4.3 Article

Comparative genomic analysis of three co-occurring annual Asteraceae along micro-geographic fragmentation scenarios

出版社

ELSEVIER GMBH
DOI: 10.1016/j.ppees.2019.125486

关键词

Genotype by sequencing (GBS); Environmental gradient; Genomic signals of adaptation; Habitat fragmentation; Range edge

资金

  1. German Science Foundation [DFG GE 1242/12-1]
  2. BMBF [FKZ 031A532 - 031A540]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This is the first population genomic analysis that examines micro-evolutionary changes in co-occurring plant species, in fragmented habitats, along a precipitation gradient. We applied Genotype-by-Sequencing (GBS) on three different annual Asteraceae on the same sites that share similar life history strategies, but different pollination and dispersal strategies (Catananche lutea, Geropogon hybridus, Urospermum picroides). We tested if the genetic diversity for all species correlates with effective population sizes along the precipitation gradient and whether therefore genetic drift drives evolution at range edges. However, our results support this hypothesis for only one species (C. lutea) but refute it for the other two. Potential genomic signals of adaptation to the high precipitation gradient were found only in one species (U. picroides). We also tested if species with complex pollination and diversified dispersal strategies are less affected by small scale habitat fragmentation, but the opposite is true. Biological differences between the species studied (pollination and dispersal) explain population genetic differences along the precipitation gradient at range edges rather than environmental filters. Pairwise correlation analyses showed no or only weak similarities in the accumulation of mutations in the different species. Our results suggest that the processes driving evolution in different co-occurring species are different, so that most genomic similarities in our investigations may only represent temporary stages in evolution.

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

4.3
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