4.6 Review

Macroecological patterns of genetic structure and diversity in the aquatic moss Platyhypnidium riparioides

Journal

NEW PHYTOLOGIST
Volume 185, Issue 3, Pages 852-864

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL PUBLISHING, INC
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.03094.x

Keywords

bryophytes; dispersal; ecotype; genetic structure; isolation by distance; Mantel test; Platyhypnidium; spatial analysis of molecular variance

Categories

Funding

  1. Aquapole
  2. Wallonie-Bruxelles International (WBI)
  3. Belgian Fund for Scientific Research (F.R.S.-FNRS)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Genetic diversity and structure are described in the aquatic moss Platyhypnidium riparioides to assess its dispersal ability at a regional scale and to determine whether patterns of genetic differentiation correlate with environmental variation. Variation at six nuclear microsatellite loci from 50 populations in southern Belgium was investigated through Mantel tests, partial Mantel tests and spatial analysis of molecular variance. Overall patterns of genotypic variation showed strong differentiation among populations at a regional scale (F(ST) = 0.57). The high values of F(IS) observed within populations at both the ramet and genet levels, and the higher proportion of ramets with the same genotype than expected by chance, all point to a strongly clonal or selfing mating system. A genetic discontinuity was identified between northern and southern groups of populations. Within each group, F(ST) and geographical distances were significantly correlated. Partial Mantel tests suggest that genetic and ecological distances are significantly correlated in the southern group. The results point to strong dispersal limitation at the landscape scale and suggest that the southern and northern groups experienced different histories. Within the former, the correlation between genetic and ecological variation is suggestive of reproductive isolation among ecotypes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available