Molecular data confirm the presence of Nycticebus bengalensis on Langkawi Island, Malaysia

Abstract

Abstract. Md-Zain BM, Mohhoyua KS, Aifat NR, Ngadi E, Ayob N, Rovie-Ryan JJ, Ampeng A, Mohd-Ridwan AR, Blair ME, Abdul-Latiff MAB. 2019. Molecular data confirm the presence of Nycticebus bengalensis on Langkawi Island, Malaysia. Biodiversitas 20: 1115-1120. Recent taxonomic reviews have stated the possibility of Bengal Slow Loris (Nycticebus bengalensis) presence in the Northern part of the Malay Peninsula. This study aims to confirm the presence of the Bengal Slow Loris in Malaysia by sequencing the mitochondrial COI gene from samples collected from Langkawi Island, Peninsular Malaysia, and Borneo. Phylogenetic analyses produced tree topologies that support the grouping of slow loris samples by their localities. The tree topologies further show that slow loris samples from Sarawak and Peninsular Malaysia form two distinct clades. The clade from Peninsular Malaysia was divided into two subclades, Langkawi and Selangor. The Langkawi slow loris subclade includes sequences from GenBank representing N. bengalensis, supported by a high bootstrap value. This mitochondrial DNA finding has a significant contribution to indicate the presence of the Bengal Slow Loris in Malaysia.

Molecular Phylogenetic Relationships and Unveiling Novel Genetic Diversity among Slow and Pygmy Lorises, including Resurrection of Xanthonycticebus intermedius

“…One group is entirely comprised of samples of the ‘dark morph’ N. bengalensis from Thailand, but the ‘northern’ N. bengalensis group includes samples from as far apart from one another as Assam, northern Burma/Myanmar, northern Vietnam, and Phu Quoc Island off the southern coast of Vietnam. The N. bengalensis group is less strongly supported than other lineages as a monophyletic group when the sample from Langkawi Island is included in the group, but the sample is likely within this group or sister to it [ 32 ]. The divergence date estimates and mean pairwise genetic distances for the subclade splits within this group appear quite recent ( Table 2 and Table S4 ), and given that some clades do not have very strong node support, further taxonomic splitting might not be appropriate within N. bengalensis , but the presence of a high degree of potentially unrecognized diversity is obvious.…”

“…In total, 51 new samples were collected, extracted, and sequenced for this study, as described below, in addition to the samples from museum specimens. An additional 13 already sequenced individuals by co-authors, collaborators from previously published studies [ 21 , 32 ], and one unpublished mitogenome, including seven samples mined from GenBank and one unpublished mitogenome (aDNA716, see Table 1 ) that was generated following the methods described in Roos et al [ 33 ]. These additional individuals were included in the study to achieve our desired level of taxonomic and geographic coverage and as outgroups (see Table 1 and Table S1 for full details and references for each included sequence).…”