4.6 Article

High genetic diversity in a remote island population system: sans sex

Journal

NEW PHYTOLOGIST
Volume 193, Issue 4, Pages 1088-1097

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2011.03999.x

Keywords

allopolyploid; bryophyte; clone; genetic diversity; Hawaii; long-distance dispersal; Sphagnum palustre; vegetative propagation

Categories

Funding

  1. Ramapo College
  2. Ramapo College Foundation
  3. NSF [DEB-0515749-002]
  4. Division Of Environmental Biology
  5. Direct For Biological Sciences [918998] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

It has been proposed that long-distance dispersal of mosses to the Hawaiian Islands rarely occurs and that the Hawaiian population of the allopolyploid peat moss Sphagnum palustre probably resulted from a single dispersal event. Here, we used microsatellites to investigate whether the Hawaiian population of the dioicous S.similar to palustre had a single founder and to compare its genetic diversity to that found in populations of S.similar to palustre in other regions. The genetic diversity of the Hawaiian population is comparable to that of larger population systems. Several lines of evidence, including a lack of sporophytes and an apparently restricted natural distribution, suggest that sexual reproduction is absent in the Hawaiian plants. In addition, all samples of Hawaiian S similar to palustre share a genetic trait rare in other populations. Time to most recent ancestor (TMRCA) analysis indicates that the Hawaiian population was probably founded 4951 kyr ago. It appears that all Hawaiian plants of S.similar to palustre descend from a single founder via vegetative propagation. The long-term viability of this clonal population coupled with the development of significant genetic diversity suggests that vegetative propagation in a moss does not necessarily preclude evolutionary success in the long term.

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