Next Article in Journal
Bio-Based Polyurethane Resins Derived from Tannin: Source, Synthesis, Characterisation, and Application
Next Article in Special Issue
Transcriptome-Wide Identification and Expression Profiling of SPX Domain-Containing Members in Responses to Phosphorus Deprivation of Pinus massoniana
Previous Article in Journal
Modeling the Bending Strength of MDF Faced, Polyurethane Foam-Cored Sandwich Panels Using Response Surface Methodology (RSM) and Artificial Neural Network (ANN)
Previous Article in Special Issue
Metabolic and Transcriptional Profiling of Fraxinus chinensis var. rhynchophylla Unravels Possible Constitutive Resistance against Agrilus planipennis
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Forests
Volume 12
Issue 11
10.3390/f12111515
forests-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Chloroplast Genome Draft of Dryobalanops aromatica Generated Using Oxford Nanopore Technology and Its Potential Application for Phylogenetic Study

by
Dwi Wahyuni
1,
Fifi Gus Dwiyanti
1,2,
Rahadian Pratama
2,3,
Muhammad Majiidu
2,
Henti Hendalastuti Rachmat
4 and
Iskandar Zulkarnaen Siregar
1,2,*
1
Department of Silviculture, Faculty of Forestry and Environment, IPB University, Bogor 16680, Indonesia
2
Advanced Research Laboratory (ARLab), IPB University, Bogor 16680, Indonesia
3
Department of Biochemistry, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science, IPB University, Bogor 16680, Indonesia
4
Forest Research and Development Center, Ministry of Environment and Forestry, Gunung Batu, Bogor 16118, Indonesia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Forests 2021, 12(11), 1515; https://doi.org/10.3390/f12111515
Submission received: 13 September 2021 / Revised: 28 October 2021 / Accepted: 31 October 2021 / Published: 3 November 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Forest Genomics and Transcriptomics)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Kapur (Dryobalanops aromatica) is an important dipterocarp species currently classified as vulnerable by the IUCN Red List Threatened Species. Science-based conservation and restoration efforts are needed, which can be supported by new genomic data generated from new technologies, including MinION Oxford Nanopore Technology (ONT). ONT allows affordable long-read DNA sequencing, but this technology is still rarely applied to native Indonesian forest trees. Therefore, this study aimed to generate whole genome datasets through ONT and use part of these data to construct the draft of the chloroplast genome and analyze the universal DNA barcode-based genetic relationships for D. aromatica. The method included DNA isolation, library preparation, sequencing, bioinformatics analysis, and phylogenetic tree construction. Results showed that the DNA sequencing of D. aromatica resulted in 1.55 Gb of long-read DNA sequences from which a partial chloroplast genome (148,856 bp) was successfully constructed. The genetic relationship was analyzed using two selected DNA barcodes (rbcL and matK), and its combination showed that species of the genus Dryobalanops had a close relationship as indicated by adjacent branches between species. The phylogenetic tree of matK and the combination of the matK and rbcL genes showed that D. aromatica was closely related to Dryobalanops rappa, whereas the rbcL gene showed group separation between D. aromatica and D. rappa. Therefore, a combination of the matK and rbcL genes is recommended for future use in the phylogenetic or phylogenomic analysis of D. aromatica.

1. Introduction

Dipterocarpaceae is an ecologically and economically important tree family widely used for timber and non-timber forest products. The non-timber forest products of Dipterocarpaceae, such as resin, sap, and camphor, have high economical values [1]. Dryobalanops aromatica, an important species from this family that produces camphor, is native to Indonesia and is distributed in North Sumatra, Riau Islands, and Borneo (West Kalimantan, Sabah, and Sawarak) [2]. Biologically, D. aromatica tree can reach a height of 65 m with a clear-bole height of 30–40 m and an average diameter at breast height of 70 cm when fully mature [3,4], living at an altitude of <500 m above sea level [5]. The camphor of D. aromatica contains a borneol compound [6] that can be utilized in the form of crystals and resins as a material for preparing perfumes and various medicine [7]. In China, it is used as an antiseptic, anti-inflammatory, analgesic, and as an additive for sanitary napkins (bio panty) to reduce pain during menstruation [8]. A recent study has found that borneol in D. aromatica can be used in diseases of the nervous system [9]. Borneol can dilute the blood in the human brain blood vessels and exert cerebral protective effects. A review [10] concluded that borneol has potential in preventing the enlargement of infarction, making it a neuroprotective agent against cerebral ischemia. At present, populations of D. aromatica are declining because the crystals obtained from the stems of D. aromatica have a higher market price than oil, leading to uncontrolled harvesting methods [11]. As a result, Kapur (D. aromatica) has been categorized as vulnerable in the 2018 IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources) Red List of Threatened Species [12]. Therefore, a concerted effort is needed to increase the population of D. aromatica through tree regeneration, which could be aligned with ecosystem restoration programs promoted by the United Nations [13].
Tree regeneration and genetic resource conservation experiments require a science-based genetic conservation strategy to provide complete genomic data and information on target species [14,15]. Genomic tools are indispensable because the current molecular methods for forest trees still have DNA fragments and limited DNA sequence analysis. Nowadays, DNA sequencing technologies rapidly evolve and have entered third-generation sequencing through long-read sequencing analysis. Recent technological developments can support the sequencing process with portable and economic devices, such as MinION sequencer from Oxford nanopore Technologies (ONT). This nanopore technology has the advantage of being able to sequence large eukaryotic genomes and minimize the presence of fragments that cause gaps between DNA strand assemblies [16]. This technology will also aid in chloroplast genome research. The chloroplast genome is characterized by having a circular structure and containing a pair of long inverted repeats that can add several errors to sequencing results by using short-read sequencing technologies [17]. Meanwhile, long-read sequencing can capture entire structural variants or repetitive segments in a single DNA read [18]. The utilization of long-read DNA sequencing technology will benefit the construction of the plant genome, which consists of repetitive DNA sequences and single-copy gene sequences.
With the advent of ONT, many native tropical trees, especially those with high economic potentials such as D. aromatica, can be further investigated as a start-up genomic research activity to support conservation, breeding, and ecosystem restoration by informing seed sourcing, species selection, or provenance selection [19]. In addition, this portable sequencing enables in situ sequencing used in various field conditions, including real-time sequencing of endangered species, which can help democratize scientific research and conservation efforts [20]. The data resulting from this portable sequencer will generate important genetic information, such as analyses of genetic relationships that can be used as baseline data in determining the conservation strategy for the species and providing new insights for evolutionary studies. Analysis of genetic relationship can be performed with the chloroplast genome. The chloroplast genome is the perfect source for phylogenetic study because of its stable genome structure, higher evolutionary rate than the mitochondrial genome, and 100–130 genes that encode ~79 proteins, ~30 transfer RNAs, and 4 ribosomal RNAs [21]. In the present study, we used universal gene markers matK and rbcL to construct phylogenetic trees because these two genes are considered standard plant DNA barcoding markers with high discriminatory power between angiosperms [22,23]. This study aimed to generate whole genome datasets and use part of them as a promising showcase to construct the draft of the chloroplast genome and analyze the universal DNA barcode-based genetic relationships for D. aromatica.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Plant Materials

Samples of one silica-gel dried twig and one fresh leaf derived from one individual healthy D. aromatica seedling (Figure 1) were collected for later laboratory work. Silica-gel dried twigs were used because they allow easier collection of sawdust with a drill tool than fresh twigs. The seedling was originated from Lingga Island in Riau Archipelago and has been raised for 5 years in the Komatsu-FORDA Conservation nursery, Forest Research and Development Center, Forestry and Environmental Research Development and Innovation Agency, Ministry of Environment and Forestry in Bogor, West Java, Indonesia.

2.2. Genomic DNA Extraction

Genomic DNA was extracted by using the modified cetyl trimethyl ammonium bromide (CTAB) method [24]. The CTAB buffer contains 1% PVP, 5 M NaCl, 0.5 M EDTA, 10% CTAB solution, and dH2O. D. aromatica fresh leaf was mixed with CTAB buffer and ground manually using a mortar and pestle before proceeding to the extraction process. Meanwhile, the twig was drilled to obtain fine sawdust using a Dremel 3000 Rotary Tool before being mixed with CTAB buffer and mashed with a mortar and pestle for further DNA extraction. The quality of genomic DNA was evaluated using agarose gel electrophoresis performed by Mupid exU, and the purity of genomic DNA was assessed using Nanophotometer IMPLEN NP80. The A260/280 ratio of 1.8 is recommended for sequencing. DNA quantity was measured with a Qubit 1.0 fluorometer using the Qubit dsDNA BR assay kit. The quantity of DNA required for sequencing was 1 µg of DNA in 48 µL volume. The use of this Qubit is recommended because it provides accurate measurements that can distinguish DNA from the rest of the solute [25].

2.3. DNA Library Preparation and Sequencing

A DNA library was prepared in accordance with the nanopore protocol using Native Barcoding Genomic DNA with barcode kit 1-12 (EXPNBD104) and ligation sequencing kit (SQK-LSK109), version NBE_9065_v109_revJ_23May2018. The DNA library preparation consists of several steps: (i) DNA repair (FFPE) and end-prep for optimizing DNA quality, (ii) preparing DNA sequence ends for barcode and adapter attachment, and (iii) preparing R9.4 flow cell for sequencing (priming the flow cell). DNA clean-up was performed in between each library preparation step using magnetic AMPure XP beads. The DNA library was loaded into the R9.4 MinION Flowcell, and sequencing was performed using MinKnow software from ONT.

2.4. Data Analysis

2.4.1. Sequence Raw Data Analysis

The output of MinION sequencing was raw Fast5 data, which was subsequently base called into FASTQ files using the Guppy program v4.2.3+8aca2af8 [26,27]. Then, a data quality check was performed using the NanoStat program v1.5.0 [28] to obtain the statistic of the FASTQ reads and its distribution of quality scores. The NanoPlot program v1.33.1 [29] was used to create a plot of reading length x average quality score. Reads with inadequate quality (Q < 7) and length <500 bp were filtered using the NanoFilt program v2.7.1 [30], and the parameters used were -l 500 -q 7 --headcrop 10 --tailcrop 10 --readtype 1D. The QC-passed reads were assembled using Rebaler (v0.2.0) [31], with Dipterocarpus turbinatus (NCBI accession code NC_046842.1) as the reference-based assembly [32], for correction of reads and assembled reads into contigs. The resulting contigs were subject to assembly polishing using the MEDAKA consensus v1.2.1 [33] to obtain contigs with high accuracy. The statistics of the polished contig were calculated using QUAST v5.0.2 [34] with reference to the D. turbinatus chloroplast genome. Subsequently, the polished contig was annotated using the GeSeq platform [35], and GenBank annotations were generated.

2.4.2. Chloroplast Marker Analysis

The GenBank annotation obtained from GeSeq was visualized using SnapGene v5.2.3 [36] to search for the potential gene marker. Two universal coding gene sequences (Table S1), rbcL and matK [22,23], were then selected for further analysis. Sequences of the rbcL and matK genes were blasted on the NCBI [37] by using translated nucleotide query (BLASTX) [38,39,40] under the Dipterocarpaceae family. The result of 50 homolog sequences of each marker was downloaded in the form of a Fasta file for further phylogenetic tree construction.

2.4.3. Phylogenetic Tree Construction

Phylogenetic analysis was performed using MEGA X v10.2.2 [38,41]. Sequence alignment of 50 homolog sequences plus marker was carried out using ClustalW alignment and default parameter. A phylogenetic tree was constructed on the aligned sequences using the neighbor-joining algorithm and a bootstrap value of 1000 repetitions to test the topological validity of the phylogenetic tree [40]. The constructed tree was evaluated, and branches with bootstrap value >70% were retained. According to [42], the bootstrap value was categorized into very weak (<50%), weak (50–69%), moderate (70–85%), and high (>85%). Therefore, the bootstrap value must be at least >70% to obtain a topology with the reliable (valid) genetic relationship of D. aromatica. The final constructed phylogenetic tree was exported to Newick format (.nwk) and then uploaded on the iTOL web server [43] to create a phylogenetic tree cladogram design. The phylogenetic tree cladogram was finalized in Inkscape v1.0.2 [44] to provide a clear branch color thickness.

3. Results

3.1. Genome Sequencing and Assembly

The first step in the long-read analysis is base-calling or conversion from raw data to nucleic acid sequences. The MinION platform outputs in the form of FAST5 files, which are then converted into FASTQ (raw data from base-calling) [27]. The FASTQ files were subject to a quality check to determine the read length with its initial quality. On the basis of the distribution (Figure 2), the longest read lengths reach approximately 60 Kb or 60,000 bp with the highest reading quality of Q25 and the lowest quality of Q4. The higher the read lengths, the lower the number of reads. Most of the reads fall under 20 Kb and quality above Q10. Thus, the sequence of D. aromatica obtained in this study is good for long-read sequencing.
FASTQ data were filtered to remove sequences whose DNA quality is <Q7 according to the ONT quality passing standard [45]. DNA sequences with read lengths below 500 bp were removed to avoid wasting computational resources in the assembly process [46]. Previously, the results of the initial data quality examination showed that the genomic data of D. aromatica still had several base sequences that could increase or affect the error value due to low read length and quality. When low read length and quality were removed, the mean read length, mean read quality, and read length N50 statistically increased (Table 1). After filtering, approximately 96% of reads passed the quality control (351,411 reads) with a reading length N50 of 6114 bp and a total base of 1.55 Gb.
The assembly stage in this study was carried out using reference-guided DNA assembly by comparing the studied genome with the reference genome in bioinformatics analysis. The reference-guided assembly produced a partial genome of D. aromatica chloroplasts of 148,856 bp. The GC content was calculated as 36.92%, which is consistent with cpDNAs from other Dipterocarpaceae family members, such as Hopea reticulata (37.4%) [47] and Parashorea chinensis (37.1%) [48]. Several genes with high GC content were exhibited by four ribosomal proteins, namely, rrn23, rrn16, rrn4,5, and rrn5 with 55%, 56%, 50%, and 51%, respectively. In addition, the total genome fraction found in the partial genome was 89.99%, with 411 indels and 135,411 alignments for reference.
Reference assembly is less time-consuming and has computational power [49]. DNA assembly to generate the whole genome starts with combining overlapping reads to construct contigs. The contigs were combined to make scaffolds, which were also combined to obtain the whole genome. However, genome assembly usually meets several challenges (sequencing error, short reads, repeats, polymorphism, etc.) that need to be resolved and requires repeated sequencing before being able to construct a complete genome. Therefore, this study focused on the chloroplast genome of D. aromatica because of the single sequencing generated in this study.

3.2. Chloroplast Genome Annotation

Genome annotation was performed to identify functional genes along the genome sequence [50]. The annotation of D. aromatica chloroplast identifies genes contained in the cpDNA (Table 2). The assembled draft chloroplast genome contains 137 genes, including 98 protein-coding sequences, 33 tRNA genes, and 8 rRNA genes. A total of 14 protein-coding genes contain intron, whereas 2 genes (rps12 and ycf3) contain 2 introns each. trnK-UUU exhibits the largest intron at 2528 bp, encompassing the matK gene. The smallest intron is located at the rps12 gene with an intron size of 232 bp (Table S2).
The chloroplast genome draft contains genetic information in the form of protein-coding regions (Figure 3), which can be used as DNA barcode markers. Several cpDNA markers found in the draft genome of D. aromatica chloroplasts are common markers that have been developed and used as DNA barcodes; these markers include rbcL, matK, the intergenic spacer trnH–psbA, and trnL-trnF [51]. The 98 protein-coding genes have been classified into genes responsible for photosynthesis (psaA, psaB, psbA, psbK, petA, petN, atpA, atpF, etc.), genes with self-replication (rpl33, rpl20, rps16, rps2, rrn16, rrn23, etc.), and other genes (accD, ccsA, cemA, infA, matK, rbcL, etc.). On the basis of these findings, DNA barcodes rbcL and matK and their combination were selected to be used in further analysis.

3.3. Phylogenetic Tree Construction

The rbcL and matK markers are commonly used as molecular identifications, especially plants for DNA barcoding in taxonomic studies. On the basis of the Consortium for the Barcode of Life’s, the two markers (rbcL and matK) and their combination were recommended for determining the genetic status of a species in a comprehensive, accurate, and fast manner [52,53]. The rbcL gene in cpDNA encodes RuBisCo and has a high degree of similarity between species because of its low mutation rate [54]. The rbcL gene has a full length of approximately ±1400 bp [55]. The matK gene marker has a sequence length of ±1500 bp and has a gene substitution rate six times higher at the amino acid level and three times higher at the nucleotide level when compared with the rbcL gene because the matK gene is the fastest evolving coding region that consistently shows high-level discrimination in species [52]. Previously, molecular phylogenetic studies have been carried out on the Dipterocarpaceae family using several markers [56,57], indicating the genetic relationship of a species observed in the phylogenetic tree. Phylogenetics is a genetic relationship diagram that can be analyzed based on the similarity of genes or phenotypes from one family; it is supported by several literature reviews as a complement to ecological and morphological information [58].
In this study, the results of genetic relationship analysis using the neighbor-joining method with 1000 bootstraps on D. aromatica with other species from the Dipterocarpaceae family showed that species of the genus Dryobalanops had a close relationship because they were in adjacent branches [59], either based on the matK gene with a length of 1314 bp (Figure 4), the rbcL gene with a length of 1428 bp (Figure 5), or a combination of the two genes (Figure 6). However, the number and members of species in a branch were different for each gene used. For example, Dryobalanops lanceolata and D. aromatica were found in the phylogenetic tree based on the rbcL gene (Figure 4); Dryobalanops beccarii, D. aromatica, and Dryobalanops rappa were found in the phylogenetic tree based on the matK gene (Figure 5); and D. rappa and D. aromatica were present in a phylogenetic tree based on the combined genes (Figure 6).
In addition, the phylogenetic tree constructed from the rbcL gene showed that D. aromatica was genetically close to another D. aromatica sequence with a bootstrap value of 61%. However, D. rappa was outside the branch of the Dryobalanops genus and separated from D. aromatica. Meanwhile, the phylogenetic tree of matK and the combination of matK and rbcL genes showed a close relationship between D. aromatica and D. rappa with bootstrap values of 64% and 95%, respectively. The rbcL gene has a high success rate in amplifying gene fragments [60], but this gene also has some disadvantages, such as low resolution in distinguishing several closely related species [61]. Therefore, the rbcL gene was inconsistent in distinguishing between genera. By contrast, the matK gene can better differentiate between genus and species levels [62].

4. Discussion

4.1. Genome Sequencing and Assembly

In this study, we present the genome sequencing of D. aromatica based on single sequencing run, which generated considerably higher output, 1,617,953,241 bases in 418,943 reads, compared with the output from the previous sequencing with the Diospyros celebica genome using MinION (318,492,700 bases in 302,567 reads) [63]. As much as 16.2% reads presented a quality score of 15 or higher with a mean quality score of 12.6. Raw read filtering yielded high-quality 1,559,878,347 reads with 15.7% presenting a quality score of 15 or higher and 100% of the total reads having a quality score of more than 7. Quality checks before and after screening were performed to determine information reads that will be gained in constructing contigs, scaffolds, or genome reconstructions.
Chloroplast genome sequencing of D. aromatica was successfully carried out with the aid of D. turbinatus as reference for assembly, which resulted in 148,856 bp of D. aromatica cpDNA. Long-read sequencing technologies, such as ONT, have the potential to allow a single read to cover the entirety or parts of the chloroplast genome, especially using the R9.4 chemistry [64,65]. In addition, ONT provides polishing tools (Medaka) to improve the accuracy of assembly results [66]. Despite concerns about the error rate exhibited by long-read sequencing technologies, genomic application to genetic resource conservation and plant breeding especially in forest trees can harness the benefit of these technologies [67].

4.2. Organization of a Partial Chloroplast Genome

The advantage of chloroplast DNA (cpDNA) is its small genome and stable structure. The low average nucleotide substitution makes the genome in cpDNA more conservative. In addition, the genome in cpDNA is not subject to recombination and is inherited uniparentally. In general, the genome size of a plant is approximately 61 Mb (Genlisa tuberosa) [66] to 152 Gb (Paris japonica) [68,69]. The chloroplast genome in terrestrial plants has been obtained with a size range of 120–170 Kb, although the chloroplast size of each plant is different [70]. For example, some studies showed a chloroplast genome size of 156 Kb (Saurauia tristyla) to 206 Kb (Rhododendron griersonianum) [51]. A study of the chloroplast genome of D. turbinatus (NC_046842.1), which is used as a reference for D. aromatica [32], successfully generated 5.2 Gb high-quality clean reads to assemble and obtain the annotation result as a complete chloroplast genome with a length of 152,279 bp.
Wang et al. [71] have recently determined that the complete chloroplast genome of D. aromatica is 152,696 bp in length. The two inverted repeats separated the two single-copy regions of 93,610 bp and 18,902 bp. A total of 128 predicted genes consisting of 84 protein-coding genes, 36 tRNA genes, and 8 rRNA genes were found. The GC content of the chloroplast genome was 39.16%. However, the result of our study could not be compared with those of Wang et al. [71] because the taxonomic classification of D. aromatica was inconsistent and incorrect, i.e., D. aromatica was designated as a species of the family Lauraceae. Differences in family groupings of D. aromatica between this study and Wang et al. [71] raised doubts on whether these two studies examined the same species. In addition, D. aromatica was clearly placed in the Dipterocarpaceae family [72,73,74] and not in the Lauraceae family [71].
The information of genes in the chloroplast genome will be useful to support the study of the evolutionary history of plants [75,76] and to select the best marker for D. aromatica in this case. Recent studies have shown that repeated chloroplasts serve a function that is useful in genetic resources for population genetics and biogeography studies [77]. In addition, other genetic studies in Lycoris species [78], Acer miaotaiense using matK [79], and C4 plants using rbcL [80] reported that these genes could be used in for comparative and phylogenetic analysis. Some studies have proven that matK and rbcL can be used as markers for plant evolutionary studies [79,81].

4.3. Phylogenetic Inference

The bootstrap values of rbcL (61%) and matK (65%) in this study showed that the nodes were still allowed in the tree (above 50%) despite the low confidence [82], whereas the combined rbcL and matK genes (95%) showed a very significant difference between D. aromatica and D. rappa. This pattern indicated that the combination of matK and rbcL genes produced a better resolution of phylogenetic analysis [83]. The barcodes used for plant species are very unstable; thus, the more DNA markers used in analyzing a plant, the greater the effort to identify the plant species [84].
The data from this information provide new knowledge related to phylogenetic study on the genus Dryobalanops [85], which previously showed a phylogenetic relationship with the genera Shorea and Hopea [86]. In a previous study, the genus Hopea was declared as closely related to Shorea [87]. In a 1999 study, the paraphyletic group between Hopea and Shorea was revealed based on the rbcL sequence, leading to further questions of their phylogenetic relationship [88]. The Dryobalanops phylogeny was not resolved using the rbcL marker; however, the use of trnL-trnF placed Dryobalanops as a sister taxon to Hopea and Shorea. In another study in 2005 [89], Dryobalanops was considered as a sister taxon to a group containing Shorea and Hopea, but Dryobalanops is more closely related to Shorea than to Hopea. The next study in 2006 [90], in which a molecular phylogeny of the Indonesian Dipterocarpaceae was constructed using PCR-RFLP of the chloroplast regions rbcL, petB, psbA, psaA, and trnL-F, revealed that Dryobalanops is intermediate between genera Shorea and Dipterocarps. However, the phylogenetic tree of Dryobalanops, especially D. aromatica, has not been studied extensively with other markers. The phylogenetic tree created from this study with rbcL marker shows that Dryobalanops is still included in the clade genus Shorea, but the genus Vatica was also included in one clade between Shorea and Dryobalanops. The matK marker and combination of rbcL and matK showed that Dryobalanops is monophyletic.
The bootstrap value showed the value of genetic relationships between species that have many similar characters and are closely related [91]. D. rappa and D. aromatica possibly descended from a common ancestor that carries the same chemical-genetic traits or patterns, which agrees with several studies that characterized the content of compounds in both species [92,93]. Several other studies have shown that D. rappa is an endemic species in Kalimantan with D. beccarii, Dryobalanops fusca, Dryobalanops keithii, and D. lanceolata, whereas D. aromatica and Dryobalanops oblongiofolia are endemic species from Sumatra [94]. The high proximity of D. aromatica and D. rappa means that the distribution of D. aromatica in Sumatra is an evolutionary form of Borneo, as evidenced by the fact that D. aromatica is found naturally in Kalimantan [95].

5. Conclusions

Genome sequencing of D. aromatica was successfully carried out by reading the base sequence of long-read DNA, resulting in high-quality DNA of 1.55 Gb from which a partial genome of D. aromatica chloroplasts of 148.856 bp was constructed. The processed data could be used to observe the genetic relationship of D. aromatica using two genes, namely, matK, rbcL, and a combination of both. The phylogenetic tree showed that D. aromatica was closely related to D. rappa based on matK gene markers and combinations (matK and rbcL). However, the combination of matK and rbcL genes showed a very high confidence level, so the combination of these genes is recommended for further analysis of D. aromatica.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/f12111515/s1, Table S1: Gene sequence from rbcL and matK marker; Table S2: Protein-coding genes containing intron.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, supervision and methodology, I.Z.S. and R.P.; Data curation and writing-original draft preparation, D.W.; software and formal analysis, R.P. and D.W.; Validation, R.P.; Resources, M.M., H.H.R., F.G.D. and R.P.; writing—review and editing, F.G.D., R.P. and H.H.R.; project administration, F.G.D. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The study was supported by the Ministry of Research and Technology/National Agency for Research and Innovation (RISTEK/BRIN) of the Republic of Indonesia for basic research scheme (Skema Penelitian Dasar) entitled “Pilot Sequencing of 100 Native Forest Tree Genomes to Support Ecosystem Restoration (Rintisan Sekuensing 100 Genom Pohon Hutan Asli untuk Mendukung Restorasi Ekosistem)”, with contract No. 1/E1/KP.PTNBH/2021 between RISTEK/BRIN and IPB University and contract No: 2029/IT3.L1/PN/2021 between LPPM IPB University and Principal Investigator (Iskandar Z. Siregar).

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Laboratory of Forest Genetics and Molecular Forestry, Department of Silviculture, Faculty of Forestry and Environment, IPB University and Molecular Science Research Group in the Advanced Research Laboratory (ARLab), IPB University for facilitating this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Purba, P.R. Aspek ekologi dan potensi kapur (Dryobalanops aromatica) di Sumatera Utara. J. Akar 2020, 9, 115–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Dwiyanti, F.G.; Kamiya, K.; Harada, K. Phylogeographic structure of the commercially important tropical tree species, Dryobalanops aromatica Gaertn. F. Reinwardtia 2014, 14, 43–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Yahya, A.Z.; van Gardingen, P. Stand growth structure and yield of plantation grown Dryobalanops aromatica in Peninsular Malaysia: >50 years after planting. J. Trop. For. Sci. 1999, 11, 205–217. [Google Scholar]
  4. Kamariyah, A.S.; Ozek, T.; Demirci, B.; Baser, K.H.C. Chemical composition of leaf and seed oils of Dryobalanops aromatica Gaertn. (Dipterocarpaceae). ASEAN J. Sci. Technol. Dev. 2012, 29, 105–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Pasaribu, G.; Gusmailina, G.; Komarayati, S.; Zulnely, Z.; Dahlian, E. Analisis senyawa kimia Dryobalanops aromatica. J. Penelit. Has. Hutan 2014, 32, 21–26. (In Indonesian) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Le, T.; Ho, A.S.; Mah, S.; Wong, T.; Ong, H.C.; Loh, P.H.; Lim, Y. Chemical composition of essential oil of exudates of Dryobalanops aromatica. Trop. J. Pharm. Res. 2017, 16, 621–625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Ritonga, F.N.; Dwiyanti, F.G.; Kusmana, C.; Siregar, U.J.; Siregar, I.Z. Population genetics and ecology of Sumatra camphor (Dryobalanops aromatica) in natural and community-owned forests in Indonesia. Biodiversitas J. Biol. Divers. 2018, 19, 2175–2182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Rangkuti, A.B.; Susilowati, A.; Rachmat, H.H.; Lubis, T.S. DNA isolation and amplification of Dryobalanops oblongifolia Drey and Dryobalanops lanceolata Burck. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2021; Volume 782, p. 042043. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Kong, Q.X.; Wu, Z.Y.; Chu, X.; Liang, R.Q.; Xia, M.; Li, L. Study on the anti-cerebral ischemia effect of Borneoland its mechanism. Afr. J. Tradit. Complementary Altern. Med. 2014, 11, 161–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Li, Y.; Ren, M.; Wang, J.; Ma, R.; Chen, H.; Xie, Q.; Li, H.; Li, J.; Wang, J. Progress in Borneol Intervention for Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review. Front. Pharmacol. 2021, 12, 606682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Gusmailina, G. Borneol-future potential of essential oils. Pros. Semin. Nas. Masy. Biodiversitas Indones. 2015, 1, 259–264. (In Indonesian) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Barstow, M.R. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Dryobalanops aromatica. Available online: https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.20181.RLTS.T61998024A173026192.en (accessed on 10 January 2021).
  13. United Nations (UN). The United Nations Decade on Ecosystem Restoration. Available online: https://www.decadeonrestoration.org (accessed on 13 July 2021).
  14. Soenarno, S.; Astana, S. Lacak balak untuk verifikasi uji legalitas kayu pada pemanenan kayu hutan alam. J. Penelit. Has. Hutan 2018, 36, 47–58. (In Indonesian) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Vernesi, C.; Bruford, M. Recent developments in molecular tools for conservations. In Population Genetics for Animal Conservation (Conservation Biology, pp. 321–344); Bertorelle, G., Bruford, M., Hauffe, H., Rizzoli, A., Vernesi, C., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Goodwin, S.; Gurtowski, J.; Ethe-Sayers, S.; Deshpande, P.; Schatz, M.C.; McCombie, W.R. Oxford Nanopore sequencing, hybrid error correction, and de novo assembly of a eukaryotic genome. Genome Res. 2015, 25, 1750–1756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Wang, W.; Schalamun, M.; Morales-Suarez, A.; Kainer, D.; Schwessinger, B.; Lanfear, R. Assembly of chloroplast genomes with long-read and short-read data: A comparison of approaches using Eucalyptus pauciflora as a test case. BMC Genom. 2018, 19, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  18. Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT). Nanopore Sequencing the Advantages of Long Reads for Genome Assembly. Available online: https://nanoporetech.com/sites/default/files/s3/white-papers/WGS_Assembly_white_paper.pdf?submissionGuid=40a7546b-9e51-42e7-bde9-b5ddef3c3512 (accessed on 12 January 2021).
  19. Breed, M.F.; Harrison, P.A.; Blyth, C.; Byrne, M.; Gaget, V.; Gellie, N.J.C.; Groom, S.V.C.; Hodgson, R.; Mills, J.G.; Prowse, T.A.A.; et al. The potential of genomics for restoring ecosystems and biodiversity. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2019, 20, 615–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Watsa, M.; Erkenswick, G.A.; Pomerantz, A.; Prost, S. Portable sequencing as a teaching tool in conservation and biodiversity research. PLOS Biol. 2020, 18, e3000667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Choi, K.S.; Chung, M.G.; Park, S. The complete chloroplast genome sequences of three Veroniceae species (Plantaginaceae): Comparative analysis and highly divergent regions. Front. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Hollingsworth, M.L.; Clark, A.A.; Forrest, L.L.; Richardson, J.; Pennington, R.T.; Long, D.G.; Cowan, R.; Chase, M.W.; Gaudeul, M.; Hollingsworth, P.M. Selecting barcoding loci for plants: Evaluation of seven candidate loci with species-level sampling in three divergent groups of land plants. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 2009, 9, 439–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Webb, C.O.; Slik, J.W.F.; Triono, T. Biodiversity inventory and informatics in Southeast Asia. Biodivers. Conserv. 2010, 19, 955–972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Doyle, J.J.; Doyle, J.L. Isolation of plant DNA from fresh tissue. Focus 1990, 12, 13–15. [Google Scholar]
  25. Avila, C.; Puente, D.L.; Tobaruela, P.; Quesada, A.; Medina, R.; Rodriguez, C.; Vallejo, E. A new procedure for DNA isolation from saliva samples and comparative analysis of quality indicators. J. Bioprocess. Biotech. 2019, 9, 2–6. [Google Scholar]
  26. Amarasinghe, S.L.; Shian, S.; Xueyi, D.; Zappia, L.; Ritchiel, M.E.; Gouil, Q. Opportunities and challenges in long-read sequencing data analysis. Genome Biol. 2020, 21, 2–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Lu, H.; Giordano, F.; Ning, Z. Oxford Nanopore MinION sequencing and genome assembly. Genom. Proteom. Bioinform. 2016, 14, 265–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  28. Urban, L.; Holzer, A.; Baronas, J.J.; Hall, M.B.; Braeuninger-Weimer, P.; Scherm, M.J.; Kunz, D.J.; Perera, S.N.; Martin-Herranz, D.E.; Tipper, E.T.; et al. Freshwater monitoring by nanopore sequencing. eLife 2021, 10, 1–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Giraldo, P.A.; Shinozuka, H.; Spangenberg, G.C.; Smith, K.F.; Cogan, N.O.I. Rapid and detailed characterization of transgene insertion sites in genetically modified plants via nanopore sequencing. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 602313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Lee, S.; Nguyen, L.T.; Hayes, B.J.; Ross, E. Prowler: A novel trimming algorithm for Oxford Nanopore sequence data. Bioinformatics 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Van der Nest, M.A.; Chávez, R.; De Vos, L.; Duong, T.A.; Gil-Durán, C.; Ferreira, M.A.; Lane, F.A.; Levicán, G.; Santana, Q.C.; Steenkamp, E.T.; et al. IMA genome—F14: Draft genome sequences of Penicillium roqueforti, Fusarium sororula, Chrysoporthe puriensis, and Chalaropsis populi. IMA Fungus 2021, 12, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Ci, X.; Peng, J.; Shi, C.; Zhu, Z.; Cai, N.; Duan, A.; Wang, D. The complete chloroplast genome of Dipterocarpus turbinatus Gaertn. F. Mitochondrial DNA Part B 2019, 4, 3636–3637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Oosterbroek, S.; Doorenspleet, K.; Nijland, R.; Jansen, L. Decona: From demultiplexing to consensus for nanopore amplicon data. ARPHA Conf. Abstr. 2021, 4, e65029. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Menghini, D.; Aubry, S. De novo transcriptome assembly data of the marine bioluminescent dinoflagellate Pyrocystis lunula. Data Brief 2021, 37, 107254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Tillich, M.; Lehwark, P.; Pellizzer, T.; Ulbricht-Jones, E.S.; Fischer, A.; Bock, R.; Greiner, S. GeSeq—versatile and accurate an-notation of organelle genomes. Nucleic. Acids. Res. 2017, 45, W6–W11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Wahyuni, F.D.; Saraswati, H.; Dewi, K.S. In-Silico Analysis for cryI gene amplification from Bacillus thuringiensis. BIOEDUKASI 2020, 18, 8–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Schoch, C.L.; Ciufo, S.; Domrachev, M.; Hotton, C.L.; Kannan, S.; Khovanskaya, R.; Leipe, D.; McVeigh, R.; O’Neill, K.; Robbertse, B.; et al. NCBI Taxonomy: A comprehensive update on curation, resources and tools. Database 2020, 2020, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Hall, B.G. Building phylogenetic trees from molecular data with MEGA. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2013, 30, 1229–1235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Yang, Y.; Jiang, X.-T.; Zhang, T. Evaluation of a hybrid approach using UBLAST and BLASTX for metagenomic sequences annotation of specific functional genes. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e110947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Mardika, B.A.P.; Setyorini, S.; Karimah, S.A. Implementasi sequence alignment pada lingkungan Spark—Hadoop berbasis single node. J. Tugas Akhir Fak. Inform. 2021, 8, 703–714. (In Indonesian) [Google Scholar]
  41. Kumar, S.; Stecher, G.; Li, M.; Knyaz, C.; Tamura, K.; Mega, X. MEGA X: Molecular evolutionary genetics analysis across computing platforms. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2018, 35, 1547–1549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Lestari, D.A.; Azrianingsih, R.; Hendrian, H. Filogenetik Jenis-jenis Annonaceae dari Jawa Timur Koleksi. J. Trop. Biodivers. Biotechnol. 2018, 3, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Letunic, I.; Bork, P. Interactive Tree Of Life (iTOL) v5: An online tool for phylogenetic tree display and annotation. Nucleic Acids Res. 2021, 49, W293–W296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Seidl, A.; Tremetsberger, K.; Pfanzelt, S.; Blattner, F.R.; Neuffer, B.; Friesen, N.; Hurka, H.; Shmakov, A.; Batlai, O.; Žerdoner Čalasan, A.Z.; et al. The phylogeographic history of Krascheninnikovia reflects the development of dry steppes and semi-deserts in Eurasia. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 6645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Delayahe, C.; Nicolas, J. Sequencing DNA with nanopores: Troubles and biases. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0257521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Tyler, A.D.; Mataseje, L.; Urfano, C.J.; Schmidt, L.; Antonation, K.S.; Mulvey, M.R.; Corbett, C.R. Evaluation of Oxford nanopore’s MinION sequencing device for microbial whole genome sequencing applications. Scientific Report. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 10931. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Ma, X.; Cai, Y.; Tang, L. The complete chloroplast genome of a critically endangered tree species, Hopea reticulata (Dipterocarpaceae). Mitochondrial DNA Part B Resour. 2020, 5, 3575–3576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Zhu, X.-F.; Sun, Y. The complete chloroplast genome of the endangered tree Parashorea chinensis (Dipterocarpaceae). Mitochondrial DNA Part B 2019, 4, 1163–1164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Tasma, I.M. Pemanfaatan teknologi sekuensing genom untuk mempercepat program pemuliaan tanaman. J. Litbang Pertan. 2015, 34, 159–168. (In Indonesian) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Indayati, I.; Purwanto, H. Controlling Culex quinquefasciatus Say, 1823 (Diptera: Culicidae) using several Lysinibacillus Sphaericus isolates endogenic to Indonesia. J. Biol. Trop. 2021, 21, 298–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Ding, S.; Dong, X.; Yang, J.; Guo, C.; Cao, B.; Guo, Y.; Hu, G. Complete chloroplast genome of Clethra fargesii Franch., an original Sympetalous plant from Central China: Comparative analysis, adaptive evolution, and phylogenetic relationships. Forests 2021, 12, 441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Mursyidin, D.H.; Makruf, M.I. Keanekaragaman dan kekerabatan genetik Artocarpus berdasarkan penanda DNA kloroplas matK & rbcL: Kajian in silico. Floribunda 2020, 6, 195–204. (In Indonesian) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. CBOL Plant Working Group A DNA barcode for land plants. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2009, 106, 12794–12797. [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  54. Dobrogojski, J.; Adamiec, M.; Luciński, R. The chloroplast genome: A review. Acta Physiol. Plant. 2020, 42, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Papuangan, N. Amplification and analysis of rbcL gene (ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase) of clove in ternate island. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science; International Conference on Life Sciences and Technology; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2019; Volume 276, pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Heckenhauer, J.; Samuel, R.; Ashton, P.S.; Turner, B.; Barfuss, M.H.J.; Jang, T.; Temsch, E.M.; McCann, J.; Salim, K.A.; Attanayake, A.M.A.S.; et al. Phylogenetic analyses of plastid DNA suggest a different interpretation of morphological evolution than those used as the basis for previous classifications of Dipterocarpaceae (Malvales). Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 2017, 185, 1–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Heckenhauer, J.; Samuel, R.; Ashton, P.S.; Abu Salim, K.A.; Paun, O. Phylogenomics resolves evolutionary relationships and provides insights into floral evolution in the tribe Shoreeae (Dipterocarpaceae). Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2018, 127, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Hasibuan, F.E.; Mantiri, F.R.; Rumendel, R.R.H. Kajian variasi sekuens intraspesies dan filogenetik monyet hitam Sulawesi (Macaca nigra) dengan menggunakan gen coi. J. Ilm. Sains 2017, 17, 60–66. (In Indonesian) [Google Scholar]
  59. Gong, Y.N.; Yang, S.L.; Shih, S.R.; Huang, Y.C.; Chang, P.Y.; Huang, C.G.; Kao, K.C.; Hu, H.C.; Liu, Y.C.; Tsao, K.C. Molecular evolution and the global reemergence of enterovirus D68 by genome-wide analysis. Medicine 2016, 95, e4416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Cabelin, V.L.D.; Alejandro, G.J.D. Efficiency of matK, rbcL, trnH–psbA, and trnL-F (cpDNA) to molecularly authenticate Philippine ethnomedicinal Apocynaceae through DNA barcoding. Pharmacogn. Mag. 2016, 12, S384–S388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  61. Suka, I.M.G. Isolasi dan amplifikasi DNA Genomik Kamper (Dryobalanops aromatica) Asal Sumatera Utara. Bachelor’s. Thesis, Sumatera Utara University, Medan, Indonesian, 2018. (In Indonesian). [Google Scholar]
  62. Ismail, M.; Ahmad, A.; Nadeem, M.; Javed, M.A.; Khan, S.H.; Khawaish, I.; Sthanadar, A.A.; Qari, S.H.; Alghanem, S.M.; Khan, K.A.; et al. Development of DNA barcodes for selected Acacia species by using rbcL and matK DNA markers. Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 2020, 27, 3735–3742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Siregar, I.Z.; Dwiyanti, F.G.; Pratama, R.; Matra, D.D.; Majiidu, M. Generating long-read sequences using Oxford Nanopore Technology from Diospyros celebica genomic DNA. BMC Res. Notes 2021, 14, 75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Lannoy, C.D.; Ridder, D.D.; Risse, J. The long reads ahead: De novo genome assembly using the MinION. F1000Research 2017, 6, 1083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Yasodha, R.; Vasudeva, R.; Balakrishnan, S.; Sakthi, A.R.; Abel, N.; Binai, N.; Rajashekar, B.; Bachpai, V.K.W.; Pillai, C.; Dev, S.A. Draft genome of a high value tropical timber tree, Teak (Tectona grandis L. f): Insights into SSR diversity, phylogeny and conservation. DNA Res. 2018, 25, 409–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Fleischmann, A.; Michael, T.P.; Rivadavia, F.; Sousa, A.; Wang, W.; Temsch, E.M.; Greilhuber, J.; Müller, K.F.; Heubl, G. Evolution of genome size and chromosome number in the carnivorous plant genus Genlisea (Lentibulariaceae), with a new estimate of the minimum genome size in angiosperms. Ann. Bot. 2014, 114, 1651–1663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  67. Holliday, J.A.; Aitken, S.N.; Cooke, J.E.K.; Fady, B.; Gonzalez-Martinez, S.C.; Heuertz, M.; Jaramillo-Correa, J.-P.; Lexer, C.; Staton, M.; Whetten, R.W.; et al. Advances in ecological genomics in forest trees and applications to genetic resources conservation and breeding. Mol. Ecol. 2017, 26, 706–717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Pellicer, J.; Fay, M.F.; Leitch, I.J. The largest eukaryotic genome of them all? Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 2010, 164, 10–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  69. [ONT] Oxford Nanopore Technologies. Whole Genome Sequencing: Large Genomes. Available online: http://nanoporetech.com/publications (accessed on 22 December 2020).
  70. Smith, D.R. Does cell size impact chloroplast genome size? Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 2116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Wang, J.; Huang, W.; Cai, S.; Zhao, J. The complete chloroplast genome sequence of Dryobalanops aromatica. Mitochondrial DNA Part B Resour. 2021, 6, 1687–1688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Ashton, P.S. Dipterocarpaceae. In Tree Flora of Sabah and Sarawak; Soepadmo, E., Saw, L.G., Chung, R.C.K., Eds.; Forest Research Institute: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2004; Volume 5, p. 388. [Google Scholar]
  73. Symington, C.F. Foresters’ Manual of Dipterocarps, 2nd ed.; Ashton, P.S., Appanah, S., Eds.; Malayan Forest Records; Forest Research Institute Malaysia: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2004; Volume 16, p. 519. [Google Scholar]
  74. Newman, M.F.; Burgess, P.F.; Whitemore, T.C. Pedoman Identifikasi Pohon-Pohon Dipterocarpaceae: Pulau Kalimantan; Prosea Indonesia: Bogor, Indonesia, 1999; p. 151. (In Indonesian) [Google Scholar]
  75. Clegg, M.T. Chloroplast gene sequences and the study of plant evolution. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1993, 90, 363–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  76. Clegg, M.T.; Gaut, B.S.; Learn, G.H.; Morton, B.R. Rates and patterns of chloroplast DNA evolution. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1994, 91, 6795–6801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  77. Xie, D.F.; Yu, Y.; Deng, Y.Q.; Li, J.; Liu, H.Y.; Zhou, S.D.; He, X.J. Comparative analysis of the chloroplast genomes of the Chinese endemic genus Urophysa and their contribution to choroplast phylogeny and adaptive evolution. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2018, 19, 1847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  78. Zhang, F.; Wang, N.; Cheng, G.; Shu, X.; Wang, T.; Zhuang, W.; Lu, R.; Wang, Z. Comparative chloroplast genomes of four Lycoris species (Amaryllidaceae) provides new insight into interspecific relationship and phylogeny. Biology 2021, 10, 715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Zhao, J.; Xu, Y.; Xi, L.; Yang, J.; Chen, H.; Zhang, J. Characterization of the chloroplast genome sequence of Acer miaotaiense: Comparative and phylogenetic analyses. Molecules 2018, 23, 1740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  80. Bowman, S.M.; Patel, M.; Yerramsetty, P.; Mure, C.M.; Zielinski, A.M.; Bruenn, J.A.; Berry, J.O. A novel RNA binding protein affects rbcL gene expression and is specific to bundle sheat chloroplasts in C4 plants. BMC Plant Biol. 2013, 13, 138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  81. Yao, X.; Tang, P.; Li, Z.; Li, D.; Liu, Y.; Huang, H. The first complete chloroplast genome sequences in Actinidiaceae: Genome structure and comparative analysis. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0129347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Ramadhani, R. Bar Code DNA Untuk Identifikasi Jenis—Jenis kemenyan (Styrax sp.) di Sumatera Utara. Bachelor’s Thesis, Sumatera Utara University, Medan, Indonesian, 2017. (In Indonesian). [Google Scholar]
  83. Carneiro de Melo Moura, C.; Brambach, F.; Jair Hernandez Bado, K.; Krutovsky, K.V.; Kreft, H.; Tjitrosoedirdjo, S.S.; Siregar, I.Z.; Gailing, O. Integrating DNA barcoding and traditional taxonomy for the identification of dipterocarps in remnant lowland forests of Sumatra. Plants 2019, 8, 461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  84. Soltis, P.S.; Soltis, D.E. Applying the bootstrap in phylogeny reconstruction. Stat. Sci. 2003, 18, 256–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Kang, Y.; Deng, Z.; Zang, R.; Long, W. DNA barcoding analysis and phylogenetic relationships of tree species in tropical cloud forests. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 12564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  86. Tsumura, Y.; Kawahara, T.; Wickneswari, R.; Yoshimura, K. Molecular phylogeny of Dipterocarpaceae in Southeast Asia using RFLP of PCR-amplified chloroplast genes. TAG Theor. Appl. Genet. Theor. Angew. Genet. 1996, 93, 22–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Kajita, T.; Kamiya, K.; Nakamura, N.; Tachida, H.; Wickneswari, R.; Tsumura, Y.; Yoshimaru, H.; Yamazaki, T. Molecular phylogeny of Dipetrocarpaceae in Southeast Asia based on nucleotide sequences of matK, trnL Intron, and trnL-trnF intergenic Spacer Region in chloroplast DNA. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 1998, 10, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Dayanandan, N.; Ashton, P.A.; William, S.M.; Primack, R.B. Phylogeny of the tropical tree family Dipterocarpaceae based on nucleotide sequences of chloroplast rbcL gene. Am. J. Bot. 1999, 86, 1182–1190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  89. Yulita, K.S.; Bayer, R.J.; West, J.G. Molecular phylogenetic study of Hopea and Shorea (Dipterocarpaceae): Evidence from the trnL-trnF and internal transcribed spacer regions. Plant Species Biol. 2005, 20, 167–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Indrioko, S.; Gailing, O.; Finkeldey, R. Molecular phylogeny of Dipterocarpaceae in Indonesia based on chloroplast DNA. Plant Syst. Evol. 2006, 261, 99–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Al-Juhani, W.S.; Khalik, K.N.A. Identification and phylogenetics study of Arabis alpina L. From the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Pak. J. Bot. 2021, 53, 1057–1064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Manshoor, N.; Aizam, E.A.; Qamarusy, S.K.; Shafarin, M.; Ahmat, N. Mass fragmentation patterns as fingerprints in identification of known oligostilbenes in Dryobalanops spp. Extracts. Int. J. Pharmacogn. Phytochem. Res. 2015, 7, 1147–1152. [Google Scholar]
  93. Hattimare, R. Crown shyness in various tree species. Int. J. Sci. Dev. Res. 2018, 3, 322–324. [Google Scholar]
  94. Harada, K.; Dwiyanti, F.G.; Siregar, I.Z.; Subiakto, A.; Chong, L.; Diway, B.; Lee, Y.-F.; Ninomiya, I.; Kamiya, K. Genetic variation and genetic structure of two closely related Dipterocarp Species, Dryobalanops aromatica C.F. Gaertn. and D. beccarii Dyer. J. Bot. Gard. Hortic. 2018, 16, 179–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Putri Fiqa, A.; Fauziah, F.; Ayu Lestari, D.; Budiharta, S. The importance of in-situ conservation area in mining concession in preserving diversity, threatened and potential floras in East Kalimantan, Indonesia. Biodiversitas J. Biol. Divers. 2019, 20, 198–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Forests 12 01515 g001 550
Figure 1. Dryobalanops aromatica samples were used in this study. Silica-dried twig (a); Fresh leaves (b).
Figure 1. Dryobalanops aromatica samples were used in this study. Silica-dried twig (a); Fresh leaves (b).
Forests 12 01515 g001
Forests 12 01515 g002 550
Figure 2. Histogram of read length distribution data and average read quality.
Figure 2. Histogram of read length distribution data and average read quality.
Forests 12 01515 g002
Forests 12 01515 g003 550
Figure 3. Partial assembly of the D. aromatica chloroplast genome.
Figure 3. Partial assembly of the D. aromatica chloroplast genome.
Forests 12 01515 g003
Forests 12 01515 g004 550
Figure 4. Phylogenetic tree of D. aromatica based on rbcL gene sequences.
Figure 4. Phylogenetic tree of D. aromatica based on rbcL gene sequences.
Forests 12 01515 g004
Forests 12 01515 g005 550
Figure 5. Phylogenetic tree of D. aromatica based on matK gene sequences.
Figure 5. Phylogenetic tree of D. aromatica based on matK gene sequences.
Forests 12 01515 g005
Forests 12 01515 g006 550
Figure 6. Phylogenetic tree of D. aromatica based on the combination of matK and rbcL gene sequences.
Figure 6. Phylogenetic tree of D. aromatica based on the combination of matK and rbcL gene sequences.
Forests 12 01515 g006
Table
Table 1. Statistics of the raw, filtered, and assembled reads.
Table 1. Statistics of the raw, filtered, and assembled reads.
Raw ReadsFiltered ReadsAssembled Reads
Mean read length/contig length (bp)38624438148,856
Mean read quality12,612,7-
Number of reads/contig418,943351,4111
Read length N50 (bp)60616114-
Total bases (bp)1,617,953,2411,559,878,347-
Average coverage--186.804
Table
Table 2. Summary of the genome assembly and annotation in D. aromatica.
Table 2. Summary of the genome assembly and annotation in D. aromatica.
Assembly Size (contig, bp)148,856
GC content (%)36.92
Genome fraction (%)89.99
Number of indels411
Alignment to reference135,411
Total number of gene features349
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Wahyuni, D.; Dwiyanti, F.G.; Pratama, R.; Majiidu, M.; Rachmat, H.H.; Siregar, I.Z. Chloroplast Genome Draft of Dryobalanops aromatica Generated Using Oxford Nanopore Technology and Its Potential Application for Phylogenetic Study. Forests 2021, 12, 1515. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12111515

AMA Style

Wahyuni D, Dwiyanti FG, Pratama R, Majiidu M, Rachmat HH, Siregar IZ. Chloroplast Genome Draft of Dryobalanops aromatica Generated Using Oxford Nanopore Technology and Its Potential Application for Phylogenetic Study. Forests. 2021; 12(11):1515. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12111515

Chicago/Turabian Style

Wahyuni, Dwi, Fifi Gus Dwiyanti, Rahadian Pratama, Muhammad Majiidu, Henti Hendalastuti Rachmat, and Iskandar Zulkarnaen Siregar. 2021. "Chloroplast Genome Draft of Dryobalanops aromatica Generated Using Oxford Nanopore Technology and Its Potential Application for Phylogenetic Study" Forests 12, no. 11: 1515. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12111515

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop