Genetic Diversity of Two Globally Invasive Snails in Asia and Americas in Relation with Agricultural Habitats and Climate Factors

Abstract

The successful establishment of invasive populations is closely linked to environmental factors. It is unclear whether coexisting species in the native area follow the same genetic pattern in the invaded continents under the local climate factors. Two coexisting morphologically similar snails (Pomacea canaliculata and P. maculata), native to tropical and sub-tropical South America, have become invasive species for agriculture production and wetland conservation across five continents over 40 years. We analyzed the correlation between the genetic diversity of the two snails and the climate factors or habitat changes. Based on the 962 sequences from the invaded continents and South America, the nucleotide diversity in the agricultural habitat was low for P. canaliculata, whereas it was high for P. maculata, compared with that in the non-agricultural habitat. The two snails showed a divided population structure among the five continents. The P. canaliculata population in the invaded continents has remained stable, whereas the P. maculata population expanded suddenly. Seven main haplotype networks and two ancestral haplotypes (Pc3, Pm1) were found in the P. canaliculata and P. maculata populations. The haplotypes of the two snails were related to local climate factors. The overall fixation index of P. canaliculata and P. maculata was 0.2657 and 0.3097 between the invaded continents and South America. The population expansion of the two snails fitted the isolation-by-distance model. We discovered nine new sequences from the sampling locations. Overall, the genetic diversity and genetic differentiation of the two invasive snails were closely related to geographic separation, agricultural habitat, and climate factors.

The unseen invaders: Tracking phylogeographic dynamics and genetic diversity of cryptic Pomacea canaliculata and P. maculata (Golden apple snails) across Taiwan

“…Pomacea canaliculata , native to South America, have been both intentionally and unintentionally introduced in several countries (Lowe et al., 2000; Zhao et al., 2022), recently becoming a serious threat to agricultural and economic development worldwide (e.g., Asia, Europe, Africa, North America, and the Pacific Islands) (Buddie et al., 2021; Hayes et al., 2008; Ranamukhaarachchi & Wickramasinghe, 2006). Several other species of Pomacea (e.g., P .…”

“…Pomacea canaliculata, native to South America, have been both intentionally and unintentionally introduced in several countries (Lowe et al, 2000;Zhao et al, 2022), recently becoming a serious threat to agricultural and economic development worldwide (e.g., Asia, Europe, Africa, North America, and the Pacific Islands) (Buddie et al, 2021;Hayes et al, 2008;Ranamukhaarachchi & Wickramasinghe, 2006). Several other species of Pomacea (e.g., P. maculata, P. diffusa, P. scalaris) have also been introduced across numerous countries, and among the introduced species of Pomacea, P. canaliculata and P. maculata are the most destructive and morphologically cryptic (Rama Rao et al, 2018) causing frequent misidentifications.…”

The unseen invaders: tracking phylogeographic dynamics and genetic diversity of crypticPomacea canaliculata and P. maculata(Golden Apple Snails) across Taiwan

“…Traditional methods using morphological observation (outer shell, internal tissue, and egg morphology) have failed to distinguish them properly because of their overlapping characteristics, thereby obscuring their actual distribution (Rama Rao et al, 2018; Banerjee et al, 2022). Molecular method implementation has recently been found to be the best option for distinguishing P. canaliculata and P. maculata (Matsukura & Wada, 2017; Banerjee et al, 2022), with population genetics analysis recently conducted to comprehend the invasive origin and distribution of P. canaliculata and P. maculata across Asia (Hayes et al, 2008; Yang et al, 2018; Dumidae et al, 2021; Yang et al, 2022; Zhao et al, 2022; Liu et al, 2023). Nevertheless, most analyses have not included samples from Taiwan, with the exception of a few sequences reported in Hayes et al (2008).…”

“…Pomacea canaliculata native to South America, have been both intentionally and unintentionally introduced in several countries (Lowe et al, 2000; Zhao et al, 2022), recently becoming a serious threat to agricultural and economic development worldwide (e.g., Asia, Europe, Africa, North America, and the Pacific Islands) (Ranamukhaarachchi & Wickramasinghe, 2006; Hayes et al, 2008; Buddie et al, 2021). Several other species of Pomacea (e.g., P. maculata , P. diffusa , P. scalaris ) have also been introduced across numerous countries, and among the introduced species of Pomacea , P. canaliculata and P. maculata are the most destructive and morphologically cryptic (Rama Rao et al, 2018) causing frequent misidentifications.…”

“…This can then lead to false biodiversity information, potentially obstructing effective invasion management (Cowie et al, 2006). Molecular method implementation has recently been found to be the best option for distinguishing P. canaliculata and P. maculata (Matsukura & Wada, 2017; Banerjee et al, 2022), with population genetics analysis recently conducted to comprehend the invasive origin and distribution of P. canaliculata and P. maculata across Asia (Hayes et al, 2008; Yang et al, 2018; Dumidae et al, 2021; Yang et al, 2022; Zhao et al, 2022; Liu et al, 2023)…”