4.5 Article

Evolution of self-fertilization at geographical range margins?: A comparison of demographic, floral, and mating system variables in central vs. peripheral populations of Aquilegia canadensis (Ranunculaceae)

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BOTANY
Volume 92, Issue 4, Pages 744-751

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.3732/ajb.92.4.744

Keywords

Aquilegia canadensis; central and peripheral populations; geographic variation; herkogamy; mating system; outcrossing; population size; self-fertilization

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Biogeographic models predict that geographically peripheral populations should be smaller, more sparsely distributed, and have a lower per-capita reproductive rate than populations near the center of a species' range. Plants in peripheral populations may, therefore, receive less pollinator visitation and outcross pollination, which may select for self-fertilization to provide reproductive assurance. We tested these predictions by comparing population size, plant density, seed production, floral traits, and mating system parameters between 10 populations of Aquilegia canadensis near the northern margin of the range with 10 near the range center. Contrary to predictions, peripheral populations were not smaller, less dense, nor less productive than central populations. Nevertheless. we detected substantial regional differences in key floral traits. Plants in central populations produced larger flowers with 68% greater herkogamy and had 30% more flowers open simultaneously than plants in northern populations. However, there was no regional difference in the mating system. In northern populations, 73% (range = 60-88%) of seeds were self-fertilized compared to 76% (51-100%) in central populations. In both regions, adult inbreeding coefficients were near zero, indicating very strong inbreeding depression despite high selfing. Marked geographic variation in key floral traits does not reflect evolutionary differentiation in the mating system.

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