4.6 Article

Zooxanthellal genetic varieties in giant clams are partially determined by species-intrinsic and growth-related characteristics

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 12, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0172285

关键词

-

资金

  1. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [26660164] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Giant clams ( tridacnine shellfishes) are large bivalves that inhabit tropical and subtropical waters and harbor the symbiotic microalgae zooxanthellae, which consist of diverse phylotypes ( clades). Each clade exhibits unique physiological characteristics, and the cladal composition may influence the host's survival and its ability to tolerate environmental changes. Using quantitative PCR ( qPCR) assays, we investigated the zooxanthellal genetic clades in Tridacna crocea ( n = 93) and Tridacna squamosa ( n = 93). These two clam species were artificially bred and maintained for an extended time period under an equivalent environment in an outdoor pond. Results showed that T. crocea had a simpler cladal composition and with an apparent dominance of clade A, whereas multiple clades were present in T. squamosa. The zooxanthellae clade A is known to occur in other zooxanthellae-bearing animals that inhabit shallow waters, which is consistent to the shallow water habitat preference of T. crocea. Interestingly, in larger individuals of T. squamosa, the main zooxanthellal clade was C rather than A. The mechanism underlying the dominance of clade C in the larger T. squamosa has not yet been clarified. However, the additional photosynthates supplied by clade C may be preferable for growing clams, as is observed in corals. The cladal composition of giant clams has previously been reported to be primarily controlled by environmental factors. However, our experiments subjected different clam species to the same environmental conditions, and our results suggested that species-intrinsic and/ or growth-related processes may also influence the cladal composition.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据