4.5 Article

Reevaluation of a classic phylogeographic barrier: new techniques reveal the influence of microgeographic climate variation on population divergence

期刊

ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION
卷 3, 期 6, 页码 1603-1613

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ece3.576

关键词

Apalachicola river; Florida; geographic barrier; Geomys pinetis; phylogeography

资金

  1. University Scholars Award from the University of Florida
  2. Howard Hughes Medical Institute Science for Life Distinguished Mentor Award

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We evaluated the mtDNA divergence and relationships within Geomys pinetis to assess the status of formerly recognized Geomys taxa. Additionally, we integrated new hypothesis-based tests in ecological niche models (ENM) to provide greater insight into causes for divergence and potential barriers to gene flow in Southeastern United States (Alabama, Florida, and Georgia). Our DNA sequence dataset confirmed and strongly supported two distinct lineages within G.pinetis occurring east and west of the ARD. Divergence date estimates showed that eastern and western lineages diverged about 1.37Ma (1.9Ma-830ka). Predicted distributions from ENMs were consistent with molecular data and defined each population east and west of the ARD with little overlap. Niche identity and background similarity tests were statistically significant suggesting that ENMs from eastern and western lineages are not identical or more similar than expected based on random localities drawn from the environmental background. ENMs also support the hypothesis that the ARD represents a ribbon of unsuitable climate between more suitable areas where these populations are distributed. The estimated age of divergence between eastern and western lineages of G.pinetis suggests that the divergence was driven by climatic conditions during Pleistocene glacial-interglacial cycles. The ARD at the contact zone of eastern and western lineages of G.pinetis forms a significant barrier promoting microgeographic isolation that helps maintain ecological and genetic divergence.

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