4.5 Article

Searching for the bull's eye: agents and targets of selection vary among geographically disparate cyanogenesis clines in white clover (Trifolium repens L.)

期刊

HEREDITY
卷 111, 期 6, 页码 495-504

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/hdy.2013.71

关键词

adaptive cline; geographic mosaic; cyanogenesis; epistatic selection; parallel evolution; plant-animal interaction

资金

  1. NSF Doctoral Dissertation Improvement Grant [DEB-1110588]
  2. NSF CAREER award [DEB-0845497]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The recurrent evolution of adaptive clines within a species can be used to elucidate the selective factors and genetic responses that underlie adaptation. White clover is polymorphic for cyanogenesis (HCN release with tissue damage), and climate-associated cyanogenesis clines have evolved throughout the native and introduced species range. This polymorphism arises through two independently segregating Mendelian polymorphisms for the presence/absence of two required components: cyanogenic glucosides and their hydrolyzing enzyme linamarase. Cyanogenesis is commonly thought to function in herbivore defense; however, the individual cyanogenic components may also serve other physiological functions. To test whether cyanogenesis clines have evolved in response to the same selective pressures acting on the same genetic targets, we examined cyanogenesis cline shape and its environmental correlates in three world regions: southern New Zealand, the central United States and the US Pacific Northwest. For some regional comparisons, cline shapes are remarkably similar despite large differences in the spatial scales over which clines occur (40-1600 km). However, we also find evidence for major differences in both the agents and targets of selection among the sampled clines. Variation in cyanogenesis frequency is best predicted using a combination of minimum winter temperature and aridity variables. Together, our results provide evidence that recurrent adaptive clines do not necessarily reflect shared adaptive processes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据