4.8 Letter

Dead-End Hybridization in Walnut Trees Revealed by Large-Scale Genomic Sequence Data

期刊

MOLECULAR BIOLOGY AND EVOLUTION
卷 39, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msab308

关键词

chromosomal rearrangements; gene flow; hybridization; postzygotic reproductive barriers; speciation; walnuts

资金

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2017YFA0605104]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41671040, 31421063]
  3. 111 Program of Introducing Talents of Discipline to Universities [B13008]
  4. key project of State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Chinese walnut, Juglans hopeiensis, is a first-generation hybrid resulting from the hybridization between Persian walnut and Asian butternuts. Despite the presence of strong postzygotic barriers preventing sexual reproduction in hybrids and unique traits, Juglans hopeiensis does not appear to be on the path to speciation.
Although hybridization plays a large role in speciation, some unknown fraction of hybrid individuals never reproduces, instead remaining as genetic dead-ends. We investigated a morphologically distinct and culturally important Chinese walnut, Juglans hopeiensis, suspected to have arisen from hybridization of Persian walnut (J. regia) with Asian butternuts (J. cathayensis, J. mandshurica, and hybrids between J. cathayensis and J. mandshurica). Based on 151 whole-genome sequences of the relevant taxa, we discovered that all J. hopeiensis individuals are first-generation hybrids, with the time for the onset of gene flow estimated as 370,000 years, implying both strong postzygotic barriers and the presence of J. regia in China by that time. Six inversion regions enriched for genes associated with pollen germination and pollen tube growth may be involved in the postzygotic barriers that prevent sexual reproduction in the hybrids. Despite its long-recurrent origination and distinct traits, J. hopeiensis does not appear on the way to speciation.

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

4.8
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