4.3 Article

Patterns of hybridization in plants

Journal

Publisher

ELSEVIER GMBH
DOI: 10.1016/j.ppees.2010.02.002

Keywords

Introgression; Vascular plant hybrids; Hybridization propensity; Species diversity; Floristic surveys

Funding

  1. Wray-Todd Fellowship
  2. Huxley Fellowship
  3. NSF [DEB 0716868]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Hybridization plays an important role in the evolution of many taxonomic groups, but large-scale phylogenetic patterns of hybridization are poorly known. Here, we investigate patterns of hybridization in vascular plants. Our dataset included 282 families, 3212 genera and approximate to 37,000 species accounts from eight regional floras covering continental Europe, two island regions, and parts of North America and Australia. lnterspecific hybrids were common in the wild, occurring in 40% of families and 16% of genera, with an overall frequency of 0.09 hybrids per nonhybrid species. Taxon species richness explained a large amount of variation in the number of hybrids, but taxon bias (study effort) did not. We accounted for species richness in calculating hybridization propensities, and found that both families and genera differed in hybridization propensity. Hybridization propensity of a given group was generally consistent across regions (with the exception of Hawaii), suggesting that hybridization behavior may be determined more by intrinsic properties of a group than by environmental conditions. We found evidence of a strong phylogenetic signal (lambda = 0.93) in hybridization propensity as hybrids were not uniformly distributed across orders of vascular plants. Characterization of the hybridization behavior of groups should lead to increased predictive power regarding their traits and evolutionary trajectories, and will allow comparative tests of the traits driving differences in hybridization propensity. (C) 2010 Rubel Foundation, ETH Zurich.. Published by Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available