4.1 Article

Conflicting estimates of connectivity among deep-sea coral populations

期刊

MARINE ECOLOGY-AN EVOLUTIONARY PERSPECTIVE
卷 31, 期 -, 页码 144-157

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-0485.2010.00380.x

关键词

Connectivity; conservation; coral; deep-sea; DNA; genetics; larval dispersal; seamounts

资金

  1. CSIRO Wealth from Oceans Flagship
  2. Department of Water, Environment, Heritage and the Arts
  3. New Zealand Foundation for Research, Science Technology
  4. Ministry of Fisheries
  5. Commonwealth Environment Research Facilities (CERF) Marine Biodiversity Hub
  6. Australian Department of Water, Environment, Heritage and the Arts
  7. CenSeam

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Genetic data were used as an indirect means of assessing connectivity among deep-sea coral populations on seamounts and slopes in the Australian and New Zealand region. We sequenced three DNA regions (16S, ITS and Control Region) in nine deep-sea coral species from sites spanning thousands of kilometers. Based on haplotype distributions and AMOVA, we found evidence of genetic subdivision across ocean expanses for three species: the scleractinian Desmophyllum dianthus, and the antipatharians Antipathes robillardi and Stichopathes variabilis. Levels of genetic variation were low for the remaining species, including the reef-forming Solenosmila variablis and Madrepora oculata, and more sensitive molecular markers may be needed to resolve their spatial structure properly. For two species (the scleractinian Stephanocyathus spiniger and the antipatharian Stichopathes filiformis), we found no evidence of genetic subdivision among sites within regions, suggesting sufficient gene flow occurs to maintain genetic homogeneity at scales of tens to hundreds of kilometers. Recognising that some seamount regions and coral populations are, or are not, effectively isolated will be a key component of successful management planning based on marine protected area networks - both within and beyond national jurisdictions.

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

4.1
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