Localized population divergence of vervet monkeys ( Chlorocebus spp.) in South Africa: Evidence from mtDNA
Files
Accepted manuscript
Date
2016-01
Authors
Turner, Trudy R.
Coetzer, Willem G.
Schmitt, Christopher A.
Lorenz, Joseph G.
Freimer, Nelson B.
Grobler, J. Paul
Version
OA Version
Citation
Trudy R Turner, Willem G Coetzer, Christopher A Schmitt, Joseph G Lorenz, Nelson B Freimer, J Paul Grobler. 2016. "Localized population divergence of vervet monkeys ( Chlorocebus spp.) in South Africa: Evidence from mtDNA." American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Volume 159, Issue 1, pp. 17 - 30.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES—Vervet monkeys are common in most tree-rich areas of South Africa, but their
absence from grassland and semi-desert areas of the country suggest potentially restricted and
mosaic local population patterns that may have relevance to local phenotype patterns and
selection. A portion of the mtDNA control region was sequenced to study patterns of genetic
differentiation.
MATERIALS AND METHODS—DNA was extracted and mtDNA sequences were obtained from 101
vervet monkeys at 15 localities which represent both an extensive (widely across the distribution
range) and intensive (more than one troop at most of the localities) sampling strategy. Analyses
utilized Arlequin 3.1, MEGA 6, BEAST v1.5.2 and Network V3.6.1
RESULTS—The dataset contained 26 distinct haplotypes, with six populations fixed for single
haplotypes. Pairwise P-distance among population pairs showed significant differentiation among
most population pairs, but with non-significant differences among populations within some
regions. Populations were grouped into three broad clusters in a maximum likelihood phylogenetic
tree and a haplotype network. These clusters correspond to (i) north-western, northern and northeastern
parts of the distribution range as well as the northern coastal belt; (ii) central areas of the
country; and (iii) southern part of the Indian Ocean coastal belt, and adjacent inland areas.
DISCUSSION—Apparent patterns of genetic structure correspond to current and past distribution
of suitable habitat, geographic barriers to gene flow, geographic distance and female philopatry.
However, further work on nuclear markers and other genomic data is necessary to confirm these
results.