Sokolovskaya, A.P.; Probatova, N.S. On the least chromosome number (2n = 4) of Colpodium versicolor (Stev.)
Woronow (Poaceae). Bot. Zhurn. 1977, 62, 241–245. (In Russian)
Davlianidze, M.T. Chromosome numbers in the representatives of the flora from Georgia. Bot. Zhurn. 1985,
70, 698–700. (In Russian)
Kotseruba, V.; Pistrick, K.; Gernand, D.; Meister, A.; Ghukasyan, A.; Gabrielyan, I.; Houben, A.
Characterisation of the low-chromosome number grass Colpodium versicolor (Stev.) Schmalh. (2n = 4)
by molecular cytogenetics. Caryologia 2005, 58, 241–245. [CrossRef]
Rodionov, A.V.; Punina, E.O.; Dobroradova, M.A.; Tyupa, N.B.; Nosov, N.N. Caryological study of the
grasses (Poaceae): Chromosome numbers of some Aveneae, Poeae, Phalarideae, Phleeae, Bromeae, Triticeae.
Bot. Zhurn. 2006, 91, 615–627. (In Russian)
Gnutikov, A.A.; Nosov, N.N.; Rodionov, A.V. IAPT chromosome data 32/7. (K. Marhold & J. Kučera (eds.), & al.
IAPT chromosome data 32). Taxon 2020, 69, 1129–1130. [CrossRef]
Tzvelev, N.N. Grasses of the USSR; Nauka: Leningrad, Russia, 1976; ISBN 545827301X, ISBN 9785458273015.
(In Russian)
Rodionov, A.V.; Kim, E.S.; Punina, E.O.; Machs, E.M.; Tyupa, N.B.; Nosov, N.N. Evolution of chromosome
numbers in the tribes Aveneae and Poeae inferred from the comparative analysis of the internal transcribed
spacers ITS1 and ITS2 of nuclear 45S rRNA genes. Bot. Zhurn. 2007, 92, 57–71. (In Russian)
Rodionov, A.V.; Kim, E.S.; Nosov, N.N.; Raiko, M.P.; Machs, E.M.; Punina, E.O. Molecular phylogenetic study
of the genus Colpodium sensu lato (Poaceae: Poeae). Ecol. Genet. 2008, 6, 34–46. [CrossRef]
Kim, E.S.; Bolsheva, N.L.; Samatadze, T.E.; Nosov, N.N.; Nosova, I.V.; Zelenin, A.V.; Punina, E.O.;
Muravenko, O.V.; Rodionov, A.V. The unique genome of two-chromosome grasses Zingeria and Colpodium,
its origin, and evolution. Russ. J. Genet. 2009, 45, 1329. [CrossRef]
Soreng, R.J.; Peterson, P.M.; Romaschenko, K.; Davidse, G.; Zuloaga, F.O.; Judziewicz, E.J.; Filgueiras, T.S.;
Davis, J.I.; Morrone, O. A worldwide phylogenetic classification of the Poaceae (Gramineae). J. Syst. Evol.
2015, 53, 117–137. [CrossRef]
Soreng, R.J.; Peterson, P.M.; Romaschenko, K.; Davidse, G.; Teisher, J.K.; Clark, L.G.; Barberá, P.; Gillespie, L.J.;
Zuloaga, F.O. A worldwide phylogenetic classification of the Poaceae (Gramineae) II: An update and a
comparison of two 2015 classifications. J. Syst. Evol. 2017, 55, 259–290. [CrossRef]
Andronova, E.V.; Machs, E.M.; Filippov, E.G.; Raiko, M.P.; Lee, Y.-I.; Averyanov, L.V. Phylogeography of the
genus Cypripedium (Orchidaceae) taxa in Russia. Bot. Zhurn. 2017, 102, 1027–1059. (In Russian)
Belyakov, E.A.; Machs, E.M.; Mikhailova, Y.V.; Rodionov, A.V. The study of hybridization processes within
genus Sparganium L. subgenus Xanthosparganium Holmb. Based on data of next generation sequencing
(NGS). Ecol. Genet. 2019, 17, 27–35. [CrossRef]
Sáez-Vásquez, J.; Delseny, M. Ribosome biogenesis in plants: From functional 45S ribosomal DNA
organization to ribosome assembly factors. Plant Cell 2019, 31, 1945–1967. [CrossRef]
Garcia, S.; Kovařík, A.; Leitch, A.R.; Garnatje, T. Cytogenetic features of rRNA genes across land plants:
Analysis of the Plant rDNA database. Plant J. 2017, 89, 1020–1030. [CrossRef]
Rosato, M.; Kovařík, A.; Garilleti, R.; Rosselló, J.A. Conserved organisation of 45S rDNA sites and rDNA
gene copy number among major clades of early land plants. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, 1–18. [CrossRef]
Hoffmann, M.H.; Schneider, J.; Hase, P.; Roser, M. Rapid and recent world-wide diversification of bluegrasses
(Poa, Poaceae) and related genera. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, E60061. [CrossRef]
Huson, D.H.; Bryant, D. Application of phylogenetic networks in evolutionary studies. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2006,
23, 254–267. [CrossRef]
Plants 2020, 9, 1647
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
10 of 11
Fomin, A.; Woronov, Y. Keys to Plants of the Caucasus and Crimea; Tipographiya, K.G., Ed.; Kozlovskago: Tiflis,
Georgia, 1909. (In Russian)
Tzvelev, N.N. On the genus Colpodium Trin. Novit. Syst. Pl. Vasc. 1964, 1, 5–19. (In Russian)
Tkach, N.; Schneider, J.; Döring, E.; Wölk, A.; Hochbach, A.; Nissen, J.; Winterfeld, G.; Meyer, S.; Gabriel, J.;
Hoffmann, M.H.; et al. Phylogenetic lineages and the role of hybridization as driving force of evolution in
grass supertribe Poodae. Taxon 2020, 69, 234–277. [CrossRef]
Pogosyan, A.I.; Narinyan, S.G.; Voskanyan, V.E. Towards karyological and geographical study of some
edificators in upper part of alpine zone of Aragats Montains. Biol. Zh. Arm. 1972, 25, 15–22. (In Russian)
Boissier, E. Plantes nouvelles recueillies par M. P. de Tchihatcheff, en Asie mineure, et décrites pendant
l’année. Ann. des Sci. Nat. Bot. 1854, 4, 243–255.
Boissier, E. Diagnoses Plantarum Orientalium Novarum. N.o 13; Typis Henrici Wolfrath: Neocomi, 1854.
Available online: https://bibdigital.rjb.csic.es/records/item/10713-diagnoses-plantarum-orientalium-novarum-nordm-13?offset=9 (accessed on 20 November 2019).
Björkman, S.O. Zingeria biebersteiniana (Claus) P. Smirn—One more grass species with the chromosome
number 2n = 8. Sven. Bot. Tidskr. 1956, 50, 513–516.
Grecescu, D. Conspectul Florei Romaniei; Tipogr. Dreptatea: Bucureşti, Romania, 1898.
Schischkin, B. Agrostis. In Flora of the U.S.S.R., vol. 2 Gramineae Juss; Komarov, V.L., Ed.; Akademiya Nauk
SSSR: Leningrad, Russia, 1934; pp. 170–188. (In Russian)
Chrtek, J. Bemerkungen zur Gattung Zingeria P. Smirn. Novit. Bot. Delect. Seminum Horti Bot. Univ.
Carol. Prag. 1963, 1, 1–3.
Tutin, T.G. Gramineae. In Flora Europaea Vol. 5; Tutin, T.G., Heywood, V.H., Burges, N.A., Valentine, D.H.,
Walters, S.M., Webb, D.A., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1980; pp. 118–267;
ISBN 9780521153706.
Dihoru, G.; Boruz, V. Species to the limit of specific spreading area in Romania: Zingeria pisidica (Boiss.) Tutin.
Oltenia. Stud. şi comunicări. Ştiinţele Nat. 2013, 29, 137–144.
Tzvelev, N.N. Poaceae. In Konspekt Flory Kavkaza 2: Magnoliophyta: Liliopsida; Takhtadjan, A.L., Ed.; Saint Petersburg
University: Saint Petersburg, Russia, 2006; pp. 248–378. ISBN 5-288-04040-0. (In Russian)
Sokolovskaya, A.P.; Probatova, N.S. Chromosome numbers of some grasses (Poaceae) of the U.S.S.R. flora.
III. Bot. Zhurn. 1979, 64, 1245–1258. (In Russian)
Ghukasyan, A.G. Speciation in genus Zingeria P. A. Smirn. (Poaceae) of the Armenian Flora. Takhtajania 2011,
1, 142–144. (In Russian)
Tzvelev, N.N. Some notes on the grasses (Poaceae) of the Caucasus. Bot. Zhurn. 1993, 78, 83–95. (In Russian)
Tzvelev, N.N.; Probatova, N.S. Grasses of Russia; KMK: Moscow, Russia, 2019; ISBN 978-5-907213-41-8. (In Russian)
Roshevitz, R.U. Eremopoa. In Flora of the U.S.S.R., Vol. 2 Gramineae Juss; Komarov, L.V., Ed.; Akademiya Nauk
SSSR: Leningrad, Russia, 1934; pp. 429–432. (In Russian)
Grif, V.G. New chromosome numbers of plants. Bot. Zhurn. 1965, 50, 1133–1135. (In Russian)
Tzvelev, N.N.; Grif, V.G. Karyosystematic study of the genus Eremopoa Roshev. (Gramineae). Bot. Zhurn.
1965, 50, 1457–1460. (In Russian)
Stoeva, M.P. Chromosome Number Reports LXXXV. Taxon 1984, 33, 756–760.
Bailey, J.P.; Stace, C.A. Chromosome Data 1. Int. Organ. Plant Biosyst. Newsl. 1989, 13, 16.
Punina, E.O.; Myakoshina, Y.A.; Dobryakova, K.S.; Nosov, N.N.; Rodionov, A.V. Karyological study of the
grasses (Poaceae) of Altai and Altai Krai. Turczaninowia 2013, 16, 127–133. (In Russian)
Gnutikov, A.A.; Myakoshina, Y.A.; Punina, E.O.; Rodionov, A.V. A karyological study of grasses (Poaceae) of
Altai. II. Turczaninowia 2017, 20, 16–22. (In Russian) [CrossRef]
Clayton, W.D.; Renvoize, S.A. Genera Graminum. Grasses of the World. Kew Bull. Addit. Ser. 1986, 13, 1–389.
Soreng, R.J. Eremopoa Roshev. Contr. U. S. Natl. Herb. 2003, 48, 310–311.
Gillespie, L.J.; Archambault, A.; Soreng, R.J. Phylogeny of Poa (Poaceae) based on trnT-trnF sequence data:
Major clades and basal relationships. Aliso 2007, 23, 420–434. [CrossRef]
Gillespie, L.J.; Soreng, R.J.; Cabi, E.; Amiri, N. Phylogeny and taxonomic synopsis of Poa subgenus Pseudopoa
(including Eremopoa and Lindbergella) (Poaceae, Poeae, Poinae). PhytoKeys 2018, 111, 69. [CrossRef]
Plants 2020, 9, 1647
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
11 of 11
Soreng, R.J.; Bull, R.D.; Gillespie, L.J. Phylogeny and Reticulation in Poa Based on Plastid trnTLF and nrITS
Sequences with Attention to Diploids. In Diversity, Phylogeny and Evolution of Monocotyledons; Seberg, O.,
Petersen, G., Barfod, A.S., Davis, J.I., Eds.; Aarhus University Press: Aarhus, Denmark, 2010; pp. 619–644.
ISBN 9788779343986.
Nosov, N.N.; Punina, E.O.; Machs, E.M.; Rodionov, A.V. Interspecies hybridization in the origin of plant
species: Cases in the genus Poa sensu lato. Biol. Bull. Rev. 2015, 5, 366–382. [CrossRef]
Cabi, E.; Soreng, R.J.; Gillespie, L.J. Taxonomy of Poa jubata and a new section of the genus (Poaceae).
Turk. J. Bot. 2017, 41, 405–415. [CrossRef]
Liming, S.; Yingying, Y.; Xingsheng, D. Comparative cytogenetic studies on the red muntjac, Chinese muntjac,
and their F1 hybrids. Cytogenet. Genome Res. 1980, 26, 22–27. [CrossRef]
Liming, S.; Pathak, S. Gametogenesis in a male Indian muntjac x Chinese muntjac hybrid. Cytogenet. Genome Res.
1981, 30, 152–156. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Chapman, D.I.; Chapman, N.G. The taxonomic status of feral muntjac deer (Muntiacus sp.) in England.
J. Nat. Hist. 1982, 16, 381–387. [CrossRef]
Wendel, J.F. The wondrous cycles of polyploidy in plants. Am. J. Bot. 2015, 102, 1753–1756. [CrossRef]
Löve, Á. Conspectus of the Triticeae. Feddes Repert. 1984, 95, 425–521. [CrossRef]
Lim, G.; Balke, S.; Meier, M.R. Determining species boundaries in a world full of rarity: Singletons,
species delimitation methods. Syst. Bot. 2012, 61, 165–169. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Doyle, J.J.; Doyle, J.L. A rapid DNA isolation procedure for small quantities of fresh leaf tissue. Phytochem. Bull.
1987, 19, 11–15.
Ridgway, K.; Duck, J.; Young, J.P. Identification of roots from grass swards using PCR-RFLP and FFLP of the
plastid trnL (UAA) intron. BMC Ecol. 2003, 3, 8. [CrossRef]
White, T.J.; Bruns, T.; Lee, S.; Taylor, J.W. Amplification and direct sequencing of fungal ribosomal RNA
genes for phylogenetics. In PCR Protocols: A Guide to Methods and Applications; Innis, M.A., Gelfand, D.H.,
Sninsky, J.J., White, T.J., Eds.; Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 1990; pp. 315–322. ISBN 008088671X.
Andrews, S. FastQC a Quality Control Tool for High Throughput Sequence Data. Available online:
http://www.bioinformatics.babraham.ac.uk/projects/fastqc/ (accessed on 8 November 2020).
Bolger, A.M.; Lohse, M.; Usadel, B. Trimmomatic: A flexible trimmer for Illumina sequence data. Bioinformatics
2014, 30, 2114–2120. [CrossRef]
Aronesty, E. Comparison of Sequencing Utility Programs. Open Bioinform. J. 2013, 7, 1–8. [CrossRef]
BLAST: Basic Local Alignment Search Tool. Available online: https://blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Blast.cgi
(accessed on 8 November 2020).
Edgar, R.C. MUSCLE: Multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high throughput. Nucleic Acids
Res. 2004, 32, 1792–1797. [CrossRef]
Kumar, S.; Stecher, G.; Tamura, K. MEGA7: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis version 7.0 for Bigger
Datasets. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2016, 33, 1870–1874. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Templeton, A.R.; Crandall, K.A.; Sing, C.F. A cladistic analysis of phenotypic associations with haplotypes
inferred from restriction endonuclease mapping and DNA sequence data. III. Cladogram estimation. Genetics
1992, 132, 619–633. [PubMed]
Clement, M.; Posada, D.; Crandall, K. A TCS: A computer program to estimate gene genealogies. Mol. Ecol.
2000, 9, 1657–1659. [CrossRef]
tcsBU. Available online: http://cibio.up.pt/software/tcsBU/ (accessed on 8 November 2020).
Múrias dos Santos, A.; Cabezas, M.P.; Tavares, A.I.; Xavier, R.; Branco, M. tcsBU: A tool to extend TCS
network layout and visualization. Bioinformatics 2016, 32, 627–628. [CrossRef]
Bryant, D.; Moulton, V. Neighbor-net: An agglomerative method for the construction of phylogenetic
networks. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2004, 21, 255–265. [CrossRef]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional
affiliations.
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).