4.5 Review

Patterns of reproductive isolation in Mediterranean deceptive orchids

Journal

EVOLUTION
Volume 61, Issue 11, Pages 2623-2642

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00231.x

Keywords

asymmetric barriers; food-deceptive pollination; postmating barriers; premating barriers; sexually deceptive pollination; speciation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The evolution of reproductive isolation is of central interest in evolutionary biology. In plants, this is typically achieved by a combination of pre- and postpollination mechanisms that prevent, or limit, the amount of interspecific gene flow. Here, we investigated and compared two ecologically defined groups of Mediterranean orchids that differ in pollination biology and pollinator specificity: sexually deceptive orchids versus food-deceptive orchids. We used experimental crosses to assess the strength of postmating prezygotic, and postzygotic reproductive isolation, and a phylogenetic framework to determine their relative rates of evolution. We found quantitative and qualitative differences between the two groups. Food-deceptive orchids have weak premating isolation but strong postmating isolation, whereas the converse situation characterizes sexually deceptive orchids. Only postzygotic reproductive isolation among food-deceptive orchids was found to evolve in a clock-like manner. Comparison of evolutionary rates, within a common interval of genetic distance, showed that the contribution of postmating barriers was more relevant in the food-deceptive species than in the sexually deceptive species. Asymmetry in prezygotic isolation was found among food-deceptive species. Our results indicate that postmating barriers are most important for reproductive isolation in food-deceptive orchids, whereas premating barriers are most important in sexually deceptive orchids. The different rate of evolution of reproductive isolation and the relative strength of pre- and postmating barriers may have implication for speciation processes in the two orchid groups.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available