4.2 Article

Within-population genetic structure differs between two sympatric sister-species of ectomycorrhizal fungi, Rhizopogon vinicolor and R. vesiculosus

期刊

MYCOLOGIA
卷 105, 期 4, 页码 814-826

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.3852/12-265

关键词

ectomycorrhizal; fungi; genet; genetic structure; Rhizopogon; spatial autocorrelation

类别

资金

  1. NSF [DEB-0137531]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Using spatial autocorreladon analysis, we examined the within-population genetic structure of Rhizopogon vinicolor and R. vesiculosus, two hypogeous ectomycorrhizal (EM) species that are sympatric sister taxa known to differ in their clonal structure. We collected 121 sporocarps and 482 tuberculate EM of both species from a 20 ha forest stand dominated by Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii). Field collections were identified to species with restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis of the nuclear ribosomal internal transcribed spacer. Five and six microsatellite markers were used to characterize the genetic diversity of EM and sporocarp samples from R. vesiculosus and R. vinicolor respectively. After correcting for genet structure, spatial autocorrelation analyses of the EM samples were used to test the null hypothesis that multilocus genotypes characterized from each species were randomly distributed within the study area. We detected positive and statistically significant fine-scale genetic structure up to 120 m within the R. vesiculosus sample. In contrast, no spatial genetic structure was evident for R. vinicolor, indicating that the genotypes characterized for this species were randomly distributed throughout the study area. Differences in statistical power or the nuclear count of basidiospores are unlikely agents of the genetic patterns observed. Our results suggest that differences in reproductive output or competitive ability may act individually or in combination to create clusters of similar genotypes for R. vesiculosus throughout the study area.

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

4.2
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